House impeaches Trump after U.S. Capitol siege; his fate in Senate hands

[Chomper Higgot]

21 minutes ago, J Town said:

trea·son

/ˈtrēzən/

noun

the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.

 

I dunno, looks like treason to me.

That’s not what the law says about treason.

 

Trump’s actions wrt the failed coup are far more aligned with sedition than treason.

His actions wrt to certain foreign nations, and one in particular, are another matter.

[PETERTHEEATER]

9 hours ago, car720 said:

Just get rid of the idiot once and for all.

But not before he has signed the authorisation to send an astronaut to the sun. Please!

[J Town]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s not what the law says about treason.

 

Trump’s actions wrt the failed coup are far more aligned with sedition than treason.

His actions wrt to certain foreign nations, and one in particular, are another matter.

You're right, it's even MORE clearly defined for constitutional treason:

 

The Constitution specifically identifies what constitutes treason against the United States and, importantly, limits the offense of treason to only two types of conduct: (1) “levying war” against the United States; or (2) “adhering to [the] enemies [of the United States], giving them aid and comfort.”

 

Acting as a general, prompting his mob to break into the capitol and attack the police and in one case killing an officer in order to illegally take over the government for four more years - that's an act of war. Imagine if Putin tried that - oh, wait, he DID by proxy.

 

Interpretation: Treason Clause | The National Constitution Center

[onthedarkside]

A post making claims without any source or attribution has been removed.

 

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, cmarshall said:

 

I am not going to both debating these points since they all arise from sloppy use of language.  Read the judge's opinion and argue against that if you can.

Here you go:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-impeachment-trial-after-his-term-ends-is-backed-by-history/ar-BB1cJWIs?ocid=spartanntp

 

[Thingamabob]

The impeachment move against Trump by the the Dems is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years. Shame on you Pelosi and your grovelling sycophants.

[GrandPapillon]

11 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Unfortunately, trying the President for impeachment after he has left office is probably unconstitutional.  If McConnell were serious about getting rid of Trump he and Schumer would have called the Senate back into emergency session to conduct the trial before Trump leaves office.  

 

The Impeachment Clause, Article II, Section 4 states:

 

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

It seems pretty clear that the point of impeachment is removal from office.  A former president cannot be removed from office and is therefore not subject to impeachment.

 

Therefore, if the Senate goes ahead and tries Trump after Jan. 20 and if, big "If," they can muster a two thirds vote in the Senate to convict, I expect a court will subsequently overturn the conviction.

 

I understand the case that is being made for the opposite view, but I think it is weak.

 

very good points, and completely unnecessary, but it will not go down well with the righteous anti-Trump crowd ????

 

Biden can see they are making Trump a martyr, and he is not finished politically, 4 more years of Trump coming up as the main opposition

[GrandPapillon]

4 hours ago, cmarshall said:

 

If you had bothered to read the judge's opinion you would have encountered the paragraph below.  In this context "impeachment proceedings" refers to all of the House and Senate procedures including the Senate trial, as he makes clear." 

 

 

The Constitution itself answers this question clearly: No, he cannot be. Once Trump’s term ends on Jan. 20, Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him — even if the House has already approved articles of impeachment.

 

Therefore, if the House of Representatives were to impeach the president before he leaves office, the Senate could not thereafter convict the former president and disqualify him under the Constitution from future public office.

 

The reason for this is found in the Constitution itself. Trump would no longer be incumbent in the Office of the President at the time of the delayed Senate proceeding and would no longer be subject to “impeachment conviction” by the Senate, under the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses. Which is to say that the Senate’s only power under the Constitution is to convict — or not — an incumbent president.

 

 

 

makes a lot of sense, but for Trump haters, legality of things shouldn't be an issue ????

Edited January 14, 2021 by GrandPapillon

[heybruce]

9 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

 

makes a lot of sense, but for Trump haters, legality of things shouldn't be an issue ????

Is legality a big issue with Trump?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

You also don't broker peace by forgiving someone who basically attempted a coup. 

A message needs to be sent and that message is extremism in any form will not be tolerated. Violence will be punished according to the law. Those attempting to overthrow a democratically elected government will face the full force of the law.

NO ONE, not even the POTUS himself is above the law. This needs to be shown to the country and indeed the world. 

