impeachment defense clown car

[TheDrake]

Mr Castor also talked about loving one's elected representatives, offered his own personal memories of working in the US Capitol building - "I got lost then and I still do" - and other nuggets including a description of the state of Nebraska as a "judicial thinking place".

Some of the randomness appeared to find explanation when Mr Castor confirmed the impact of the prosecution video, saying it had forced the defence team to switch strategy at the eleventh hour.

"We changed what we were going to do on account that we thought the House impeachment managers' presentation was well done," he said.

He finished by arguing that the US justice department would have grounds to arrest Mr Trump if the impeachment allegations against him were true.

"A high crime is a felony, and a misdemeanour is a misdemeanour. After he's out of office, you go and arrest him," Mr Castor said. "The Department of Justice does know what to do with such people. And so far, I haven't seen any activity in that direction."

bbc. Damn mainstream media.

[rightleft22]

the Trump defense team failed to make their case, didn't even spend much time on the constitutional argument that was the point of this vote.
Still the majority of the Republicans looked away.

[msquared]

I keep wondering why so many people are using the wrong words.  Trump has been impeached. This is the trial.  Those trying to use the excuse you can not impeach him since he is out of office have it wrong. He was impeached while in office. This is just the trial.

And for Mitch M to say "oh we can not try him since he is out of office" when he was the reason the trial is being done after Trump left office is a joke.

[TheDrake]

True, I would have been more accurate to say "removal from office defence clown car" or "impeachment trial defense clown car", but would that have changed anyone's understanding?

[oldbrian]

So if someone is arrested and charged for a crime a few days before the statute of limitations would have expired, but the trial date is AFTER the expiration, can their lawyer argue that the state missed their shot at prosecuting?

[yossarian22c]

And for Mitch M to say "oh we can not try him since he is out of office" when he was the reason the trial is being done after Trump left office is a joke.

It is a joke, just not a funny one. 

[TheDrake]

This isn't analagous to a criminal proceeding, the closest analogy would be civil damages and a restraining order - as far as the result of a conviction.

[oldbrian]

Are there statute of limitations on civil crimes?  If so, my question stands.

[TheDrake]

Maybe so, but its not 3 weeks.

[kidv]

Are there statute of limitations on civil crimes?  If so, my question stands.

In the unlikely event this is not a rhetorical question, the answer is that the statute of limitations for both civil and criminal actions is satisfied by the date the complaint is filed, even if the eventual trial occurs years later.

[Grant]

I feel this extends beyond a comparison to a clown car. This is a derailment.  A derailment of the entire Trump Train. And when I say derailment, I mean an old steam engine plunging into a gorge after the bridge was dynamited just a minute before, all while I hear “we’re going to keep winning and winning”, “fabulous people”. 

[oldbrian]

kidv:

In the unlikely event this is not a rhetorical question, ...

Why would it be rhetorical?  There are a bunch of lawyers on this site, so I figured someone would know the answer.

I try not to ask rhetorical questions in that manner.  It mainly serves as a way of subtly pointing out information the other party should already know, and showing how smart I am.  This is a very bad place for me to try flexing on people. 

[kidv]

kidv:

In the unlikely event this is not a rhetorical question, ...

Why would it be rhetorical?  There are a bunch of lawyers on this site, so I figured someone would know the answer.

I try not to ask rhetorical questions in that manner.  It mainly serves as a way of subtly pointing out information the other party should already know, and showing how smart I am.  This is a very bad place for me to try flexing on people. 

The question is incredibly insightful as to evaluating a bizarre argument that you can't have a trial after a charge has been filed.  [In a room full of lawyers, your question would be a fine rhetorical question because the answer is so abundantly clear to that audience.]  [You hit on a very salient point, and your knowing enough to ask the question made me think you knew the answer. ]
Anyway-  i don't mean to offend in any way, I didn't want to appear condescending, and I do want to compliment an apt analogy.

[fizz]

Are there statute of limitations on civil crimes?  If so, my question stands.

