Impeach Trump for the Good of the Country

[DoggyDaddy]

Defense rested after only about 3 hours. Looking like he'll be acquitted.

 

[foszoe]

Defense rested after only about 3 hours. Looking like he'll be acquitted.

Not because of anything the defense did

 

[actaeon277]

Not because of anything the defense did

no kidding

 

[Hatin Since 87]

LOL

 

[KLB]

Defense rested after only about 3 hours. Looking like he'll be acquitted.

I think they should have just refused to show up.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Defense rested after only about 3 hours. Looking like he'll be acquitted.

I doubt anyone thought it would go any other way.

 

[jamil]

Not because of anything the defense did

The outcome is deterministic political theater. We always knew the outcome. We always knew who was going to vote to convict. It didn’t matter who called which witnesses, or evidence presented, or arguments made. It was always going to come down to a vote mostly along partisan lines.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The outcome is deterministic political theater. We always knew the outcome. We always knew who was going to vote to convict. It didn’t matter who called which witnesses, or evidence presented, or arguments made. It was always going to come down to a vote mostly along partisan lines.

Theater, that I’d Trump was to run again, which has offered some pretty unflattering things concerning the Capitol Riot response.

 

[jamil]

Theater, that I’d Trump was to run again, which has offered some pretty unflattering things concerning the Capitol Riot response.

Can you fix this? I don’t know what you’re saying.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Can you fix this? I don’t know what you’re saying.

Sorry, phone. The impeachment process has revealed some pretty unflattering things about the way the president handled the riot. Stuff that could prove quite detrimental if he were to run again. The McCarthy call was particularly damning.

 

[Twangbanger]

Can you fix this? I don’t know what you’re saying.

I'll translate for you: "Because Trump."

 

[actaeon277]

 

[BugI02]

I don't think people are nearly incensed enough that the senate took a vote to decide what was constitutional, and then proceeded as if that was sufficient

If that is the 'rule of law' they're always on about, they're doing it wrong

Where was the chief justice, again?

 

[KG1]

I don't think people are nearly incensed enough that the senate took a vote to decide what was constitutional, and then proceeded as if that was sufficient

If that is the 'rule of law' they're always on about, they're doing it wrong

Where was the chief justice, again?

The chief justice is sitting this one out because it was not a legit impeachment trial over THE President that requires him to preside over as spelled out in Article 1 Section 3. Specifically in Clause 6.

This is a Constitution ad hoc end around trial for political expediency over a FORMER President that they despise voted on by the Senate Democrats and a handful of Republicans.

 

[BugI02]

Exactly. How can the procedure be constitutional without the chief justice presiding

Further evidence, if any was needed, that they do not feel at all bound by the constitution - and that they are scared to death that Trump might run again and they would have to try to beat him in a fair election

Remember, Trump will be no older in 2024 than Xiden is now

 

[KG1]

Everyone that needs to understand what's going on here should watch this video. The Democrats have been engaged in the exact kind of rhetoric they are trying to impeach Trump over and worse for the same exact reasons. They have been vehemently questioning the legitimacy of the election process when they lose way before Trump ever did but no one calls them conspiracy theorists.

Damn crooked hypocrites every last one of them.

 

[Jimb]

Bill Clinton was impeached and he's still allowed a life time protection and a full pension.

If impeached Trump might not be allowed to run again for president in 2024.

Clinton was impeached for lying about sex vs sedition, and was not convicted. The pot & the kettle are both indeed black.

 

[Jimb]

The Democrats don't care about causing division; they control both houses and the Presidency.
Their "Let's unify" rhetoric will be the same as Obama's; "The Republicans can come along, but they have to ride in the back."

We should be able to take what we dish

 

[jamil]

Your question is silly. If a President were to do these things and resign, what would an impeachment do to him?

Yes, I think they designed it exactly that way, and they thought of those things.

Impeachment for an elected official is different than for an appointed official. I do not think that they intended for impeachment to be a tool to stop someone for running for office, but rather to remove someone from office that heinously misused their power in office. They would have left it up to the constituents to determine if said person should be elected again.

An appointed official would be different, as the people never chose that person.

We were told to STFU when Marion Barry ran for Mayor after being convicted for Crack. It’s the people’s choice if they want to elect that person. Right? People deserve the government they voted for, right?

Yeah. I think the founders intended this to be the case. The only thing in doubt, if we’re being honest, is that through impeachment they can prohibit officeholders from ever running again. Maybe some people should really be banned from that. But as a private citizen, can they do that?

If they can, it’s as much a bug in the system as it is a feature. It’s a handy political tool, if you have a big enough majority, to punish political opponents. If they can do this, then every congress, where there is an outgoing president of the opposing party, should just make it precedent to impeach and ban them from ever holding public office ever. Just because the other sucks. Nust because partisanship rules, just so that Kut may have the system he wants.

 

[jamil]

We should be able to take what we dish

What was dished?