I changed my mind.
Unless the information I have is wrong, impeaching Trump and removing him from office means he cannot run again in 2024. That would be a great service to the country.
According to Article 1, Section 3, a president convicted by the senate in an impeachment cannot run for any office in the US.
But the court of public opinion is unlikely to ever give him a shot anyway. His endless attempts at what appear to be frivolous attempts to over turn the election hurt him greatly, but he could have survived given time and carefully worded speeches. However, his actions over the last week have alienated him from all but a small group of sychophants.
I think it's very unlikely Joe will get re-elected and should Trump attempt to run as a 3rd party candidate, he'd only be helping the dems.
I doubt it's likely congress could accomplish the action of impeachment or the 25th in the time remaining and they have far better and more important things to worry about.
you want to really provide service to the country JOJ or just run off at the mouth with your TDS crap. Everyday you say Trump is a tyrant, Trump is a dictator. Now who is the dictator Trump or twitter who banned who you think is a dictator? And just how do you ban a dictator?
Tim, while I agree with everything you said, better safe than sorry.
Mcfarm, If I would have told you 6 months ago all that Trump would do these past days/weeks and the attack on the people's house that would have occurred, you would have said I had Trump Derangement Syndrome. Reality is a cold bucket of ice water aye?
again who is the dictator Trump or twitter.....how in the hell do you ban a dictator? Admit you are over the top outside the lines and ate up with outlandish claims that cannot be defended
So we have alot from the left saying "see, I told you so".
This is very true and I was worried about Trump being this way but more worried about how the left would respond to a loss to their guy.
So the question for people like me might be:
Would you have still supported much of Trump's agenda the past 4 years despite his bad but not this extreme behavior if you knew he would act like this in a November 2020 loss?
I would still have to say yes but am not copping out because it would be based on the realities of facts as we knew then, including how unstable Trump has always been.
In retrospect however, is the country better off because of Trump being president, I would say, probably no. In many respects, we would be better off if Clinton had been president when it comes to divisiveness.
Tons of issues that were or were not in America's best interest would have been managed COUNTER productively but in the end, when Biden takes over, we will just go back to the way things were under Obama anyway, so not much will have been accomplished except the left got extremely motivated to push the extremes on their side because of Trump.
Obama caused the right to unify over his policies.
Trump caused the left and MSM to unify MUCH more profoundly in a powerful way that overwhelmed anything seen in the past.
So in retrospect, a Trump presidency that includes the last 2 months was worse then a Clinton presidency would have been.
I would say the country is more divided because Trump was president, but not because of Trump. I'll elaborate if anyone really needs me to.
I think the 2020 midterms will be very interesting and unless Biden turns out to be one of the best presidents in history, the complection of the house/senate will look quite different.
I knew Trump was unhinged in 2015 when he was completely unable to control himself in the first GOP debate.
My analysis of Trump's domestic policy agenda is primarily the following: He was a useful tool to the skilled and determined Mitch McConnell.
Tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations? Mitch says yes. Trumps signs.
Judges? Mitch orchestrates the theft of Obama's nominee. Rams through RBGs replacement.
Infrastructure deal? Trump wants it? Mitch says "not going to happen".
Mild gun legislation? Trump was in favor. Mitch says not going to happen.
Trump was a useful tool for McConnell and now Mitch is done with him. Kind of like MM.
As for foreign policy: Trade war and tariffs with China (conservative?). Alienating our NATO allies (conservative?). Pulling out of Iran deal. Pulling out of Paris Climate accord.
I play tennis with a pastor (a great guy) who is one of millions that vote on one issue, and one issue alone. Abortion. He explained to me that there are numerous problems he has with Trump's policies (not to mention his obvious personal repulsiveness). Particularly the policy to separate families and put children in cages. But when it comes to abortion, he voted for Trump twice. Without that issue Trump doesn't get anywhere near the WH.
