The Senate is pretending to have an impeachment trial
For something or other.
Today they’re hearing arguments on its constitutionality, and they’re pretending to consider them soberly. But I can virtually guarantee that the mind of every senator was already made up before today, and that the answers fall pretty much as they did before: every single Democrat voting “yes, this is constitutional” along with maybe five RINOs, and the rest of the Republicans voting “no.”
The correct answer is undoubtedly “no.” And I would say that no matter who they were trying to convict from whatever party, if that person was no longer in office.
Let Alan Dershowitz explain:
Yawn…,
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
~ Voltaire
Rather than seek to get the trial over, Republicans should run it on and on as long as possible to shove the process right back in Democrat faces. Run it out a year if possible. Call every witness under the sun. Speechify until hoarse or shut down. Deny the Senate a quorum if possible
But they won’t. “Nice guys” determined to finish last.
Eventually as the election fraud issue is clarified, and the indisputable evidence of at least run-of-the-mill corrupt Democrat practice becomes undeniable, they will shrug, say that nothing can be done about it now, say that their posture is for the good of the nation, and then drop to all fours and present ass up as an example of said posture.
It’s a hell of a thing to watch a society operate in which honor and courage and manly virtue in the public sphere have died.
Hello. Points on my mind instantly:
1. There is no appeal to SCOTUS or anyone else of a conviction, right? I find it one of the interesting points of Constitutional procedure to see where the unappealable or irrevocable decisions are defined in a process. In other words, where are the hard endpoints of a given process flow? It looks like impeachment is one which, since it cannot be appealed, is one of the relatively rare instances in our system (on paper, at least) of Congress getting the final say on a matter.
2. Has this Congress actually passed any legislation yet? Anything at all, no matter how small? Or is it just King Joe who’s just cranking out decrees? He might be the only one in DC getting anything (un)done right now. (Well, okay, there was that partial SCOTUS finger-wag directed toward Prince Gavin; I suppose that counts.)
Philip Sells, the voters actually might have the last word. We shall see.
Ah yes, a Stalinist Show Trial, American style; where everybody knows the outcome and/or has made up their minds months ago.
And presiding over this “constitutional” political satire, this joke, this disgusting display of a junior high school mean girls vendetta, is the neutral, non-partisan , objective leftist hack , Patrick Leahy.
In the real Stalinist show trials, all of Stalin’s opponents – many of whom had been in Lenin’s inner circle – met their predetermined fate in the infamous Lubyanka prison.
One can only hope that those conducting and supporting this farce we are now witnessing in the US congress will realize a similar fate.
I think the Dems are scared to death Trump will run in 2024 and WIN!
They have to finish him off … so that can never happen.
I think the Dems are scared to death Trump will run in 2024 and WIN!
I think they’re improvising, playing psyops, and doubling-down, something their media lickspittles allow them. There’s no plan here, just narrative manufacture.
Let’s pretend – because it’s going to happen – that the trial proceeds. Then, let’s further speculate that there is a guilty or not-guilty finding – because that will probably happen, too.
Then – because the entire process, while being completely without any form of Constitutional Legitimacy, yet having proceeded as a politically-weaponized form of kabuki theater – let’s pretend that we are going to move down the activity list to consider, in the Sacred Chamber, the ban from holding future office – the Bill of Attainder.
Let us assume that the Senate changes its rules to allow a secret vote, since the majority lies favorably with the Democrats, including Mittens and a handful of others.
Let’s presume that there are enough terrified psuedo-Republican establishment figures to vote like they did to support Liz Cheney last week, if allowed to safely do it anonymously.
What’s to stop them? More importantly – what authority does Congress have to enforce it, come 2024? “The Constitutional language is clear” says Prof. Deshowitz. “Who cares? It means what we sez it means.”
How does this play out? My instinct is that it plays out with a third party, and Trump getting on the ballot whether the uni-party likes it or not.
Aggie:
In that Frei and Barnes video excerpt I posted today on impeachment, Barnes makes the point that if that were to happen, Trump would probably just shrug and run anyway if he wanted to. Of course, under those circumstances I’m pretty sure he’d have to run third-party.
But I don’t know that he wants to run in 2024. He’d be pretty old. He might just support another candidate, such as for example DeSantis if he runs.
Some of this is just the Left’s crazed momentum. Some of it is a kind of black mass exorcism ritual which has layers of hermetic meaning in the esoteric religion of our Managerialist Bugmen Overlords.
When a populist rural uprising was put down by the army with bloodshed in Bangkok in 2010, the “we’re not like those rural hicks” urban middle class came out en masse with mops and buckets to wash the streets clean of the *ritual* defilement caused by the peasantry who had dared to venture there and behave as if they had equal rights.
We’re not entirely rational beings. Except perhaps our resident Statler and Waldorf, which is why they never see the forest for the trees.
But I wonder if there might not be a plan to get Trump in there to testify in the not unrealistic hope of goading him into a narcissistic rage meltdown on live TV?
A considered, blatant and knowing violation of the Constitution by a member of Congress is a demonstration of a basic unfitness for the office. An act that in truth, disqualifies them from further legitimacy.
A solemn Oath of elective office is more than just a verbal affirmation of allegiance. It is the last step in qualifying for the responsibilities of the office to which they have been elected. Fidelity to that oath is the foundation upon which legitimacy rests.
In fundamentally violating the solemnity of their oaths, they have voluntarily forfeited a legitimate claim to their office.
The truth of the matter does not require an appropriate legal consequence for their violation of their oath of office. Justice denied does not change of that which justice consists.
Justice denied simply adds to the injustice they have assumed.
America is now governed by an illegitimate ‘President’ and Congress that acts in collusion with a corrupted bureaucracy.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”
But the show trial must go forward! Now that the Deplorables have declined to play further in the streets, something has to explain and justify the continuing military occupation of the nation’s capital.
It appears that the Senate believes Donald Trump is still President because they are proceeding to trial. Yet Trump is not the President now. On the other hand, the Chief Justice is not presiding but the Constitution mandates that he “shall”.
So who are they trying? A President, but Trump is no longer President. Or a private citizen, which they have zero authority to do.
Thus a sham trial brought to you be the DemonRat Party.
When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside … Article I, Section 3 Clause 6.
That the trial is unconstitutional doesn’t obviate the truth that Donald J Trump actually was reelected and that, in winning reelection he is the legitimate President of the United States.