Trump Impeachment 2: Insurrection Boogaloo

[Js1 87182]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He can’t run again after this.  He’s way too dangerous now.  You don’t need to cut a deal. Trump declared war on the United States. 

Lol at can’t. He can and will. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Js1 said:

Lol at can’t. He can and will. 

No, he won’t.  Corporate media nor social media is going to platform this guy. I’m not sure it’s registering with you how fucked he is.  

[Neonmoon 38130]

16 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
 

 

the text doesn’t say he has to be convicted of insurrection or rebellion. If both houses sign off on a resolution of censure stating he has engaged in such is that enough to enforce a ban on holding office? 

I’m all for applying the 14th, I just want to now how it’s applied and would need to be applied, and the decide if it’s worth giving up impeachment leverage. (Aka making Republicans vote on it) 

if all you need is a simple majority to apply the 14th, then fuck them, pass that shit anyway after you impeach 

[Chewy's Hairy Horn 868]

He’ll grift of running his kids and staging rallies. He’s not running again, himself.  

[immamac 44347]

I like the 14th now a lot too. Censure and let him go on the 20th and he's out forever. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

He becomes a fugitive from justice in nine days regardless of what happens with impeachment/pardons. 

Edited January 12, 2021 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Foosters 18280]

What does the GOP get out of offering a deal like this? They can just tell their constituents that "we didn't impeach him, we just banned him from ever being POTUS again" and that's gonna fly?

I would assume this is a device intended to delay or deceive.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

What does the GOP get out of offering a deal like this? They can just tell their constituents that "we didn't impeach him, we just banned him from ever being POTUS again" and that's gonna fly?

I would assume this is a device intended to delay or deceive.

Well, it might be more palatable to them than a conviction vote, where either 17+ need to get on board and/or they will all be branded cowards (by either real patriots or freedumbpatriots).

To vote to censure, the House needs no R votes and in the Senate, only three.

So, they could 1) take Trump off the table for 2024; 2) not have to commit to a controversial or "traitorous" impeachment conviction vote (where they're damned if they do or don't); 3) not have to subject many Rs to reaming by the Trumpists.

[Js1 87182]

8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

What does the GOP get out of offering a deal like this? They can just tell their constituents that "we didn't impeach him, we just banned him from ever being POTUS again" and that's gonna fly?

I would assume this is a device intended to delay or deceive.

They don’t want Donald hanging around in 2024. He will romp to the nomination and they all know it. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

6 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He can’t run again after this.  He’s way too dangerous now.  You don’t need to cut a deal. Trump declared war on the United States. 

Dude, what world have you been watching?  He could absolutely run, and win, again.  We are a country that is, at least 50% moron.  If Dems can work out a deal banning him from holding office again...fucking take it and run. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

23 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Dude, what world have you been watching?  He could absolutely run, and win, again.  We are a country that is, at least 50% moron.  If Dems can work out a deal banning him from holding office again...fucking take it and run. 

A week ago this would have been true.  Let’s revisit this in one month.  People kept saying nothing matters.  Lots of people believe that now.  I don’t.  Trump should not be negotiated with under any circumstances. 

[miguelito 11505]

Can his kids be banned, too?

[MaybeACoordinator 8350]

At least he won't be able to run Melania in his place as a Ma Trump candidate, or at least it would seem like he couldn't. I have no idea how it was decided we were cool with Canadian Ted Cruz running. 

[Wanker Bob 379]

In the end a functioning democracy requires at least a basically educated enough population for the majority to understand how to vote for their positive benefit. If the US hasn't crossed the stupidity threshold yet it's very close, and when it does nothing can be done to save it. Politics will become more toxic and more corrupt until you have situations like India or like Russia. Either full on tribal politics warring with each other constantly or a psedo-dictatorship.  

[immamac 44347]

Or idiocracy

[bad_teammate 13523]

19 minutes ago, Wanker Bob said:

In the end a functioning democracy requires at least a basically educated enough population for the majority to understand how to vote for their positive benefit. 

We're plenty educated. The problem we have is that Facebook is feeding us poison. (Other social media, too, but FB in particular.)

