Trump finally understands how to treat this sham. And the sham on the Republic it is and will be.

None of that is evidence however(it's just speculation.). Which brings to the point: There is no purpose to this trial, there is no positive outcome. The only thing this trial will do, is to make the US Senate a mockery and to bring a further black eye to our politics.

Building back better appears to be looking to the past and to keep hanging onto it.

 

You are essentially arguing that the Trump can not be held accountable for its actions. You argue that the impeachment is over politics, not criminality. And you are correct. What the Trump did was a political crime. A crime against our political process. A crime against the entire country. It needs to be held accountable.

At some point, you are going to have to come to grips with the fact that the Trump is, and always has been, a bad actor. Time to let it go and find a new, more worthy, hero to worship.

 

All the Democrats had in the past two elections was "We ain't Trump", PERIOD! That campaign tactic became null and void on January 20th, and their continued bleating over him shows how little they have to offer. Sorry Dems, the "orange bogeyman did it" excuse won't fly anymore, you've got the whole ball of wax for the next two years, unrestrained except for the courts. So now you sink or swim as a result of YOUR policies.

 

Now you are just getting lame. That would be a great defense at a trial. “But your honor, I did that weeks ago. What is the use of living in past? If you proceed with my trial, you will just make a mockery out of this court and these proceedings, give a black eye on the fine reputation of these here courts.”

As things are starting to shape up, the post Trump world seems to be devastating to the Republican Party. Many of the elected Republican leaders are well aware of the ineptitude and corruption of the Trump, but feel they have to play along to get along. This insurrection attempt is breaking apart the Republicans. There is even talk of a Trump Party, guaranteed to hand elections to the Democratic Party.

 

The legal sophistry you're peddling is laughable and shameful.
Worshipping a person over the rule of law is the most profoundly unAmerican thing to do.

 

I suppose you’d be correct except for the fact that the Democrats have been campaigning on healthcare, environmental protections, improving foreign relations, correcting income inequality, increasing affordable housing, increasing college affordability, reforming the police and the criminal justice system, repairing and rebuilding our infrastructure.... Currently there is a massive bill before Congress to help stave off economic collapse due to the virus. Republicans are blocking it, but in the end, the Democrats will push it through.

Your complaint rings rather hollow.

 

Damn near all...

 

Nope hasn't been based on that in decades at least since 1968. It is now based almost solely on the geriatric DC crowd's belief in its own superb competence and willingness to play divide and conquer to retain power.

 

Are you saying that you have been prevented from being the individual you want to be because the Federal government passed legislation making it illegal to discriminate on account of race?

 

Like most things political and impeachment is a purely 100% political process, not a legal one. This why the Constitution separates the two, Allowing congress the only the power to remove and if convicted to disqualify an impeached person further holding of a public office. The it let's the court of law decide guilt or innocents of the actual charge in the legal arena.

Now, we all know Democrats thinks Trump guilty as Hades and should be convicted. Republicans as you stated, think the trial is a sham for political purposes only and Trump innocent. Okay, what happens if we throw out Republicans and Democrats, go to independents only. Those who are non-affiliated, less to non-partisan which one could say doesn't have a horse in the impeach trial as both the democrats and republicans do.

On 17 Jan while Trump was still president, independents favored removal and conviction by a 52-43 margin.


https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3687


On 20 Jan Trump leaves the presidency, Joe Biden becomes president. On 26 Jan with Biden as president, independents came in at 40% for conviction, 41% opposed or should not vote for conviction.


https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/ld46rgtdlz/econTabReport.pdf


Finally, as of 2 Feb, 41% of independents are now for conviction in the senate, but 50% say the senate should not vote for conviction.


https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/460mactkmh/econTabReport.pdf


Perhaps, since independents voted for Biden by a 54-41 margin wanting to get rid of Trump. They feel it is mission accomplished, Trump’s gone. Now it’s time to move on to governing the country and forgetting about Trump. What we’ve seen among independents and independents only, the swing voters, the less to non-partisan and non-affiliated group is a drop from 52% favoring conviction down to 41%. But perhaps nothing more shows this group of voter’s desires to move on past Trump is the rise in not wanting conviction from 43% up to 50%.


Then too, perhaps independents think both major parties are too fixated on Trump and not America’s problems that need to be solved. Independents unfavorable view of the democratic party has risen from 51% on 19 Jan to 58% today. Independents unfavorable view of the republican party has also risen, from 55% on 19 Jan to 61% today. Time to move on, according to independents, yes.