You cannot scream "Fire!", in a crowded theater, and you can't say "come on down to the capitol January 6th. It's going to be wild!" Trump can still say anything he wants. (Even though they are mostly lies). Twitter is similar to MF. The moderator can shut down someone's fowl language or even ban them. Are you saying MM is guilty of some crime? I hope not.
You nail some great points joj, especially about the strongly pro life crowd on abortion giving Trump the support that he needed to get elected.
I am thinking that Mitch McConnell had less control over him than what you do.
Their positions in the Middle East, for instance clashed.
No doubt the Mitch McConnell has been a very powerful guy though.
joj is correct about Twitter, Facebook and other private companies.
They can make and apply their own rules. If people don't like it, they don't have to use Twitter.
If you or me don't like something being sold by a private company or the service they provide............we don't have to buy it or use it.
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
With regards to Trump not being able to run again, he is toxic to the Republican party and that could NEVER happen.
He could run as an independent though.
Knowing his stratospheric ego.....ok, that's not high enough, how about exospheric ego (-: that crazy action is conceivable but seems unlikely.
He is banned from Twitter for life, which cuts off his lifeline there. The MSM would be bashing him relentlessly and reminding us of the last 2 months.
But he probably could get............, maybe 20% of the votes as an independent almost all republicans. If that happened, the hate for him from republicans would go way up because he sabotaged whoever their person is by stealing their votes.
Almost no democrats would vote for him.
I agree though with joj, that this would be the only good thing about impeaching him...........NEVER AGAIN Trump even trying to run under any circumstances.
“The case cannot come to trial in the Senate. Because the Senate has rules, and the rules would not allow the case to come to trial until, according to the majority leader, until 1 p.m. on January 20th, an hour after President Trump leaves office,” Dershowitz said in a Fox Business interview on Sunday.
Dershowitz, who defended Trump during the Senate impeachment trial about a year ago, suggested that the Constitution does not allow for impeaching a former president.
“And the Constitution specifically says, ‘The President shall be removed from office upon impeachment.’ It doesn’t say the former president. Congress has no power to impeach or try a private citizen, whether it be a private citizen named Donald Trump or named Barack Obama or anyone else,” he said.
It comes as House Democrats have proposed articles of impeachment after Trump made a speech to protesters near the Capitol. Some critics have claimed Trump incited the crowd into violence before a group stormed the Capitol building.
Trump told the crowd beforehand that their protest shows “the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country” and “let us walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.” The president did not tell the protesters to breach the Capitol or commit acts of violence and later condemned them.
At one point, Trump told the protesters to “peacefully and patriotically make your voices be heard.”
Another Trump defender during the House impeachment inquiry, law professor Jonathan Turley, explained that impeaching Trump over his speech would set a dangerous precedent.
“When I testified in the impeachment hearings of Trump and Bill Clinton, I noted that an article of impeachment does not have to be based on any clear crime but that Congress has looked to the criminal code to weigh impeachment offenses,” he said in an opinion piece. “For this controversy now, any such comparison would dispel claims of criminal incitement. Despite broad and justified condemnation of his words, Trump never actually called for violence or riots. But he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol to raise their opposition to the certification of electoral votes and to back the recent challenges made by a few members of Congress.”
Meanwhile, Democrats and some Republicans have floated the idea of Trump’s cabinet invoking the 25th Amendment, which concerns succession of the vice president if the president dies, resigns, or is removed from office.
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, a member of his cabinet, dismissed calls to invoke the 25th Amendment.
“As a Nation we need to heal. I have not talked to anyone about invoking the 25th Amendment, and I am focused on finishing what I started in uplifting the forgotten women and men of America. It’s time to move toward peace. We are not each other’s enemies!” he wrote.
Does anyone else see the irony in "To protect democracy, we must never allow the people to vote for this individual again".
I truly don't believe Trump could ever win another election, but that's really not for congress to decide.
"I truly don't believe Trump could ever win another election, but that's really not for congress to decide."
