Dems are always trying to break the laws, the rules and the norms to push their agenda. When Trump was President they always tried to charge him with some crime even though you cannot indict a sitting President. Now that he's out of office they're still trying to charge him even though it is unconstitutional to Impeach someone no longer in office.
I notice you never say he was innocent of what they charged him with. Why do so many Trump supporters base their arguments on supposed legal technicalities instead of guilt or innocence?
Fake News. They have falsely accused him of "incitement" when the Brandenburg Test shows definitely that he was engaged in Constitutionally Protected Free Speech. The breathtaking assault by the Authoritarian Left on the Free Speech Principles that lie at the Bedrock of American Liberal Constitutional Democracy are nothing short of breathtaking. The once great Democrat Party, that in years past stood for Free Speech, Free Expression, Free Press, Freedom from illegal search and seizure, were the champions of the right to counsel and the sworn enemies of Blacklists are today the Party of Division, Censorship, Deplatforming, Speech Policing, Blacklists, and now for the second time, they are trying to strip a former office holder of his rights for engaging in thoughts, expression and publication of ideas and conclusions that they demand be forbidden and punished. With 44 senators on recorded vote that this trial is categorically unconstitutional, Trump is looking at full exoneration as soon as next Tuesday. Will beat Crazy Nancy and the Delirious House Managers like a rented mule, for a second time. The same Democrats who want to punish Trump, who make up the House Prosecution and Senate Jury, engaged in the same kinds of constitutionally protected free speech that they now want to punish Trump for, and it's not a good look. Democrats in both chambers urged their audiences to “fight” for the country and “retake” Congress. During the inauguration of Trump, Democrats denounced his legitimacy as riots broke out in Washington involving several violent groups. Maxine Waters directly called on people to confront Republicans in public. Ayanna Pressley insisted during the violent marches last year that “there needs to be unrest in the streets.” Kamala Harris claimed “protesters should not let up” even as many of them became violent, looting was rampant, people had been killed and downtown areas were in flames. Nancy Pelosi has condemned her fellow lawmakers as traitors and the “enemy within.” These Democrats claim they meant and intended peaceful acts and I have no firm evidence to the contrary, and it's an incontrovertible fact that people burned buildings, tried to burn many others, and even seized police stations and sections of cities. The remarks of Democrats did not cause that violence. Yet this impeachment trial invites similar words to be interpreted as "criminal" simply based on whether you approve of the speaker, their party or their positions. https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...ic-is-a-reckless-standard-in-this-impeachment The president, lawmakers and pundits often engage in speech that includes words also used to describe violence. Many of their claims are being defended as appropriate calls to action to combat greater social injustice. We have sure tests and standards of what is inciteful or insightful that are not fluid, shifting to and fro at the whim of transient majorities.
He is not being tried for free speech. He said what he said and no one stopped him from saying it. He is being tried for intent/results of that speech. Remember the old adage, "you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre." That may apply here.
Hello, he was still president when he was impeached. Instead of flapping your lips you need to spend some time finding out how the system works.