In the unlikely event this is not a rhetorical question, the answer is that the statute of limitations for both civil and criminal actions is satisfied by the date the complaint is filed, even if the eventual trial occurs years later.

A small side note pointing on differences around the world.
In Italy, the statute of limitation include the trial period: the consequence of such a thing is that Berlusconi, just to give a famous example, managed to have many trials expire by using strategically deployed delaying tactics (including when in a public role using the excuse of institutional commitments to skip trial dates).

[Aris Katsaris]

A note, lest I forget, that the Republicans are such weaselly cowards that they pretended "bringing the calvary" wasn't a mere mispelling of "bringing the cavalry", but that they supposedly were intentionally saying that they were bringing a representation of the crucifixion of Jesus.

So very believable.

[msquared]

I really wanted the Dems to call Trump to testify under oath.

[rightleft22]

I watched a documentary on the rise and fall of Saddam Hussein.
It was interesting to see how few members of the government that  stood by their convictions that Saddam had to murder in order to have the rest fall in line. How he demanded loyalty from everyone but gave it to none other then perhaps his sons. I find that a common trait of those that demand loyalty, they themselves are seldom loyal  With the leaders with conviction gone the remaining members tended to focus on what was good for themselves and not the people they served with the inevitable ending that wasn't good for anyone or the century.

It seems to me history long term memory prefers to remember kindly those that stood up for the good of the people even when it cost them. Perhaps that's selective. Who wants to think of themselves as someone who might have not just stood by but supported men and woman who supported and enabled men like Saddam.  No we imagine we would stand with those that stood against such men even if it cost them their lives.

Trump defense team failed to make their case and those that looked away and failed to fulfill their oath won't be remembered by History in the way I suspect they might hope.

[LetterRip]

The 'demand loyalty' is common among psychopaths.  Psychopaths are physiologically incapable of loyalty (our capacity for loyalty is oxytocin pathway dependent and it is a mutation of the oxytocin receptor that causes psychopathy).  Thus psychopaths find loyalty to be a trait of normal individuals that they can exploit and yet have no risk of it being used against themselves.

[Wayward Son]

Speaking of "demand loyalty," Electoral Vote.com has a nice chart of the censures of the GOP senators who voted for Trump's impeachment:

[T]ake a look at the 10 Republican Representatives who voted to impeach Trump and the 7 Republican senators who voted to convict. Only three of the former and one of the latter have thus far completely avoided efforts to censure them (censuring organ, or potential censuring organ, in parentheses):

Member   Censured?
Rep. Liz Cheney (WY)            Yes (Wyoming GOP)
Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (OH)   No
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (WA)   Yes (Washington GOP)
Rep. John Katko (NY)            No
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (IL)       Yes (La Salle County GOP Central Committee)
Rep. Peter Meijer (MI)           Yes (Calhoun County GOP)
Rep. Dan Newhouse (WA)      Yes (Washington GOP)
Rep. Tom Rice (SC)               Yes (South Carolina GOP)
Rep. Fred Upton (MI)             Yes (GOP of Cass and of Allegan Counties)
Rep. David Valadao (CA)        No
Sen. Richard Burr (NC)          Yes (North Carolina GOP)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (LA)            Yes (Louisiana GOP)
Sen. Susan Collins (ME)         Pending (Maine GOP)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (AK)      No
Sen. Mitt Romney (UT)          Pending (Utah GOP)
Sen. Ben Sasse (NE)             Yes (Nebraska GOP)
Sen. Pat Toomey (PA)                   Yes (Westmoreland County GOP)

They even included a letter from 11 members of Adam Kinzinger's family to him:

They sent him a handwritten letter that the Representative released to The New York Times. It's fairly brief, and it's worth reading the whole thing, we think, so here is the text:

Adam,

Oh my, what a disappointment you are to us and to God! We were once so proud of your accomplishments! Instead, you go against your Christian principals (sic) and join the "devil's army." (Democrats and the fake news media). How do you call yourself a Christian when you join the "devils army" believing in abortion! We thought you were "smart" enough to see how the left is brainwashing so many "so called good people" including yourself and many other GOP members. You have even fallen for their socialism ideals! So, so, sad!