Aaron Burr was the Donald Trump of his day.  If you learn Burr's early history you will understand why. 

 

After his duel with Alexander Hamilton (evidence suggests Hamilton deliberately missed, then Burr took a few seconds to take careful aim and shot to kill) Burr went to the Louisiana Territory to either commit treason or fleece the English and Spanish governments by soliciting money from them by promising to commit treason.  After going through the motions and choosing poor allies Burr was found out and tried for treason.  He was acquitted but fled to England to escape creditors.  He eventually returned to the US but was roundly reviled and barely eked out a living.

 

Perhaps I should have opened with "Donald Trump is the Aaron Burr of this day so far", except Trump hasn't the balls to challenge anyone to a duel.  One can hope that an impeachment trial will leave Trump as impoverished and discredited as Aaron Burr's treason trial.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Me too but I was wondering if that was the penalty for treason. 

Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution:  "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

 

"them" in this case refers to the United States (initially we were a plural).  Outside of war, or initiating war, treason is difficult to prove.  Other charges are fair game.

[heybruce]

33 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

The impeachment move against Trump by the the Dems is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years. Shame on you Pelosi and your grovelling sycophants.

Let's try variations on that logic:

 

The charges against BLM protestors are infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years.

 

The claim Obama was born in Kenya is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years.

 

War on Afghanistan for what bin Ladin did is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years.

 

Wow!  If you state opinions as facts, and predict dire consequences without substantiation, you can argue against anything.

[J Town]

12 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

 

makes a lot of sense, but for Trump haters, legality of things shouldn't be an issue ????

And you keep making loaded con man statements. Adults capable of critical thinking don't hate the man 45 himself. They DO hate his policies, his lies, his multiple crimes that have cost lives. Try arguing like an adult.

[welovesundaysatspace]

37 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

The impeachment move against Trump by the the Dems is infantile.

You and your lot are the last ones who should be complaining about anyone being infantile. 
 

37 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US

You and your lot are the last ones who should be complaining about dividing the country. 
 

37 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years.

You and your lot are the last ones who should be complaining about enraging the “economically disadvantaged”.

 

37 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Shame on you Pelosi and your grovelling sycophants.

You and your lot are the only ones who need to be ashamed. 

[Eric Loh]

19 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

 

very good points, and completely unnecessary, but it will not go down well with the righteous anti-Trump crowd ????

 

Biden can see they are making Trump a martyr, and he is not finished politically, 4 more years of Trump coming up as the main opposition

Malarkey use of the word martyr. He's not dead and money don't count as religious or beliefs. Anyway his popularity is dimming judging by polls, his party want to purge him and his donors are deserting him. He will be a washed up poorer  ex-President in 4 years.  

[Eric Loh]

58 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

The impeachment move against Trump by the the Dems is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years. Shame on you Pelosi and your grovelling sycophants.

Nothing like a good spanking of Trump; impeachment style by bipartisan votes. 10 House GOPs is a record in impeachment history.  

[welovesundaysatspace]

It’s naive to believe the Republicans would ever convict Trump. They not only don’t care; they’re not “spineless” or “fear”—they love it. It’s exactly what they and their party are: totalitarians and fascists(*). 
 

According to historians who attend these and other protests, it wasn’t just freaks storming the Capitol, but everyday-Republicans and even GOP politicians. 
They’ve always been the party of minority rule based on voter suppression. They filled the courts with their henchmen, all the way up to the Supreme Court. Almost none of them has ever spoken up against Trump, not even after his attempted coup. In fact, only a few days after the failed coup, Graham travels with him to the Mexican border; some refuse to go through the new metal detectors; only 10 vote for impeachment; and one will even be filing articles of impeachment against Joe Biden once he’s taken office. 

Make no mistake, that soft distancing from Trump that you’re seeing now is pure damage control. Frankenstein’s monster, the useful orange idiot, got out of control. But that doesn’t change the fact that he was always Mitch’s baby

that he groomed to bring the party closer to dictatorial power under the disguise of “American democracy”. 
 

They will never convict him. They want him to run again 2024 to try another time to establish a Republican Reich. 
 

 

 

(*) not referring to WWII but to the political system

[pacovl46]

4 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

see "former presidents act"

 

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/19980605_98-524_5719c7e830226aec8a17505871ced06bcaf84b13.pdf

 

if he resigns, or is impeached but not convicted, he keeps his benefits.

