Split Thread: A second impeachment

[JoeMorgue]

Game changer if true, but I never doubted that the GOP trash-talks Trump all day behind closed doors.

As said what they say in public, and more so what they say on record, that matters.

[Stacyhs]

"There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and of his oath to the Constitution" Liz Cheney

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I think there have always been "half of them" who have hated him, but that hasn't stop them from enabling him and supporting him for the last 4 years including acquitting him in the last impeachment.

Originally Posted by dirtywick

I agree. they got a pretty visceral look at why that was a bad idea

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Game changer if true, but I never doubted that the GOP trash-talks Trump all day behind closed doors.

As said what they say in public, and more so what they say on record, that matters.

They might actually be a bit irked that Trump was threatening some of them.

And it's hard to believe any who have worked with Trump wouldn't despise him. So kicking him when he's becoming a liability must feel good.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by acbytesla

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

This is also the title for article of impeachment that the House has prepared.

Hah! <pedant mode> Is it possible for an incumbent president to rebel against himself? </pedant mode off>

[Stacyhs]

New York Republican Rep. John Katko will also back impeachment in the House.

[dudalb]

Liz Cheney just said she will vote in favor of Impeachment.

[dudalb]

Between McConnell ,Cheney and the JCS statement, it's might be worst day ever for Donnie.

[Mader Levap]

I will believe it when I will see them actually voting.

[angrysoba]

Wow! Major development. This should be good.

Watch one side scuttle to McConnell and say they were always totally against Trump, in their heart, and were just waiting for the day...


...it will be interesting to see the isolated dead-enders trying who have been the biggest public boosters of Trump (Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Lindsay Graham...) trying to rationalize their support of Trump to the GOP base/America/history etc.., or trying to rationalize their betrayal of the Dear Leader to Trump's base. I look forward to their immense discomfort.

And once we have found out where they stand, bring on the impeachments of the members of Congress who stoked this thing in the first place. People like Mo Brooks who is squirming now.

Quote:

Accusation Flaw #1:

Mr. Malinowski, in his Censure Resolution, alleges that “Representative Mo Brooks addressed a rally in Washington, DC, attended by numerous members of known extremist and anti-government groups, including the Proud Boys, QAnon, Boogaloo Boys, and Oathkeepers, who would shortly thereafter march to seize the United States Capitol”

That statement is meaningless because it omits a key fact. Mr. Malinowski fails to allege I knew any of that!

Why? Because I did not know any of that.

For the record, I have never knowingly associated or communicated with any of those groups in my life and I certainly had no inkling any of these groups were a part of the Trump rally at the Ellipse.

Bwahahahaha! Yeah, you never heard of them, right? You never saw the T-shirts, and you never heard their name mentioned on the news? Presumably his defence is that he is utterly ignorant about contemporary US politics. Tell that to the judge!

Quote:

Accusation Flaw #2:

Mr. Malinoski’s Censure resolution alleges, “Whereas, Representative Brooks then exhorted the audience: “Today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass”.

While I did utter those words, what is deceitfully omitted is the immediately preceding sentence, that begins with, “But let’s be clear, regardless of today’s outcome, the 2022 and the 2024 elections are right around the corner.”

This preceding sentence, clearly and unambiguously confirms that my “take names and kicking derrieres” remarks refers to fighting to win elections in 2022 and 2024 and had absolutely nothing to do with the illegal breach of the Capitol that occurred later in the day.

Bwahahahahaha! Lies! Obvious lies.

Quote:

Accusation Flaw #3.

Mr. Malinoski’s Censure Resolution alleges I “encouraged and incited violence against his fellow Members of Congress, as part of an assault on the United States Capitol.”

That statement is utterly false and beyond contempt.

In addition to the foregoing rebuttals, consider the following:

1. I was in the House Chamber when the attack began! The idea that I would encourage and incite violence” on myself, my friends, and my colleagues is absurd.

2. The Censure resolution (and the Fake News Media) conveniently and deceitfully omit the action I asked rally attendees to undertake: take WORDS (not violence) to the Capitol!

At the start of my speech, I tell the audience quote, “I’ve got a message that I need you to take to your heart, and take back home, and along the way stop at the Capitol.”

Holy crap! You are making this worse for yourself!

I can't be bothered to read the whole thing. It is embarrassing. He ought to be ashamed.

[turingtest]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Wow! Major development. This should be good.

Watch one side scuttle to McConnell and say they were always totally against Trump, in their heart, and were just waiting for the day...


...it will be interesting to see the isolated dead-enders trying who have been the biggest public boosters of Trump (Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Lindsay Graham...) trying to rationalize their support of Trump to the GOP base/America/history etc.., or trying to rationalize their betrayal of the Dear Leader to Trump's base. I look forward to their immense discomfort.

And once we have found out where they stand, bring on the impeachments of the members of Congress who stoked this thing in the first place. People like Mo Brooks who is squirming now.



