Wrote Mitch McConnell, quoted in "Hours before the verdict, McConnell tells Republicans he plans to vote to acquit Trump, calling it ‘a close call’" (NYT).
To say "close call" is to hedge his political bet. To rely on the jurisdictional ground avoids the question on the merits. Who knows if he'd consider that a "close call" too?
The NYT seems to know, because it has this:
The leader had let it be known that he believed Mr. Trump committed impeachable offenses and told advisers and colleagues he was open to conviction as the best way of purging Mr. Trump from the Republican Party. He even said publicly that Mr. Trump had “provoked the attack.”
Posts
140 comments:
I think McConnell was honestly furious at Trump, five weeks ago. The real close call for him was the temptation to vote yes, versus the sense that this is all pointless bullshit anyway.
The January exception doesn't make any sense anyway if a president is in his second term. He can't run for office again. Impeaching him isn't going to do anything. So it's a "January Exception" we've long lived with.
Turtle getting primaried
Now they vote to have witnesses. What a clown car.
McConnell is trying to hedge his bets. When the dust settles, Trump's supporters are going to realize the only accomplishment McConnell had in the entire of Trump's term was to get his own slate of judges confirmed. By the time McConnell comes up for re-election, the Republican party as he knows it will look a lot different. If Trump's takeover of the party holds, McConnell hopes being able to say he never voted to impeach Trump will be enough to save him. If the GOP goes back to where it was before 2016, he thinks to be able to say he wanted to convict Trump, but he wasn't sure it was constitutional will keep him afloat. I'm not sure either way if enough voters in Kentucky will be forgiving.
God, I wish we could get honest analysis of the Impeachment power.
Impeachment is an emergency check on power. The Executive, and those he appoints, directs.
It is dishonest to advocate the Senate has some power, not enumerated in the Constitution that allows them the power to disqualify a single person from running for an elected office. That Power is reserved for the STATES.
This supposed to be a check on FEDERAL POWER. Power is supposed to rest with the people and the states. The federal govt is subservient to those two. But we have willingly ceded the power. Mostly out of ignorance because Civics has been displaced by black history month, and months long seminars on micro aggressions, all the while producing students graduating from high school that reads and ciphers at the 5th grade level.
The federal govt is creating a majority class that is uneducated and willing to live at subsistence levels on the govt dole.
"he was open to conviction as the best way of purging Mr. Trump"
Just so we know what Mitch considers the "merits."
I see that the "New York Times Review" continues.
Shorter NYT: Hearsay > direct testimony
So, do I have this right.
“We don’t need witnesses.” Their case gets torched. “New rules, we need witnesses.”
Is that right?
And Now......"Democrats flipped the script this morning after their case collapsed on Friday against President Trump.
Democrats now want to change the rules and call in witnesses. This comes after Senator McConnell announced he will vote to acquit."
This is what they do with everything, including the fraudulent election, and then they wonder why the American People are pissed off AT THEM for cheating????
"According to the Seattle Times — Rep. Jaimie Raskin, lead impeachment manager, called Saturday morning for Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington to be subpoenaed for the Senate trial, saying her corroboration of a Jan. 6 phone call between House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and former President Donald Trump was critical. Beutler, one of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump. The senate is now voting to call witnesses.
Trump’s attorneys erupted after Democrats flipped the script knowing they were losing their case."
Cheaters will always cheat and the uninformed will believe all of their lies This is the Twilight Zone.
And they just voted themselves some witnesses. Aren't the cheaters grand in thinking they will get away with this without pissing us all off more and more?? That's why the gates are up...to protect them from our wrath that they keep poking and poking and poking. They aren't going to enjoy what's coming.
wendybar said...
And they just voted themselves some witnesses. Aren't the cheaters grand in thinking they will get away with this without pissing us all off more and more??
They're only thinking how much fun it will be watching Anderson and Don and Fredo mock the QAnon types they drag in to testify.
Oh yeah, and AOC's Oscar bait testimony for pathos!
I hate Mitch the Bitch. He's not a dishonest backstabber, he's a secret liberal and Democrat. That he would *pretend* to believe Trump committed an "High Crime and misdemeanor" by telling people to "protest peacefully", I don't doubt that for a second.
Mitch the Bitch only cares about ONE thing, pleasing the Big Republican donors and raking in all that sweet Chamber-of-Commerce cash. He hated Trump because Trump spoiled his lovely cushy situation. He's so much happier now that Biden is President. He can make conservative noises and threaten to oppose Biden knowing absolutely nothing conservative will be done. And he can then cut deals with the D's to get the Chamber-of-Commerce tax cuts/agenda passed in some 5,000 page omnibus. Frankly, if we learn that the Chicoms owned Mitch and Wife, i wouldn't be surprised.