Grandma goes on FB and says "I like America!" and clicks Like on a picture of a Blue Lives Matter flag and the FB algorithm sees that and thinks, "Oh! This user would love MAGASTORM1488!" and the next time she logs in she's recommended Ben Shapiro's face and a pepe frog throwing Nancy Pelosi out of a helicopter.

She clicks on the Pepe meme to find out what it is and the algorithm sees how to get her to click more and, 6 months later, she's storming the US Capitol building with a tiny flag and juicebox.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4999]

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Does he fit the bolded part? He wasn't a member of Congress and didn't hold any offices at the state level, so it would come down to whether he is considered an officer of the United States. Does that mean military officer (would make sense given the context of the passing) or someone in any office? There is more potential for SCOTUS to overturn a removal based on the 14th, so I would lean more towards impeachment, especially if more info comes to light regarding any coordinated efforts. Of course, they could always do both.

[Wanker Bob 379]

If grandma and millions of Americans like her aren't capable of seeing through that horrific bullshit and get sucked into a cult mindset then they are no longer capable of voting in their own positive interests. They're now liabilities to the republic. Get a large enough percentage of them and it all breaks down no matter what anyone does. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Pelosi came out saying no thanks to Censure. They will vote to impeach 

[WhatTheBuck 28929]

16 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Does he fit the bolded part? He wasn't a member of Congress and didn't hold any offices at the state level, so it would come down to whether he is considered an officer of the United States. Does that mean military officer (would make sense given the context of the passing) or someone in any office? There is more potential for SCOTUS to overturn a removal based on the 14th, so I would lean more towards impeachment, especially if more info comes to light regarding any coordinated efforts. Of course, they could always do both.

He holds the highest office in the United States. 

[TwiceHorn 32079]

15 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Does he fit the bolded part? He wasn't a member of Congress and didn't hold any offices at the state level, so it would come down to whether he is considered an officer of the United States. Does that mean military officer (would make sense given the context of the passing) or someone in any office? There is more potential for SCOTUS to overturn a removal based on the 14th, so I would lean more towards impeachment, especially if more info comes to light regarding any coordinated efforts. Of course, they could always do both.

The meaning of "officer of the United States" has attracted some attention in the context of the Appointments Clause in determining who is a legitimate appointment and how they may be removed.  The context of that, where it is the President that does the appointing, excludes the President.

Although the language is the same, I'm not sure the exclusion of the President would necessarily follow.  Ejusdem generis probably says the President is included.

What a God-awful drafting job that is.  The English language and principles of clarity in writing, even legal drafting, have not changed sufficiently to justify some of the garbage drafting that has gone on in our governmental affairs.

[The Dog 44861]

I mentioned this in the Ted Cruz thread but invoking the 14th doesn't keep Trump (or anyone) from being elected again. It's not an option if you want to make Trump ineligible for office. 

Quote

The clause was originally enacted to limit the influence of former Confederates in the Reconstruction era. It has been used occasionally since. Victor L. Berger, a member of the Socialist Party of America, was repeatedly prevented from taking his seat by a House resolution after winning election in 1919 because he had been convicted under the Espionage Act.

In Mr. Berger’s case, a House resolution was passed — with an overwhelming 309-to-1 vote — barring him from his seat in Congress. A special election was held in his Wisconsin congressional district for the vacated seat, but he was re-elected with an increased margin of victory. The seat was again vacated by a House resolution, though Mr. Berger was eventually allowed to take his seat.

 

[Js1 87182]

GOP played the long game.

Now 3 Dem Reps going into COVID quarantine after testing positive following the coup attempt and being packed in rooms with Republican lawmakers refusing to wear masks.

In a precarious small majority, Pelosi now has 3 members out due to COVID when it comes to an impeachment vote tomorrow.  Better hope there is actually "10-20" Republicans as well.   

[wildcat09 29579]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The meaning of "officer of the United States" has attracted some attention in the context of the Appointments Clause in determining who is a legitimate appointment and how they may be removed.  The context of that, where it is the President that does the appointing, excludes the President.

