Trump Impeachment

[Paigntonian]

So the circus in The Senate gets underway. Trump has the nerve to say that 'this sacred, landslide victory was unceremoniously and viciously taken away'. What's sad is that there will be an endless stream of Democrats and Republicans spouting the same rehearsed litanies. Trump's defence team making a statement in about half an hour. As a process it's painful, only enlivened with Trump accusing Pence of cowardice.

[Sunk]

I doubt the 17 Republicans will turn and find him guilty. And he won’t be banned for standing again.
So largely a waste of time.
The Biden Administration has a lot to do, they shouldn’t be sidetracked by this nonsense.

[ichkeria]

Nice to hear Trump’s lawyer say his client was removed by the voters. I hope everyone is listening to that.
For that reason alone it’s worthwhile going through with this trial.

[jim360]

Seems to me that Trump's lawyers are going for the "it doesn't matter what we say so we'll go for the most outrageous or pointless defence possible".

Closing statement seems to amount to "if Trump's guilty of a crime he should be arrested". I am not sure why they would ever think of going down that road...

[archibaldy]

I don't know enough about this - will they be citing any of the instances where Trump previously failed to condemn right/white supremacist violence or is it just his influence on that the single day recently when they attacked the senate?

[Paigntonian]

Archi: Yes, they'll be using Trump's record but in this case of impeachment they have to cite 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. It's a bit like doing someone for burglary in this country and having Taken into Consideration' other offenses. Not condemning right-wing protests during his term doesn't fit the bill.

[Paigntonian]

Sunk: Agree. Sure that Biden doesn't welcome these developments. Yes, he does have better things to do. And there is still a very real danger of the Right kicking off again.

[tomus42]

Other than potentially providing a few entertaining moments, like the first one it's a bit pointless.

We all know the outcome, and any evidence that may be presented won't change it.

[Peter Pedant]

I think this is going forward because the law makers were pooing their pants including Mike Pence
werent they shouting where is Pence and brandishing weapon

the commentator made short shrift about whether it was unlawful/unconstitutional by pointing out that if it were started before the defendant departed then it coiuld be followed thro

she also pointed to the underlings being indicted and how unamerican it was that the instigator would get off scot free

[jim360]

Just to reply to Sunk's BA: The Biden Administration isn't involved in the trial at all. The charges were brought by the House of Representatives, and the trial is proceeding in the Senate, and neither of those are part of Biden's Administration. Agreed that it seems extremely unlikely that 17 Republican Senators will vote to Convict -- signs are that maybe six will, depending on how convinced the other 44 are that this is all Unconstitutional anyway, but that's not enough.

Not altogether sure I agree it's a waste of time, though. Impeachment and Conviction is a remedy in the Constitution, and arguably the only remedy, for Presidential misconduct. If it's never exercised, though, except in the extreme case that the Senate is already 2/3 the Opposition party, then it's a meaningless remedy. It's worth sending a message that Congress will at least *try* to hold such conduct to account. Trump is perhaps protected from actual consequences* because of his unique grip on just enough of the American psyche to pressure more of his party to acquit, but future Presidents may be less reckless because of pressing ahead.

*At least, consequences in any political setting. The legal system may well be less kind to him, albeit on different charges.

[Jackdaw33]

Republican senators will no doubt be watching to see how all this plays in their home states. If conviction is unpopular then they will be unwilling to risk their own seats.

[jim360]

Further, the vote that's happened so far, on whether the trial is even Constitutional, is, at least according to any kind of common sense, a complete nonsense. Of course it's constitutional: otherwise, a President would in effect be free to commit "High Crimes and Misdemeanours" as long as the time remaining would mean that any fair Senate trial couldn't be organised in time. This could even include resignation -- which is no consequence either. A President who resigns can always try to return to office later, and is not barred from seeking the vice-Presidency or any other High Office, but the literal understanding of the Republicans' vote today (and a fortnight ago) is that resignation would be consequence enough. It is not.

Most Republicans are bowing to political pressure by trying to declare the trial itself unconstitutional. There's no sense in this argument, and I'll bet that most of them know that.

As a further aside, it's noteworthy that one Republican who voted against holding the trial two weeks ago voted *for* it today; perhaps there is hope yet that a few more will switch sides, or, at least, will listen without prejudice to the case and vote on its objective merits.

As it is, this is likely to mark the first time in US history that Senators of their own party have voted to convict the former President; even though the threshold of 67 is almost certainly impossible, that in itself would be of huge significance.

[Peter Pedant]

yeah it is a political process dressed up as legal

[Peter Pedant]

oh his first defence was gonna be - the election really was stolen
but his legal team resigned over that one

[Paigntonian]

Jackdaw: There's the rub. Do Republicans play to their base that, post-trump, is difficult to define? Or do they condemn Trump? Difficult for them.

[Paigntonian]

And is the Republican Party Trump's Party or is someone else going to challenge him? And if someone else manages to get a leadership role what will happen with the Trump supporters? They're in a hell of a quandary.

[Spicerack]

Hope they get AOC to testify about how she thought she was going to die. There won't be a dry eye in the house. ;-)

[DTCwordfan]

I agree - it's a waste of time and money. 17 senators are not going to cross the House floor and vote with the Demos to create the 2/3rds majority needed.

It's the same as gun control as in the 2nd Amendment of The Constitution - A 2/3rds majority in each of both Houses is required for any Amendment addition or change - it' ain't going to happen though once can never say ever.

They would be better off going for him on treason - which has two sovereigns in the USA, the country itself and at State level - the issue being was he directly involved in Russia and this they could go for through the federal courts. The grounds would be 'aiding the enemies of the state', and it requires two witnesses or a confession in open court. Fewer than thirty people have ever been charged with treason under these laws so it's probably a little arcane too.

[ichkeria]

It most certainly is not a waste of time
For one thing there are Trump’s lawyers - awful tho they may be - effectively claiming that the election was fair and Trump was removed from office therefore why would you convict him now? And you have Trump
apparently throwing things at the TV in response. If 56% of Americans as claimed support this trial - rather more than you might think - then at least no one can claim it’s not being done in the interests of most of America.
He still won’t be convicted of course but even his defenders on the Floor have admitted that the opposition is making an impressive case.
It’ll be interesting to see how this hapless pair of briefs attempt to defend what is surely the indefensible. How much more - was it Longfellow? - are we going to be treated to?

[Untitled]

It is disgusting that the majority of republicans are simply planning to support him regardless of the "defence" (that word is doing a lot of work!) put forward by his legal team. They have no backbone and no dignity. I utterly despise toadies for trump.

[gulliver1]

This trial must be costing a fortune.