We need to primary these Republican Clowns in 2022. Not only Lisa Murky, but Thune and all the rest of Mitch's bitches.
It's WAG the TAIL to keep your eyes here instead of the EO's and destruction coming our way because of the damage Delusional China Joe is doing overturning all the things that make America great....
McConnel as leader is the reason I will not support any Republican national organization.
That's why the gates are up...to protect them from our wrath that they keep poking and poking and poking. They aren't going to enjoy what's coming.
They know what's coming. They know their policies are destructive and even the faithful are going to have a hard time swallowing them. They know even the fence isn't enough. They know they need to vet the troops. Trump fucked up the plan.
The original vote to call witnesses was 55-45, and then Miss Lindsey joined in. Its the same clowns, Romney, Sasse, COllins, Lisa Murkey, and Toomey. It it now clear to everyone, even Althouse, that this is a Stalinist show trial? And that the only reason it to embarrass and damage Trump?
I listened to the crap questions yesterday. What a clown show! The D's aren't even trying to prove that Trump's words meet the legal definition of "incitement" or that there's any objective evidence showing his words caused the riot. They also lied about Trump and others. And when it was pointed out the D's were like "haha, so we lied. Hahaha".
iowan2 @ 9:52: Could you please stop being so damned persuasive? I'm getting all steamed up again.
Seriously, though: that's a nice succinct description of where the power resides and how it flows. "Impeach" has a helpful etymology: "impedicare --> to fetter (the foot). To impede, prevent." It is about stopping a process that is ongoing. Once the target of the impeachment has stepped outside the process, has left behind the power that is allegedly being abused, there is nothing left to impede or prevent. It's over.
Impeachment is a shield, not a sword. But these hate-crazed idiots want to turn it into a sword. Very bad idea.
Claiming that Trump provoked the attack suggests that Trump should have said nothing and merely conceded. That’s my impression. But no one truly knows what effect that would have produced. As I’ve said before, local people objected to the election irregularities and their outrage was shared online. It took on a life of its own. People were not just listening to Trump and following him. If Trump had said nothing there may have been an even more explosive reaction. No one really knows. McConnell doesn’t know.
When McConnell was up for re-election he benefited from Trump’s endorsement though.
Yurtle is mad that Trump tried to run the government for the betterment of the American people instead of the betterment of Yurtle’s benefactors. Trump wasn’t as great as his supporters claim, he mostly just tried to implement policies he saw work over his lifetime and roll back policies he saw damage the US. He was not an insurrectionist by any tortured definition of that term. In 100 years historians will be agahst at what the Democrats and establishment Reps have sunk to.
"DavidUW said...
Turtle getting primaried"
Not likely to run. His current term runs to 2027. He'll be 85 (if he makes it). I think this is more about staying in power in the Senate as Minority leader.
Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington is simply repeating hearsay. If they want to know what Trump said to McCarthy they should call
McCarthy. In any case, what Trump told McCarthy has ZERO to do with the article of impeachment Notice how NO ONE, not the D's, not mitch the bitch, not frauds like Mittens or Sasse, care that the Impeachment article isn't being proven or that it does NOT meet the standard of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors"
In case you forgot, Romney wanted to drag out the first Impeachment trial too. Because Jesus told him to, or something. Laughably, when people pointed out that he'd already decided Trump was guilty and didn't need anymore witnesses, Mittens said he thought Bolten would change his mind to innocent! He's such a clown.
AYFKM that they just voted to call witnesses? Oh boy, this promises to be even more fun. Because I thought the "conventional wisdom" was that both sides (but especially the Dems) wanted to end this clown show quickly: just get their pro forma win and "move on" to the sunny uplands of the Biden Agenda. So I guess that was a bad guess: they DO want to drag this out! I better order more popcorn; because if I were Trump I would be telling my lawyers to draw up the witness list from hell: hundreds and hundreds of people, all requiring deposition, discovery, prep, direct and cross and recross, the whole nine yards. We'll be watching this on C-SPAN for decades.
conviction as the best way of purging Mr. Trump from the Republican Party.
Serious Question
Without "Mr. Trump"* and his supporters....WHO (what?) would be left of the Republican party?
Other than Life Long Republicans, in the pay of the DNC.. And Pedophile Poofters;
WHO is going to support this purged Republican Party?
"Mr Trump"* Can anyone cite me a place, where a former President is referred to as Mr Carter, or Mr Clinton? Anyone?
