Somebody on YouTube needs to make a few of those Thug Life videos of Dr. Fauci using the comments of his from today finally being to tell the truth about how full of shit the Trump administration has been in handling the COVID pandemic.
Joe Biden is now POTUS
- Thread starter Spectrum
- Start date
Senate Republicans uniting behind impeachment defense
By Andrew Desiderio 1 hr ago
Senate Republicans uniting behind impeachment defense
Senate Republicans are coalescing around a long-shot bid to dismiss the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump before it even begins, relying on a disputed legal argument that says putting an ex-president on trial is unconstitutional.
© Alex Edelman-Pool/Getty Images
Interviews with more than a dozen GOP senators revealed broad support for the claim that the Senate has no constitutional authority to put a private citizen on trial, which could translate into a substantial number of votes to scrap the trial altogether. The issue came up several times during a Senate GOP conference call Thursday afternoon, according to multiple senators.
Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said in an interview that concerns about the constitutionality of putting a former officeholder on trial were top of mind among GOP senators — even those who are open to voting to convict Trump on the House’s charge that he incited the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6 that left five people dead.
“Our members, irrespective of what they might think about the merits, just believe that this is an exercise that really isn’t grounded constitutionally and, from a practical standpoint, just makes no sense,” Thune said.
But critics — including scholars from the conservative Federalist Society and other right-leaning organizations — maintain that the argument is on flimsy legal ground. Moreover, federal courts have consistently deferred to Congress’ “sole power” to set its own rules and procedures, including over impeachment proceedings.
Still, Republicans’ contention is shaping up to be a central theme of the ex-president’s defense strategy in the Senate’s upcoming trial, with several GOP senators publicly echoing it in recent days even as they signal increased hostility toward Trump over the attack on the Capitol.
“I think the key point is, is it constitutional to do this when somebody is out of office — and then, is it purely retribution when you try to push it forward,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) said. “[That’s] not to dismiss any of the enormity of the day itself.”
“I think it is one of the most potent arguments [for Trump], absolutely,” added Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a top Trump ally who has been pushing for a vote on dismissing the trial at its outset.
Indeed, the Senate has never put a former president on trial on impeachment charges, though in 1876 the Senate tried former Secretary of War William Belknap after he had already resigned. Supporters of the Senate’s authority to try an ex-official have pointed to the Belknap trial to underscore that a president or any other person subject to impeachment could simply resign or otherwise leave office to evade punishment.
“If an official could only be disqualified while he or she still held office, then an official who betrayed the public trust and was impeached could avoid accountability simply by resigning one minute before the Senate’s final conviction vote,” a bipartisan group of legal scholars, including prominent conservatives, wrote on Thursday.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) still need to iron out a framework, which will outline the rules and procedures of the trial. McConnell on Thursday also proposed delaying the start of the trial by two weeks to allow Trump to prepare his defense strategy, though it’s unclear if Schumer will agree.
rs
The framework will spell out whether to allow for a motion to dismiss the trial at its outset — a vote that could signal the likelihood of the Senate convicting Trump. Seventeen Republicans would need to join all Democrats for Trump to be convicted. Some senators said they are considering supporting such a motion, if one is offered, as a way of voicing their objections to putting a former president on trial.
“I don’t think, once a person has left office, that impeachment is available. I think it’s a moot issue at that point,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said. “Constitutionally, it’s the wrong thing to do.”
In this case, as Republicans note, there is no office from which to remove Trump, though convicting him could lead to other punishments such as barring him from seeking federal office in the future.
“Let the voters decide whether they want President Trump to run again,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said. “There’s nothing I see in the Constitution that allows you to impeach a president after he’s already left office.”
Johnson said he would “definitely” vote to dismiss the trial, adding that the House’s impeachment article “shouldn’t even be sent over here.” Transmitting the article from the House to the Senate triggers the beginning of the trial.
But Democrats, who now control the Senate, are intent on holding a trial, even as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not yet formally transmitted the impeachment article to the other side of the Capitol. Schumer declared as much after the House impeached Trump last week, though Democrats have not yet decided how long the trial should last, which will be dictated by whether they decide to call witnesses as part of the proceedings.