Three card monty. First say that his political life is done and that nothing will be gained by removing the President. Then, when someone argues that it could result in him being barred legally from ever holding any political office, argue that it is not for congress to decide.
Trump encouraged insurrection, encouraged violence, and was giddy at the site of it.
The latest reporting is that there were organized militia (for lack of a better word) who were attempting to kidnap and possibly kill Pence and Pelosi. We were a whisker away from a huge disaster.
Stop! Just stop looking for cute little arguments against removing Trump.
His words and actions are impeachable. Period!
Stop! Just stop looking for cute little arguments against removing Trump.
His words and actions are impeachable. Period!
I will happily use "cute little arguments" to support the constitution when those argument are constitutiuonally based. So, sorry, but not sorry.
Trump's words were irresponsible, but not illegal. I've gotten used to the left in general, and your in particular, using blatant double standards when it comes to Trump and everyone on the dems side, so i won't ask you to stop. It's apparently part of your DNA.
In the midst of his inflammatory rhetoric, he did ask for peaceful protest. Day late/dollar short, but it was there. He was far less inflamatory than Maxine Waters, for example, and I'll not hold my breath awaiting the outrage. That's reserved for Pubs, right?
Further, last I checked, you can't impeach the president for actions or intents of a few idiots. But of course, the left has lowered the bar so far on impeachment, perhaps that's no longer true?
I've really been going back and forth on this one and am not certain whats best but am confident that the worst thing for our country's unity would be to impeach Trump.
Trump really did the worst thing that a president has ever done, in my opinion and deserves to be impeached in order to impose a penalty on him for that behavior.
I get that side.
However, if you are thinking clearly, you know that we have the most divided country since the Civil War. You should also know that the one act to increase the division by the greatest amount possible..........would be to impeach the person who a great number of people from one side still support with a couple of days left in his term.
Why would you do that?
Are the consequences and damage to this country worth it to punish him?
For those driven by hate, which I see gushing out like a firehouse from anti Trumpsters, it goes back to what I've been saying for years now.............and they don't care about the harm it will do to our country because:
"I am a fan and admirer of the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. His sermons and speeches arouse hope and a passion for justice in my heart. But honestly, there is one quotation of his that just bugs the heck out of me.
The quote is: “Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that.”
Yes… it is a powerful quote.
Yes, it hits the proverbial nail on the head.
Yes, it speaks Truth with a capital “T” and shines a righteous light squarely where it needs to shine.
So what’s my problem with it?
Actually, I love this quote. But I say that it bugs me because it convicts me and makes me squirm in my seat every time I hear it.
This quote throws cold water on my knee-jerk impulse to post negative, snarky Facebook comments about national and world events.
It makes me look into the mirror and ask, “What are YOU doing to spread actual, tangible love in the world?”
I hear the question… I ponder my answer… and I fall silent. Because I am not sure I have an answer.
But I know I have to keep seeking one. Actually, we ALL do.
Our future probably depends on it."
Hate is the most destructive emotion of all.
"It will cause you to lower and violate the previous standards that you set for yourself for ethical behavior and honestly because this emotion drives you to hurt the person that you hate more than those previous standards cause you to follow the truth and be objective...............and act professionally, with integrity.
It will cause you to do and say things that are harmful to you and your reputation when the hate becomes neurotic because you become so obsessed with harming the hated person that rational thinking no longer applies.
Your interpretation of circumstances involving the hated person becomes so blatantly skewed that the hoped for endpoint in every realm is always for them to be hurt.
Hate blackens the heart and soul of the hater. It can ruin personal relationships and ironically, more often than not destroys the hater, not the target of their hatred.
This emotion drives the thoughts of many people when it comes to any issue involving President Trump."
What's wrong with hating a son of a bitch that wants to destroy our country's freedoms and our democratic republic style of govt. and put citizens in danger from rabid extremists? I have every right to hate the son of a bitch. I wish you'd stop beating me and others who are not Trump supporters over the head with this. You're insulting our intelligence.
