Impeachment Round Two (6 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)

    Yggdrasill

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Aug 12, 2020
    Messages
    201
    Reaction score
    290
    Age
    63
    Location
    Seattle
    Offline
    I am in the camp that Trump must -not should- be impeached. If not this President, for this behavior, then what bar would have to be cleared to merit impeachment?

    Impeachment not only sends a signal to the country and the world that fomenting a coup is unacceptable and will be punished, but it also removes much of the threat Trump could pose going forward as, I understand it, he would lose his pension, his access to daily security briefings, free medical care and other amenities and benefits afforded to former Presidents. If impeached, he would not meet the definition of a Former President under the Former Presidents Act. I don't think it is clear whether he would continue to receive Secret Service protection.
     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    I agree. The house managers are making this case for the American people just as much as for the senators. Especially the ones that got name-dropped. Footage of an insurrectionist saying "Ted Cruz is one of us" is powerful.
    Click to expand...

    That is the way I've been looking at it all along. It is exposing those Trump-Cruz republicans for what they are, hopefully some of the folks at home are actually understanding the gravity of what happened and exactly who is to blame....we will see....
     
    Roofgardener said:
    Quite right Optimus Prime ! Perhaps we should omit this tedious 'trial' process and move directly to the Lynching ?
    Click to expand...

    What's good for the goose and something about gander?

    Guys, this joker is clearly a troll....
     
    Lapaz said:
    How do you think mafia bosses call for executions? They don't give direct commands. They exhort their people to do what needs to be done. Trump isn't very smart, but he's learned how to command indirectly. He's not that stupid and is savvy about how to manipulate people and crowds. Trump is absolutely responsible...if not for Trump, none of that violence would've occurred.
    Click to expand...

    Michael Cohen said that's exactly how Trump operates

    Trying to pretend Trump didn't incite this as as bad as Barr saying "I didn't say do it, I said get it done"
     
    Oath Keepers leader waited for Trump's direction before Capitol attack, DOJ says - CNNPolitics

    Previously, the Justice Department has somewhat held back on linking Trump's words so closely to the extremist group's actions during the riot. At least four defendants this week have argued in court they followed Trump's direction to go to the Capitol building on January 6.

    The Justice Department filing continued: "Her concern about taking action without his backing was evident in a November 9, 2020, text in which she stated, 'I am concerned this is an elaborate trap. Unless the POTUS himself activates us, it's not legit. The POTUS has the right to activate units too. If Trump asks me to come, I will. Otherwise, I can't trust it.' Watkins had perceived her desired signal by the end of December."
    Click to expand...

    I can't believe republicans aren't giving two shirts about any of this and are just going to acquit him for their own political purposes.
     
    You have to give Trump props: from merely promising to pay bails for Trumpers who beat up protesters at rallies (which in true Trump fashion, he didn't) to full blown insurrection to overturn an election.
     
    House managers are spending the first hour+ tying the insurrectionists and their actions to Trump's rhetoric. This included showing similar things that happened in Michigan that foreshadowed a lot of the more disturbing aspects of the Jan 6 insurrection.
     
    Xeno said:
    It's really November 7th through January 6th. The election being called for Biden through Congress certifying the results. Trump and his administration spent those two months priming his followers, whipping them into a rage with constant claims that the election had been stolen, not only refusing to concede but saying that he would in fact be inaugurated on January 20th. It wasn't till well after certification that he admitted, although not very strongly, that there would be a new administration. And even then, that statement seemed like it was made just to cover him from any potential liability.

    edit: You can actually go back further. October 6th and before, Trump claimed that the only way he could lose would be if the election was stolen. He spent no less than three months priming his followers to do this.
    Click to expand...

    I'd argue he has been priming them for this for the past 5 years. It is easy to forget that he was priming them for this for the 2016 election.

    www.bbc.com

    US election 2016: Trump says election 'rigged at polling places'

    Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump says those who cast doubt on his claims that next month's US elections will be rigged are "so naive".
    www.bbc.com

    _91954751_capture.jpg

    _91947484_trumpab.jpg

    _91947589_trumpabc.jpg


    www.google.com

    Trump: 'I'm afraid the election's going to be rigged'

    Donald Trump on Monday took his complaints about the "rigged" political system one step further.
    www.google.com www.google.com

    "I'm afraid the election's going to be rigged. I have to be honest," Trump told voters in Ohio, a crucial swing state.

    www.google.com

    Donald Trump's 'rigged election' claims raise historical alarms

    Trump's warnings that fraud could hand the election to Hillary Clinton not only are unprecedented, but they could also do long-term harm, experts say.
    www.google.com www.google.com

    "Historians say Trump's sustained effort to call the process into question has no close parallel in past elections. And some are increasingly worried that his claims — for which he's offered no real evidence — could leave many of his supporters unwilling to accept the election results, potentially triggering violence and dangerously undermining faith in American democracy."

    www.theguardian.com

    US presidential election is rigged, says Donald Trump – video

    Republican presidential candidate says the media are colluding with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and that people who died 10 years ago are casting votes
    www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com







    No one, NO ONE, should be surprised by this. He has been fomenting this since his appearance in politics. That some chose to not take him seriously, or ignore him, or not believe him or others capable of such depravity or that he meant it was recklessly naive, dangerous and fatal. He has been priming this pump throughout his candidacy. He told us. Openly, in plain sight.
     
    Are there any historical precedents...like, has anyone in history been convicted of "incitement to riot" or the equivalent charge? If so, surely there's a transcript of the speech that got them in trouble.
    In how many, I wonder, did the speaker come right out and say "All right now! Let's go over to the (beerhall, convention center, etc.) and do some violence! I mean hurt people, even kill them! This very minute, on my orders alone! Chaaaarge!"
     
    Taurus said:
    Are there any historical precedents...like, has anyone in history been convicted of "incitement to riot" or the equivalent charge? If so, surely there's a transcript of the speech that got them in trouble.
    In how many, I wonder, did the speaker come right out and say "All right now! Let's go over to the (beerhall, convention center, etc.) and do some violence! I mean hurt people, even kill them! This very minute, on my orders alone! Chaaaarge!"
    Click to expand...

    Yeah, I've wondered that as well. Not that precedent will matter all that much in this case.
     
    DaveXA said:
    Yeah, I've wondered that as well. Not that precedent will matter all that much in this case.
    Click to expand...

    What it would do is give us a baseline to where we can say "This here is what it takes to be convicted in criminal court beyond a reasonable doubt." Then we compare that to what Trump's been doing.
     
    Taurus said:
    Are there any historical precedents...like, has anyone in history been convicted of "incitement to riot" or the equivalent charge? If so, surely there's a transcript of the speech that got them in trouble.
    In how many, I wonder, did the speaker come right out and say "All right now! Let's go over to the (beerhall, convention center, etc.) and do some violence! I mean hurt people, even kill them! This very minute, on my orders alone! Chaaaarge!"
    Click to expand...
    I was only half listening while working but I believe someone being interviewed during the break a few minutes ago said that no one has ever been convicted of it.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom