• 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 41 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Republicans - "He’s still president because the election was stolen".

Republicans - "He can’t be impeached because he’s not the president"

🙄

The most damning evidence against Trump isn’t what he said before the riot; it’s what he said and did during and after. That is to say: nothing. A normal (non-criminal) president, when informed “Mr. President! A violent mob is attacking the Capitol! Congress is in danger!” would:

Send in National Guard reinforcements, immediately.

See to the safety of Congress and their staff

Ask about his VP

Go on TV/Twitter and demand that this outrage stop, and vow that the pepetrators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Trump did diddlysquat : Because it was all going according to plan. After 4 hours, he addressed his followers and said “we love you. You’re very special.”

Whether his speech technically meets the legal standard for inciting violence doesn’t matter that much. Whether it meets the legal standard may hinge on intent, and while IANAL, his rather unhurried reaction to the actual storming of the Capitol sure says a lot about his intent.

Here's some intent ....

www.opensecrets.org

Trump's political operation paid more than $3.5 million to Jan. 6 organizers

Newly uncovered payments show Trump’s 2020 campaign paid even larger sums to people involved in organizing Jan. 6 protests.
www.opensecrets.org www.opensecrets.org

And ...AFAIK ... Having the only daytime rally in 4 years, caliing it Stop The Steal, and timing it so it coincides with the certification of the election you are arguing is ‘stolen’ and needs to be ‘stopped’ ALSO goes a long way in signaling intent.
 
VRAMdemon said:
Republicans - "He’s still president because the election was stolen".

Republicans - "He can’t be impeached because he’s not the president"

🙄

The most damning evidence against Trump isn’t what he said before the riot; it’s what he said and did during and after. That is to say: nothing. A normal (non-criminal) president, when informed “Mr. President! A violent mob is attacking the Capitol! Congress is in danger!” would:

Send in National Guard reinforcements, immediately.

See to the safety of Congress and their staff

Ask about his VP

Go on TV/Twitter and demand that this outrage stop, and vow that the pepetrators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Trump did diddlysquat : Because it was all going according to plan. After 4 hours, he addressed his followers and said “we love you. You’re very special.”

Whether his speech technically meets the legal standard for inciting violence doesn’t matter that much. Whether it meets the legal standard may hinge on intent, and while IANAL, his rather unhurried reaction to the actual storming of the Capitol sure says a lot about his intent.

Here's some intent ....

www.opensecrets.org

Trump's political operation paid more than $3.5 million to Jan. 6 organizers

Newly uncovered payments show Trump’s 2020 campaign paid even larger sums to people involved in organizing Jan. 6 protests.
www.opensecrets.org www.opensecrets.org

And ...AFAIK ... Having the only daytime rally in 4 years, caliing it Stop The Steal, and timing it so it coincides with the certification of the election you are arguing is ‘stolen’ and needs to be ‘stopped’ ALSO goes a long way in signaling intent.
Click to expand...
...If only Republicans valued country above party, I'm afraid 😕
 
VRAMdemon said:
Republicans - "He’s still president because the election was stolen".

Republicans - "He can’t be impeached because he’s not the president"

🙄

The most damning evidence against Trump isn’t what he said before the riot; it’s what he said and did during and after. That is to say: nothing. A normal (non-criminal) president, when informed “Mr. President! A violent mob is attacking the Capitol! Congress is in danger!” would:

Send in National Guard reinforcements, immediately.

See to the safety of Congress and their staff

Ask about his VP

Go on TV/Twitter and demand that this outrage stop, and vow that the pepetrators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Trump did diddlysquat : Because it was all going according to plan. After 4 hours, he addressed his followers and said “we love you. You’re very special.”

Whether his speech technically meets the legal standard for inciting violence doesn’t matter that much. Whether it meets the legal standard may hinge on intent, and while IANAL, his rather unhurried reaction to the actual storming of the Capitol sure says a lot about his intent.

Here's some intent ....

www.opensecrets.org

Trump's political operation paid more than $3.5 million to Jan. 6 organizers

Newly uncovered payments show Trump’s 2020 campaign paid even larger sums to people involved in organizing Jan. 6 protests.
www.opensecrets.org www.opensecrets.org

And ...AFAIK ... Having the only daytime rally in 4 years, caliing it Stop The Steal, and timing it so it coincides with the certification of the election you are arguing is ‘stolen’ and needs to be ‘stopped’ ALSO goes a long way in signaling intent.
Click to expand...
On this note, can someone explain to me why trump was impeached instead of just prosecuted in a court of law with a real jury?
 