Bwahahahaha! Yeah, you never heard of them, right? You never saw the T-shirts, and you never heard their name mentioned on the news? Presumably his defence is that he is utterly ignorant about contemporary US politics. Tell that to the judge!



Bwahahahahaha! Lies! Obvious lies.



Holy crap! You are making this worse for yourself!

I can't be bothered to read the whole thing. It is embarrassing. He ought to be ashamed.

I loved this little bit-

Quote:

Further, I spoke very early in the political rally. There was music, there was my speech, there was more music, then there was some number of speakers, then a couple hours or so later, President Trump began speaking.

I ask this question, if my remarks were as inspirational as the Socialist Democrats and their Fake News Media allies want the public to believe, why didn’t the Trump rally participants, after my remarks, immediately get up and storm the Capitol?

Why not indeed! The answer is simple. No one at the rally interpreted my remarks to be anything other than what they were: A pep talk after the derriere kicking conservatives suffered in the dismal 2020 elections.

He says he spoke early in the rally, a couple of hours before the headliner (Trump)- but he thinks it's an absolute gotcha! in his defense that nobody immediately got up and went down to the Capitol.

A perfect Trump acolyte- the abysmally stupid worshipping the terminally not-very-bright.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Between McConnell ,Cheney and the JCS statement, it's might be worst day ever for Donnie.

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

I will believe it when I will see them actually voting.

Trump isn't going to forgive them, and nor will his thugs, so for their own sake, they have to get rid of him.

I really don't understand the reasoning that because Trump's popularity is tanking after this week, he shouldn't be sanctioned. It just makes it easier and better to rub in the lesson that it's a bad idea.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Wow! Major development. This should be good.

Watch one side scuttle to McConnell and say they were always totally against Trump, in their heart, and were just waiting for the day...


...it will be interesting to see the isolated dead-enders trying who have been the biggest public boosters of Trump (Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, Lindsay Graham...) trying to rationalize their support of Trump to the GOP base/America/history etc.., or trying to rationalize their betrayal of the Dear Leader to Trump's base. I look forward to their immense discomfort.

And once we have found out where they stand, bring on the impeachments of the members of Congress who stoked this thing in the first place. People like Mo Brooks who is squirming now.



Bwahahahaha! Yeah, you never heard of them, right? You never saw the T-shirts, and you never heard their name mentioned on the news? Presumably his defence is that he is utterly ignorant about contemporary US politics. Tell that to the judge!



Bwahahahahaha! Lies! Obvious lies.



Holy crap! You are making this worse for yourself!

I can't be bothered to read the whole thing. It is embarrassing. He ought to be ashamed.

To use a old Southern expression for Mo Brooks:

"The child just ain't right".

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Trump isn't going to forgive them, and nor will his thugs, so for their own sake, they have to get rid of him.

I really don't understand the reasoning that because Trump's popularity is tanking after this week, he shouldn't be sanctioned. It just makes it easier and better to rub in the lesson that it's a bad idea.

My mian concern is making sure that Trump can never, ever hold public office again.

[acbytesla]

Schumer contradicts McConnell's memo about how quickly the Senate trial could begin. McConnell has stated that without unanimous Senate approval it cannot reconvene before January 19..really the 20th.

According to Schumer a 2004 law states that all it takes is an agreement of the Majority and Minority leader which is McConnell and Schumer.

[turingtest]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Hah! <pedant mode> Is it possible for an incumbent president to rebel against himself? </pedant mode off>

(Also pedantically) Well, no, and for the same reason that President Dunderhead was so wrong every time he tweeted "Treason!" when he was talking about someone being disloyal to him- he isn't actually "the authority of the United States."

[Safe-Keeper]

So now we finally know what it would take for Trump to make everyone turn on him.

Attempt a coup.

[EHocking]

Originally Posted by Aridas

Now?

Now as in this instance.
Again or still would have been more accurate.

Quote:

They've been doing it since the first hint of entirely predictable violence happened.

For example, though, a trumpist tweeted a picture of two people who were known to be outright Nazis doing bad things during the attack and claimed that they were Anti-Fa, as just the tip of the iceberg of such insanity.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

My mian concern is making sure that Trump can never, ever hold public office again.

Indeed; I was just commenting on the amoral calculus that could tip those three to turn on Trump.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

So now we finally know what it would take for Trump to make everyone turn on him.

Attempt a coup in the last few days of his presidency

FTFY

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Indeed; I was just commenting on the amoral calculus that could tip those three to turn on Trump.

McConnell and Cheney, sure, but the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a different matter. They essentially have to go along with the Commander-in-Chief.

It's just interesting troubling that they felt the need to remind their own forces that their duty is to the Constitution and NOT to the president.

For those who continue to insist that this is more coo-coo than coup coup, they obviously think that there is a risk that Trump will try to use military personnel to stay in power. Just this alone underlines how important it is to strip him of any influence whatsoever.