Top lawmakers from both parties, though, are predicting a relatively short trial. Trump’s first impeachment trial lasted three weeks, but that was only after a weeks-long impeachment inquiry in the House that yielded hundreds of pages of evidence and legal arguments. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the House’s lead impeachment manager, said Thursday that the upcoming trial will not last as long as the previous one.
That’s in part because, this time, the House did not conduct a formal investigation, and several senators have said calling witnesses is not necessary because lawmakers were all witnesses to the siege on the Capitol and because Trump’s actions and statements were on full public display.
“It’s not like we need much information on the merits of the case,” Braun said. “We were here.”
“I guess the public record is your television screen,” Graham quipped. “I don't see why this would take a long time.”
Apart from the constitutional arguments, Republicans are questioning why Democrats want to put Trump on trial while President Joe Biden is emphasizing unity and bipartisanship, noting that an impeachment trial is among the most divisive undertakings on Capitol Hill.
“I’m not sure why it helps the Dems either. I know there’s an awful lot of antipathy for the former president. But they’ve got a new lease on life,” Thune said. “They’ve got the White House, they’ve got the majority in the Senate. They’ve got a lot of stuff they want to do. They want to rehash the last four years, and it doesn’t seem like it makes a lot of sense.”
Republicans have been urging Biden to step in to halt or otherwise impede the Senate trial on the grounds that it will delay consideration of Biden’s Cabinet nominees as well as his legislative agenda, which includes another round of Covid-19 relief.
“It’ll be incredibly divisive for the country if we go through that,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said. “We’re in the middle of this massive pandemic. We’ve got all these nominations that we need to do. We’ve got all these threats around the world that we’ve got to be focused on. There’s a lot to be done. The notion that we’re going to spend a week or two weeks on a trial on somebody who’s not even in office — it sounds to me like a waste of time.”
Pelosi pushed back against that contention earlier Thursday, saying bluntly: “The president of the United States committed an act of incitement of insurrection. I don't think it's very unifying to say, oh, let's just forget it and move on. That's not how you unify.”
Burgess Everett contributed to this report.
By Andrew Desiderio 1 hr ago
Senate Republicans uniting behind impeachment defense
Senate Republicans are coalescing around a long-shot bid to dismiss the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump before it even begins, relying on a disputed legal argument that says putting an ex-president on trial is unconstitutional.
© Alex Edelman-Pool/Getty Images
Interviews with more than a dozen GOP senators revealed broad support for the claim that the Senate has no constitutional authority to put a private citizen on trial, which could translate into a substantial number of votes to scrap the trial altogether. The issue came up several times during a Senate GOP conference call Thursday afternoon, according to multiple senators.
Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said in an interview that concerns about the constitutionality of putting a former officeholder on trial were top of mind among GOP senators — even those who are open to voting to convict Trump on the House’s charge that he incited the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6 that left five people dead.
“Our members, irrespective of what they might think about the merits, just believe that this is an exercise that really isn’t grounded constitutionally and, from a practical standpoint, just makes no sense,” Thune said.
But critics — including scholars from the conservative Federalist Society and other right-leaning organizations — maintain that the argument is on flimsy legal ground. Moreover, federal courts have consistently deferred to Congress’ “sole power” to set its own rules and procedures, including over impeachment proceedings.
Still, Republicans’ contention is shaping up to be a central theme of the ex-president’s defense strategy in the Senate’s upcoming trial, with several GOP senators publicly echoing it in recent days even as they signal increased hostility toward Trump over the attack on the Capitol.
“I think the key point is, is it constitutional to do this when somebody is out of office — and then, is it purely retribution when you try to push it forward,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) said. “[That’s] not to dismiss any of the enormity of the day itself.”
“I think it is one of the most potent arguments [for Trump], absolutely,” added Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a top Trump ally who has been pushing for a vote on dismissing the trial at its outset.
Indeed, the Senate has never put a former president on trial on impeachment charges, though in 1876 the Senate tried former Secretary of War William Belknap after he had already resigned. Supporters of the Senate’s authority to try an ex-official have pointed to the Belknap trial to underscore that a president or any other person subject to impeachment could simply resign or otherwise leave office to evade punishment.