What a misleading headline.
Did McConnell say that acquittal was a close call, or only that the Constitutional argument was a close call. The direct quote looks like he said the latter, but the headline implies the former.
To everyone condemning McConnell -- Be careful not to let the NYT play "Let's You and Him Fight" with us. The things McConnell is on record saying directly are quite different from the things the NYT assures us he's "letting be known" privately or telling their anonymous sources. Why would we trust the NYT to portray him honestly?
Who the hell is Mitch McConnell?
He's a nobody. Of his own making.
clint - indeed.
Trusting the reporting from the NYT is a mistake.
Clint @ 10:25
Indeed.
The most successful Republican President in history, as measured by the number of votes cast in his favor, and McConnell wants him purged? Trump just wanted an honest and fair election result, and he gets impeached for it. Our ruling class is on the wrong side of history.
. I think this is more about staying in power in the Senate as Minority leader.
*in power
A lot of people are still in denial, and are going to be shocked what real power looks like when applied.
Final comment. The power of impeachment for a President was only used twice in 210 years. Pelosi has now used it twice in ONE year. It was thought to be a serious constitutional act to get rid of President who is committed "Treason or High Crimes and Misdemeanors". By removing a President, you are in effect nullifying the will of the America people, who ELECTED the President to serve for 4 years.
Mcconnell, Schumer, and Pelosi have now turned impeachment into a partisan weapon of convenience. Don't like the President and hate the 70-80 million who voted for him? Just get rid of him on some crap charge that you thought up over a weekend and ram it through on a partisan vote. Then have a stalinist show trial. Nobody will care if its true or even makes sense. If you got the votes, do it.
I can't tell you have disgusted I am at the Republican Senate. Except for about 6-10 of them, they should ALL be primaried and voted out. The ones that aren't RINO and corrupt are cowards who won't fight. Vote 'em all out.
National guard troops are supposed to remain in DC until March.
The "real" or traditional inauguration day is March 4.
Connection or coincidence?
John Henry
Good. I want witnesses. I want hundreds and hundreds of witnesses occupying the full Senate's time until doomsday.
Hey! Cut Mitch Mcconnell some slack! It's Not like he's married to Chinese Agent
Is It?
In case you forgot, Romney wanted to drag out the first Impeachment trial too.
Honestly, the GOP dropped the ball by not having witnesses at the first impeachment. The dems served up the Hunter Biden issue on a silver plater with a blank fucking check and the GOP said, "not hungry." Now they all cry that the media didn't pursue the HB story hard enough.
I also want to hear what the witnesses say this time. The good, the bad, and the ugly. It's important enough that I should not have to worry whether "sources close to so and so" are fucking liars. Put "so and so" under oath and let them testify.
I can't tell you have disgusted I am at the Republican Senate. Except for about 6-10 of them, they should ALL be primaried and voted out. The ones that aren't RINO and corrupt are cowards who won't fight. Vote 'em all out.
I have some bad news-
Congress has an approval rate of 15%
Congress has a re-election rate of 95%
It's nearly impossible to unseat an incumbent Senator.
Ken B said...
So, do I have this right.
“We don’t need witnesses.” Their case gets torched. “New rules, we need witnesses.”
Is that right?
----------------=============
now they know which witness needs to say what!!!!!!!!!!
subornation of perjury anyone??!!! law professor emerita????!!!!
this is a Stalinist show trial? And that the only reason it to embarrass and damage Trump?
No. You folks are immune to feeling remorse or embarrassment. Any decent human would be humiliated that they ever were tricked into believing that Trump wasn’t a carnival barker charlatan, who drained the swamp right into his family’s bank account and left America in the weakest and most divisive place she’s ever been in.
That’s the most deplorable part of being a MAGAt; the complete lack of shame.
Only the most completely in the bag sycophants could deny that Trump caused and then encouraged the Capitol insurrection.
Politicians don't get the same satisfaction out of helping their country as normal people do.
NYT “knows” and promotes/propagates a lot of stuff that is not true. To Hell with that lot.
Ted Cruz
@tedcruz
Thread: Chaos at the impeachment trial.
Dems had agreed to know witnesses, then House Managers changed their mind this morning.
Schumer blindsided. Pandemonium. They’re negotiating now to figure out next steps.
This is what real power looks like-
It looks just like "Fuck you and your rules. I'll do what I want and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it".
In an odd way, I sense the reversal to call witnesses has more to do with Cuomo, Newsom, the Lincoln Project and the Biden agenda than Trump's words or actions.
Drat. More imitation ice milk from soyboi darigelded...
