Graphic video of Capitol attack opens Trump's historic impeachment trial

[mtls2005]

1 minute ago, helpisgood said:

I think that they believed because they wanted to believe.  Hopefully, lessons can be learned and better days will follow.  

 

They still believe, as do most cult members, right up until they take that last sip of Kool-Aid.

 

March 4 is the new January 6. When, I guess, trump will become the 19th president? trump's DC Hotel is raised rates to March 3 and 4 to $1,745/nt.

 

 

 

 

[J Town]

Just now, mtls2005 said:

 

They still believe, as do most cult members, right up until they take that last sip of Kool-Aid.

 

March 4 is the new January 6. When, I guess, trump will become the 19th president? trump's DC Hotel is raised rates to March 3 and 4 to $1,745/nt.

 

In any other universe I would think this is a joke, but I've heard the same "4 March 19th president" thing.

[pseudorabies]

3 hours ago, Sujo said:

Where did trump get his lawyers. They were terrible.

One of them is a high-volume trial lawyer (aka ambulance chaser) from Philadelphia who was actually involved in a lawsuit against Trump last year -

One of Trump’s lawyers sued him last year — and accused him of making claims about fraud with ‘no evidence’

Trump has had even more difficulty than usual finding lawyers to represent him this time.  Nobody wants to represent him.  I wonder why....

[mtls2005]

3 hours ago, Sujo said:

Where did trump get his lawyers. They were terrible.

 

Referrals from Bill Cosby and Jeffrey Epstein?

 

 

[TKDfella]

1 hour ago, kamahele said:

should we only have trials for criminals when we are sure that the jury will convict before the trial has already begun?

Jury's don't vote prior to a trial...least wise they don't in the UK...maybe they do in the US?

[Scott]

Off-topic post reported and removed.

 

[klauskunkel]

19 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

As I said, I am no fan of Trump so please drop the Strawman, it's tedious.

 

I was simply pointing out that politically this is a bad move. It makes the Democrats look spiteful and petty. It will fail and therefore it won't hold anyone to account. It also puts American politics in a very poor light on the international stage. He's gone, it would be better to let people forget and heal, allow him to slip out of the limelight rather than keep putting his name on every news report. It's playing into his hands.

 

However, the hatred towards him from the left is so strong that they simply cannot help themselves from pursuing this vendetta. It's damaging and counter productive. And all for nothing since the impeachment process will ultimately fail, which Trump will publicly celebrate as another victory for him and his supporters.

 

If only the left could calm down enough to see it. However, the red mist has descended and they are blinded by it.

1) Trump needs to be held accountable for his deeds, just like every other law breaker. Even a President should not be above the law, that is a democratic principle. It is a necessity for government oversight and an incentive for future Presidents to act according to the law. You want for Trump to get away with this because of politics? That's wrong.

 

2) You only condemn the left as being full of hate and blinded when it comes to Trump... Do you have viewpoint on how the right is acting with regards to Trump? I don't see that mentioned in your opinion piece.

 

3) You say you are not a Trump fan, but you sure argue like one.

[JCauto]

1 hour ago, ExpatOK said:

Here is why it won't lead to conviction: Forty five Senators have already declared it unconstitutional which means they will not vote to convict, thus preventing the Democrats from getting the 2/3 majority they need. This impeachment trial is like the last one: a waste of time.

Except that the vote to decide whether it was unconstitutional has been tallied and it was found "constitutional" by a majority vote. 

As to the remaining issues to be decided at the trial, once the Senate has declared the trial "constitutional", and you as a Senator decide "I'm not voting on this because it's unconstitutional", then you're basically saying you don't accept the Constitution. Because the Constitution doesn't provide for individual Senators to decide whether something is constitutional or not, Congress does. Congress is a collective body comprising the House and the Senate. The House voted that it was both constitutional and grounds for impeachment. The Senate has already confirmed that it is constitutional since it has already voted. So, to reiterate, the answer is "yes, it is constitutional".

Sorry for the repetition, but it seems those on the Trump side need things repeated and clarified dozens of times before the light enters. The constitutional question has been answered, the trial now moves to Trump's conduct and whether or not he was inciting an insurrection. We already know that the people who were undertaking the insurrection have stated multiple times on video during their rampage at the Capitol that they were specifically answering the President's call. So who to believe?

[mtls2005]

After seeing Castor’s woeful performance, “On a scale of one to 10, with 10 being the angriest, Mr. Trump ‘was an eight’”

 

Maggie Habberman, New York Times

 

https://t.co/EhmeGyxQuB?amp=1

 

 

Good thing. He only "grabs" a "ten".

 

 

[Surelynot]

2 hours ago, Tug said:

Unfortunately it won’t lead to a conviction imo the republicans are to terrified of trumps (base) to do what they know is right it would take true courage on any republicans part to convict him as he so richly deserves

As someone pointed out.....the key here is to put on permanent record those Republican voting to support Trump and his attempt to overturn democracy.......quite powerful when you think about it.

