• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Impeachment coming

Page 27 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A tale of two GOPs:

www.newsweek.com

Rubio Against 'Stupid' Impeachment, Admits Trump Responsible for Riot

"We already have a flaming fire in this country, and it's like taking a bunch of gasoline and pouring it on top of the fire," said the Florida senator.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

www.newsweek.com

Romney: Trump's Actions 'Impeachable' and Senate Trial Is 'Constitutional'

"I think it's pretty clear that over the last year or so there has been an effort to corrupt the election of the United States," the Republican senator said.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
So, the papers have been filed with the senate and the trial is set to begin 2-8.
The twice impeached, COVID-19 accomplice serial killer has now started threatening senators that vote for conviction. Can this fact be brought up in the trial? This really is mob boss shit-speak, except it's out in the open.

Trump sends a message to Senate Republicans ahead of his trial

"The message from Brian Jack, Trump’s former political director at the White House, is the latest sign that Republicans considering an impeachment conviction will do so knowing that Trump may come after them in upcoming primaries if they vote to convict him for “incitement of insurrection.”

www.politico.com

Trump sends a message to Senate Republicans ahead of his trial

The ex-president could seek vengeance on GOP senators if they break with him on impeachment and vote to convict.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
woolfe9998 said:
They'll just ignore the subpoenas. Remember, there are zero consequences for disobeying a congressional subpoena. That was another of Trump's lovely contributions to our political system.
Click to expand...
That’s not true - Congress would refer them to federal law enforcement, who would presumably enforce them.

The contribution of Trump was that its safe to ignore congressional subpoenas when your party controls the executive. This is an incredibly damaging precedent but it doesn’t apply at the moment.
 
lol at Trump going for witness tampering...in public.

subpoena that fuck. The good thing about this, is that there doesn't really have to be a "rush to convict" ...is it possible, to make the trial a thing that can be adjourned in time, and continue on in sections? Why not just subpoena all the GOP thugs in Congress that organized the insurrection, subpoena Trump and Miller and Kushner and all the fucking bitches, let them play lawyer games, send the new Sergeant at Arms to drag the Congressmen that refuse Congressional subpoenas into jail; etc etc. Subpoena that Pack peice of shit at VoA. Subpoena Murdoch and Carlson and Hannity and all the Newsmax and OANN fucking snowflake bitches and make them testify in front of Congress. Fucking string them out.

Don't play the GOP game of refusing all legal precedent and put these fucking traitorous sons (and daughters) of bitches on the table and ask them questions. Get them under oath so that they have no choice but to lie themselves toward jail, and removal from office. Let it take 2 years. Who cares? Strip the rot out of the country, gut the GOP, make them no more.

maybe rebuild those gallows that the Trumptard army brought with them and constructed outside the capital building on the 6th, let Mo Brooks and Ted Cruz and Biggs and Beobbirt and Hawley and Cawthorn and all those snowflake pieces of shit know that the required, constitutional fate that awaits them if they are to be convicted of the crimes with which they are charged, is to hang at the end of those gallows--that their very own supporters brought to them out of convenience.
 
Last edited:
Lost_in_the_HTTP said:
Undecided. Thoughts?


www.newsweek.com

Sen. Leahy to Preside Over Trump Impeachment Trial, a First in U.S. History

Normally, a Supreme Court justice would preside over the trial, but the Constitution never specified what happens when a former president faces trial in the Senate.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
Click to expand...
Seems to be there's a precedent somewhere that Senate Pres Pro Tem would preside when the subject of impeachment is no longer in office--Chief Justice only presides when it's a sitting President?

That said, I think this will play into the hands of GOP who want to label this a useless political witch hunt vs. a real trial.
 
UNCjigga said:
Seems to be there's a precedent somewhere that Senate Pres Pro Tem would preside when the subject of impeachment is no longer in office--Chief Justice only presides when it's a sitting President?

That said, I think this will play into the hands of GOP who want to label this a useless political witch hunt vs. a real trial.
Click to expand...
Well an outright majority of the country thinks that Trump should not only be impeached but convicted so the GOP has a lot of work to do on that front.

This could really play into the Democrats' hands very well - the GOP base demands fealty from GOP lawmakers to Trump, but Trump is an absolutely radioactive brand to the rest of the country. So, you have a situation where the GOP is going to be nominating a lot of people who are huge fans of someone the rest of the country hates. Seems bad for their electoral prospects.
 
fskimospy said:
Well an outright majority of the country thinks that Trump should not only be impeached but convicted so the GOP has a lot of work to do on that front.

This could really play into the Democrats' hands very well - the GOP base demands fealty from GOP lawmakers to Trump, but Trump is an absolutely radioactive brand to the rest of the country. So, you have a situation where the GOP is going to be nominating a lot of people who are huge fans of someone the rest of the country hates. Seems bad for their electoral prospects.
Click to expand...
Last I heard 60% support conviction. So essentially democratic win margin + 5%. This means that Republican constituents are against it, and since Republican senators answer to their electorate there is no incentive for them to convict. I wish they'd do the right thing, but I've been wishing that for 4 years, my wishing well is empty. Nothing is going to change unless there is a drastic demographics shift enough offset inherent electoral advantage the Republican party enjoys at the moment.
 
fleshconsumed said:
Last I heard 60% support conviction. So essentially democratic win margin + 5%. This means that Republican constituents are against it, and since Republican senators answer to their electorate there is no incentive for them to convict. I wish they'd do the right thing, but I've been wishing that for 4 years, my wishing well is empty. Nothing is going to change unless there is a drastic demographics shift enough offset inherent electoral advantage the Republican party enjoys at the moment.
Click to expand...
There was a small chance immediately following the coup attempt when the memory of an angry mob coming to kill them was fresh enough I think Trump had a small chance of being convicted. That time has passed - I think you'll get a few more votes for conviction this time than last time but not a ton more. If there's even 5 Republicans who vote for conviction I'd be surprised.
 