Although the language is the same, I'm not sure the exclusion of the President would necessarily follow.  Ejusdem generis probably says the President is included.

What a God-awful drafting job that is.  The English language and principles of clarity in writing, even legal drafting, have not changed sufficiently to justify some of the garbage drafting that has gone on in our governmental affairs.

Yeah it could be worded better, but the idea that it doesn't include the President is based less on a reasonable interpretation of it than motivated reasoning. We'll never be able to draft a law so clearly that people of bad faith can't convince a lot of people that it means something else entirely.

[Underdog 29187]

Should be allowed a mail-in vote, would really piss off Trump. 

[wildcat09 29579]

14 minutes ago, Js1 said:

GOP played the long game.

Now 3 Dem Reps going into COVID quarantine after testing positive following the coup attempt and being packed in rooms with Republican lawmakers refusing to wear masks.

In a precarious small majority, Pelosi now has 3 members out due to COVID when it comes to an impeachment vote tomorrow.  Better hope there is actually "10-20" Republicans as well.   

The members that have to quarantine can instruct others to cast their vote by proxy.

[Js1 87182]

 

[Biff Tannen 46166]

22 minutes ago, Js1 said:

 

I don't think there will be much difference.  These creatures have no conscience.

[Brisketexan 106898]

Just now, Biff Tannen said:

I don't think there will be much difference.  These creatures have no conscience.

This.  Do not count on the GOP, or anyone in it, to do the right thing.  Ever.  From now until the End of Days.

[wildcat09 29579]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don't think there will be much difference.  These creatures have no conscience.

Right. The only reason they're not whipping the vote is that they don't even need to.

[Guest Lobo]

It's about money.  they're not afraid of Trump anymore, they're afraid though of looking too lenient on the events of the last week and getting put on that "No cash for you" list being assembled by half of Wall Street and the Fortune 1000.  They're not whipping any votes right now because with a markedly smaller pie of cash to share going forward, it's every man for himself.  

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don't think there will be much difference.  These creatures have no conscience.

Not a single one voted for impeachment last time, right?  Probably get 8-10 who might vote for it this time. 

[Goredho 17656]

Well, and the MAGAts have elected their own in a lot of parts of the country.  There are people like Mitch McConnell who are opportunists willing to get into bed with Trump for political gain and then there are a shit ton of GOP house members that truly believe in the all powerful Trump as demigod.  They would probably drop to their knees if given the chance to suck him off to completion in the belief that they would absorb some of his God-like power and wisdom.  Those people will never, ever go against Trump.  They will die with him in a fire if they have to.

[wildcat09 29579]

3 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Well, and the MAGAts have elected their own in a lot of parts of the country.  There are people like Mitch McConnell who are opportunists willing to get into bed with Trump for political gain and then there are a shit ton of GOP house members that truly believe in the all powerful Trump as demigod.  They would probably drop to their knees if given the chance to suck him off to completion in the belief that they would absorb some of his God-like power and wisdom.  Those people will never, ever go against Trump.  They will die with him in a fire if they have to.

I'd be ok with that.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Pretty remarkable how Bill Barr, McConnell, and Pence knew the precise time to hedge their bets on Trump’s coup. 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20917]

4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

We're plenty educated. The problem we have is that Facebook is feeding us poison.

 

These two sentences directly contradict one another. Were we plenty educated, the "poison" that Facebook is feeding us would have no impact.

[Dnaguy 12630]

40 minutes ago, Lobo said:

It's about money.  they're not afraid of Trump anymore, they're afraid though of looking too lenient on the events of the last week and getting put on that "No cash for you" list being assembled by half of Wall Street and the Fortune 1000.  They're not whipping any votes right now because with a markedly smaller pie of cash to share going forward, it's every man for himself.  

[wildcat09 29579]

24 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

These two sentences directly contradict one another. Were we plenty educated, the "poison" that Facebook is feeding us would have no impact.

That's not really how an education works.

[Brisketexan 106898]

14 hours ago, Js1 said:

Lol at can’t. He can and will. 

AND. HE. WILL. WIN THE NOMINATION.