Wince said...
In an odd way, I sense the reversal to call witnesses has more to do with Cuomo, Newsom, the Lincoln Project and the Biden agenda than Trump's words or actions.
You're barking up the right tree.
The Constitution has become like The Bible.
People who don't really believe in its authenticity or tenets like to use them to implement their opposite intent.
Some even teach college courses on the subject and are considered "experts".
Drat. More imitation ice milk from soyboi darigelded
Sorry I should just said some shit like covefe and left it at that.
Pearls before swine, I tell you.
Remember in one flew over the cuckoo's nest how they did sort of the same thing to randall Patrick mcmurphy? And for much the same reasons.
They kept trying to shut him down and he kept coming back stronger than before. There's a great riff when he comes back from electroshock. I looked but can't find it. Something about being all charged up and ready to make women hear thunder and shoot lightning. Nicholson does a good job of it in the movie too.
Win or lose I think president trump comes out of this stronger than before.
John Henry
To rely on the jurisdictional ground avoids the question on the merits.
That’s been the whole dodge since the selection, to deny Trump any exploration of the merits of his case.
Mitt Romney, McCain, Hillary, Kerry... Little people filled with scorn for not getting their turn to be President.
Romney #1.
so are we
Eh, sounds like McConnell is saying the jurisdictional question is a close call. The headline suggests he views it as a close call on the merits. Times gonna Times.
Could somebody PLEASE tell McConnell to get liposuction on that fat bubble under his chin? The dude's got money. Give us all a break.
Just read 100 or so quotes from Cuckoo. I've probably read the book 20-30 times but not in the past 20 years or so. I just bought it to read on the plane.
Was kesey writing about President Trump back in 61?pdjt as mcmurphy giving us, as chief Bromden, our growth back?
Or am I just spending too much time in the airport waiting to fly back to warmth?
John Henry
This clown show was about to wrap up when Christopher Walken burst onto the Senate floor and yelled "I NEED MORE COWBELL!"
Molly:
https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1360318572023730181
"Pointing out that Democrat messaging regarding lost elections -- going back decades -- is that they were stolen. These include Sen. Brown, Sanders, Clinton. Rep. Pelosi (who explicitly supported debate on election integrity at reception of electoral counts back in 2005)"
"this is a Stalinist show trial?
In third grade one might learn that this is a “topic sentence” and then to follow it up with supporting evidence and arguments so
you were supposed to follow that up with a list of reasons that it wasn’t. Yet all you did was regurgitate shit you probably heard from Samantha Bee or CNN or the like. It almost seems like you are poorly educated. I don’t think you could pass a composition class, that’s for sure.
Mollie
@MZHemingway
·
"21h
Now showing tons of Democrats objecting to electors from the 2016 election. (none were censured or impeached)"
"Was kesey writing about President Trump back in 61”
I thought everybody knew he was writing about the other people in his writer’s workshop.
You know what? I'm GLAD that the Congress-scum got a small taste of the fear that gripped hundreds of thousands of their constituents for months on end, while they encouraged the Antifa mobs to rage unhindered. Truly, I'm delighted.
And I'm laughing my butt off that all this pathetic trembling and pearl-clutching was precipitated by a handful of unarmed soccer moms and middle aged Rotary Club types, not masked young men with Molotov cocktails.
For far too long, our hired help have failed to fear us as they should. I hope to see many more middle-class riots, and I hope they bring their guns.
I think McConnell was honestly furious at Trump, five weeks ago. The real close call for him was the temptation to vote yes, versus the sense that this is all pointless bullshit anyway.
I think McConnell, however furious he was (is still!) at Trump realizes that if he votes to convict he can never go back to Kentucky again.
Brown dog 10:59
Comment of the day
John Henry
301 witness on the Trump team list so far. Good times.
I'm sure all of the American people are going to be thrilled to know that their COVID checks, all of the COVID relief legislation, and the order of National Business is going to be further put on hold so that we can hear from all the witnesses. I'm sure nothing could possibly go wrong with this strategy. Trump will do what he always does, let them dig a hole.
I can't think of a single Demographic, aside from RINOs and Democrat politicians and NeverTrumpers on both sides, that want to see this continue. Amazing. Absolutely amazing tone deafness.
Yeah, Tim. That's what they want you to think.
Kesey was really looking 60 years into the future.
Btw: the book is $5.99 via Ann's portal.
John Henry
The leader had let it be known
Unnamed sources tell us...
BillieBob Thorton: "301 witness on the Trump team list so far. Good times."
There is zero chance the American Soviets will allow the Trump team to call any witnesses that would actually assist the defense.
