Impeachment

Then why did Democrats call for the 2nd impeachment only after the speech and Capitol break in?

 

Seriously?

 

Because whomever you quoted who I can't see, is full of crap, that's why. See, calling someone disingenuous is like "bless your heart", "With all due respect", etc. It's BS, and the person, whoever it is, under any circumstances, who says it, is a liar himself while pretending to be nice about calling someone else a liar.

 

It’s like a liberal screwed your ex and stole your dog. I’d want to put a billet in their heads if they were as despicable as you describe. People who need to work things out often don’t believe that is the case.

Take care.

sincerely,
An Oklahoma liberal.

 

To ignore that his other speeches were free from violence is not only disingenuous but shows people clearly have not followed the past four and one-half years...

 

The hatred is visceral...and not healthy. If you're using biblical terms of good vs. evil to describe people whose politics you disagree with, thumbs may be more useful when pointing out problems.

 

Wait...we should ignore claims in August saying "the only way they win is if they steal the election", speeches/tweets in other locations prior to Jan. 6th pleading to the audience to be IN D.C. on the 6th to "Stop the Steal" and any number of other references directing them when, where and how to conduct the insurrection? Really?

I'm struggling to understand the inference that Trump was simply some random dude that randomly showed up in D.C on the Mall on Jan. 6th with 400,000 others that also randomly showed up to listen to a speech by a random person and somehow collectively (randomly?) decided to attack the Capital building for some unknown reason.

If you remove "random" and "unknown" then how did that all happen? Who was an organizing influence? How did an estimated mob of 800 (NOT the peaceful rally goers) know to attack the Capital building? Who gave them the idea to "hang Mike Pence"? Who invited them to the Capital building which several were screaming at police during the insurrection?

 

Compost? Out of respect for the people who have to monitor board behavior I will just ignore your drivel.

 

The whole thing is obviously political theater. Trump is already out of office. I'm wondering which GOP Senators vote to convict Trump. Those that do will have a big fat target on their backs for primaries. While Trump is out, Trumpist sentiments still dominate the Grand Ole Party.

 

Clearly it's political theater. Most of what happens in politics is aside from the actually legislative drafting and votes. "Investigations" by Congress are simply political weapons.

Curious of your viewpoint. Do you think Trump has culpability for Jan 6th?

 

For a criminal law trial - not even close (based on what I've seen thus far). Of course, I'd have to see all the evidence to make a decision.

For this impeachment trial, it's the subjective opinions of the Senators. Basically, it's a power play, and again, political theater.

 

The semi-familiar by now impeachment without conviction is functionally a censure / vote of no confidence. It's a final FU to Trump from the Congress.

Congress valued giving this final going away FU to Trump even more than they value getting some legislation passed in Biden's early days--when he has some momentum.

 

This isn't a criminal proceeding and I would never trust politicians to manage one. I missed your answer to the question, is Trump culpable for the mob's behavior on 1/6?

 

I like his stuff. Yours too...sometimes..when it isn't composty.

 

A temper tantrum by grown children. Got it.

 

A censure is hapless, IMHO. It's not an FU but rather a futile exercise in political theater. If Impeachment is merely a "censure" then our forefathers screwed up pretty significantly.

 

Impeachment WITH conviction is a change in government. Impeachment without conviction is functionally a censure--that's what Clinton's and the first Trump impeachment were. Nobody really thought they would get a conviction in either. And yes, those were all political theater. Grandstanding for their political bases.

A. Johnson's impeachment was a raw power play whose proponents did think they would get a conviction.

 

So you support the claims of Maxine and Kamala and Cori and Corey (and the list goes on) where they invited harm to be visited upon any member of the GOP and the Trump Administration?

Guess what- you cannot wave that away and then claim that DJT incited anything. Places continue to burn because of the rhetoric from the left that has been unchecked and, indeed, has been exhorted by politicians.

Rallies had occurred all across the nation without incident. Even if one presumes that the events that a small percentage of the participants in the 1.6.2021 rally were somehow coordinated by Trump, then they must ALSO explain how so many other thousands who were present did NOT participate. The left also ignores the presence of known agitators at the Capitol, some of whom have since been arrested.

Guess what? Many of us LIKED the economic climate under DJT and are appalled at what is happening in just a few weeks since the inauguration. It does not mean we liked the tweets. There ARE many who recognize the various irregularities that occurred in the election cycle, to include States that made changes to their process in a manner that did not comport with their State Constitution or their election laws. It does not make each and every one of those DJT supporters culpable for the events of 1.6.2021 and it does not make DJT culpable either.