And it won't even be close.  Jr. and Gaetz were not wrong when they said "this is Trump's party now.  Trump doesn't care if Congressman Jones can get a nice donation from Citibank anymore.  Trump will grift hundreds of millions -- perhaps billions -- from the masses.  That's all that matters to him.  He will siphon off their money, and feed their ego.  And the only path forward for the GOP will be the path they've followed for the past 4 years: complete fealty to the Emperor.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

AND. HE. WILL. WIN THE NOMINATION.

And it won't even be close.  Jr. and Gaetz were not wrong when they said "this is Trump's party now.  Trump doesn't care if Congressman Jones can get a nice donation from Citibank anymore.  Trump will grift hundreds of millions -- perhaps billions -- from the masses.  That's all that matters to him.  He will siphon off their money, and feed their ego.  And the only path forward for the GOP will be the path they've followed for the past 4 years: complete fealty to the Emperor.

If you believe this then the idea of him being constrained by some election ban is curious.  The law isn’t going to contain him from consolidating political power unless he’s in custody or out of the country. 

[Brisketexan 106898]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If you believe this then the idea of him being constrained by some election ban is curious.  The law isn’t going to contain him from consolidating political power unless he’s in custody or out of the country. 

Oh, I have already said that.  He has one of two roles, guaranteed: king, or kingmaker.  The next GOP nominee will be whoever Trump wants it to be -- either him, or his anointed candidate.

[Biff Tannen 46166]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The next GOP nominee will be whoever Trump wants it to be -- either him, or his anointed candidate.

Gozer the Gozarian?

[Brisketexan 106898]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Gozer the Gozarian?

Like he'd pick someone that good-natured.

[TexasEd 8266]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

AND. HE. WILL. WIN THE NOMINATION.

And it won't even be close.  Jr. and Gaetz were not wrong when they said "this is Trump's party now.  Trump doesn't care if Congressman Jones can get a nice donation from Citibank anymore.  Trump will grift hundreds of millions -- perhaps billions -- from the masses.  That's all that matters to him.  He will siphon off their money, and feed their ego.  And the only path forward for the GOP will be the path they've followed for the past 4 years: complete fealty to the Emperor.

Yes, he's using the televangelist playbook on steroids.

[Michael Knight 13218]

 

[Js1 87182]

35 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

 

They also told members not to speak out against or disparage any House GOP member who votes for impeachment to prevent death threats or attacks. 

So I assume Mo Brooks would be leading the pitchfork and tiki torch mob and Gaetz is providing the anthrax for the envelopes 

[wildcat09 29579]

Brooks, Gaetz, Boebert, Greene, Gosar, Goehmert, and Cawthorn are the ones just off the top of my head I think we can expect to gladly get their fellow Republicans murdered if they think it will advance their political careers.

[Francisco 2.0 32590]

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/01/12/us/impeachment-trump-25th-amendment?type=styln-live-updates&label=presidential transition&index=0&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-impeachment-trump-mc

 

Quote

Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, has told associates he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.

 

Quote

At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he ought to call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of last week’s riot at the Capitol, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.

 

Quote

While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.

Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically fraught and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces in the wake of last week’s assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.

 

Quote

Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky has indicated he wants to see the specific article of impeachment that the House is set to approve on Wednesday, which is expected to draw support from as many as a dozen Republicans, potentially including Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the party’s No. 3 in the House. But he has made clear in private discussions that he believes now is the moment to move on the weakened lame duck, whom he blames for Republicans losing the Senate.

On Monday, President-elect Biden telephoned Mr. McConnell to ask whether it was possible to set up a dual track that would allow the Senate to confirm Mr. Biden’s cabinet nominees and hold a Senate trial at the same time, according to officials briefed on the conversation who disclosed it on condition of anonymity. Far from avoiding the topic of impeaching Mr. Trump, Mr. McConnell said it was a question for the Senate parliamentarian, and promised Mr. Biden a quick answer.

 

 

Edited January 12, 2021 by Francisco 2.0

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I hate Mitch so much b/c he’s so good at being evil and getting away with it. 

[wildcat09 29579]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I hate Mitch so much b/c he’s so good at being evil and getting away with it.