I can proudly say that I never voted for him.
You can't possibly be unaware of the thousands of positive messages here the past 3 years, featuring how to make the world a better place or uplifting quotes teaching us how to love or respect one another.
Or how to be better people in life for those around us and for ourselves.
I have always been kind and respectful to you and encouraged you to post here, even on the occasions when you were trashing MarketForum.
You are a brilliant guy..........and I mean that sincerely. Your contributions on the trading forum are unmatched by anyone. You are actually very gifted in analyzing weather and information and applying it to trading.
But your NTR posts are also wonderful because they are good reality checks to dampen out the extreme right echo chamber here.
I also understand why it upsets you that I call out hate when I see it because you think that hating is perfectly ok.
You also have the right to express your hatred here as long as its not personal to a poster (you have never done that-another reason for why I like you so much).
You have the right to object to me recognizing hatred and demonstrating in real life how it affects people(its damaging our relationship right now for instance and I'm not feeling any hate but just look at you).
But I will not adjust my biggest purpose in being here...trying to make the world a better place, demonstrating love and tolerance and to enlighten people with the truth because you are offended at me recognizing a big character flaw that you obviously have with Trump.
Look in the mirror Larry. Please don't vent at me for the way that you are because I am being the way that I am......which is just trying to help you to be a better person....or at the very least, not cause so much self inflicted pain over Trump.
I'm not judging you, really.
I posted this earlier this month.
I was really ticked off at Trump over all this and made a very angry post directed at him.
Shortly after that, I read it and thought "dang, I'm preaching about love and not hating other people(trump) and I just displayed a tirade venting my own hatred about him..............so I yanked it.
I'm not trying to deny you your right to hate Trump, I'm just trying to point out the destructive nature of it in my/our lives.
And the destruction that it causes to US is indisputable.
And by US, I mean to all of us and also to the country.
If we eliminated the emotion hate from our beings, much of the extreme divisiveness in this country would go away.
In fact, I believe that might be the only way to do it.
People will always disagree on things but the best way to have them never agree with you on anything is to apply hate to the relationship.
"Trump's words were irresponsible, but not illegal."
I never said throw him in jail. I said impeach him. Clearly not fit for office. Where am I wrong "Constitutionally"?
But nice insults in your post.
MM, As for healing the country. You know what will really drive up the division in this country? Trump for president in 2024.
I also admire Dr. King (although he didn't have a lab coat on as MF posters would insist). But I confess, I cannot get all the way to his pure heart. WWII could not have been approached with love and forgiveness to Hitler in my opinion. The man was unhinged and incapable of empathy. War was the only choice.
I'll do my best not to hate Trump, but I'd like him gone a week ago, or tomorrow if I can't have that.
Wise words joj and I agree too.
Not just on Trump being gone ASAP and not being able to run in 2024 but he deserves some sort of consequence/penalty for causing this.
However, we should look at whether the benefits and justice of his impeachment are greater than the added divisiveness it will cause with certainty.
I totally understand why people hate Trump so much. I have had a couple bouts of feeling hate for him myself recently because of what he's done to the brains of millions of people that believe his election bs.
Expressing hate here is just fine too. It's human nature and it gives me an opportunity to point it out and how hate can turn very rational, fact/science based people into emotionally raging beings that attack and judge friends and family.
I'm glad that you used Hitler as an example. Many people probably hate Trump more than Hitler with todays powerful MSM and social media not around 80 years ago to feed the hate.
When people put Trump in the same category as Hitler, then I feel they are not being fair and part of this, is that when you hate somebody, your objectively goes out the window.
The results of WW2 because Hitler wanted power are many orders of magnitude worse than Trumps agenda/behavior and this last despicable act.
But for the past 2 months, as I have continually pointed out..........you and me agree on almost everything related to Trump and with most of your solid points, I don't see hatred......mostly just common sense and rational thinking.