And there are any number of "republicans" in the Senate who will gleefully provide the "bi-partisan" (actually just the Uni-Party) cover to the American Soviets.
What we’re finding out? It’s those spots at the trough that count. And keeping the folks who feed there happy.
"...impeachments are a tool..."
There are a lot of tools in DC.
I find Ted Cruz arguments from his podcast more compelling. Cruz points out that the Senate has tried late impeachments in the past for former officials. Cruz voted against trying the Impeachment of Trump because he thought the Senate should refuse such a shoddy Impeachment Articles made by the House. For Cruz, the call isn't close about acquittal unless the debate rhetoric "fight like hell" is now to be the standard for incitement, and therefore other of Articles of Impeachment should be forthcoming for nearly every politician in DC.
clint said, "Be careful not to let the NYT play 'Let's You and Him Fight' with us."
Completely agree. We peasants only know what really goes on third-, fourth-, fifth-, or more- hand.
Also, nice indirect reference to Eric Berne's Games People Play.
Browndog said, "Congress has an approval rate of 15%
Congress has a re-election rate of 95%
It's nearly impossible to unseat an incumbent Senator."
Or a US Representative (yes, I know there is some turnover).
We the People certainly deserve what we get Good and Hard.
I think CNN, MSNBC, etc are responsible for the switch to witnesses. What are they going to cover if the "trial" ends so quickly? They have kept the "outrage" meter up to 11 for the past 4 years. If there is nothing from Trump to discuss and they aren't inclined or permitted to criticize Biden/Harris, they will struggle to fill airtime.
Call lots and lots of witnesses, please!!!!!! I want this going until Summer.
Wait. They're extending the trial to add witnesses? But the House Managers stated: "Any claim that the House moved too quickly in responding to a violent insurrection that President Trump incited is mistaken." That means that, per the House Managers, they did not need witnesses. Are they admitting their own brief was flawed?
The House Managers stated: "There is no reason for Congress to delay in holding accountable the President who incited the violent attack, inflamed the mob even as it ransacked the Capitol, and failed to take charge of a swift law enforcement response because he believed such dereliction of duty might advance his political interest in overturning the results of an election that he lost." So, why do they now need to delay? The House Managers insisted: "As will be shown at trial, President Trump endangered our Republic and inflicted deep and
lasting wounds on our Nation."
Why do they get a second bite at the apple when they were so sure they could demonstrate this WITHOUT witnesses? The Defense should flatly refuse this. The rules of play were agreed at first; I've said since the beginning the defense should walk out because this is a farce. If the House Managers decide they want witnesses now, the defense should walk.
From USA Today: "Michael van der Veen, a Trump lawyer, said he would like to depose 100 witnesses, starting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser. Van der Veen said he would like to ask why they didn’t request more security on Jan. 6, given the threat of protests."
I kind of like this guy, since that's exactly why I said they wouldn't allow witnesses, and will most likely curtail Trump's ability to call witnesses.
Meanwhile, I remember quite a lot of browbeating and bullying and rage here back in 2012 from people demanding that the rest of us bend over and support Mitt Romney.
Of course, now they never heard of him except to now rightly condemn him. But precious few apologies for the attacks on those who all along knew him to be a POS weasel.
Dems folded. Closing argument to begin.
... Wow. Senate Democrats broke pretty quick on that point. I've never seen such a fantastic "Never mind" moment in modern history. I'd have thought they'd at least try to hear a few witnesses and then try and block further witnesses or standard jerk assery.
This complete and utter rout of the House Managers and Senate Democrats is a sign of major weakness -- they knew they would get the worse end of the witnesses exchange (both in being overwhelmed by pro-Trump witnesses in time and content), that they just... caved.
Good job on Republicans for calling the bluff.
Blogger DarigoldVanilla said...
You folks are immune to feeling remorse or embarrassment. Any decent human would be humiliated that they ever were tricked into believing that Trump wasn’t a carnival barker charlatan, who drained the swamp right into his family’s bank account and left America in the weakest and most divisive place she’s ever been in.
That’s the most deplorable part of being a MAGAt; the complete lack of shame.
Only the most completely in the bag sycophants could deny that Trump caused and then encouraged the Capitol insurrection
Another new troll, or perhaps recycled. Are you Antifa? Want to express some hatred in person? It can be arranged.
BillieBob Thorton said...Dems folded. Closing argument to begin.
Well they are a bunch paid-for cheap suits--the whole lot of them.
Other things that were a close call: Nancy Pelosi having to explain how she was such a terrible leader.