 

So not all were

 

so.. the President was ousted from office by a successful (after 4 years of effort) coup d'tat and he's the one that is on trial for sedation? I've read about that type of reasoning before,and it doesn't turn out well for the masses.

 

Wow you got everything wrong in that post. Impressive.

learn what a coup actually means, then read the articles of impeachment.

 

The problem with this assertion is that the Dems did move quickly, but it was Mitch who played politics. He said that he would not bring the Senate back until the day of inauguration, and they would look at it then. Now, he says that they cannot seriously consider it because Trump is out of office.

 

People were saying "take the Capitol" during the speech. You need to see all the evidence. There's plenty.

 

Oh good grief, what I'm saying is that the government doesn't give a tinkers damn about individual excellence. In fact they find the idea to be anathema.

 

All the ones in the interior photos...

 

Which allege an incitement to an insurection that was not asked for and did not happen.

 

Trump was going to be out of office in any case before and impeachment trial could happen. Mitch knew it Nancy knew they all knew it. At that point the Senate no longer has jurisdiction over Trump or any other private citizen.

 

It was both asked for and we have video footage from live tv cameras as well as cell phone cameras of it happening.

 

It still remains a constitutional hot potato - there is no clear answer on the constitutionality. But I did find this article:

Is there a consensus on whether Trump’s post-presidency trial is legal?

No, but the majority of experts say it is constitutional to have an impeachment trial after an official has left office, said Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University and a leading impeachment scholar.

Kalt was part of a bipartisan group of roughly 150 lawyers who signed a letter arguing that Trump can still be convicted in an impeachment trial.

Signatories of the letter included the co-founder and other members of the Federalist Society, a legal group that wields influence in conservative politics.

“We differ from one another in our politics, and we also differ from one another on issues of constitutional interpretation,” said the Jan. 21 letter. “But despite our differences, our carefully considered views of the law lead all of us to agree that the Constitution permits the impeachment, conviction, and disqualification of former officers, including presidents.”

Many experts believe that presidents who commit misconduct late in their terms should not be immune from the very process the Constitution created for holding them accountable.

Since the Constitution makes clear that impeachment proceedings can result in disqualification from holding future office, there is a live issue for the Senate to resolve even though Trump is no longer president, those scholars argue.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-constitution-ex-idUSKBN2A21AM

 

Fake News, it's intended to be a CONSTITUTIONAL process though this is clearly nothing more than a political show trial.

Gee, ya think? But, Pelosi is the spoiled mayors daughter she always has been and she and the crazed Dem House "leadership" have personal scores to settle.

AT THIS POINT, IT’S JUST PERFORMANCE ART TO FLAUNT HER POWER: Pelosi Under Fire For Breaking Her Own Rules, Evading Metal Detectors When Entering House Chamber.

​

Last week, Democrats in the House passed a new rule that ALL members had to go through a metal detector before they entered the House floor. The rule was passed because several Democrats expressed fear of armed GOP members, that some Republican congressmen would shoot them.

When several House members ignored the metal detectors and entered through another route, Crazy Nancy began issuing fines for evading the metal detectors. Rep. Louis Gohmert was fined $5,000 after briefly leaving the floor to go to the bathroom.

But Crazy Nancy is guilty of the exact same thing. Rep. Rodney Davis caught Pelosi entering through the speaker’s lobby while evading the detectors.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw was more direct. “Pay the fine, Speaker Pelosi,” he tweeted.

Crenshaw told Fox News Pelosi should pay the fine because her action was “against her own rules.”

the Texas Republican continued.

“She won’t abide by the rules herself so we’re going to make a huge push for her to actually have to pay that fine,” Crenshaw said.

That's the same attitude they bring to impeachment. One set of rules for the "ruling class" that quickly forgives all, and another brutal exacting standard for everyone else, even, as in the case of impeachment, if the rules are made up after the fact as will the House's brand new definition of "incitement" which they made up ad oc and after the fact.

She's on her last hurrah, by 2023 we will have a REAL Speaker, finally.

Soon!​

 

No you don't have either.

 

Lol

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...n-new-shocking-footage-like-never-before/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-55640437

 

None dare say INSURRECTION!

Mob Threatens Arson During 'F*ck The Police' March In DC

"If we don't get it, burn it down."