President Trump is not perfect, but neither are you or any of us for that matter! It is not for us to judge or be judged! But he is a Christian! (If God can forgive and use King David in the Bible, He can do the same with President Trump.) Franklin Graham, Robert Jeffress, to just name a few, of many Pastors, who mentor President Trump, know that he is a believer! Obviously, you did not hear President Trump's "Christmas Message" to the American people (fake news media did not cover his message) where he actually gave the plan of salvation, instructing people how to repent and ask the Savior into their heart to be "Born Again"! (To believe in John 3:16). When was the last time you proclaimed your faith Adam? (Oh, we forgot you now belong to the "devils army."). You won't convince us otherwise with your horrible, rude accusations of President Trump! (To embrace a party that believes in abortion and socialism is the ultimate sin.) We should list even more grievances against you, but decided you ae (sic) not worth more of our time to list them. We have said enough!

You should be very proud that you have lost the respect of Lou Dobbs, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Greg Kelly, etc. and most importantly in our book, Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh and us!

It is now most embarrassing to us that we are related to you. You have embarrassed the Kinzinger family name. We are not judging you. This letter is our opinion of you!

Oh, by the way, good luck in your fund raising (sic) endeavors. We are sure we know there are many others good GOP and Christian supporters, that feel the same way we do. Also very disappointed with the many other GOP have sided with the Democrats. (We should demand our money back!)

The following Kinzinger family members have asked that their names be added to this letter:

Signed

[names redacted]

P.S. For your information, many more family members, feel the same as we do. They just didn't have the courage to sign our letter or write their own letter! Not us, we are throughly (sic) disgusted with you!! And, oh by the way, we are calling for your removal from office! I have received numerous calls concerning your actions and egregious behavior towards our President of the United States, Donald J. Trump!

CC: Many conservative Republicans.

*President Trump has done more for the American people in four years, than you, the Rino's (sic), and Democrates (sic) have done in years!!
It's nice that Kinzinger's family isn't judging him (since that would be very wrong), they are just giving their opinion. It's also interesting to learn that the conservative media pecking order goes Limbaugh, Levin, and then everyone else. And who knew that Jesus, a man who said "Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back," (Luke 6:30) regarded socialism as a sin on par with abortion? Such theological insight!

In any event, one begins to understand why many Republicans (even those whose careers are ending, like Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio) held the line for The Donald. They could find themselves outcasts from the think tanks, the lobbying firms, and the media outlets they hope to land at. Their families could turn against them. They could be putting their very lives at risk; every one of the folks listed above has gotten death threats from angry Trump supporters. And we know full well that these people are armed, and are willing to use deadly force in defense of the Dear Leader.

Maybe things will cool down over the coming months, but right now, as far as a large number of Republicans go, you either support Trump in all ways and things, or you're a worthless RINO, or worse.

[Aris Katsaris]

The amusing thing about people calling Trump a "Christian" is that he's champion supreme in pretty much all of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Lust
Greed
Sloth
Wrath
Envy
Pride
Literally the only one of the seven Deadly Sins I'm not certain he's particularly guilty of is "Gluttony".

But to be an epitome of at least 6 of the 7 Deadly Sins, and to be supported by Christians as a supposedly good man!

[Wayward Son]

Christians aren't perfect--just forgiven. 

Or, as Trump sees it, a license to sin. 

[msquared]

They are forgiven if they repent or if they do good deeds.  Neither of which apply to Trump.

[cherrypoptart]

At the end of the day though, he was found NOT GUILTY.

TWICE.

So twice now pretty much every Democrat along with some of the deep state swamp Republicans used a kangaroo court in a desperate but ultimately futile effort to railroad an innocent man.