I'm disappointed that Buffalo Man isn't going to be called to testify.
"Did Trump tell you to raid the Capitol? Did he also suggest the costume?"
Matt Sablan is right.
I checked on Breitbart (the site that Althouse won't read) and it appears that they will only insert depositions into the record. Jamie Raskin is making closing arguments for the Soviets, I mean the persecution. Oops! I mean the prosecution.
"It's agreed. We'll have witnesses."
"OPEN THE GATE!"
"Wait, you want to depose Pelosi, Harris, and Bowser?"
"CLOSE THE GATES!"
"Add Herera's witness testimony into the record, but then no more witnesses."
"OPEN THE GATES A LITTLE!"
Too funny. Seems like only yesterday that pundits were sniveling that it was all bogus because no witnesses were called but oh well, *sigh* let's move on...
Oops. OOPS. OOPSIE!
Matt Sablan said...
Good job on Republicans for calling the bluff.
Republican didn't do shit they are all a bunch of feckless ass hats just as interested in getting Trump and all of his supporters as the demos are. They don't deserve credit to anything. It was Trumps legal team.
Wow they didn’t do their homework, they didn’t bring a charge that could stick— so at the last minute they are building a lot of their case on a phrase that Trump said to McCarthy, which proves next to nothing.
Why didn’t they investigate when orders were made to the National Guard, and other elements to reinforce the Capitol police? They did not do that for whatever reason.
What happened to those “anonymous sources” that said that Trump refused to send aid to the Capitol? It looks like the Democrats know who those “anonymous sources” are and that they are liars, otherwise they would bring them forward as witnesses. It’s obvious that the Democrats know that those “anonymous sources” would not survive exposure and scrutiny but they were useful enough at the time for their allies in the media.
McConnell is no prince, but I don’t believe he is stupid enough to believe Trump has committed impeachable offenses or disingenuous enough to say he believes so. Odds are that the NYT or their sources are lying.
I think McConnell was honestly furious at Trump, five weeks ago.
One way of looking at this is that McConnell is displaying the virtue of looking beyond his personal emotions and ruling as the law requires.
Apparently, they've changed their minds again.
No witnesses.
Just an un-cross-examined hearsay statement -- a second-hand account of a phone conversation that's not relevant to the charges.
I expect this will finally be the straw that breaks the back of the 44 Senators who thought the whole proceeding was unconstitutional to begin with.
Like any great leader, McConnell saw his followers headed in another directions and scrambled to get out in front of them.
"'m disappointed that Buffalo Man isn't going to be called to testify.”
He could explain how he used drumming to get the invisible spirits who live all around us amped up. Typical MAGA.
Mitch is ignoring Senate precedent and the clear language of the Constitution in avoiding a decision on the merits. The Senate already decided it had jurisdiction. And, the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try ALL impeachments. To say they don't have the power to try this impeachment is nonsensical.
Mitch McConnell is the asshole who, less than 2 weeks before teh GA Senate runoff elections, had the GOP Controlled Senate pass a $2.4 trillion prod filled monstrosity of a "Covid relief" bill.
That had $600 for Americans, and $2 trillion of corrupt payoffs
If you want to know why the GOP candidates lost in GA, look to McConnell, the guy who decided he didn't want the stress of having to lead the Senate in opposition to Biden.
So McConnell can go fuck himself
independent said...
Mitch is ignoring Senate precedent and the clear language of the Constitution in avoiding a decision on the merits. The Senate already decided it had jurisdiction. And, the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try ALL impeachments. To say they don't have the power to try this impeachment is nonsensical.
Thank you for playing, we have a lovely parting gift for you.
The clear Senate precedent is that a majority can force through an illegitimate "impeachment" of someone who is no longer in office, but that more than 1/3 of the Senate will reject the illegitimate move.
And that's what's going to happen this time.
Follow the precedent, loser
"The Senate already decided it had jurisdiction."
-- If the Senate were to vote and say, "We have the power pass laws that allow the government to quarter troops in homes without recompense and to compel people to testify against themselves," and a Senator said, "No we don't, so I vote against those laws," would you say: "What an idiot. The Senate decided it had the jurisdiction to do those things?"
Because, you're basically saying that the Senate can decide what they're allowed and not allowed to do, and if they decide they can do something, there is no check against it.
Blogger independent said...
"Mitch is ignoring Senate precedent and the clear language of the Constitution in avoiding a decision on the merits. The Senate already decided it had jurisdiction. And, the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try ALL impeachments. To say they don't have the power to try this impeachment is nonsensical."
But the impeachment is to REMOVE a sitting president.. hence Senate has no authority to remove someone who is already removed...
