Storming the Capitol

[Sportello]

I've read, it's hilarious!

Idiot Democrats impeached him claiming his speech incited an insurrection.

Then it came out people planned it weeks ahead of the speech. Democrats really are stupid people lol.

So the defense is that the speech didn’t incite the insurrection, it had been planned in advance?

Brilliant!

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

So the defense is that the speech didn’t incite the insurrection, it had been planned in advance?

It's an unconstitutional impeachment.
Enough senators to acquit him have already voted on a resolution to that effect. It's dead in the water, nothing more than stupid Democrats playing politics instead of doing their jobs.

You need to move on snowflake.

 

[Sportello]

It's more like a company's disciplinary board meeting to discuss firing an employee that has already resigned.

No, it’s more like holding the employee responsible for the damage he caused after he was given notice.

Responsibility has never been a trumpian attribute.

 

[It will be fine]

It's moot, not mute. And the article of impeachment wasn't presented to Congress until after Trump left. The purpose of a Senate trial is to determine if the crimes that caused the impeachment rise to the level that necessarily require removal from office. You can't remove someone who's already gone. It's unconstitutional and a farce. And strictly about trying to find a way to bar Trump from holding Federal office again.

There are only a handful of impeachments in the nation’s history. Many of the trials have taken place after the accused left office. Your argument demonstrates how little you understand the history of impeachment.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

No, it’s more like holding the employee responsible for the damage he caused after he was given notice.

Responsibility has never been a trumpian attribut.

No, a company has no authority to "hold the employee responsible for the damage", he doesn't work there anymore. Think it through little lady.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

There are only a handful of impeachments in the nation’s history. Many of the trials have taken place after the accused left office.

"Many" lol.
Oh you mean like that one Secretary of War a hundred years ago, who was acquitted because enough senators voted it was an unconstitutional impeachment?

Okay.

 

[bacha29]

It's moot, not mute. And the article of impeachment wasn't presented to Congress until after Trump left. The purpose of a Senate trial is to determine if the crimes that caused the impeachment rise to the level that necessarily require removal from office. You can't remove someone who's already gone. It's unconstitutional and a farce. And strictly about trying to find a way to bar Trump from holding Federal office again.

On January 13,2021 The US House of Representatives voted to impeach Donald J. Trump for a second time by a vote of 232-197. The Senate will decide whether or not to convict Trump on the article. So the fact that he's gone is a MOOT point because they can still convict him . A censure could be more damaging to Trump if it's one that bars him from ever holding public office again cancelling out whatever desires he may have about running again in 2024.

 

[Box Ox]

A censure could be more damaging to Trump if it's one that bars him from ever holding public office again cancelling out whatever desires he may have about running again in 2024.

A censure alone can allow for a simple majority vote to do that?

 

[vantexan]

On January 13,2021 The US House of Representatives voted to impeach Donald J. Trump for a second time by a vote of 232-197. The Senate will decide whether or not to convict Trump on the article. So the fact that he's gone is a MOOT point because they can still convict him . A censure could be more damaging to Trump if it's one that bars him from ever holding public office again cancelling out whatever desires he may have about running again in 2024.

Per the Constitution the Senate trial is to determine removal of the president. That's it, period. And he won't be barred if not convicted, censure or not. If censure would insure Trump wouldn't be eligible for office again that would be the route they'd go because an impeachment trial conviction requires 67 senators. Good luck with that!

 

[vantexan]

There are only a handful of impeachments in the nation’s history. Many of the trials have taken place after the accused left office. Your argument demonstrates how little you understand the history of impeachment.

Doesn't apply. ttku

 

[Box Ox]

No, a company has no authority to "hold the employee responsible for the damage", he doesn't work there anymore. Think it through little lady.

You'll remember you said that if Joe Biden sends a violent hard leftist mob to "fight like hell" to disrupt a joint session of Congress at the Capitol Building on January 6, 2025?

 

[vantexan]

You'll remember you said that if Joe Biden sends a violent hard leftist mob to "fight like hell" to disrupt a joint session of Congress at the Capitol Building on January 6, 2025?

As if a violent hard leftist mob needs an excuse to riot.

 

[Box Ox]

As if a violent hard leftist mob needs an excuse to riot.

All good in the Capitol hood as long as Biden unleashes it near the end of his term.

 

[Box Ox]

Eh, you just said yesterday that QAnon has all the facts. LOL

 

[The big package]

On January 13,2021 The US House of Representatives voted to impeach Donald J. Trump for a second time by a vote of 232-197. The Senate will decide whether or not to convict Trump on the article. So the fact that he's gone is a MOOT point because they can still convict him . A censure could be more damaging to Trump if it's one that bars him from ever holding public office again cancelling out whatever desires he may have about running again in 2024.

Unconstitutional !!!

 

[Box Ox]

 

[El Correcto]

No, it’s more like holding the employee responsible for the damage he caused after he was given notice.

Responsibility has never been a trumpian attribute.

 

[It will be fine]

Doesn't apply. ttku

Your complete lack of understanding history doesn’t apply to the conversation? Interesting argument.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Your complete lack of understanding history doesn’t apply to the conversation? Interesting argument.

You are very misinformed little lady.

 

[fishtm2001]

'No Blame?' ABC News finds 54 cases invoking 'Trump' in connection with violence, threats, alleged assaults.

President Donald Trump insists he deserves no blame for divisions in America.

abcnews.go.com