One of our few disagreements is whether he should be impeached or not and I actually agree with almost all of those points, except that it will mess up the country even more.
House Democrats are charging ahead this week to impeach President Trump anew for his role in Wednesday’s attack on the U.S. Capitol — and this time they might have some GOP support.
No House Republicans crossed the aisle 13 months ago when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her caucus impeached Trump for leveraging U.S. aid to pressure Ukrainian officials to investigate his rival, President-elect Joe Biden.
But last week’s violent siege of the Capitol by pro-Trump supporters — an assault that occurred with Congress in session and Vice President Pence presiding — has infuriated a host of GOP lawmakers, some of whom are now considering support for the ensuing impeachment charge, which Democrats introduced on Monday.
The resolution, which charges Trump with “inciting violence against the Government of the United States,” will hit the House floor on Wednesday. And a number of Republicans have suggested they might be on board.
Centrist Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), an Iraq and Afghanistan war vet who’s clashed with Trump, has signaled support for impeachment.
"I'll vote the right way, you know, if I'm presented with that,” Kinzinger said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” program. “I just think it's probably not the smartest move right now, but I think that's going to be out of my hands."
A day later, after the article of impeachment was introduced, Kinzinger's spokesman struck a harsher tone and indicated the Illinois Republican may very well vote with Democrats.
“Congressman Kinzinger is committed to doing what is right, no matter the political cost. What President Trump did last week was incite violence and encourage a mob to attack the United States Capitol. Clearly, the President violated his oath of office and is unfit to serve," the spokesman said in a statement.
Kinzinger won re-election in November by 29 percentage points.
Republicans are closely watching moderate House GOP members facing tough reelections in 2022, including Tuesday Group Co-Chairs John Katko (N.Y) and Fred Upton (Mich.), as well as Reps. Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.).
GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (Wyo.), a Trump critic who opposed Republican efforts to overturn the certification of Biden’s election victory, has not yet said how she will vote. But on a conference call Monday, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told fellow House Republicans he opposed impeachment.
House Democrats are racing to adopt the new impeachment charge in the short window before Jan. 20, when Trump is scheduled to leave office. The resolution was formally introduced by Democratic Reps. David Cicilline (R.I.), Ted Lieu (Calif.), Jamie Raskin (Md.) and Jerry Nadler (N.Y.). Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced later on Monday that the House will rush the resolution to the floor Wednesday.
“We have a president who most of us believe participated in encouraging an insurrection, an act on this building and on democracy and trying to subvert the counting of the presidential ballot,” Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol on Monday morning.
For many first-term Republicans, Wednesday’s impeachment roll call will be the first major vote of their congressional career. Several of the lawmakers, including Reps. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), are furious over the Capitol assault and have blamed GOP colleagues for pushing to overturn the election without basis.
“When it comes to impeachment, it’s something we’re strongly considering at this point. … What we saw on Wednesday left the president unfit for office,” Meijer told WXMI, the Fox affiliate in Grand Rapids.
But Mace said she was worried impeachment could inflame partisan tensions that are already at a boiling point.
“We were sitting ducks in the halls of Congress. … Everyone was put at risk, unnecessarily so,” Mace told CNN on Sunday, adding that “we have to hold the president accountable for what happened.”
But she has called on Biden to urge Democrats to back off impeachment, warning, “We need to be very careful about the rhetoric, about being divisive right now in the next 10 days.”
The comments highlight the dilemma facing Republicans after Wednesday’s shocking attack on the Capitol complex. On one hand, GOP lawmakers want to burnish their law-and-order bona fides by holding those responsible for the violent siege to account. On the other, they don’t want to alienate the party’s conservative base, which remains largely loyal to the president, and risk the backlash in the form of either a primary challenge or a threat to their personal safety.
Some Republicans on the Hill said there’s another consideration for GOP lawmakers still on the fence: how their vote will look if Trump incites more violence and bloodshed leading up to Inauguration Day or in the months to come.
