Senate Trial has started.

[Brian37]

Second nutball lawyer suggests that holding trump accountable is the real insurrection, and that this attempt to hold him accountable will disenfranchise millions of americans.  He's vry grrr about it all, and how they're doing unity wrong.  Also threatening a second civil war.

The entire GOP defense of that sicko is the same as Nixon, "It is not illegal when the President does it."

Nixon resigned, and that GOP of his time would have convicted him if he had not.

But today's GOP is nuts, and wants it both ways.

While 45 was President, his defenders and lawyers(if you want to call them that) pointed out the DOJ "RECOMMENDATION" which was never a law, never set by congress, or decided on by the SCOTUS, that "You cant indict a sitting President".  But now that he is out of office now they are claiming you cant impeach someone who has already left office. They want it both ways. Basically no accountability as long as it is the person they support.

[brewer]

The entire GOP defense of that sicko is the same as Nixon, "It is not illegal when the President does it."

Nixon resigned, and that GOP of his time would have convicted him if he had not.

But today's GOP is nuts, and wants it both ways.

While 45 was President, his defenders and lawyers(if you want to call them that) pointed out the DOJ "RECOMMENDATION" which was never a law, never set by congress, or decided on by the SCOTUS, that "You cant indict a sitting President".  But now that he is out of office now they are claiming you cant impeach someone who has already left office. They want it both ways. Basically no accountability as long as it is the person they support.

45 is becoming the new 19. You should practice your grovel before March 4th so you don't look like a noob.



https://twitter.com/BadLegalTakes/status...6410942465

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Second nutball lawyer suggests that holding trump accountable is the real insurrection, and that this attempt to hold him accountable will disenfranchise millions of americans.  He's vry grrr about it all, and how they're doing unity wrong.  Also threatening a second civil war.

The entire GOP defense of that sicko is the same as Nixon, "It is not illegal when the President does it."

Nixon resigned, and that GOP of his time would have convicted him if he had not.

But today's GOP is nuts, and wants it both ways.

While 45 was President, his defenders and lawyers(if you want to call them that) pointed out the DOJ "RECOMMENDATION" which was never a law, never set by congress, or decided on by the SCOTUS, that "You cant indict a sitting President".  But now that he is out of office now they are claiming you cant impeach someone who has already left office. They want it both ways. Basically no accountability as long as it is the person they support.

There is precedent for both impeaching and trying someone who is out of office (not regarding presidents, but the legal reasoning is identical). 

But it doesn’t matter - the Senate will decide they have the jurisdiction to try him, and will then acquit him.

Boru

[Brian37]

The entire GOP defense of that sicko is the same as Nixon, "It is not illegal when the President does it."

Nixon resigned, and that GOP of his time would have convicted him if he had not.

But today's GOP is nuts, and wants it both ways.

While 45 was President, his defenders and lawyers(if you want to call them that) pointed out the DOJ "RECOMMENDATION" which was never a law, never set by congress, or decided on by the SCOTUS, that "You cant indict a sitting President".  But now that he is out of office now they are claiming you cant impeach someone who has already left office. They want it both ways. Basically no accountability as long as it is the person they support.

There is precedent for both impeaching and trying someone who is out of office (not regarding presidents, but the legal reasoning is identical). 

But it doesn’t matter - the Senate will decide they have the jurisdiction to try him, and will then acquit him.

Boru

Of course, because it will be about party, not law.

[onlinebiker]

The entire GOP defense of that sicko is the same as Nixon, "It is not illegal when the President does it."

Nixon resigned, and that GOP of his time would have convicted him if he had not.

But today's GOP is nuts, and wants it both ways.

While 45 was President, his defenders and lawyers(if you want to call them that) pointed out the DOJ "RECOMMENDATION" which was never a law, never set by congress, or decided on by the SCOTUS, that "You cant indict a sitting President".  But now that he is out of office now they are claiming you cant impeach someone who has already left office. They want it both ways. Basically no accountability as long as it is the person they support.

There is precedent for both impeaching and trying someone who is out of office (not regarding presidents, but the legal reasoning is identical). 

But it doesn’t matter - the Senate will decide they have the jurisdiction to try him, and will then acquit him.

Boru

Unless they use a secret ballot. Never been done and unlikely - but - it is possible......


Without constituent accoutability - many ( R )s might opt to throw Donny under the bus.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

A masochistic streak goes a long way around here...

So do map reading skills.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

There is precedent for both impeaching and trying someone who is out of office (not regarding presidents, but the legal reasoning is identical). 

But it doesn’t matter - the Senate will decide they have the jurisdiction to try him, and will then acquit him.

Boru

Of course, because it will be about party, not law.

Of course it’s about party. Impeachment is a political mechanism.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

There is precedent for both impeaching and trying someone who is out of office (not regarding presidents, but the legal reasoning is identical). 

But it doesn’t matter - the Senate will decide they have the jurisdiction to try him, and will then acquit him.

Boru

Unless they use a secret ballot. Never been done and unlikely - but - it is possible......


Without constituent accoutability - many ( R )s might opt to throw Donny under the bus.

Agreed. I wonder what it would take for Schumer to force a secret ballot. The House’s R’s did it for MTG, not sure why they couldn’t do it for Trump.

Boru

[The Valkyrie]

[The Grand Nudger]

Unless they use a secret ballot. Never been done and unlikely - but - it is possible......


Without constituent accoutability - many ( R )s might opt to throw Donny under the bus.

The qanon loons would simply hold them all accountable, and even more accountable precisely because of a secret ballot.  They're obviously willing.