Democrats preparing to launch impeachment trial by end of week, sources say
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Democrats preparing to launch impeachment trial by end of week, sources say
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is expected to send the article of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate later this week, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News -- a move that would kick off formal proceedings the next day and opening arguments on the Senate floor the following week.
The timing of formal transmission from the House to the Senate is significant, as the Constitution dictates that the trial begins at 1 p.m. the following day.
Pushing that procedural step back until after President-elect Joe Biden takes office -- back to Thursday or Friday -- would also give his administration at least a day or two to gain its footing as the Senate begins the balancing act of putting Trump on trial while starting to take up Biden's agenda.
Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Pelosi, declined to comment on the timeline.
"Stay tuned," he told ABC News.
Democrats are expected to assume control of the Senate on Wednesday, following the swearing-in of incoming Georgia Sens. John Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. Any move to begin impeachment proceedings is also contingent upon Senate leaders hashing out rules to govern the trial on the Senate floor.
In near-daily meetings, Democratic impeachment managers and lawyers have been discussing how to best make their case to the narrowly divided Senate -- focusing on the seventeen Republicans required to convict Trump and the desire to bar him from seeking office in the future. The vote to bar Trump from holding any elected office would require a simple majority, following a vote to convict from two-thirds of the Senate.
"I don't think anybody would seriously argue that we should establish a precedent where every president on the way out the door has two weeks or three weeks or four weeks to try to incite an armed insurrection against the union or organize a coup against the union," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the lead manager, said on CNN on Sunday, arguing that Trump needed to be barred from a future presidential run.
So, not today!
Pelosi is holding it ....
The impeachment trial provides cover for Executive Orders. Pelosi is giving Biden a free hand.
Well, as president, Biden can do whatever he wants. At least that's what trump and his supporters have been screaming for the last 4 years.
Yes, Joe Biden is President. Public attention will be focused on the impeachment trial. Whatever Biden does won't be receiving much public scrutiny until it's too late.
"Whatever Biden does won't be receiving much public scrutiny until it's too late."
Too late - ooh, how ominous!!!!!!!LOL!
The immediate actions Biden has indicated he would take are ominous. The migrant caravan stopped at the Guatemalan border is only a small beginning for what is coming.
I'm so scared! LOL!
So those roaming caravan hordes are finally getting here?
get the cabinet confirmed. get the covid relief organized, finally. save the economy. then hunt down the insurrectionists and show their leader the door to justice with zero benefits of his disservice to the US. fuck him up, fuck up his toadies, and fuck up his stupid sycophants.
Biden is a smart guy, I'm sure that's the order of his priorities, the right order, or should I say, the correct order, the proper order.
tRump's only priority was himself.
You sound angry.
Any rational patriotic American who loves democracy would be after seeing that psycho mob of unhinged conspiracy theorist seditionists attack the Capital. The fact that they were emboldened and inspired by lies and rhetorical fantasy coming directly from the sitting Presidents mouth should also make true patriots angry.
[Deleted]
[deleted]
Impeaching Trump should take about 5 minutes.
He sent tens of thousands of people to the Capitol with the expressed mission of getting Mike Pence to violate his oath to the Constitution and overturn a fair and legal election.
case closed.
Lies, lies, lies - pure conspiracy playing there John. Thought you were better than that.
Case closed.
After awhile you just have to have sympathy for people like that, who lie and make up stuff endlessly and find no joy in life.
Sorry 1st..... You seem to be willfully ignoring captured video by the bushel. Incitement to riot, with the intent of sedition is there for those that are fair enough to see and hear it.
lol.
FLY - there is considerable conversation going on as to whether or not the "In-coming" administration has the authority/jurisdiction to conduct such action - per the Constitution.
There are/have been laundered words published by the MSN/idiotic politicians and Michael Cohen (whom we all know we can trust with our very lives) of "so-called" incitement/sedition with no further truth than rubber lips and rumored dogma.
