Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America

[Lacius]

imao JULY???????? https://twitter.com/AtomicDenny/status/1360606071950356482

Morning Consult said this, not Joe Biden.

Says a lot about the state of the Republican Party when they're so obsessed with party lines over sanity that having like five of them budge an inch is quite possibly the most supportive they've ever been of having one of their own leaders get what's coming to him.

One of the sad things is you don't have to look far to find some of these Republican senators who are going to vote to acquit calling Trump a threat to democracy, disqualified from running for president, etc. back in 2015-2016.

It's amazing how things change when your electorate is madly in love with the tyrant you once disparaged.

 

[smf]

Keep this energy when he gets acquited.

He probably won't ever face justice for the many crimes he has committed.

But until he does then there are a lot of his supporters who will ruin their lives with cope.

At least when Trump was president you could have fun in your moral vacuum. It's not so much fun now I guess.

My History Class teacher is teaching me that Trump and Trumpist are Racist.

You only need to listen to what he says to know that.

Your history class teacher should start by teaching you what racism is, it doesn't mean you wear white robes and burn crosses. You can have friends who are black, you can even be black.

 

[Valwinz]

Democrats are a train wreck. Schumer egg on face again.what a failure of a impeachment

 

[smf]

Democrats are a train wreck. Schumer egg on face again.what a failure of a impeachment

Impeachments always fail because half the jury are in on your crime. Imagine if you held up a bank and demanded that half the jury were your accomplices.

It's all good, Trump is losing money.

 

[Foxi4]

Impeachments always fail because half the jury are in on your crime. Imagine if you held up a bank and demanded that half the jury were your accomplices.

It's all good, Trump is losing money.

Very true - it is a waste of money, both tax money and Trump's money, but Van Der Veen's performance is worth every penny - he's been phenomenal. I have a feeling I know who's going to be Trump's favourite lawyer going forward, the man is taking scalps with a stone poker face.

 

[Deleted User]

just going to link this video here
If you don't watch here's pretty much the important part. Senators are supposed to impartial. However the Republican senators are meeting with the defense lawyers and discussing with them

 

[Valwinz]

Total acquittal imminent. get ready for the salt

 

[Deleted User]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...with-trumps-impeachment-team-to-talk-strategy
https://www.businessinsider.com/3-g...awyers-day-before-defense-presentation-2021-2
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/11/politics/gop-senators-trump-impeachment-lawyers/index.html
here's sources backing it up

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Total acquittal imminent. get ready for the salt

If it happens, then I wouldn't be surprised. If you read what I just said. Republicans are in bed with the defense team. They are not being impartial as they should be when an impeachment hearing happens.

 

[Foxi4]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...with-trumps-impeachment-team-to-talk-strategy
https://www.businessinsider.com/3-g...awyers-day-before-defense-presentation-2021-2
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/11/politics/gop-senators-trump-impeachment-lawyers/index.html
here's sources backing it up

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


If it happens, then I wouldn't be surprised. If you read what I just said. Republicans are in bed with the defense team. They are not being impartial as they should be when an impeachment hearing happens.

This is irrelevant as Congress had already established at the beginning of the trial that the process of impeachment is not a federal criminal trial and does not need to follow the same procedural standards. If it was, it would be thrown out by now due to numerous breaches of procedure by the prosecution, including submitting unlisted evidence mid-way through the hearings and relying on hearsay.

 

[Lacius]

Total acquittal imminent. get ready for the salt

It's not a secret that the vast majority of Republicans are going to vote to acquit. It also isn't a secret that some of these Republican Senators are complicit.

 

[Deleted User]

This is irrelevant as Congress had already established at the beginning of the trial that the process of impeachment is not a federal criminal trial and does not need to follow the same procedural standards.

bullshit. You have to take a oath that you would be impartial. That is breaking that oath. You know that is bull, I'd highly doubt you wouldn't know that.

 

[Plasmaster09]

Very true - it is a waste of money, both tax money and Trump's money, but Van Der Veen's performance is worth every penny - he's been phenomenal. I have a feeling I know who's going to be Trump's favourite lawyer going forward, the man is taking scalps with a stone poker face.

The guy's wiggling about like he's on crack, spouting distractions and basically turning himself into a comedy act.
SNL is going to have a field day with Mister Phillydelphia.

oh my fucking god
closing arguments
the absolute SOB claims that Trump "wasn't given a chance [to participate in the trial]" when he declined, MULTIPLE TIMES, to do anything of the sort, and claimed that the evidence provided was (and I quote verbatim) "cribbed from a biased news media".
who writes his scripts, drumpf himself?
like this endless fountain of horsecrap just denies everything and pins everything on the Dems

 

[Foxi4]

The guy's wiggling about like he's on crack, spouting distractions and basically turning himself into a comedy act.
SNL is going to have a field day with Mister Phillydelphia.

