Senator Leahy to preside over Trump's impeachment trial

[impulse]

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

This is insane logic.  Trump was impeached while still in office, for actions he took while in office.  So your example is completely false.

 

Except that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has declined to preside over the trial, which is required by the constitution in an impeachment of the president.  That stops the impeachment trial of the president in its tracks.  So the Dems decided to "impeach" him as a private citizen, which (they claim) allows them to choose Leahy to preside over the trial.

 

Which would open the door for them to impeach pretty much anyone, for pretty much anything the majority party doesn't like.

 

If they want to punish him, they could easily indict him in a court of law.  He's no longer protected by being the sitting president.  But that would require pesky things like rules of evidence and an impartial jury, as opposed to a vote by his alleged victims and potential 2024 opponents.

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by impulse

[Jeffr2]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems we agree on something. Any GOP senator that votes to convict will, IMO, pay "bigly". IMO they should be expecting to be removed at their next election.

However, I would apply "spineless" to the Democrats that go along with this, IMO, revenge trial, despite knowing it is wrong to do so.

Sad times when a member of congress is attacked for voting their conscience.  As Kevin McCarthy has said.

 

Spineless are those who just follow the former corrupt president, bowing to his ridiculous whims.  Which change from day to day depending on what he say on OANN or Newsmax.

 

Seems the top democrats don't agree with your opinion....

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/19/politics/mitch-mcconnell-rioters-provoked/index.html

Mitch McConnell: Capitol Hill mob was 'provoked' by Trump

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/kevin-mccarthy-capitol-riots-trump-responsibility.html

Trump bears some responsibility for Capitol riot, top House Republican tells lawmakers

[Jeffr2]

55 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Except that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has declined to preside over the trial, which is required by the constitution in an impeachment of the president.  That stops the impeachment trial of the president in its tracks.  So the Dems decided to "impeach" him as a private citizen, which (they claim) allows them to choose Leahy to preside over the trial.

 

Which would open the door for them to impeach pretty much anyone, for pretty much anything the majority party doesn't like.

 

If they want to punish him, they could easily indict him in a court of law.  He's no longer protected by being the sitting president.  But that would require pesky things like rules of evidence and an impartial jury, as opposed to a vote by his alleged victims and potential 2024 opponents.

 

This has been debated at length.  He can be impeached while out of office according to many legal experts.

 

He did instigate the invasion of the capitol.  Justice needs to be served.

 

If Hillary did this, you'd be OK with her getting away scot free?

[billd766]

5 hours ago, Berkshire said:

This is insane logic.  Trump was impeached while still in office, for actions he took while in office.  So your example is completely false.

Did you really expect any other response from a true Trump worshipper?

[Jingthing]

Just now, billd766 said:

Did you really expect any other response from a true Trump worshipper?

Yes, truth and facts have nothing to do with any toxic cult of personality movement. The conclusion is always that Mr. trump is always right, no matter what. You can't have a normal debate against that. It's like a disease. 

[xylophone]

20 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

People with triple digit IQ's see the folly of the Democratic party's actions

So no trump supporters then.......!!

[Jeffr2]

26 minutes ago, xylophone said:

So no trump supporters then.......!!

Guaranteed....

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Except that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has declined to preside over the trial, which is required by the constitution in an impeachment of the president.  That stops the impeachment trial of the president in its tracks.  So the Dems decided to "impeach" him as a private citizen, which (they claim) allows them to choose Leahy to preside over the trial.

 

Which would open the door for them to impeach pretty much anyone, for pretty much anything the majority party doesn't like.

 

If they want to punish him, they could easily indict him in a court of law.  He's no longer protected by being the sitting president.  But that would require pesky things like rules of evidence and an impartial jury, as opposed to a vote by his alleged victims and potential 2024 opponents.

 

They didn't decide to try him as a private citizen. He is a private citizen. They are trying him now that he is a private citizen for acts he allegedly committed while being President of the United States. 

[placeholder]

"5 of Trump's lawyers supposed to represent him in the Senate trial, including the lead attorney, have quit the case.

Former President Donald J. Trump has abruptly parted ways with five lawyers handling his impeachment defense, just over a week before the Senate trial is set to begin, people familiar with the situation said on Saturday.

Those departures include his lead lawyer, Butch Bowers, whose hiring was announced last week, a person familiar with the situation said. Four other lawyers who were reported to be joining, including Deborah Barbier, a criminal defense lawyer in South Carolina, are also leaving, according to multiple people familiar with the situation."{

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/30/us/politics/trump-butch-bowers-impeachment.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Supposedly, they're leaving because Trump insists on a defense based on the grounds of electoral fraud. It is to laugh.

 

[Jingthing]

38 minutes ago, placeholder said:

"5 of Trump's lawyers supposed to represent him in the Senate trial, including the lead attorney, have quit the case.

Former President Donald J. Trump has abruptly parted ways with five lawyers handling his impeachment defense, just over a week before the Senate trial is set to begin, people familiar with the situation said on Saturday.

Those departures include his lead lawyer, Butch Bowers, whose hiring was announced last week, a person familiar with the situation said. Four other lawyers who were reported to be joining, including Deborah Barbier, a criminal defense lawyer in South Carolina, are also leaving, according to multiple people familiar with the situation."{

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/30/us/politics/trump-butch-bowers-impeachment.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Supposedly, they're leaving because Trump insists on a defense based on the grounds of electoral fraud. It is to laugh.

 

Trouble in Mar a Lago paradise. He is so predictable.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

They didn't decide to try him as a private citizen. He is a private citizen. They are trying him now that he is a private citizen for acts he allegedly committed while being President of the United States. 