[Athyrio]

Originally Posted by dudalb

To use a old Southern expression for Mo Brooks:

"The child just ain't right".

And, he ain't left either.

[Minoosh]

I wonder if McConnell is trying to get Trump to resign.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by Minoosh

I wonder if McConnell is trying to get Trump to resign.

Why?

[Minoosh]

I also wonder what "impeachable offense" McConnell has in mind. It makes a difference in the language the House adopts.

Republican House members speaking up is good - they could just keep their mouths shut, knowing that their votes aren't needed. A fair number of them may be hearing from their constituents, and not just the Democratic ones.

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Why?

Isn't that how Nixon was persuaded to resign? But then again, Nixon was a hell of a lot savvier than Trump.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Isn't that how Nixon was persuaded to resign? But then again, Nixon was a hell of a lot savvier than Trump.

And he wasn't a sociopathic malignant narcissist either.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

And he wasn't a sociopathic malignant narcissist either.

Whoah! Whoever thought they would be saying that Nixon was the more evenly keeled man than another president? Until Trump came along Nixon was the very Platonic Form of the Crazy President.

[alfaniner]

A headline I'm looking forward to seeing as soon as tomorrow:

IIMPEACHED

Originally Posted by dudalb

To use a old Southern expression for Mo Brooks:

"The child just ain't right".

He didn't even get the particular phrase right -- it's "kick ass and take names", not "take names and kick some ass".

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Whoah! Whoever thought they would be saying that Nixon was the more evenly keeled man than another president? Until Trump came along Nixon was the very Platonic Form of the Crazy President.

I never thought he was crazy. Evil, maybe, but not crazy.

[Mader Levap]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Whoah! Whoever thought they would be saying that Nixon was the more evenly keeled man than another president? Until Trump came along Nixon was the very Platonic Form of the Crazy President.

Basic rule is "it can always get worse". In this case, in 4 years there will be republican contender for presidency worse than Trump. Let it sink in.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Isn't that how Nixon was persuaded to resign? But then again, Nixon was a hell of a lot savvier than Trump.

Not really. Nixon had lost the SCOTUS decision US v Nixon and the White House tapes were turned over and then the smoking gun tape was being played on the news. IIRC,The House Committee overseeing the investigation had just voted to send the Articles of Impeachment to the floor.

Then a bunch of Republican Senators went to the White House and told Nixon that his support had dissapeared and when the articles of impeachment made it to the Senate he would be convicted. He resigned the next day effective the day after that. Then after saying goodbye to the White House Staff and boarding AF1 his Presidency was over and Gerald Ford took the oath of office.

[Regnad Kcin]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

In Rules Committee hearing, Jim Jordan opposes using 25A to remove Trump saying, "we should use this time to bring the nation together."
Chairman McGovern asks Jordan if he will say Biden "won fair and square."
Jordan refuses to say this.

January 2021 in a nutshell.

ETA: Paul2 ninjas a little too close for comfort.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Whoah! Whoever thought they would be saying that Nixon was the more evenly keeled man than another president? Until Trump came along Nixon was the very Platonic Form of the Crazy President.

Whoever thought we'd be saying that Dubya was the more competent president than another president?

[ChristianProgressive]

Mitch has been cited by the NY Times as approving of the second Impeachment, believing that it will "make it easier to purge him from the Republican party..."

Is this the "Senate goes to Nixon moment of the Trump regime?

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

January 2021 in a nutshell.

ETA: Paul2 ninjas a little too close for comfort.

“In a nutshell” sounds like it’s from the 1800s. Shoulda gone with sumpin different.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Whoever thought we'd be saying that Dubya was the more competent president than another president?

It’s been a 60-year decline, with maybe GHW Bush as the lone exception.

[Jim_MDP]

I've lost track of the article (just saw the headline) but didn't he also say he wouldn't vote for a Senate conviction.
Kinda kills the idea he's being reasonable. It's historic as a second House slap on the wrist, but it hardly shows T the door.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Mitch has been cited by the NY Times as approving of the second Impeachment

This was discussed in one of the other threads....

If this is the same article that was referred to there, then some of us are... skeptical. (Moscow Mitch didn't publically say he supported impeachment, but it was something reported second hand, which could mean some misinterpretation.) And even if he does support impeachment privately, there is no guarantee that would translate to an actual impeachment, as McConnell might think there are still too many drawbacks strategically to support such a vote.

[Craig4]

I'm kind of amused that all the reporters act like they have this well placed source when it's perfectly obvious that Mitch had his press officer work the phones on background. Multiple outlets broke it at the same time. It might have even been a group text.

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by Craig4

I'm kind of amused that all the reporters act like they have this well placed source when it's perfectly obvious that Mitch had his press officer work the phones on background. Multiple outlets broke it at the same time. It might have even been a group text.

I had a feeling that the source was McConnell.