Sunburn74 said:
On this note, can someone explain to me why trump was impeached instead of just prosecuted in a court of law with a real jury?
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. You see with impeachment a bunch of lawmakers get to stand up before cameras and make long impassioned speeches aimed directly at making soundbites for their favored news outlet, and then vote down party lines and make sure nothing actually happens.
In a court of law the judge would probably not allow cameras, only people that had some reason to address the court would be allowed to speak, and Trump would be found guilty. Then the Parties would have to deal with the fall out of a President convicted for things he did while in office. If a President is held accountable for his action Americans might get ideas that Congress Critters should be too.
We can't have that.
Therefore the dramatic, but safe, impeachment.
 
Bottom line is, he will be in court for the foreseeable future in the both the state of Georgia and New York. I just hope he preoccupation will keep him politically dead.
 
SMOGZINN said:
Ah, yes. You see with impeachment a bunch of lawmakers get to stand up before cameras and make long impassioned speeches aimed directly at making soundbites for their favored news outlet, and then vote down party lines and make sure nothing actually happens.
In a court of law the judge would probably not allow cameras, only people that had some reason to address the court would be allowed to speak, and Trump would be found guilty. Then the Parties would have to deal with the fall out of a President convicted for things he did while in office. If a President is held accountable for his action Americans might get ideas that Congress Critters should be too.
We can't have that.
Therefore the dramatic, but safe, impeachment.
Click to expand...

I don't think any decision has been made about prosecution yet. The new AG hasn't been confirmed yet, and the various AUSA's aren't all even in place.

But what I think we're going to find is that there isn't solid legal grounds to prosecute. While Trump's 1A defense is nonsense in an impeachment trial, it will probably prevail in a criminal court because incitement speech is a very narrow exception to the 1A and the incitement has to be quite direct.

I hope I'm wrong about this and that it's a broader exception, as I'd like to see him go to jail for this. I do doubt that the new AG will refrain from prosecuting just for "unity" or some such crap though. Not for this. If they don't prosecute, it will be because they believe a conviction is unlikely.
 
woolfe9998 said:
I don't think any decision has been made about prosecution yet. The new AG hasn't been confirmed yet, and the various AUSA's aren't all even in place.

But what I think we're going to find is that there isn't solid legal grounds to prosecute. While Trump's 1A defense is nonsense in an impeachment trial, it will probably prevail in a criminal court because incitement speech is a very narrow exception to the 1A and the incitement has to be quite direct.

I hope I'm wrong about this and that it's a broader exception, as I'd like to see him go to jail for this. I do doubt that the new AG will refrain from prosecuting just for "unity" or some such crap though. Not for this. If they don't prosecute, it will be because they believe a conviction is unlikely.
Click to expand...
Well, I mean, I doubt he can be realistically be criminally indicted for incitement, but there are plenty of other things he could be criminally indicted for. I mean, even just sticking within the context of his election interference, his phone call with Raffensperger is already under criminal investigation.
 
hal2kilo said:
Bottom line is, he will be in court for the foreseeable future in the both the state of Georgia and New York. I just hope he preoccupation will keep him politically dead.
Click to expand...
Yes and probably some civil suites to follow as well? I bet he doesn't have access to a lot of cash so might have trouble retaining good legal help. His being insane and also never paying his debts might just be catching up with him.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
What I love about this trial is the heavy use of video by the Democrats. The former Presidents preferred way of getting information and his general ratings obsession.
His legal team is using no video....
I love it.
Click to expand...
His legal team is scrambling to get some supporting video together, good luck with that.

www.cnn.com

Trump impeachment defense team scrambling to make new videos to bolster case

President Donald Trump's legal team is scrambling to collect and produce more videos to bolster their impeachment trial arguments after a rambling debut performance that enraged the former president and dismayed Republicans, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
 
Uhtrinity said:
His legal team is scrambling to get some supporting video together, good luck with that.

www.cnn.com

Trump impeachment defense team scrambling to make new videos to bolster case

President Donald Trump's legal team is scrambling to collect and produce more videos to bolster their impeachment trial arguments after a rambling debut performance that enraged the former president and dismayed Republicans, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
Click to expand...
I’m sure Hannity & Friends has offered to help.
 
Republican only defense at this point is to attack THE VIDEO’S. Fox News WELL SCRIPTED HOLLYWOOD VIDEO IS ALL THAT DEMOCRATS HAVE. Republicans in congress ALL THEY HAVE ARE HOLLYWOOD PRODUCED VIDEO. Well folks, when Donald Trump’s entire presidency has been based on video and social media THAT is what you use in an impeachment. Either video, or pages and pages of Twitter postings. And so.... in the opinions of Trump supportive loyalists, they can not defend the actions of Donald Trump, they can only attack and minimize the source of the evidence. IF THE GLOVE DOESN’T FIT, YOU MUST ACQUIT. Sound familiar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top