 

My personal opinion (and that's all it is): I think Trump was irresponsible. But culpability is a legal term implying guilt. I personally haven't seen anything yet that would make Trump guilty of a crime based on what happened with the angry mob. Unless there's something else out there (and there very well could be), I couldn't see any federal prosecutor filing a criminal case against Trump based on the actions of persons in the angry mob.

 

Trump is certainly a manipulative and Machiavellian genius. I'll definitely give you that. His understanding of what makes people tick is almost super-human. And he knows how to push people's buttons. Still, all that doesn't equate to the commission of a crime.

I would prefer if all sides toned down the anger many notches, and focused on our commonalities. Joe may be good for that; Kamala, I'm not so sure about.

 

I thought compost was better than ********. But I agree it was nasty. I apologize.

 

My question was asking if you think the 2nd impeachment would have occurred without anything that happened on January 6, like previous speeches, etc.

I included the Capitol break in because it happened. But if you believe that Trump is being reimpeached because of the break-in, he either had to participate in it or be responsible for it.

I don't think he was responsibility for it, even though he did have some influence on the situation.

 

Joe had a major opportunity to tone down the anger. He could have asked the House to focus on his priorities instead of impeachment for 100 days or so. But he chose not to. Joe also could have studied killing the Keystone and killing fracking instead of issuing EOs.

I think Joe is not good for that so far.

 

To claim this impeachment is not disingenuous is not only disingenuous but indicates some aren't following the impeachment trial.

 

I can't resist...
My addition to the compost / bullsh!t sub-debate:

Compost vs Manure: The Best For Your Soil Health

What's Better for Soil Health-Compost or Manure? - Holistic Management International

 

Frankly, I find the disingenuous retort to the disingenuous reply to the disingenuous response to the disingenuity of Congress to be disingenuous.

 

Calling for any physical confrontations is abhorrent, IMHO. The moral equivalence of claiming rhetoric supporters should "get up in the faces" (Maxine?) of the opponent vs saying show up on Jan 6th, the opponent will be in the Capital Building, stop them from doing their job. One is rhetoric while the other demonstrates planning, forethought and has an specific outcome time tied to it. It's like a potential criminal saying "we should rob a bank" and another planning and executing the bank robbery. Are both culpable? Yes! Is one more culplable than the other? I think we can agree that the latter would be more at fault and punished more severely.

If you can show that Maxine, Kamala, Cory Booker or any organized, directed and ultimately specified the outcome of those protests, specifically any looting/burning then I'll join you in calling for their impeachment/removal from office too. If not, it's a vapid attempt at moral equivalence that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If I shout fire in a crowded theater of 100 and only 20 react leading to injury does that mean I'm not culpable because all 100 didn't act? Just because an estimated 400k didn't converge on the Capital Building doesn't mean his words, direction weren't effective for the thousands that did cross the police barriers.

Holding all protesters accountable for the act of a subset is dumb. That applies to rally goers on 1/6 and BLM protesters throughout the US. Attending a rally to let your voice be hear is an American freedom. Crossing police barriers, assaulting cops and breaking and entering the Capital Building or Nordstrom is illegal and should be punished. Burning a car in Kenosha or taking a crap in a Capital Building bathroom and smearing it all over the hallway should be punished. If you can find the rally organizers and show similarly that they incited the crowd to loot then punish them. My guess is that looting/burning is less organized and typically more spontaneous or lone wolfs. What happened on 1/6 was organized in plain sight, was celebrated by Trump after it was done. Trump's reaction to the sacking of the Capital Building cannot be ignored.

I've very clearly said that not all Trump supporters are culpable for 1/6, limiting my disdain for those that crossed police barriers and the people that organized/pointed/fired them at the target. DJT isn't simply a supporter. On more than a dozen occasions he directed his supporters to amass on 1/6, the day of the counting. His speech was timed to finish within minutes of the 1pm EST, the start of the count. He waited 3 hours after the start of the insurrection to respond to any of the mob activity, despite passionate please from Republican in Congress, then while doing so called them "patriots" and "we love you".

 

idoit!

 

Not following the reason. Do I think the trial for bank robbery would have occurred without the robbery? Clearly the Capital sacking was a turning point. At that point we transitioned from rhetoric to action, very specific action to stop the count.

Appreciate the response. Though I'm having trouble differentiating "influence" and responsibility. It's no secret where I land.

 

Has anyone ever explained, or heard the explanation of why some guards moved back barriers to allow in the protestors? Are they saying they were Trump supporters but had no clue what would be the results? I seriously haven’t heard any follow up on this.
And no, I have not followed the proceedings, I did follow the first but the edited videos used on this one were too much for me, so I stopped very early on.