I agree with Chris Christie who was on the radio today that Republicans including Trump need to stop fighting amongst themselves. The Democrats stand united and that's why they are winning. Trump really threw the pooch out into into the cold in Georgia by not telling people to vote like their lives depended on it. Trump was our last best chance but if I'm honest, now it's over. With Biden flooding America with over ten million new Democrat voters there isn't a chance in the now bitter cold of Texas that Republicans will ever hold national power again. Biden is rigging the next election so that no matter how bad he screws up and how much worse the American standard of living gets it won't matter because the new demographics ensure Democrat power into the foreseeable future. The fake impeachments along with the social media companies helped a lot to manipulate the elections so congratulations, I guess.

I may as well blame Biden too for my power going out for over a day and for going on and off now. He was in Congress for decades and this is the result. Biden said if he'd been President instead of Trump not one person in America would have died of Covid. Well if Trump had been President instead of Biden not one Texan would have lost power. Okay none of that's true of course but I will nail the media again because if Trump were still in power his name would be all over every story about the power grid problem whereas with Biden his name is always kept out of it. Neither of them really have that much direct control over it but the point is that is how the media manipulates, just like they did and are still doing with the impeachments. I think the defense did a great job in showing how deceptive the impeachment managers were and also in pointing out that Trump's words were less inciting than those of many members of Congress. Harris herself participated in bailing out BLM rioters who went right back on the street and attacked police officers. By the standards of Democrats, dozens of them should impeach themselves and be thrown out of office but of course they never apply their own standards to themselves.

Final point is that no matter how much the impeachment defense was a clown car show the result was victory for Trump. Again.

[msquared]

So over half of the Senators voted to convict, and he is innocent?  And the jury was made up of accomplices (Hawley and Cruz, along with others)? Let's see how the other legal proceedings go?

They tried to use the "I killed my mother and father, have mercy on me, the poor orphan" defense.  They claim the House rushed to impeach but then why wait so long to have the trial?  McConnell did exactly that.  He held off the trial until Trump was out and then said he could not convict Trump since Trump was out of office.  If McConnell had had a fast trial, Trump would have been in office at the time of the trial.

[NobleHunter]

If they had been trying to railroad Trump, they'd have sent the articles of impeachment to the Senate on the 7th.

And if you think the failure to convict had anything to do with the "arguments" presented by the defense, I have some excellent swampland down in Florida to offer you.

[Aris Katsaris]

At the end of the day though, he was found NOT GUILTY.

TWICE.

So twice now pretty much every Democrat along with some of the deep state swamp Republicans used a kangaroo court in a desperate but ultimately futile effort to railroad an innocent man.

TWICE now, some of the Republicans succeeded in exonerating a man who's *censored*ing guilty as hell, but they didn't even manage to convince their own entire party, getting rightful dissent from the most honorable among them, no matter how much these few honorable Republicans among them would get hurt because of it.

Twice now, even some of the Republicans who voted to acquit, admitted publicly that Trump was guilty as hell, but (a) either supposedly he'd learned his lesson (no he didn't) or (b) supposedly they had no jurisdiction (yes they did) -- namely being weasels that tried to have it both ways.

I agree with Chris Christie who was on the radio today that Republicans including Trump need to stop fighting amongst themselves.

Hard to do so, since it's fundamentally and absolutely *crucial* to the Trump narrative of a stolen election, that Georgian Republicans conspired with the Democrats to have the election stolen, and that everyone in Congress who voted to certify the election (including the majority of Republicans) is also a filthy traitor, including his own vice-president.

You can't *censored*ing have it both ways cherry, no matter how well-trained in doublethink you are. Either Trump is a piece of *censored* that broke his oath of office and should be impeached and convicted, or alternatively Mike Pence and the majority of the Republican Party are pieces of *censored* that broke their oaths of office and should be impeached and convicted.

*censored*ing choose, and be a man for once instead of a freaking weasel.

