Nancy Pelosi is off her rocker

[Matt]

While there's certainly a case to be made for going the SECOND impeachment route, I'd be far more in favor of having federal Marshalls at the door of wherever Trump's hidey hole will be at 12:01 Jan. 20th with a set of bracelets and an arrest warrant in hand for aiding and abetting the events of Jan 6th at the United States Capitol Bldg. Make it happen Merrick!!

This isn't a great solution for the country, but it is still better than impeachment or 25th amendment.

[Lester The Nightfly]

I truly don't understand the pushback on an impeachment and trial. This is a method as prescribed in our Constitution!

What happened on Wednesday was a big deal. A once in a couple centuries type of event. Weaker nations have had governments collapse under just these kinds of scenarios.

If now isn't the time to fairly inquire what happened and who is to blame, what kind of situation would it take for there to be such inquiries?

I beg of you -- take off the liberal and conservative sunglasses and look at what happened without the cloudiness of partisanship.

Robert, therein lies the problem. When it comes right down to it, regardless of how legally meritorious a case can be brought against Trump, we're still going to be counting hands and those hands are bound by the cloudiness of partisanship in the court of a legislative impeachment. We've already seen the first reel of that movie. Better to take it to a venue where adjudicating criminal conduct is their forte. A federal court seems like the right place to me.

[MWmetalhead]

They however ARE afraid that he won't leave politics and that he may not only run in 2024, but that he may stay in the public spotlight during Biden's entire Presidency. This is their last ditch effort to destroy him to try to either outright prevent those things from happening, or to try to make sure that he's viewed as a fringe politician moving forward.

Trump's own self-inflicted wounds - starting with his abysmal debate performance - was a gift to the Dems. He also failed to articulate meaningful policy proposals for a second term. (Simply declaring "We'll have great health care!" does not qualify as a meaningful policy proposal.)

From purely a political vantage point - seems to me the Dems would benefit from Trump remaining active in political life.

By the way, Rudy Giuliani should immediately be arrested and prosecuted for his "trial by combat" remark. That clearly was intended to be inflammatory and was far worse than anything Trump said during the so-called "Save America" rally.

I share Matt's views regarding impeachment, and I share bmw's views regarding Nancy's rhetoric. She is not being helpful.

[Matt]

Thing is, Republicans still control the Senate for now. I don’t know when Georgia certifies their elections, and what kind of challenges there may be. If it’s after January 20, what’s the point, other than pure politics?

Edit: Purdue officially conceded, so barring anything strange, power will change when Georgia certifies.

Incorrect. With the Georgia results, the Senate is 50-50, with the VP determining the majority.

[Bryce]

Someone please cut and paste the segment of Trump's speech where he encouraged people to storm the Capitol.

[Robert Faygo]

Robert, therein lies the problem. When it comes right down to it, regardless of how legally meritorious a case can be brought against Trump, we're still going to be counting hands and those hands are bound by the cloudiness of partisanship in the court of a legislative impeachment. We've already seen the first reel of that movie. Better to take it to a venue where adjudicating criminal conduct is their forte. A federal court seems like the right place to me.

I'm fine with one or the other, or both methods of determining culpability or innocence in this situation.

I agree 100% about the cloudiness of partisanship, with a caveat. I view it as both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because it emphasizes how important it is that we vote. It matters who our representatives are and what their ideals are because we send them there to make the decisions we want - especially it comes to items of such profound importance. A curse because so many get discouraged and give up when it's not their "side" making the decisions.

The impeachment / trial process, I believe, is a much closer representation of the will of the people because it involves 535 jurists, something no courtroom can boast.

[Matt]

That drunken Swamp Sow needs to be arrested.

Skrewball is good. If Nancy drinks that it is her ONE redeeming quality. What is your drink of choice, Bidet?

[Lester The Nightfly]

Robert, therein lies the problem. When it comes right down to it, regardless of how legally meritorious a case can be brought against Trump, we're still going to be counting hands and those hands are bound by the cloudiness of partisanship in the court of a legislative impeachment. We've already seen the first reel of that movie. Better to take it to a venue where adjudicating criminal conduct is their forte. A federal court seems like the right place to me.

I'm fine with one or the other, or both methods of determining culpability or innocence in this situation.

I agree 100% about the cloudiness of partisanship, with a caveat. I view it as both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because it emphasizes how important it is that we vote. It matters who our representatives are and what their ideals are because we send them there to make the decisions we want - especially it comes to items of such profound importance. A curse because so many get discouraged and give up when it's not their "side" making the decisions.

The impeachment / trial process, I believe, is a much closer representation of the will of the people because it involves 535 jurists, something no courtroom can boast.

I guess we're looking at taking Trump to task in different ways. If it's political retribution we seek, then yes, take it to the 535 representative of the people. I'm looking at it in terms of being a criminal proceeding.

[Lester The Nightfly]

Someone please cut and paste the segment of Trump's speech where he encouraged people to storm the Capitol.

Bryce, if the point of your post is to say unless there's some verbal smoking gun Trump has no culpability in the events of Jan. 6th, I would pass along this story from Vox where a University of Minnesota law prof offers 13 federal criminal statues that may have been violated. I don't think it's unreasonable for the judicial system to investigate and determine Trump's direct or indirect involvement in the commission of those crimes. This goes well beyond a cut & paste exoneration you seem to be advocating.

https://www.vox.com/22217973/13-federal ... conspiracy

[TC Talks]

BMW has already exonerated Trump he just wants to put in possible metrics against proving that Trump is a traitor.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

You mean like you guys tried to disenfranchise 80 million voters on Wednesday by trying to overthrow the government? This was a coup.

No, it was a white trash mob. It was not a coup.

If Trump is as bad as they think he is, then why do they have to be out for blood? Shouldn't he be unelectable? You know, other than that time he DID win and they didn't accept it...

I do think this second impeachment is going to open a pandora's box that will continue to escalate.

Why were Donald, Eric, and Ivanka there if it wasn't a coup? C'mon, Matt.

[zzand]

If they want to rid of Trump once and for all, wait till he is out of office and file against him for various felonies associated with the shit show at the Capitol. A felon tag takes him totally out of the game.