[Surelynot]

45 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Jury's don't vote prior to a trial...least wise they don't in the UK...maybe they do in the US?

I think they are...kind of.....referring to prima facie evidence.....which already exists and acts as a filtering mechanism.

[J Town]

4 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

As someone pointed out.....the key here is to put on permanent record those Republican voting to support Trump and his attempt to overturn democracy.......quite powerful when you think about it.

Particularly for those running for re-election in 2022!

[mtls2005]

1 minute ago, J Town said:

Particularly for those running for re-election in 2022!

 

That's why quite a few are "retiring".

 

Shelby R AL announced yesterday he will not seek re-election, joining Burr, Toomey and Portman.

 

 

 

 

[bendejo]

I pray to the gods of entertainment and politics that DT takes the stand in his own defense. 

 

 

[Surelynot]

22 minutes ago, J Town said:

Particularly for those running for re-election in 2022!

Cruz et al....defo.

[Surelynot]

4 hours ago, Sujo said:

Where did trump get his lawyers. They were terrible.

I, for one, am gutted that Sidney is no longer on his books........best entertainment ever.

[Tug]

2 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

Here is why it won't lead to conviction: Forty five Senators have already declared it unconstitutional which means they will not vote to convict, thus preventing the Democrats from getting the 2/3 majority they need. This impeachment trial is like the last one: a waste of time.

Here’s why ,45 senators are more interested in hanging on to their jobs not protecting and upholding the constitution as they are sworn to do no more no less we saw what he did we know what’s right we also know that profiles of courage are sadly lacking in the Republican Party on the bright side their names will live on in infamy as cowardly inablers they will be on record 

[Surelynot]

Just now, Tug said:

on the bright side their names will live on in infamy as cowardly enablers they will be on record 

Exactly.....

[Rimmer]

Troll post and reply removed.

If you use derogatory names to suit your personal agenda expect your posts to be removed

[Phoenix Rising]

2 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

Here is why it won't lead to conviction: Forty five Senators have already declared it unconstitutional which means they will not vote to convict, thus preventing the Democrats from getting the 2/3 majority they need. This impeachment trial is like the last one: a waste of time.

It's not a waste of time. Doing the right thing is never a waste of time. Your argument is like saying don't prosecute the KKK Grand Klukker (or what the heck those imbeciles call their leader) for that lynching because the jury pool is 50% racist and will never deliver a guilty verdict.

[Phoenix Rising]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

A really bad move by the Democrats. I am no Trump fan but this move shows just how vindictive they really are once you remove their mask of fake Woke politics.

If prosecuting a "leader" who incites his follower to commit treason, murder etc, etc is woke politics I say, yes please, I'll have some of that!

[herfiehandbag]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Thankfully the USA is slightly more sophisticated in terms of it's legal process than allowing the verdict to be reached based upon an opinion poll. 

I'm not sure if a trial in which the jury is formed by a body (The Senate) in which Wyoming with 580,000 people has exactly the same degree of representation as California with 39.37 million people, is a particularly sophisticated legal process...

 

 

[Sujo]

24 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

I, for one, am gutted that Sidney is no longer on his books........best entertainment ever.

I must say, if sidney and rudy were doing it you could have it on ppv and make millions.

 

Mcconnell is really a piece of .....

 

He delays the trial and then votes against it because its too late.

[Phoenix Rising]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Thankfully the USA is slightly more sophisticated in terms of it's legal process than allowing the verdict to be reached based upon an opinion poll. 

Well, when you consider that trump was elected president through a thoroughly undemocratic voting process (Electoral College) and that he even got 74 mil. votes after a total s**t show of a "presidency" I just gotta question your assertion about the sophistication of the place.

Edited February 10, 2021 by Phoenix Rising

[OneMoreFarang]

Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO) on the constitutionality of former Pres. Trump's second Senate impeachment trial:

"There is no January exception to the impeachment power, that presidents can't commit grave offenses in their final days and escape any congressional response."

[Phoenix Rising]

2 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

That President Trump did nothing wrong has something to do with it, too. ????

 

And in other news from the Twilight Zone.......

[OneMoreFarang]

Imagine a DEM politician would have told people to storm the Capitol. How many GOP senators would vote to jail that politician? qed

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

I'm not sure if a trial in which the jury is formed by a body (The Senate) in which Wyoming with 580,000 people has exactly the same degree of representation as California with 39.37 million people, is a particularly sophisticated legal process...

 

 

Yep, hence my use of the word 'slightly'.

 

[J Town]

Just now, Phoenix Rising said:

 

And in other news from the Twilight Zone.......

Let's be completely honest - anyone who attempts to defend this horrible, deplorable man support cheats. Plain and simple. The former president didn't even TRY to hide it, he's a cheater, and that speaks VOLUMES for those who align with such thinking.

[J Town]

Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

Imagine a DEM politician would have told people to storm the Capitol. How many GOP senators would vote to jail that politician? qed

And the Democrats would also prosecute a fellow Democrat who had so blatantly spurred a terrorist attack on the capitol.