“If an official could only be disqualified while he or she still held office, then an official who betrayed the public trust and was impeached could avoid accountability simply by resigning one minute before the Senate’s final conviction vote,” a bipartisan group of legal scholars, including prominent conservatives, wrote on Thursday.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) still need to iron out a framework, which will outline the rules and procedures of the trial. McConnell on Thursday also proposed delaying the start of the trial by two weeks to allow Trump to prepare his defense strategy, though it’s unclear if Schumer will agree.
rs
The framework will spell out whether to allow for a motion to dismiss the trial at its outset — a vote that could signal the likelihood of the Senate convicting Trump. Seventeen Republicans would need to join all Democrats for Trump to be convicted. Some senators said they are considering supporting such a motion, if one is offered, as a way of voicing their objections to putting a former president on trial.
“I don’t think, once a person has left office, that impeachment is available. I think it’s a moot issue at that point,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said. “Constitutionally, it’s the wrong thing to do.”
In this case, as Republicans note, there is no office from which to remove Trump, though convicting him could lead to other punishments such as barring him from seeking federal office in the future.
“Let the voters decide whether they want President Trump to run again,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said. “There’s nothing I see in the Constitution that allows you to impeach a president after he’s already left office.”
Johnson said he would “definitely” vote to dismiss the trial, adding that the House’s impeachment article “shouldn’t even be sent over here.” Transmitting the article from the House to the Senate triggers the beginning of the trial.
But Democrats, who now control the Senate, are intent on holding a trial, even as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not yet formally transmitted the impeachment article to the other side of the Capitol. Schumer declared as much after the House impeached Trump last week, though Democrats have not yet decided how long the trial should last, which will be dictated by whether they decide to call witnesses as part of the proceedings.
Top lawmakers from both parties, though, are predicting a relatively short trial. Trump’s first impeachment trial lasted three weeks, but that was only after a weeks-long impeachment inquiry in the House that yielded hundreds of pages of evidence and legal arguments. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the House’s lead impeachment manager, said Thursday that the upcoming trial will not last as long as the previous one.
That’s in part because, this time, the House did not conduct a formal investigation, and several senators have said calling witnesses is not necessary because lawmakers were all witnesses to the siege on the Capitol and because Trump’s actions and statements were on full public display.
“It’s not like we need much information on the merits of the case,” Braun said. “We were here.”
“I guess the public record is your television screen,” Graham quipped. “I don't see why this would take a long time.”
Apart from the constitutional arguments, Republicans are questioning why Democrats want to put Trump on trial while President Joe Biden is emphasizing unity and bipartisanship, noting that an impeachment trial is among the most divisive undertakings on Capitol Hill.
“I’m not sure why it helps the Dems either. I know there’s an awful lot of antipathy for the former president. But they’ve got a new lease on life,” Thune said. “They’ve got the White House, they’ve got the majority in the Senate. They’ve got a lot of stuff they want to do. They want to rehash the last four years, and it doesn’t seem like it makes a lot of sense.”
Republicans have been urging Biden to step in to halt or otherwise impede the Senate trial on the grounds that it will delay consideration of Biden’s Cabinet nominees as well as his legislative agenda, which includes another round of Covid-19 relief.
“It’ll be incredibly divisive for the country if we go through that,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said. “We’re in the middle of this massive pandemic. We’ve got all these nominations that we need to do. We’ve got all these threats around the world that we’ve got to be focused on. There’s a lot to be done. The notion that we’re going to spend a week or two weeks on a trial on somebody who’s not even in office — it sounds to me like a waste of time.”
Pelosi pushed back against that contention earlier Thursday, saying bluntly: “The president of the United States committed an act of incitement of insurrection. I don't think it's very unifying to say, oh, let's just forget it and move on. That's not how you unify.”
Burgess Everett contributed to this report.
Can they mobilize them in the short term?
How can the Democratic Party engage with rural Republican voters in the short term?
MOFO who steamrolled Democrats to deny Merrick Garland a hearing for the Supreme
Court, and then steamrolled them to impose Amy Comey Barrett on the same Supreme
Court, and had vowed to friends when he thought he would be the majority leader that
he would block the entire Biden agenda. No! No deal Chuck Schumer. Give him what he
wants, the MOFO will filibuster everything. He had no problem rolling back the filibuster
of Supreme Court justices. Teach him a fucking lesson.
I have always lamented BGOL posters posting the former presidents tweets. I am honestly disappointed to see a forum like this disseminate such awful rhetoric from deplorable legislators.