Even now Trump is still most relevant force in politics. In my mind the only way out of this mess is for the republicans to all back a cohesive effort to make Trump irrelevant. That means vote to convict him on impeachment, stop defending him, and stop even mentioning his name. I believe Trumps followers would quickly turn elsewhere or forget about him if he was made irrelevant. It's not like the conservative voters would vote to remove every republican if they all voted together.

Of course there are a minority of the very radical that would continue to try and support Trump. And OAN and Fox etc. To that end he needs to be in jail. Wtf happened to all of the speculation that the POS would be going to jail? All of the things he has done and he is still walking around free? SDNY where are you? Let's get this piece of shit out of sight and out of mind pronto!
 
nOOky said:
Even now Trump is still most relevant force in politics. In my mind the only way out of this mess is for the republicans to all back a cohesive effort to make Trump irrelevant. That means vote to convict him on impeachment, stop defending him, and stop even mentioning his name. I believe Trumps followers would quickly turn elsewhere or forget about him if he was made irrelevant. It's not like the conservative voters would vote to remove every republican if they all voted together.

Of course there are a minority of the very radical that would continue to try and support Trump. And OAN and Fox etc. To that end he needs to be in jail. Wtf happened to all of the speculation that the POS would be going to jail? All of the things he has done and he is still walking around free? SDNY where are you? Let's get this piece of shit out of sight and out of mind pronto!
Click to expand...

How on earth is he the most relevant force in politics? His legacy is being dismantled before his eyes, his party has lost the entirety of the elected government, etc.

He does still exert a lot of influence over his party, unfortunately for him his party has no power.
 
fleshconsumed said:
Last I heard 60% support conviction. So essentially democratic win margin + 5%. This means that Republican constituents are against it, and since Republican senators answer to their electorate there is no incentive for them to convict. I wish they'd do the right thing, but I've been wishing that for 4 years, my wishing well is empty. Nothing is going to change unless there is a drastic demographics shift enough offset inherent electoral advantage the Republican party enjoys at the moment.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, there are already rumblings about data integrity issues with the census last year. The data may already be rigged for GOP, and if Biden does anything to course correct you can bet it will be challenged in court.


We don’t yet know how much Trump’s xenophobic policies might have chilled census response rates. Preliminary data shows that two-thirds of predominantly Hispanic or Black neighborhoods had lower self-response rates in 2020 than in 2010, according to an analysis of census tracts from Steven Romalewski of the Center for Urban Research at the City University of New York’s Graduate Center.

Other researchers have told me that some educational institutions withheld students’ names and other characteristics when contacted by the Census Bureau last year, because they worried the information would be used to track down immigrants.

All this made those “hard to count” populations even “harder to count,”
 
I still see a chance of conviction, even if it's not necessarily likely.

The GOP likely realizes that giving in to Trump's pressure and letting him run for office in 2024 also means the party is chained to him for the next four years, like it or not. If he stokes more violence or goes to prison, they have to pay for it. And remember, Trump just cost them the Presidency and the Senate in one go after losing the House in 2018 — does the party really want him motivating Democrat supporters to deny Republicans in 2022 and 2024?

There is the risk that Trump will take many voters with him if there's a Senate conviction, but there's also a chance he'll split with the GOP anyway. A Senate conviction would prevent that split (at least with Trump at the helm). And let's face it, many Trump supporters would vote for the Republicans anyway, despite protests to the contrary.
 
Commodus said:
I still see a chance of conviction, even if it's not necessarily likely.

The GOP likely realizes that giving in to Trump's pressure and letting him run for office in 2024 also means the party is chained to him for the next four years, like it or not. If he stokes more violence or goes to prison, they have to pay for it. And remember, Trump just cost them the Presidency and the Senate in one go after losing the House in 2018 — does the party really want him motivating Democrat supporters to deny Republicans in 2022 and 2024?

There is the risk that Trump will take many voters with him if there's a Senate conviction, but there's also a chance he'll split with the GOP anyway. A Senate conviction would prevent that split (at least with Trump at the helm). And let's face it, many Trump supporters would vote for the Republicans anyway, despite protests to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Only way it happens is if McConnell decides it's what needs to happen and whips his caucus for enough votes. Which is very doubtful. I agree there are good reasons for the GOP to do it, but in the end they're just too partisan. One GOP staffer was quoted as saying, "unfortunately most of them view this all as a game of shirts and skins."
 
I should reword that to make it more of a parallel.....

If a co-worker incites a gang to break into your house, threaten your guests, family members and other co-workers and kills a responding police officer, do you say 'give the (inciting co-worker) a break'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top