With Republican firewall, U.S. Senate acquits Trump of inciting deadly Capitol riot

[ExpatOK]

2 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

He just lost the electoral college and the popular vote......did you not notice that?

LOL, it was only a "miracle" that caused that to happen. ???? 

[J Town]

1 minute ago, Surelynot said:

That could be the 'beauty' of it......... he is free.......he will can now go to extremes that even republicans will find unacceptable.

Nope. He already went WAY past those extremes but his base has consumed the Koolaid, are now spiritually dead, and will never waver. The former president could throw kittens into a woodchipper, broadcast it live, and they would find a way to justify it in their minds. Or not, they just seem not to care.

[Surelynot]

Just now, ExpatOK said:

LOL, it was only a "miracle" that caused that to happen. ???? 

555...what color is your sky today?

[ExpatOK]

3 minutes ago, J Town said:

I think you meant "Untouchable" and you are right. This will only strengthen his narcissism further. He is toxic, dangerous, and now he believes he is bulletproof.

Funny. Five years ago you were saying he was a clown and couldn't get elected. Nancy said the same.????

[Rimmer]

An inflammatory post has been removed

[J Town]

Just now, Surelynot said:

555...what color is your sky today?

Two words:

 

Ignore user

[Surelynot]

Just now, ExpatOK said:

Funny. Five years ago you were saying he was a clown and couldn't get elected. Nancy said the same.????

Five years later he was correct...better late than never.

[OneMoreFarang]

What is the difference between a banana republic and the USA?

In a banana republic you don't get away with insurrection. 

[mtraveler]

40 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

No, but the DoJ or possibly the Atty General of D. C. could still charge him with crimes arising out of Jan. 6.  The impeachment process is completely separate from the criminal justice system.

Correction:  The impeachment process is completely separate from REALITY.   The impeachment process is completely separate from any semblance of justice.  From the behavior of jurors, to the behavior of lawyers.  What a waste of time.  

 

(I'm not contradicting you, cmarshall.  I'm just pointing out the truth of what a disgrace the impeachment process is.)

[Phoenix Rising]

8 minutes ago, ExpatOK said:

Funny. Five years ago you were saying he was a clown and couldn't get elected. Nancy said the same.????

True, he was and is a clown. What we got wrong was the sheer number of [that word HRC used] in the US.

[J Town]

Just now, mtraveler said:

Correction:  The impeachment process is completely separate from REALITY.   The impeachment process is completely separate from any semblance of justice.  From the behavior of jurors, to the behavior of lawyers.  What a waste of time.  

 

(I'm not contradicting you, cmarshall.  I'm just pointing out the truth of what a disgrace the impeachment process is.)

I've come to realize (after it was said multiple times) this was NOT a criminal process, it was political. A fancy "vote of confidence."

 

However it was NOT a waste of time. I and others have explained this ad nauseum. Please read through previous posts to understand this concept.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by J Town

[cmarshall]

7 minutes ago, mtraveler said:

Correction:  The impeachment process is completely separate from REALITY.   The impeachment process is completely separate from any semblance of justice.  From the behavior of jurors, to the behavior of lawyers.  What a waste of time.  

 

(I'm not contradicting you, cmarshall.  I'm just pointing out the truth of what a disgrace the impeachment process is.)

 

The impeachment process is not part of the justice system, because the purpose of it is not to punish the president.  The purpose is to protect the Republic by removing the president.  Removal from office is not punishment.  That's why the Constitution takes pains to point out that after removal, whether by the Senate or the voters, the former president is fully exposed to criminal prosecution at every level.  That's why the possibility of subsequent criminal prosecution does not constitute double-jeopardy.

 

Yes, the impeachment and removal process is one of the worst ideas of the Framers who were motivated by the English Civil War which was a conflict between the monarchy and Parliament, which Parliament won.  The Framers therefore expected conflict to be between the branches of government as it was in 1640.  But they failed to foresee the rise of political parties which would mean that conflict between the parties would spread across all three branches of government rendering the impeachment process completely futile.