Constitutional lawyers (no, not Obama) are saying that train is out of coal with no water in the tank, and I much rather prefer to listen to legal authorities than I would listening to MSN and Michael Cohen.
No, you keep seeing imaginary shyt that isn't really there.
If even McConnell can half way admit what happened, I think others can too.
I don't believe it is up to the incoming administration. This is strictly in congress. They are the ones that have the authority/jurisdiction in this matter. It's up to them.
So the MAGA morons that were recorded shouting "Hang Pence" on 6JAN21 was all imaginary?
So you don't believe that his so-called speech egged on the insurrectionists to attack the Capital and endanger our political system? His lies about the election and everything around it are just what, 1st?
Did you miss his speech and the insurrection while they erected a gallows and shouted for Mike Pence to be hanged? Did you miss that LEO's were hurt and killed?
But remember he said, ''I love you'' to the scum that attacked our capital.
But in the delusional world, Trump is free of any association with the radical white supremacists.
Gee that sounds familiar
He said 'I love you and you are very special' to the scum that attacked our capital.
He also told this mob that they didn't have to abide by the same sets of rules as others " you are allowed to go by very different rules"
Nothing to discuss. Obviously, the FP has all the answers.
My comment didn't say anything about the FP. If you're unable to answer say so, don't try to deflect.
Trump will become a private citizen tomorrow immediately after Biden is sworn in. Is it in the Constitution that a private citizen can be impeached and removal trial begin after he has left office,
The Democrats are off to a very bad start, and their vindictive actions will not turn out in their favor.
If he committed the crime before he left office, then yes. Just because he is leaving office doesn't mean he never committed the crime.
And if he's convicted, it means he won't be able to run for office again.
[Deleted]
And no SS detail and no million a year for travel expenses.
What crime...he never told anyone to commit crimes or riot. If the impeachment charges went to the Senate before noon tomorrow, it would be voted down.
I don't think he wants to. I don't think most Republicans want him to either. He's tainted and spoiled goods.
Trumpism can survive without him
Read it for yourself.
Perhaps, but......
Elections have consequences.
Even Mitch McConnell says trump provoked the riot at the Capitol.
Trump has promoted violence MANY times since he has been in office.. On twitter and in public addresses.
You KNOW what he'll say.. "McConnell is a RINO!!!".
Standard response when proven wrong.
donald called for violence even before he was elected, all the while with a wink and a nod to extremist, hate groups.
The faithful will never admit it, even when shown his own words.
It is always, he didn't mean that or he was joking...
True and who can forget him telling the proud boys, "Stand back and stand by". I think it's pretty obvious what he was saying.
If someone you knew was lying to everyone around you telling them you were a pedophile rapist, standing outside your home with signs that said "Pedophile rapist lives here!" and a group from your community attacked you in your own home because of these unfounded vile lies, who would you blame? Even if the person who was lying about you didn't physically attack you or even tell the others to attack you, wouldn't you consider the lies they told about you that inspired the violence enough to make them responsible for the violence against you?
Trump lied to his supporters, there is ZERO evidence of widespread election fraud and ZERO evidence the election was "stolen" as he claimed. Trump lied about the election and lied about his opponents and demonized them in the minds of his rabid sycophants and told them rules don't matter. He told them to march down to the Capital building and "fight much harder", "You have to show strength, and you have to be strong", " you are allowed to go by very different rules" "We will not take it anymore, and that is what this is all about."
His crowd was cheering and chanting "Fight for Trump. Fight for Trump. Fight for Trump. Fight for Trump. Fight for Trump. Fight for Trump".
And after the Capital attack what was the message Trump sent the attackers? "We know how you feel" , "We love you, you're very special.".
Trump was a criminal long before he incited his supporters to commit an act of sedition. His history of criminality will now be exposed for all to see as he is forced to defend himself against multiple State charges that he cannot pardon himself for, from felony campaign finance violations, tax fraud, bank fraud to sedition and inciting a riot. Trump makes Nixon look like a choir boy by comparison. Trump will go down as the worst President in US history no matter what his poorly educated sycophant supporters in denial want to believe.