Oh no, not SNL, how will he ever recover?

bullshit. You have to take a oath that you would be impartial. That is breaking that oath. You know that is bull, I'd highly doubt you wouldn't know that.

I don't see what one has to do with the other. If this is not a criminal proceeding then there is no rule explicitly preventing the parties from discussing anything. If this is specified in impeachment-related legislation and you can cite the relevant paragraph, I would like to read it - I'm not saying that I'm correct, I simply don't know of any such rule.

 

[Plasmaster09]

Oh no, not SNL, how will he ever recover?
I don't see what one has to do with the other. If this is not a criminal proceeding then there is no rule explicitly preventing the parties from discussing anything. If this is specified in impeachment-related legislation and you can cite the relevant paragraph, I would like to read it - I'm not saying that I'm correct, I simply don't know of any such rule.

dude, the entire point of a jury is to be impartial
having one side and one side only discuss with part of said jury is quite possibly the most blatant lack of impartiality that could happen aside from something like being held at gunpoint by one side DURING THE TRIAL
it really isn't that hard to understand
and now they're accusing us of basically rigging the trial... when they've tried to rig the jury

 

[Foxi4]

dude, the entire point of a jury is to be impartial
having one side and one side only discuss with part of said jury is quite possibly the most blatant lack of impartiality that could happen aside from something like being held at gunpoint by one side DURING THE TRIAL
it really isn't that hard to understand
and now they're accusing us of basically rigging the trial... when they've tried to rig the jury

I don't care about what the "point" of the jury is, I care about the legal standard. If this is not a criminal trial and the relevant limitations do not apply then they do not apply, regardless of what your fee-fees are telling you.

 

[Deleted User]

I don't see what one has to do with the other.

Let me get this straight.
talking to the defense lawyers, outside of the hearings, after taking an oath that you would be impartial has no correlation in your head? Nothing?
Is this peak braincell loss or something?
"Before proceeding to the consideration of the articles of impeachment, the presidingofficer shall administer the oath hereafter provided to the members of the Senate then present,and to the other members of the Senate as they shall appear, whose duty it shall be to take thesame"
and this is the oath:
"I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the tria lof the impeachment of , now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: so help me God."
This phrasing may of changed, however this part still exists. You take an oath to be impartial.
source:https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/1_1868ImpeachmentRules.pdf

 

[Plasmaster09]

I don't care about what the "point" of the jury is, I care about the legal standard. If this is not a criminal trial and the relevant limitations do not apply then they do not apply, regardless of what your fee-fees are telling you.

what?
the legal standard... is impartiality.
also, please stop the bullshit pathos gambit. I am not arguing from a point of emotion, nor is anyone else here.
I am arguing from a point of basic legality and morality.
one side should not have direct communication with the jury before the trial.
heck, NEITHER side should have any such communication (which is a thing I should NOT have to say because it should be obvious by default), let alone one side specifically!
oh and yeah
the whole "they all have to take an oath to be completely impartial" thing
which applies to all trials

 

[Foxi4]

We're not discussing whether they *should* meet - in a federal court case they shouldn't and are prohibited from doing so. We're discussing whether they could. If you believe for one second that any one person in that chamber is impartial and will vote based on the presented evidence, you're the sucker. I will demonstrate.

Every single Democrat will vote to impeach, along with a small handful of Republicans in name only. The gross majority of Republicans will vote to acquit. I could've told you that *before* the trial started

Any delusion of impartiality you still have in your head is misguided and naive. If you think that meeting with the defense team, if it had occurred in a way that would be improper, changed *one* vote, I'll need you to demonstrate that and provide evidence. Minds were made up 5 days ago. Heck, they were made up a month ago.

 

[Plasmaster09]

Every single Democrat will vote to impeach, along with a small handful of Republicans in name only. The gross majority of Republicans will vote to acquit. I could've told you that *before* the trial started.

So... because they vote to impeach Trump, they aren't true Republicans?
That is the textbook definition of the no-true-scotsman fallacy.
That is further proof that you don't side with any political ideologies, any parties, anything... but with one man.
One man named Donald Trump, who incited a violent insurrection against our country and would gladly unplug the life support of everyone on the planet in order to charge his fucking phone.
The fact that ANYONE would vote to acquit Trump is the epitome of what is fundamentally wrong with our country- that almost nobody understands that actions come with consequences, and that Trump's actions warrant impeachment and conviction as the BARE MINIMUM.

 

[Valwinz]

The year is 2023, we still haven't gotten our stimulus checks and Donald Trump has been impeached for the 14th time.