 

And, worst of all, the Constitution cannot be amended.  So, the internal contradictions will eventually cause the collapse of the Constitutional regime, although not over impeachment.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by cmarshall

[ThailandRyan]

41 minutes ago, J Town said:

First, he was impeached - twice. I understand this is a confusing concept, took me a long time to wrap my head around it. Impeachment is like getting a speeding ticket - it really doesn't mean anything unless you're forced to pay it. The former president's sycophants made sure he didn't have to pay the price politically.

 

Having said that, the two-faced McConnell DID set a foundation for civil courts to prosecute the former president. He most likely will be held accountable for anything and everything that happened in this terrorist attack.

He was Half impeached, it takes both the House and the Senate to impeach him in both venues.  Yes did the House impeach him, of course they did, but did the senate concur and impeach him as well, No they did not, which begs the questions was he truly and completely impeached, or just half impeached with no consequences within the bounds of the Political process.  Hard one I know, Just like a court arraigning someone based upon evidence, but then a jury finds them not guilty.  

Edited February 14, 2021 by ThailandRyan

[Walker88]

Two things stand out from this, both kind of funny:

 

1) The very same (R)s who voted to acquit are the ones who called 45 on 6 Jan begging him to call off the mob. They knew full well he had them under his control, yet when it came time to be something less than a coward, they couldn't stand up.

 

2) All those (R)s like mccarthy or jordan or have ambitions of being Speaker of the House ought to reconsider, as their Party just make it A-ok for a defeated POTUS to incite a mob to lynch them, so long as it's in the last two weeks of the Administration. That could come back to haunt them, and they could have nothing to say, as they rubber stamped the 'right' of a POTUS to foment violence, declare a loss a win, etc.

[welovesundaysatspace]

2 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

He was Half impeached, it takes both the House and the Senate to impeach him him both venues.  (...) was he truly and completely impeached, or just half impeached 

You really should read the constitution before writing nonsense on an Internet forum. 

[Surelynot]

3 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

as their Party just make it A-ok for a defeated POTUS to incite a mob to lynch them

Doesn't have to be POTUS, defeated or otherwise......he is free to do the same again as a private citizen.....now that would be interesting!!!!

 

His base would be up for it....STOP THE STEAL

Edited February 14, 2021 by Surelynot

[ExpatOK]

7 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

He was Half impeached, it takes both the House and the Senate to impeach him him both venues.  Yes did the House impeach him, of course they did, but did the senate concur and impeach him as well, No they did not, which begs the questions was he truly and completely impeached, or just half impeached with no consequences within the bounds of the Political process.  Hard one I know, Just like a court arraigning someone based upon evidence, but then a jury finds them not guilty.  

President Trump was impeached twice.  In both those cases the Senate acquitted President Trump. BTW, the Senate does not impeach the president.

Edited February 14, 2021 by ExpatOK

[Dagfinnur Traustason]

Get over this circus. There is a new president now. If there is something to convict Trump of, that is founded by clear evidence, then just get it over with.

Edited February 14, 2021 by Dagfinnur Traustason

[Scott]

A post from an unapproved source has been removed.  

 

[ThailandRyan]

4 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

You really should read the constitution before writing nonsense on an Internet forum. 

He was impeached by the House and Not convicted of the crimes by the Senate that the House filed against him.

IMPEACHMENT | U.S. Constitution Annotated | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

Interpretation: Article II, Section 4 | The National Constitution Center

List of efforts to impeach presidents of the United States - Wikipedia

 

Try again.  Should he be kept from ever running for office again, that unfortunately is the 64K Dollar question.

[ThailandRyan]

7 minutes ago, ExpatOK said:

President Trump was impeached twice.  In both those cases the Senate acquitted President Trump. BTW, the Senate does not impeach the president.

They failed to convict him in the sense of the law and the way the constitution is written.

[Surelynot]

Just now, ThailandRyan said:

Should he be kept from ever running for office again

Definitely not.....he is destroying the GOP.....rock on.

[mtraveler]

7 minutes ago, J Town said:

I've come to realize (after it was said multiple times) this was NOT a criminal process, it was political. A fancy "vote of confidence."

 

However it was NOT a waste of time. I and others have explained this ad nauseum. Please read through previous posts to understand this concept.

 

 

I think I was misunderstood.  What upset me is that most standards used in normal courts of law are not used in impeachment trials, and that saddens me.  And that's why we ended up with an acquittal or not guilty, whatever they decided.  