They are building up quite a herd. lol
"Even Mitch McConnell says trump provoked the riot at the Capitol."
He most certainly did:
McConnell: Trump 'provoked' Capitol siege, mob 'fed lies'
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday explicitly placed blame on President Donald Trump for the deadly riot at the Capitol, saying the mob was “fed lies” and that the president and others “provoked” those intent on overturning Democrat Joe Biden’s election.
McConnell's remarks as he opened the Senate were his most severe and public rebuke of outgoing President Donald Trump. The Republican leader vowed a “safe and successful” inauguration of Biden on Wednesday at the Capitol, which is under extremely tight security.
“The mob was fed lies," McConnell said. “They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.”
McConnell said after Biden's inauguration on the Capitol's West Front — what he noted former President George H.W. Bush has called “democracy's front porch” — “We'll move forward.”
Hopefully not. Chances are it'll just be largely ignored and wither away. Just like Trump's followers.
This is quite interesting. Sounds like he's admitting that white 'protesters' do not see the same type of law enforcement presence during their 'protests'
Reminds me of the ...fine people on both sides...quote
Well, it depends on the context. There has been a four plus year history of Trump supporters, most white, many brown or black, protesting peacefully. The riot at the Capitol was screwed up and the rioters should be prosecuted at the highest level of the law, but that was one time.
However, at most of the BLM and ANTIFA "protests", they ended up with riots, burning and looting.
That is why there was little law enforcement presence at the Capitol on January 6th. History showed violence was a very small chance, whereas violence at a BLM riot was expected..
Your denial, deflection and projection are duly noted.
[deleted]
I've done none of the above. You asked a question and I answered it truthfully. Just because YOU don't like it has no effect on me.
[Removed for context]
[deleted]
Of course you have, that's all you got. . .your version of truth is denial, deflection, and projection
[deleted]
But your post was quite alright to you though, huh?
That's not automatic. It's a separate vote. One vote for removal, and then a second one on disqualification to hold office. However, while removal requires a 2/3 vote (It's the same vote that convicts. Removal is automatic.), disqualification only requires a simple majority.
That's why I said "if."
No that's not it. If he is convicted (that was the "if" you used), he is automatically removed. It doesn't mean he can't run again. The decision to disqualify him from future service is a different vote with a lower standard.
Without him those who are part of that movement will only double down on advancing it.
The Constitution makes it clear that a President cannot run for a second term if impeached & convicted. Article I, Section 3 states [emphasis mine], "Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.
Double of zero is still zero.
That phrasing sets an upper limit on what follows, not a minimum. There have been cases, for example, where judges were impeached and convicted such that they were removed, but then a separate vote was held on disqualification.
An interesting thing to note is only judges have been disqualified from future office. But I stand corrected: An impeached and subsequently removed President can run for a 2nd term, but only if the Senate does not votes to prohibit a 2nd term run with a simple majority vote. Of course, such an occurrence has never happened in our history.
I’m actually dubious about whether or not the Senate could muster the 67 votes required for removal, but since only 51 are required for disqualification, that would be a piece of cake. You wouldn’t even need to bring in the VP for that. The problem is they don’t even get to the disqualification vote without the conviction/removal vote.
That statement is a total unadulterated lie, not unlike the many lies coming from Trump and his rabid sycophants. In fact, the exact opposite is true.
"The vast majority of Black Lives Matter protests— more than 93%—have been peaceful , according to a new report published Thursday by a nonprofit that researches political violence and protests across the world."
In contrast, we had a white supremacist Trump supporter ram his car into the crowd in Charlottesville killing one and maiming dozens.
We had a white supremacist Trump supporter in Oakland shoot and kill two officers in an attempt to start a civil war and blame it on the BLM protesters.
We had a peaceful protester at a Trump rally attacked and Trump saying he'd pay for the attackers defense.
Trumps own FBI director admitted that "white supremacist domestic terrorists" were the greatest domestic threat to our nation.