Never mind the Biden agenda, Bitch McConnell had even thrown around the
possibility of denying Biden a cabinet by not giving his picks a confirmation
hearing, and now the bitch is crying victim. Fuck him. Give absolutely nothing
and expand the damn Supreme Court to 15 seats while you are at it.
fuck this black hand cracker
This is good, so that people can be informed of the antics of the enemy.
Instead of complaining about it, make sure to comment and explain to
people who might be swayed by this shit, what exactly is going on. It is
your job and mine to dissect shit like this
This coming from the guy who just broke his own rule by approving a Supreme Court judge during an election year.
Last edited:
His hypocrisy is knows no limit. Reaffirming that a president with less than a few months left in office shouldn't decide a vacant Supreme Court Justice, was absolutely impossible. So, what is he really saying?
Aren’t you tired of being gaslighted?
I don't understand. I would rather know what the enemy is thinking;
but for you and me, this sort of information deepens our understanding
of things.
Twitter banned Trump -- and peace broke out
After the violent but failed insurrection of Jan. 6, federal and state authorities were understandably terrified about violence on Inauguration Day. The FBI warned of threats of violence not just in Washington D.C. on January 20, but all 50 state capitols, the homes of prominent members of...
www.rawstory.com
Lawyers want Giuliani investigated, license suspended
Associated Press
JANUARY 21, 2021 — 8:11PM
JACQUELYN MARTIN, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for President Donald Trump, speaks during a news conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters, Thursday Nov. 19, 2020, in Washington.
NEW YORK — A lawyers' group filed an ethics complaint against Rudy Giuliani with New York's courts, calling for him to be investigated and his law license suspended over his work promoting former President Donald Trump's false allegations over the 2020 election.
Lawyers Defending American Democracy, which includes former judges and federal attorneys among its members, sent the complaint on Wednesday to the Attorney Grievance Committee of the state's court system saying Giuliani had violated the rules of professional conduct.
"Giuliani has spearheaded a nationwide public campaign to convince the public and the courts of massive voter fraud and a stolen presidential election," the complaint said.
The complaint called for the committee to investigate Giuliani's conduct, including his comments at a rally before rioters stormed into the U.S. Capitol, and to suspend his law license immediately while any investigation is being done.
A message was left with the committee seeking comment. An investigation would be the first step in a process that could lead to a disbarment.
Another complaint against Giuliani was filed earlier in January by New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman, a Democrat, who asked that disbarring Giuliani be taken up for consideration.
The New York State Bar Association separately has opened an inquiry into whether he should be expelled from that organization, which is a voluntary membership organization.
Associated Press
JANUARY 21, 2021 — 8:11PM
JACQUELYN MARTIN, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for President Donald Trump, speaks during a news conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters, Thursday Nov. 19, 2020, in Washington.
NEW YORK — A lawyers' group filed an ethics complaint against Rudy Giuliani with New York's courts, calling for him to be investigated and his law license suspended over his work promoting former President Donald Trump's false allegations over the 2020 election.
Lawyers Defending American Democracy, which includes former judges and federal attorneys among its members, sent the complaint on Wednesday to the Attorney Grievance Committee of the state's court system saying Giuliani had violated the rules of professional conduct.
"Giuliani has spearheaded a nationwide public campaign to convince the public and the courts of massive voter fraud and a stolen presidential election," the complaint said.
The complaint called for the committee to investigate Giuliani's conduct, including his comments at a rally before rioters stormed into the U.S. Capitol, and to suspend his law license immediately while any investigation is being done.
A message was left with the committee seeking comment. An investigation would be the first step in a process that could lead to a disbarment.
Another complaint against Giuliani was filed earlier in January by New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman, a Democrat, who asked that disbarring Giuliani be taken up for consideration.
The New York State Bar Association separately has opened an inquiry into whether he should be expelled from that organization, which is a voluntary membership organization.
Should be at least 80 more. Can't believe republicans are going to make this a partisan issue
I'm curious to see what Bernie thinks about all these memes. lol
Bernie has a pretty good sense of humor. He probly like "lets turn all this meme energy into some goddamn legislation".
turned out to be Ned the wino tho....
Who is famo?Mystery solved for who was rocking that drip at the inauguration
Obama 3rd term