An Honest Question to Republicans Supporting Throwing Out Trump's Second Impeachment

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

#1.- It's not like he resigned to escape prosecution. His term was up. The house knew his term was up. They impeached him on January 13, and then didn't even deliver the articles of impeachment until AFTER his term was up. Why not at least attempt to do it while he is still in office? A new senate, maybe? I don't know.

I don't know either. But it's irrelevant either way. He was impeached while still in office.

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

#2. - They have to remove him from office BEFORE the second "remedy" is available. But they cant remove him from office. He doesn't HOLD any office. There is no logic to this type of thinking. This is all about what is constitutional, not about whether or not Trump deserves retribution.

Do they? I think that's very much open to interpretation.

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

#3 - There is precedent set by the senate to try someone after they have left office. Who knows if it is even constitutional? The two times there were trials, one was halted in the middle because the senate decided it didn't have jurisdiction. The other time, the senate voted for acquittal, and the reason they gave was that they lacked jurisdiction.

So yes, there is precedent to hold a trial.

There is also precedent to not convict on account of a lack of jurisdiction.

If that's the Senate's decision, so be it.

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

I have said right from the beginning that they will try him, and he will be acquitted, for the reasons above. And it is looking like I was right. They want to put on the show, for the people. But in the end, they know a conviction of a private citizen will never hold up in court. It is unconstitutional, no matter how much left wing lawyers try to twist the meaning of the words written in it, to get their desired outcome.


In answer to the OP's question:

"So I ask, conservatives, Republicans and Trump supporters, would you support a Democrat doing the same thing as Trump has done?"

No. I don't support what Trump did either. But if it were a democrat, I still wouldn't want to see the senate change the meaning of the words in the constitution, just to get their pound of flesh. Let them try him in criminal court if they think they have a case.

I agree that it's more symbolic than anything else - I believe several Dems have even alluded to the fact. If it's the most they can do, it's the most they can do. I'm OK with that, but I'm also OK with them imposing as much consequence on Trump as they can -- because I think his actions and statements are well below acceptable behavior for the Chief Executive.

[illtaketwoplease]

this post is a perfect example of a poll put out by a clearly biased pollster that limits the choices given to respondents in order to achieve a desired result.

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by mkpunk

If the election was stolen where is the proof of such steal? Sounds more like someone is crying that democracy didn't work the way they wanted it to.

Democracy? We're promised a republican form. A democracy is a vile form where a majority can legally persecute a minority.
/ / /
What constitutes "proof" when courts ignore witnesses?
Not in this particular case, but I witnessed judges ruling that testimony was not allowed.
(It was a Georgia hearing to bar Obama from the ballot, for violations of state election law. And the judge would not hear the evidence! I knew "the fix" was in, on that one.)
. . .
I have second hand hearsay knowledge, so it is NOT "proof". I knew a couple. They were not allowed to vote, because the record showed they already voted BY MAIL. When they objected, they were told to file a complaint with the Election board. Yeah, right. Nothing going on here. Go home, little girl. And take your dog, too.

What a difference it would be, if such a thing meant STOP THE ELECTION - THERE IS FRAUD AFOOT.
And all who engaged in voting fraud were giving life sentences...except the "dead" voters.
BTW - this is nothing new - political machines have been rigging elections - especially presidential (Mayor Daley helped Kennedy, the scion of a liquor smuggling family, win the presidency).
See the movie "The Great McGinty" for Hollywood's slapstick version.
. . .
Wake up.
Biden rallies barely had a seat filled, while Trump rallies had SRO and more outside.
Believe in the tooth fairy and the invisible pink unicorn of socialist prosperity, but this election was "fixed" by the Insiders.

[2mares]

Originally Posted by mkpunk

I have an honest question about disgraced former President Trump's second impeachment trial. As we all know, this is the first time a President challenged election results to the point of a terrorist plot to change the election results. This is the first time a former president is being impeached to prevent them from running again. Precedent will be set by this case whether you talk having the reason to impeach, an impeachment to disqualify a presidential candidate, or the result.

So I ask, conservatives, Republicans and Trump supporters, would you support a Democrat doing the same thing as Trump has done?

Yes. I dont think it matters if its democrats or republicans, if one party obviously rigs and election the other party should have every right to speak out and challenge the corruption.

A terrorist plot. LOL.