Congress found "White supremacists and other far-right-wing extremists are the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the United States."
An unclassified May 2017 joint intelligence bulletin from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security found that “white supremacist extremism poses [a] persistent threat of lethal violence,” and that White supremacists “were responsible for 49 homicides in 26 attacks from 2000 to 2016 … more than any other domestic extremist movement”.
And now we saw white supremacists waving their vile confederate flags and Trump flags attack and desecrate our Capital building and the halls of congress as our elected representatives fled for their lives and we all watched the worthless sniveling maniacal right wing domestic terrorists murder one of the Capital police officers. Yet here we have just more useless rhetoric coming from the right dismissing their own complicity and trying to again incite the gullible dumb shits among them into violence against Democrats and anyone who would dare disrespect their dear Leader. But what else can we expect from the truly deplorable? Certainly not dignity, not intellect, not respect for democracy, just more whining, sniveling, crawling on their bellies and hissing like the snakes in the grass they are.
Removal is hard. Disqualification is easy. At this point, with Trump now gone, a successful impeachment would serve 2 purposes: removing post presidential benefits, and pave the way for a Senate vote on whether to deny Trump from another Presidential run. Either way, I have doubts as to whether impeachment will be successful and if Trump would actually consider another run if possible.
Each on their own? I suppose. The vote required for removal is harder in that it requires more votes. However, the vote for disqualification first requires the conviction/removal vote, so taken as a whole, disqualification is not easier. And there have been votes to convict and remove without the subsequent disqualification. The latter requires the former.
I'm actually against this, but not because I want Trump to be president again. I don't. I hate the concept of winning by forfeit or disqualification, especially when - as here - it would be imposed by the power of the other party's majority power. Democrats (or Republicans in a primary, for that matter) should be able to beat Trump because they are better choices for the office. It's not an achievement if the system is rigged so that he can't even try to compete.
And if it goes down that way, I guarantee you that both he and his most devoted followers will never shut up about it. If he is disqualified, then from 2024 on, they will constantly be claiming that Trump would be president but for the fact that the Democrats conspired to keep him from running again. It will entrench a resistance that can only hurt the country.
If there are enough votes for an impeachment conviction, it stands to reason there would be enough for disqualification from future office. But, 1 step at a time. However, voting to keep an impeached President from running again was put into place by the Founding Fathers, and for good reason. After all, why would anyone want an individual who committed some wrongdoing to be President again? That sort of defeats the purpose of impeachment and removal. But the Democrats aren't conspiring anything. That's how the system is set up and they're following the impeachment process. And Trump's supporters are already not shutting up about anything, especially about the whole election. At this point, it's just delusional whining and I suspect from a fringe group of supporters.
You'd think so, but that hasn't always been the case.
In 1936, Federal Judge Halsted Ritter was impeached and convicted of bringing the judiciary into disrepute by accepting free meals. I know: shocking!
Anyway, he was convicted in the Senate on a vote of 56-38. I'm guessing a bunch of senators were out of town because 56 was exactly the 2/3 needed for conviction. They then had a separate vote to disqualify him and nobody voted for disqualification. That vote was 72-0.
For any wrongdoing that has a punishment available, not every possible punishment is imposed every time. It is not universally the opinion that we should always throw the book at someone who has done wrong. There are many responses we might have to wrongdoing that don't involve entirely ending a person's career and there may be many reasons why we might decide not to impose every possible punishment. As I indicated above, there are good and valid reasons for not voting to disqualify Trump even if you don't want him to be president again.
We have had over four years of Trump's vindictive behavior. As proof, I offer his 10's of 1,000's of tweets stating not only his vengeful intentions against people, businesses, etc., but the gloating he did when those intentions became realities.
There is also one little thing you can never spin: President Joe Biden has stated publicly his disinterest in impeaching Trump. He is more concerned with steering this country, our country, toward much-needed healing that we all deserve, and that includes you, m'dear.
Yeah, too bad Biden isn't the leader of the party.
I don't think many Democrats much care what Biden wants.