The Democrats stand united and that's why they are winning. Trump really threw the pooch out into into the cold in Georgia by not telling people to vote like their lives depended on it. Trump was our last best chance but if I'm honest, now it's over. With Biden flooding America with over ten million new Democrat voters there isn't a chance in the now bitter cold of Texas that Republicans will ever hold national power again.

I recommend to the Republicans that they try to be less racist next election so that they get more than 8% of the African American vote.

Biden is rigging the next election so that no matter how bad he screws up and how much worse the American standard of living gets it won't matter because the new demographics ensure Democrat power into the foreseeable future.

Be less racist, so that the "new demographics" don't hurt you, but rather work in your favour. Easy enough if you become less racist.

[msquared]

Also the war within the "Republican" Party is mainly because Trump is pissed off every Republican will not kneel down before the king and kiss his ring.  He wants total loyalty from every member of the party or you are his enemy.  Not a principled person who thinks Trump might be wrong, but the enemy. 

[yossarian22c]

At the end of the day though, he was found NOT GUILTY.

TWICE.

So twice now pretty much every Democrat along with some of the deep state swamp Republicans used a kangaroo court in a desperate but ultimately futile effort to railroad an innocent man.

...

Final point is that no matter how much the impeachment defense was a clown car show the result was victory for Trump. Again.

Define innocent. Trump lied repeatedly about election fraud. Trump lied so frequently he convinced about 3/4's of Republicans there was something to it despite every specific claim of fraud he alleged being shown to be much ado about nothing or outright false. He called for a rally in DC on the 6th to "stop the steal" and then told a crowd of angry, misled people, that they needed to march to the capital and fight to save their country. Then they did just that. 1/4 of the people arrested have said they were just following the president's instructions, a few even said they deserved pardons.

Which of these are you using to determine his innocence?
1) He is a coward and didn't lead the March over to the capital himself?
2) He said peaceful once in the speech?
3) He has enough influence in the Republican party that only 7 instead of 17 Republican Senators voted to convict - even one's who voted not guilty came out with statements like "Trump was practically and morally responsible" for what happened on the 6th?
4) You like him and therefore he is guilt free no matter what he did.
5) Something else...

I don't really get it. He's a demagogue who wants to be a strong man. Look at how Myanmar's military enacted their coup. They used the exact same kind of language as Trump, their military will just follow along with the lies. Ours wouldn't so Trump tried for a mob that wanted to hang his VP for not trying to break the constitution and our nation by declaring by fiat Trump is president again.

[NobleHunter]

The less racist thing can be done, btw. The Conservative party won three (I think?) elections and got ten(?) years in government by appealing to immigrant communities in the Toronto suburbs, while hanging onto their base in Western Canada. The Liberals screwing up helped, of course, and race isn't nearly as big a political factor here as it is in parts South but if you focus on good governance and showing up, you can build new coalitions to win elections. 

[msquared]

And you know, Catholic immigrants might naturally favor the Republican Party.  If they were not so busy demonizing Hispanic immigrants, that might actually help the Republicans in the south west/south.  If the Republicans gave them citizenship, they might get rewarded.

[yossarian22c]

The less racist thing can be done, btw. The Conservative party won three (I think?) elections and got ten(?) years in government by appealing to immigrant communities in the Toronto suburbs, while hanging onto their base in Western Canada. The Liberals screwing up helped, of course, and race isn't nearly as big a political factor here as it is in parts South but if you focus on good governance and showing up, you can build new coalitions to win elections.

Bush II got something like 40% of the Latino vote. Many of them are conservative Catholics and if you just aren't enacting policies that allow police to arrest and hold people for not looking American enough or use language that is outright hostile to immigrants a large number of those voters will be Republicans. And that's assuming Biden gets what he wants. I'm guessing the immigration bill goes the way of the minimum wage hike. That $15 per hour is becoming $9.50. So I'm guessing the pathway to citizenship is going to be stripped and we get a codification of DACA and maybe some type of semi-permanent legal status that falls short of citizenship and I think that would be a stretch to get through congress. I think in reality he would be happy with a legislative DACA and a path to citizenship for those kids/young adults.