Chennaul said...
Wow they didn’t do their homework, they didn’t bring a charge that could stick— so at the last minute they are building a lot of their case on a phrase that Trump said to McCarthy, which proves next to nothing.
No.
They're hanging their "case" on the anonymous claim that Trump said something to McCarthy. Something that they're attempting to twist into support for a proposition the statement doesn't actually support.
Dont' grant them more than they actually deserve
"That’s the most deplorable part of being a MAGAt; the complete lack of shame."
Go watch the video of Democrats doing all the things the Democrats are trying to impeach Trump for.
Your projection is cute, but stupid. Because everyone with a functional brain is aware of which Party is utterly lacking in shame. It isn't the Trump side
Just in... they are gonna 'extend' the trial to have 'witnesses' come forward.
No.. now that ain't! But they are gonna slip in a word or two... hahaha... what a joke.
In other words the Kangaroo Court saw their presentation didn't do it.. thus they have to lie some more and maybe at least make SOMEONE think they were right.
Meanwhile Cuomo may get kicked out... Newsom may get kicked out... illegals bring COVID-19 while Biden wants to lock down Florida... the Lincoln Project heads run as their sordid scam is exposed...
Wow.. how the worm turns!!
2022 midterms here we come!!!
DavidUW said...Turtle getting primaried
We're gonna find out how far down it really is.
Matt - Senators take an oath to follow the Constitution. If they pass an unconstitutional law it should be struck down by the courts.
Here, the senators by majority vote decided they have jurisdiction. Of course, the senators can vote on impeachment however they want for any reason and don't have to explain their vote. But IMHO they should follow precedent they just established.
So: Yes. You think the Senate can do whatever it wants if it says it can, and that if the majority of Senators think they could vote to hang your neighbor just cuz, they should all vote it into law, and hopefully the courts stop them before the hanging occurs. Your opinion is noted, but, unfortunately, due to the obvious problems that your opinion creates, I must reject it as a working theory of governance for the Senate, or any ruling body.
The Senate can't vote itself new, extra-Constitutional powers.
Paul. I disagree and I think the clear language of the Constitution supports me. No one argues that Trump was not impeached by the House. He was impeached. And the senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. All impeachments include this impeachment. Doesn't seem ambiguous to me.
Oddly enough, in every impeachment that happened when people were no longer in power, except for the one regarding the guy who literally was a spy for the British, acquittals occurred in every case I've seen mentioned because Senators voted to acquit, in part, because they thought it was unconstitutional. Several other impeachments died after people left office because the Senate didn't think they could try them.
So. Your "clear language of the Constitution" argument is flawed. I understand the beauty of the simplistic argument that the language is "clear" and "obvious," yet it is not, which is why there have been clashes about this for a long time, and Constitutional scholars and lawyers disagree on the meaning and ruling.
independent said...
Paul. I disagree and I think the clear language of the Constitution supports me.
------------===========
what do you make then of SC CJ John Roberts not presiding?
Does Constitution allow Senate to pick who shall preside?
Another new troll, or perhaps recycled. Are you Antifa? Want to express some hatred in person? It can be arranged.
LOL.
Ok internet tough guy. Let’s rumble! Meet you behind the library, after school.
I don’t hate you, I pity you.
Narayanan - The CJ is only required to preside if the president is on trial. Biden is the president.
McConnell is an old 78, I don't think he'll run again.
It's nearly impossible to unseat an incumbent Senator.
Not in Georgia.
Is this accurate?
Dems: We don’t need no stinking witnesses, we have hearsay and doctored video.
Defense: Speaking of videos ...
Dems: Er, um. Witnesses that's the ticket, yeah ... witnesses.
Cruz: Call Pelosi, ask her about what she did.
Dems: We don’t need no stinking witnesses.
Because modulo a paraphrase or two it looks accurate to me.
Seem to be studiously avoiding mention of Trump supporter Sicknick. He's no longer helpful. Go with the black cop for a better narrative.
Matt Sablan said...
"Did Trump tell you to raid the Capitol? Did he also suggest the costume?"
That's gold, Matt. Gold!
But the impeachment is to REMOVE a sitting president.. hence Senate has no authority to remove someone who is already removed...
But you forget he was still President when he told his zombie-minions to kill all of our representatives in Congress, many of whom now suffer from PTSD.
Earnest Prole said...Like any great leader, McConnell saw his followers headed in another directions and scrambled to get out in front of them.
I suspect that you are correct.
I also suspect that Mitch is the consummate game player who is seldom off balance.
