"Pelosi rebukes Cuomo claim that New York didn’t receive enough federal aid" https://nypost.com/2021/02/13/pelosi-rebukes-cuomo-claim-that-ny-didnt-get-enough-federal-aid/
conviction on a charge incitement would require definitive knowledge of intent and state of mind. they didn't produce any witnesses, there was virtually no evidence given. As many commentators have articulated, this impeachment proceeding was very nearly 100% about emotion, and it was never really about proving a case
Let’s refer to McConnell’s speech after he voted to acquit, not because Trump is innocent of fomenting of insurrection but because of a paperwork technicality:
Maybe in a criminal court case where the punishment is stripping the basic rights of a human through detention. Not in a political trial to condemn an elected official and prevent them from holding future office. I think basic common sense applies here. The President and the high level polticians who espoused the narrative that the election was literally stolen through innacurate vote counts should be treated as competent adults. No it isn't the same as Democrats claiming a foerign government hacked nto thier private correspondences and leaking it during election season to help one candidate over another because it actually happened and it doesn't question the integrity of the actual election results hence why Hillary conceded the night of the election. Now as citizens we need to place an assumption that these high level polticians are competent enough to understand the ramifications of telling a country full of people who believe firearms are the solution to government tyranny that the entire election was fraudulent and there is a fake usurper heading the executive branch where all legal recourse to reverse this atrocity has been spent. What other options are in these people's heads now that believe in the rhetoric of these polticians? Violence. That is literally the only option they would justifiably have left if the rhetoric was true. Just like we expect any mentally healthy adult to know the consequences of yelling "fire!" In a crowded closed off environment, any polticians should understand the consequences of spamming that the election was stolen and that the ballots are not counted right. Yelling "fire!" In a crowded theater when there is an actual fire is not inciting panic. It is when there isn't one. Same applies here. If the election was stolen and all legal recourse was spent, those people had a right to be overthrow the capitol building. But they were fed a fake narrative. So the responsibility should be on the responsible adults which are the polticians in this case rather than those who are merely guilty of being suckered into a certain type of media bubble where their rhetoric of voter fraud was spammed constantly.
there was never going to be a conviction here--both sides knew it right from the beginning. this was something else. political theater, really. and for folks who like that kind of thing I guess it was a good show
So now we blame democrats for the bootlicking that the GOP does for Trump due to the fear of their base which is entirely their fault due to the media bubble they helped create? Only those GOP senators who voted to aquit such an obvious unbecoming action of a president are to blame for turning this into what you call "political theater". Yes we all knew that most of the GOP senators are going to chose their careers over country. We get that. We just need to show it on record.
It was a show for posterity. People died and we almost had the veep strung up by a mob of hillbillies under you-no-Hu’s suggestion. They weren’t screaming Hang AOC or Pelosi like your avg dipshit con mob. They turned on their own quickly and grotesquely. Something had to give...except it didn’t. At least we all know we still have work ahead of us. So if they weren’t going to get a conviction with 10 charges or 10 months, why bother with going thru all of it the “proper way”? Out of principle when the other party is clearly lacking? Just wasting Biden’s first 100 days.
If Trump kill a kid on live TV and the Republican would not hold him accountable, should there be an impeachment trail when it will result in an acquittal?
It's pointless to have witnesses if the jury made it's mind up before the trial started so I understand them wanting to move forward quickly. Staff and people immediately around him during the Capitol riots should have been subpoenaed and deposed. The people of this country deserved that at the minimum but all we're left with now is speculation.
The case was predetermined from before impeachment ever started. Impeachment accomplished a few things: Hold DJT accountable for his role in Jan 6 events. Provide a public record for the history books of the individuals that would look the other way. Provide a platform for Republicans that predetermined their vote to go ahead and grow a set of balls and maybe change their mind (seemed to at least worked with Cassidy). This whole witness BS would have been absolutely worthless since we know the Trump team would have turned it into a circus. His defense team didn't even have to prepare for this case at all and even when they were looking like idiots, you had individuals like Cruz lending a hand to stop embarrassing the Senators that were going to vote no for impeachment. The evidence was there, but since no Republicans were harmed by insurrectionist, they decided to turn the other way. You would think that a few of blue deaths and injuries would have convinced them otherwise, but instead they stood up for their lord and savior, DJT. I am glad this case was wrapped up quickly so we didn't have to waste a few months of Biden's presidency on a futile attempt to impeach Satan.
This is false - impeachment is not a criminal court of law nor is it a criminal charge. It is a political process and literally requires nothing specific at all. But beyond that, you had dozens of GOP Senators stating that they wouldn't convict *even before the impeachment articles were announced*, let alone voted on in the House, sent to the Senate, or arguments presented in the Senate. You also had GOP Senators planning strategy with the defense while pretending to also be jurors. So evidence was irrelevant to these people.
"The Botched Democratic Effort to Convict Donald Trump": https://newrepublic.com/article/161369/botched-democratic-effort-convict-donald-trump excerpt: The second impeachment trial of Donald Trump ended with a whimper Saturday afternoon, leaving time for the long weekend in honor of, yes, presidents. And like a veteran mob boss who sneers at justice, Trump beat the rap again as his adversaries fell 10 votes short of the 67 needed for conviction. Yes, there were small consolations. Seven Republican senators mustered the moxie to find Trump guilty of inciting an uprising that directly led to members of Congress and Vice President Mike Pence running for their lives. There were also lasting moments of eloquence from the House Democratic managers, particularly Jamie Raskin and Joe Neguse, even as Trump’s lead attorney Michael van der Veen, a Philadelphia slip-and-fall lawyer, managed to humiliate himself at every turn, at one point even mispronouncing the name of his own hometown. But what the last day of the impeachment trial will mostly be remembered for is Democratic disarray on the vital question of calling witnesses. As legendary baseball manager Casey Stengel said about the 1962 New York Mets, “Can’t anyone here play this game.” At times on Saturday, it seemed that Chuck Schumer and Company were as lost as a baseball team that blew 120 games.
That's not really related at all. Nothing I mentioned was about common sense. It was about the Constitutionally defined concept of impeachment. Perhaps spend less time reading Ann Althouse and instead more time reading this: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