 

if convicted, he loses all benefits, although congress would probably vote to continue the security detail.

Yeah, that’s what I meant. Impeachment and conviction. Thanks for the info! ????

[pedro01]

12 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

An even more important aspect about this article of impeachment was the firm clause that bars Trump from taking any [elected/appointed] public office in the future. 

 

Yes - they are scared he'll come back an win an election

 

[Dumbastheycome]

2 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

It’s naive to believe the Republicans would ever convict Trump. They not only don’t care; they’re not “spineless” or “fear”—they love it. It’s exactly what they and their party are: totalitarians and fascists(*). 
 

According to historians who attend these and other protests, it wasn’t just freaks storming the Capitol, but everyday-Republicans and even GOP politicians. 
They’ve always been the party of minority rule based on voter suppression. They filled the courts with their henchmen, all the way up to the Supreme Court. Almost none of them has ever spoken up against Trump, not even after his attempted coup. In fact, only a few days after the failed coup, Graham travels with him to the Mexican border; some refuse to go through the new metal detectors; only 10 vote for impeachment; and one will even be filing articles of impeachment against Joe Biden once he’s taken office. 

Make no mistake, that soft distancing from Trump that you’re seeing now is pure damage control. Frankenstein’s monster, the useful orange idiot, got out of control. But that doesn’t change the fact that he was always Mitch’s baby

that he groomed to bring the party closer to dictatorial power under the disguise of “American democracy”. 
 

They will never convict him. They want him to run again 2024 to try another time to establish a Republican Reich. 
 

 

 

(*) not referring to WWII but to the political system

I strongly  doubt that  by the time the dust settles over  current events that Trump will retain  enough standing   for nomination in the 2024 Primaries. His  public support  now  from Republican party members even combined  with   Independents has dropped to around  40%. McConnell has enjoyed his time as  POTUS  Handler very much  but would look to  the like of Pence as easy meat. Not fresh meat  but  not  tainted !

Regardless of the political aspect Trump has yet to deal with the reality of exposure  to the civil actions  that as POTUS he has  been shielded from. There  are also some significant issues surrounding more than  one GOP affiliated individual that  may add to the  taint Trump  has attracted  to his alternative  "swamp" !

[welovesundaysatspace]

11 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

Yes - they are scared he'll come back an win an election

 

After he divided the country and groomed a mob of domestic terrorists to try a violent coup, it seems understandable that people don’t want him to come back. (And that’s not even considering all the embarrassments this clown has caused his country.) 

Edited January 14, 2021 by welovesundaysatspace

[ExpatOK]

13 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Unfortunately, trying the President for impeachment after he has left office is probably unconstitutional.  If McConnell were serious about getting rid of Trump he and Schumer would have called the Senate back into emergency session to conduct the trial before Trump leaves office.  

 

The Impeachment Clause, Article II, Section 4 states:

 

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

It seems pretty clear that the point of impeachment is removal from office.  A former president cannot be removed from office and is therefore not subject to impeachment.

 

Therefore, if the Senate goes ahead and tries Trump after Jan. 20 and if, big "If," they can muster a two thirds vote in the Senate to convict, I expect a court will subsequently overturn the conviction.

 

I understand the case that is being made for the opposite view, but I think it is weak.

Yeah, it really is unfortunate. I was hoping they'd impeach George Washington for owning slaves.

[Sujo]

16 minutes ago, ExpatOK said:

Yeah, it really is unfortunate. I was hoping they'd impeach George Washington for owning slaves.

Did he incite them to overthrow the govt?

[Gecko123]

The below video of what appears to be a rally the evening before the January 6th DC rally leaves little doubt that President Trump knew or should have known that there would be a high propensity for violence at the Capitol. This appears to be a gathering of Trump's most hard core supporters, almost all male, many ex-military,  largely a 30-55 year old demographic. A smattering of the rhetoric from the speakers will provide a flavor of the threats and menace that were being made if the Electoral College tabulation wasn't aborted:

 

"God is about to do something"

"fired up?"

