1
Politics & Religion / Re: Yes the Senate can try Trump
« on: Today at 02:10:53 PM »
I disagree.
1. His examples all come from states and other countries.
2. Meaning there is no precedent here.
3. The trial would expose his (high) crimes. So would a criminal trial. This extreme remedy is not the only remedy available
4. The Chief Justice has already declined to preside, downgrading this from a "Presidential" impeachment trial.
5. The process is by definition political. All it is capable of accomplishing besides vindicating Trump is to ban him from running again.
6. Future elections are another political process available to prevent him from serving in federal office again.
7. "Mr. Whittington is a professor of politics at Princeton". Roughly speaking, so is Paul Krugman.
8. Even wrong, he could get 3 Supreme Court votes for his view, maybe more, but likely not 5.
9. The trial would end in acquittal. There aren't new facts to add and 95% of Republicans oppose it.
---------------------------------
The "trial" is not in Democrats best interests. There is no way it is polling well and it will get worse if/when it happens. Begs the question, how will \democrats get out of it. I couldn't think of a way they could save face. Neither could they. So it starts with delays.
1. Pelosi did not deliver the article to [former] Majority leader McConnell. That is her new game. Clever.
2. 2nd delay, Schumer said not until next month, Feb 8.
3. Guess what? By Feb 8, the country will have other, more pressing concerns. 3rd delay, indefinite? They may never say it is dropped, just never hold it.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schumer-delay-donald-trump-impeachment-hearing
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-impeachment-republicans-seek-delay-044721520.html
1. His examples all come from states and other countries.
2. Meaning there is no precedent here.
3. The trial would expose his (high) crimes. So would a criminal trial. This extreme remedy is not the only remedy available
4. The Chief Justice has already declined to preside, downgrading this from a "Presidential" impeachment trial.
5. The process is by definition political. All it is capable of accomplishing besides vindicating Trump is to ban him from running again.
6. Future elections are another political process available to prevent him from serving in federal office again.
7. "Mr. Whittington is a professor of politics at Princeton". Roughly speaking, so is Paul Krugman.
8. Even wrong, he could get 3 Supreme Court votes for his view, maybe more, but likely not 5.
9. The trial would end in acquittal. There aren't new facts to add and 95% of Republicans oppose it.
---------------------------------
The "trial" is not in Democrats best interests. There is no way it is polling well and it will get worse if/when it happens. Begs the question, how will \democrats get out of it. I couldn't think of a way they could save face. Neither could they. So it starts with delays.
1. Pelosi did not deliver the article to [former] Majority leader McConnell. That is her new game. Clever.
2. 2nd delay, Schumer said not until next month, Feb 8.
3. Guess what? By Feb 8, the country will have other, more pressing concerns. 3rd delay, indefinite? They may never say it is dropped, just never hold it.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schumer-delay-donald-trump-impeachment-hearing
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-impeachment-republicans-seek-delay-044721520.html