 

I was once a juror in a criminal trial.  I certainly didn't behave like the "jurors" in this trial behaved.  I sat in my seat, and listened carefully to all the testimony. And I believe my trial was longer than this one. 

 

I read that up to 15 Republican "jurors" were absent during certain times in the trial. I also read that Cruz, Graham, and one other "juror" met with attorneys for Trump to strategize.  And that Hawley sat in the back with his feet up, reading some material.  That doesn't happen in a traditional trial. 

 

Also, it completely baffles me that day 1 was spent deciding whether this trial was constitutional or not.  And the determination was that it WAS constitutional.  And yet, when all was said and done, McConnell (and I'm sure many others) decided to vote not guilty because they believed it was unconstitutional.  

 

So, let me say again...  I'm deeply disturbed with the outcome of this case.  I think it's a travesty.  I think all facts point to Trump's guilt, and that he should have been found guilty in the impeachment trial.  My first post merely was trying to point out that the rules (or lack thereof) make a mockery of what a trial means.  Sorry if my intent was confusing.   

 

And I don't think the trial was a waste, in terms of getting the facts on record, and letting the American people hear the truth of what happened on January 6.  Though I'm sure those who support Trump will not be swayed in the least by any of the evidence.  

[RichardColeman]

If they could not predict the outcome of this, God help them predicting other matters

[J Town]

Oh dear GAWD! The former president's attorney is blathering after the trial, spewing lies. His side won, why not just slink away like the slime he is?

[Psimbo]

Even McConnell's wife, Elaine Chao  had the moral turpitude to resign her position as Secretary of Transportation following the events of 6 Jan. He and his ilk are an absolute disgrace. If I was an American I would do my level best to rid the Senate of these self-serving parasites whos only goal is to remain at the trough come the mid-terms.

 

Trump walks away from this with the blood of at least 5 people on his hands, notwithstanding the divisions and hatred he leaves in his wake.  

 

Trump will trumpet his acquittal and not give a toss about the deaths he was DIRECTLY responsible for. Shame on him and shame on the cowards in the Senate. Hopefully civil suits connected with the deaths will pursue him. He is pure toxicity.

[Surelynot]

“It is a sad commentary on our times that one political party in America is given a free pass to denigrate the rule of law, defame law enforcement, cheer mobs, excuse rioters, and transform justice into a tool of political vengeance, and persecute, blacklist, cancel and suppress all people and viewpoints with whom or which they disagree.

 

Guess who has just released this statement!

[IraqRon]

1 hour ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

A bit harsh to call him an absolute coward. He stood up and said Trump is clearly guilty and he would have voted as such if not for the fact that you can't get a conviction for impeaching a former president. 

An easy way out maybe, and most disagree, but in his speech he supported the Republicans who voted to convict and noted that Trump can still be held to account outside the Senate.

Strong words, and add to that Senators from Republican strongholds such as  Louisiana and North Carolina voting to convict, and I think it's enough to take the wind out of the sails for a while for Trump supporters. 

He's still got his base but I think he's lost at least a decent share of thinking Republicans. 

It is not a fact, it is an opinion not shared by many constitutional scholars and has no grounding in the law or the use of rational thought, should be tested in the Supreme Court.

I agree with the rest of your post.

[ThailandRyan]

It is so sad to see this occurring, it is just like his reality show, it never stops.  Most of the former presidents slowly and quietly slid into retirement and were barely heard from for awhile afterwards unless they were put in the spotlight again because of something they were doing, much like Jimmy Carter and his Habitat for Humanity outreach.  Clinton stayed alive because of his wife and of course his making millions for speaches and the Clinton foundation.  Obama slid into retirement and not much was heard from him except when he was sucked into the recent election chaos.  But then maybe I am wrong and they always stayed in the spotlight, I just can not recall that happening like it is now and will unfortunately continue because people wish to live in the past and not move forward.

[PatOngo]

1 hour ago, ExpatOK said:

This case should have never been prosecuted. We all knew Trump would be acquitted and it further divided the country contrary to what biden SAYS he wants.  Shame AGAIN on Nancy for bringing this meritless case.

Very sad when both sides of the isle are a mess, is'nt it! Says a lot about the country as a whole, though I'm sure things can only improve moving forward, they surely can't get any worse!