As soon as the "Brave Brave Brave" American Soviet "Sir Robins" saw that the lunatic Pelosi and DC Mayor liars would be called and questioned under oath the New American Soviet Party "bravely" ran away from witnesses.
Even though everyone knows the FBI/DOJ exist as an adjunct to the American Soviet Party and would never investigate even transparent lies.
Mitch McConnell's political manoeuvring since the election loss, Senate majority loss and Capitol riot have been a lesson in how a seasoned politician turns a disadvantageous situation to his, and the party's advantage. Mitch has more plays in his book then Tom Brady.
Anyone who has watched Portland burn has concerns about violence in the country. Also running through their minds is the idea that fire needs to fought with fire x 10. But someone else has to do it.
Fear stokers like Pelosi and AOC are a sure enemy.
Everyone. Everyone is thinking if I was in that situation I would have to be violent to survive. When that is your thinking what do you think will happen? Seen the record ammo purchases?
If Biden is smart he'll pardon Trump et al, send out half a dozen $2,000 stimulus checks, and then begin to work on his agenda. Why doesn't he just pardon Assange and Snowden today? It's because of the hidden power. That hidden power is the problem.
This is awesome. Trump’s no-name lawyers are schooling the ‘elite’ Ivy League Democrat House Managers.
This is further proof that Waukesha County Wisconsin is collectively smarter than Dane County Wisconsin, ESPECIALLY when UW is in session.
The absence of the college attendees during that time, boosts Waukesha County’s IQ average.
Van der Veen right now rightly charging the House Dem managers with fraud upon the court for manipulating the evidence.
This is awesome. Trump’s no-name lawyers are schooling the ‘elite’
Too bad that Romney the Weasel and Beto O'Sasse aren't smart enough to understand it, even if they had integrity enough to follow the law, the Constitution and the facts.
Raskin gets another chance to cry. Go for it!
Here, the senators by majority vote decided they have jurisdiction.
You are being very "loose" with you language.
The Majority decided they could hold a tribunal.
Jurisdiction assumes the POWER to carry out some form of official action. This is where the leftist fall apart. What action can the Senate take? Remove from office? Nope the subject in question is not an office holder. Prevent the accused of a future office of trust, honor, and proFit? Appointed office, yes. Elected Office? No constitutional enumerated power. The Senate cannot strip States from their enumerated power to hold elections. For those seeking elected office in DC, the states, using constitutional direction of qualifications, set the criteria for gaining a slot on the ballot are the final arbiter of who stands for election, not the Senate. The voters retain the ultimate power to elect who they want. Not DC politicos.
So jurisdiction is extremely limited in this case,
Vote reminds WI Baldwin is alive.
Blogger DarigoldVanilla said...
Another new troll, or perhaps recycled. Are you Antifa? Want to express some hatred in person? It can be arranged.
LOL.
Ok internet tough guy. Let’s rumble! Meet you behind the library, after school.
I don’t hate you, I pity you.
No, no, no! Free bus ticket to Portland! Roam the streets with your own kind.
“Roam the streets”? He be oozin’ in teh streets...
independent said...
Here, the senators by majority vote decided they have jurisdiction. Of course, the senators can vote on impeachment however they want for any reason and don't have to explain their vote. But IMHO they should follow precedent they just established.
The precedent was established during Grant's Administration:
A majority can demand an illegitimate "impeachment trial", but more than 1/3 will refuse conviction.
Just as happened here.
Every Senator takes an individual oath to support and defend the US Constitution. They didn't swear an oath to violate it just because someone else says they should.
And you can only Constitutionally impeach someone who is currently in office
independent said...
Narayanan - The CJ is only required to preside if the president is on trial. Biden is the president.
That's right, Biden* is "President"
Trump is a private citizen who holds no office.
The Constitution does not permit the impeachment or trial in Congress of private citizens
Thus this impeachment was illegitimate.
See, when you think really hard, even you can figure out why this was bullshit
Skippy Tisdale said...
But you forget he was still President when he told his zombie-minions to kill all of our representatives in Congress, many of whom now suffer from PTSD
If the protestors had gone there with the intention of killing people, there would have been a lot of dead people from the other side
50 Armed people looking for Dems to kill would have killed the cops blocking the way, then gotten in there and killed a large number of Democrats.
Since that didn't happen, your claim is an obvious lie.
The fact that many Democrat members of Congress are intellectually deficient morons who are emotionally unstable is their problem, not ours
With leadership like this, what can't the Republicans accomplish!
Mitch is heading for the barn anyway, but he will no doubt be primaried in the great state of Kentucky after those comments.
Post a Comment