"lock shields"

"conviction worth dying for"

"lay down our lives"

"fighting for America"

"Fired up? <deleted> off?"

multiple 1776 references

One speaker says: "I had a meeting at the White House today and they are very optimistic.  They thing something good is gonna happen tomorrow"

Rep Kitzinger called "a little rat"

"warriors"

"better make the right decision tomorrow or you're gonna have a whole lot of <deleted> off patriots in DC tomorrow"

"victorious tomorrow"

 

This wasn't a peaceful protest that somehow got out of hand. It was planned violence and Trump knew ahead of time what was almost certainly going to happen.

 

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I strongly  doubt that  by the time the dust settles over  current events that Trump will retain  enough standing   for nomination in the 2024 Primaries. His  public support  now  from Republican party members even combined  with   Independents has dropped to around  40%. McConnell has enjoyed his time as  POTUS  Handler very much  but would look to  the like of Pence as easy meat. Not fresh meat  but  not  tainted !

Regardless of the political aspect Trump has yet to deal with the reality of exposure  to the civil actions  that as POTUS he has  been shielded from. There  are also some significant issues surrounding more than  one GOP affiliated individual that  may add to the  taint Trump  has attracted  to his alternative  "swamp" !

Remember how reviled George W. Bush was when he left office? He's quite popular now. Of course, Bush knew enough to keep a low profile.  In that regard, Trump will continue to be his own worst enemy.

[Walker88]

25 minutes ago, ExpatOK said:

Yeah, it really is unfortunate. I was hoping they'd impeach George Washington for owning slaves.

Slavery was immoral, but not against the law at that time. The comment, made by graham on fox, is spurious, albeit typical of how 45's quislings behave.

 

Insurrection has always been against the law.

 

The Senate trial, if 45 is convicted of insurrection, will take from him certain perks usually afforded a former POTUS. The Impeachment managers can add specific penalties to the indictment, such as preventing 45 from holding any national elected office again, receiving a pension, or given a post-POTUS office and budget.

 

Another advantage of the delay bringing the indictment to the Senate, is that additional investigation can take place between now and then, which may open up the possibility of additional Federal and civil charges against 45. Impeachment is likely to be the least of 45's problems. It's a pretty sure bet jail is in his future. South Korea, a vibrant modern democracy and economy, has jailed several of its former leaders for crimes less egregious than insurrection.

 

 

[billd766]

5 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

see "former presidents act"

 

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/19980605_98-524_5719c7e830226aec8a17505871ced06bcaf84b13.pdf

 

if he resigns, or is impeached but not convicted, he keeps his benefits.

 

if convicted, he loses all benefits, although congress would probably vote to continue the security detail.

Why would he keep the security detail? He won't need them in jail, or perhaps he would. ????

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

 

makes a lot of sense, but for Trump haters, legality of things shouldn't be an issue ????

Dont fret, if they dont succeed first time they can try another 60 times.

[Walker88]

Conviction in the Senate requires a supermajority of those present. It is likely some repubs will vote with their feet and simply not attend the trial, thereby not having to take a stand, while all 50 Dem and Ind Senators are likely to be on hand.

 

Almost certain votes to convict are Romney, Murkowski, Sasse and Thune. Likely 'convict' votes are Burr, Collins and Shelby. McConnell could go either way, as could Portman. They may wish to reclaim the Party, particularly after losing both GA runoff seats. 45 is bad for the repub brand.

 

Any repub who has dreams of running in 2024 will likely want 45 out of the way, so it is possible cruz, hawley and rubio will vote to convict. It isn't as if any of them has any actual principles other than self-interest. Depending on what new information comes out between now and the trial, plus any additional vindictive, childish damage 45 does in his final 6 days, could add yet more.

 

Conviction is anything but a longshot.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

The impeachment move against Trump by the the Dems is infantile. It will achieve nothing other than to sew even deeper divisions within the US, and to enrage further those who have been economically disadvantaged in recent years. Shame on you Pelosi and your grovelling sycophants.

So you think that it is OK for  POTUS to lie, make false claims with no evidence and exhort a crowd of HIS supporters to invade, occupy and destroy property, threaten the lawmakers inside with serious injury and in the case threaten to hang the VPOTUS and not even get a slap on the wrist,

 

In case you had forgotten or somehow missed the fact that 4 people died I am just reminding you of that fact.

 

I do understand Trump supporters hate facts and the truth but that IS what happened, though you will probably say that it is fake news.