I do think Democrats would very much like to get to the impeachment vote in the house before Trump leaves office, so that they’ve got him in history as having been impeached IN OFFICE twice, on separate occasions.
Me neither. I want to be very clear here - re-read my message: I just pointed out that without removal it won’t mean anything. It’s still something that should be done, for sure. But, if dems see a path to removal, and this is that path, I’m for letting them take their time to do it right. As long as it gets done eventually, even without a removal.
I assume it would require more than just an impeachment like we saw earlier then, or he’d already have lost those things. My hope is that they pull this off on the level that he loses these perks, however long that takes to pull off.
There’s symbolic meaning even if it fails. There’s meaning in getting the votes on record.
Removing him now or on the 20th when his term is over is probably something that makes no difference, other than the nuclear football Trump has access to (and which I now think he will be blocked from using unless it’s a true emergency). It’s symbolic, really.
Yes, exactly, we seem to be saying the same things in agreement. I just hope it means something this time.
ShivaX
4232
I mean you have to convict. There are quite a few GOP Senators who are on board and more willing to listen. Unlike last time where there was Mitt Romney.
Also it forces the GOP on the record.
vyshka
4233
Get them on record and then run ads against all the ones that support insurrection.
I am reading this article about Sund, the Capitol police chief who resigned. He is going to play a major role in the prosecution (if there were to be one), he communicated and named names, and was on a call with 4 other DC officials who corroborated that he “pleaded” for the National Guard, it will come down to Pentagon officials to play it down as a bureaucracy that just did not get signed off on in time.
However, I feel bad for him, especially reading that his superiors happily welcomed the resignation. Trying to throw him under the bus? Can’t believe this nightmare will continue to many more years, but at least these are prosecutions that will move the country forward (again, if they happen).
I don’t agree. I’m sure he was desperate on the day of January 6th. Maybe he even made extraordinary or even heroic efforts that day.
What he is justifiably being criticized for is a failure of leadership leading up to the events of January 6th. I don’t think anyone on either side of the aisle thinks that the Capitol Police were properly or reasonably prepared for the day, given all of the information leading up to the day. I’m not even talking about confidential information that the law enforcement and intelligence communities were likely privy to, just publicly available information should have made clear that there was a likelihood that some of those showing up would try to make things happen by force.
As far as I know, no one has credibly alleged that he should actual be prosecuted for his failure. I think (or hope) it was pure incompetence.
magnet
4238
That issue was put to rest in 1876 when William Belknap left office, was impeached, and was tried in the Senate in that order.
The Senate convened its trial in early April, with Belknap present, after agreeing that it retained impeachment jurisdiction over former government officials. During May, the Senate heard more than 40 witnesses, as House managers argued that Belknap should not be allowed to escape from justice simply by resigning his office.
The courts did not get involved.
He also commands a force almost the size of Atlanta’s police force. Even if he was denied the guard, he could have surged his force for the rally and had hundreds of cops holding the building.
And it’s like a Navy captain. He may have been asleep in his cabin when the night shift accidentally hit a reef, but he is 100% responsible nonetheless.
I don’t know how big the crowd size was on January 6th. It is possible that it was of a size bigger than what the very big Capitol Police force could handle on their own. If that was the case, his failure was the failure to ask for more help before January 6th. What is irrefutable was the force guarding the Capitol Building was extremely inadequate based on all public information of what some people were threatening to do that day, regardless of what the cause of that inadequacy was, as it could have and should have been planned for.
Alstein
4242
Ah, in that case there’s a precedent, and I think the court would go with it.
I thought I heard him say, “They called me a fucking terrorist…”
But maybe it’s just a mask dispute vid?
How did they get on in the first place?
Dejin
4245
It’s likely a mask dispute according to CNN fact checker, Daniel Dale.
Unfortunately there’s been a fair amount of disinformation spread by our side over the past day.
ShivaX
4246
We saw a point being held by like 4 cops without any crowd control gear.
They didn’t treat this any different than a random day of the week near as I can tell.
We know they can bring a lot of force and people because they were happy to show us when it was BLM protestors.