Yes and there is no possible fine or imprisonment possible from such an impeachment. On the other hand there are numerous other possible cases particularly in New York that could potentially send the disgraced ex-president Mr. trump to the hoosegow. 

[Sujo]

7 hours ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

How is holding a Senate trial for a private citizen, a break with precedent, different from impeaching a president no longer in office (also a break with precedent). Be careful what you wish for.

Its not a break from precedent.

 

trump was impeached while in office.

[Sujo]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Except that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has declined to preside over the trial, which is required by the constitution in an impeachment of the president.  That stops the impeachment trial of the president in its tracks.  So the Dems decided to "impeach" him as a private citizen, which (they claim) allows them to choose Leahy to preside over the trial.

 

Which would open the door for them to impeach pretty much anyone, for pretty much anything the majority party doesn't like.

 

If they want to punish him, they could easily indict him in a court of law.  He's no longer protected by being the sitting president.  But that would require pesky things like rules of evidence and an impartial jury, as opposed to a vote by his alleged victims and potential 2024 opponents.

 

Its only required if the president is in office. He is now out, so no need for roberts.

 

He is already impeached, while in office so no, dems dont need to impeach him out of office.

 

The door is open, was always open. Congress can pretty much impeach whoever they want, scotus already agreed they have that authority, whilst they are in office, which trump was when impeached.

 

Charge him in a court of law? Do you understand the difference between impeachment and a criminal trial? Hint, no crime needs to be committed for impeachment.

 

If you dont like it, amend it, until then follow the constitution that is held so dear.

[impulse]

7 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

This has been debated at length.  He can be impeached while out of office according to many legal experts.

 

He did instigate the invasion of the capitol.  Justice needs to be served.

 

If Hillary did this, you'd be OK with her getting away scot free?

 

It's been debated ad nauseum.  But I think the fat lady sang when the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court declined to participate, as required by the constitution in the impeachment of a president.  

 

I listened to the speech in question.  I didn't hear anything instigating a violent invasion of the capitol.

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

It's been debated ad nauseum.  But I think the fat lady sang when the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court declined to participate, as required by the constitution in the impeachment of a president.  

 

I listened to the speech in question.  I didn't hear anything instigating a violent invasion of the capitol.

You're totally wrong. 

The chief justice is not required when the president is no longer in office.

That doesn't mean that this conviction trial is unconstitutional. 

Also, it sounds like you either don't understand the article of impeachment or are deliberately distorting it.

The charge against Mr. trump is in no way only about that one speech. It's about the entire chain of events that led up to the insurrection including of course Mr. trump's vile promotion of the election being stolen (as the only way he could lose) many months even before the election. All the speeches. All the tweets. All the actions. It adds up to guilt. 

[Thakkar]

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

"5 of Trump's lawyers supposed to represent him in the Senate trial, including the lead attorney, have quit the case.

Former President Donald J. Trump has abruptly parted ways with five lawyers handling his impeachment defense, just over a week before the Senate trial is set to begin, people familiar with the situation said on Saturday.

Those departures include his lead lawyer, Butch Bowers, whose hiring was announced last week, a person familiar with the situation said. Four other lawyers who were reported to be joining, including Deborah Barbier, a criminal defense lawyer in South Carolina, are also leaving, according to multiple people familiar with the situation."{

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/30/us/politics/trump-butch-bowers-impeachment.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Supposedly, they're leaving because Trump insists on a defense based on the grounds of electoral fraud. It is to laugh.

 

Bernie Madof had a lawyer. OJ Simpson had a lawyer. Harvey Weinstein had a lawyer. Bill Cosby had a lawyer. Charles f***ing Manson had a lawyer. The genocidal murderers at Nuremberg had lawyers. Think about how galaxy-sized your lie is when, with hundreds of millions at your disposal, you can’t find a lawyer (a lawyer!!!) to lie for you. 

 

[Credo]

11 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Except that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has declined to preside over the trial, which is required by the constitution in an impeachment of the president.  That stops the impeachment trial of the president in its tracks.  So the Dems decided to "impeach" him as a private citizen, which (they claim) allows them to choose Leahy to preside over the trial.

 

Which would open the door for them to impeach pretty much anyone, for pretty much anything the majority party doesn't like.

 

If they want to punish him, they could easily indict him in a court of law.  He's no longer protected by being the sitting president.  But that would require pesky things like rules of evidence and an impartial jury, as opposed to a vote by his alleged victims and potential 2024 opponents.

 

The Chief Justice is only required by the Constitution to preside over the impeachment of a sitting president.   Trump is no longer in office, therefore, the Justice does not have to preside.  

Impeachment of other government officials, such as federal judges are not presided over by the Justice.   

 

[gamb00ler]

6 hours ago, placeholder said:

"5 of Trump's lawyers supposed to represent him in the Senate trial, including the lead attorney, have quit the case.

Former President Donald J. Trump has abruptly parted ways with five lawyers handling his impeachment defense, just over a week before the Senate trial is set to begin, people familiar with the situation said on Saturday.

They just now realized they were unlikely to get paid....?

Edited January 31, 2021 by gamb00ler

[candide]

5 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

They just now realized they were unlikely to get paid....?

Exposing oneself defending ridiculous fraud claims, and on top of it not being paid, is not appealing to any lawyer.

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, candide said:

Exposing oneself defending ridiculous fraud claims, and on top of it not being paid, is not appealing to any lawyer.

Yes of course, but I heard the reason they quit was that Mr. trump was insisting on a defense based on his false assertion that he won the election and that he wouldn't play ball with a reality based defense.

 

But I'm not sure what difference any defense or no defense would make. The great border wall of trump loyalist republican senators won't convict him even if presented with 100 smoking guns of guilt. That could be why Mr. trump just wants the attention to present his misinformation again. He could have them read an old phone book. Same result. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Jingthing