Let's stop pretending we don't know why most GOP Senators didn't vote to convict Trum

signalmankenneth said:
  • GOP senators have a bunch of nonsense reasons for why they didn't convict Donald Trump of incitement.
  • They are all just an attempt to cover up the real reasons, which are much simpler and more obvious.
  • Many GOP Senators were complicit in Trump's crime. Plus, they want to use him to keep grifting.
  • This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.

    Republican senators have concocted a litany of silly, irrelevant reasons for why they didn't vote to convict former President Donald Trump of fomenting an insurrection on January 6.
​They said his impeachment was not constitutional (an argument even conservative lawyers shredded) or a violation of his First Amendment rights (also, no). They said Trump deserves a "mulligan" (which is just stupid, juvenile, and an affront to the rule of law). And they said convicting him is pointless (which ignores the fact that a conviction could have barred Trump from office).

​https://www.yahoo.com/news/lets-stop-pretending-dont-know-132800038.html


Et6O8NzXcAA7ZFg.jpg


moyers.jpg
Click to expand...

He was innocent?
 
JDAM said:
no, but the signal was clear by the chief justices absence during the senate trial, as per the USC.
Click to expand...

Not at all. It is a ceremonial job that no one wants. It could have gone on for several weeks if they called witnesses and took depositions. Roberts could have done it, but he refused. It said nothing about the legitimacy.
 
Nordberg said:
Not at all. It is a ceremonial job that no one wants. It could have gone on for several weeks if they called witnesses and took depositions. Roberts could have done it, but he refused. It said nothing about the legitimacy.
Click to expand...




https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S3-C6-1-3-1/ALDE_00000708/#ALDF_00013786

In reaching this conclusion, the Court noted that the Constitution imposes three precise requirements for impeachment trials in the Senate: (1) Members must be under oath during the proceedings; (2) conviction requires a two-thirds vote; and (3) the Chief Justice must preside if the President is tried.3
 
Big Money Dolla said:
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S3-C6-1-3-1/ALDE_00000708/#ALDF_00013786

In reaching this conclusion, the Court noted that the Constitution imposes three precise requirements for impeachment trials in the Senate: (1) Members must be under oath during the proceedings; (2) conviction requires a two-thirds vote; and (3) the Chief Justice must preside if the President is tried.3
Click to expand...

That applies to sitting presidents. Roberts had an excise to avoid it. In such cases, the senate pro tem presides. That is what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top