“That was always something we knew we would have to grapple with after the election: what to do about Trump,” said one Republican source on the Hill. “The events of the past week have revealed that Trumpism is not the future of the Republican Party. We have to say who we are, what we stand for and how we can win.”
House Democrats are expected to pass their impeachment article easily Wednesday, regardless of how many Republicans join them. The terrifying assault on the Capitol has unified Democrats of all stripes, from liberal members of "the squad" to conservative-leaning Blue Dogs, all of whom say Trump’s refusal to acknowledge his election defeat — combined with his entreaty to supporters to march on the Capitol and “fight like hell” to overturn the results — fueled the tensions leading to the violent breach.
It remains unclear, however, when House Democrats will send the article to the Senate — an issue that seems to be dividing the caucus.
Several prominent Democrats, including Hoyer and Cicilline, said Monday that they want to deliver the resolution across the Capitol immediately after passage, setting the stage for Senate action just as Biden takes office.
But others, including Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.), the Democratic whip, have suggested the better plan would be to hold the article in the House to allow Biden the time to seat his Cabinet in the earliest stages of his new administration — a process that might be disrupted by an impeachment trial.
There’s virtually no chance the Senate would convict Trump, which requires support from two-thirds of the upper chamber. But it is likely that the number of supportive Republicans would increase relative to a year ago, when only Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) broke ranks and backed one of the two Democratic impeachment articles related to Trump’s Ukraine dealings.
This time around, Romney could be joined by other moderate Republicans fed up with the turmoil of the Trump years, and furious with the president’s role in stirring up Wednesday’s mob. That list includes Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Ben Sasse (Neb.).
“I will definitely consider whatever articles they might move,” Sasse told CBS over the weekend.
I never said throw him in jail. I said impeach him. Clearly not fit for office. Where am I wrong "Constitutionally"?
If you were to read the constitution, you would see that re: impeachment, it's pretty clear "Impeachment for and the conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors".
I read that as meaning that some law has to have been broken to justify an impeachment. Should the dems continue in their second Quixotic adventure, they'll be 0 for 2 on Trump.
Absent legal violations, an individual's "fitness" for office is the decision of the voter. Recent history (at least since the '70s) tells us that when voters disagree with dems. they (dems) will use impeachment and/or any other means available to over turn the vote. Sadly, we have a growing segment of the populatiion cheering them on so it's not likely to matter much longer.
Interesting interpretation of the constitution Tim. I'm pretty sure you were on board for Bill Clinton's impeachment for lying about an extramarital sex act while under oath. A "crime" that has never been prosecuted in the history of our republic but which Republicans were enthusiastic about.
MM, I was not comparing Hitler to Trump. It's not even close. I was trying to wrap my head around the philosophy of Jesus, Gandhi, and Dr. King. I just can't get there. Evil must be combated. But no, Trump is not evil. He's just not to be trusted with power.
I expect Trump's political career to be over. My worry is that if we head into economic decline, he will be there to exploit people's suffering.
It's not an interpretation, it's the actual wording of the document. How would you "interpret" those words?
And as I have said here before, I think the Cilnton impeachment was also a farce. I can only assume they were so sure he was guilty of something, they were willing to settle for any charge. Sound familiar?
Main difference between us. I object to both.
BTW, reading the rest of your comment.. How will an impeachment stop Trump from "exploiting peoples suffereing" in the event of the likely economic decline we face? BTW, "expolting", in this case, would be telling the truth.
January 12, 2021Updated: January 12, 2021
President Donald Trump told reporters outside the White House on Tuesday that the fresh Democrat push for a second impeachment is part of a long-running campaign against him that is fueling anger among his supporters.
“On the impeachment, it’s really a continuation of the greatest witch hunt in the history of politics,” Trump said. “It’s ridiculous. It’s absolutely ridiculous. This impeachment is causing tremendous anger, and you’re doing it and it’s really a terrible thing that they’re doing.”
Democrats on Monday released a resolution charging Trump with “incitement of insurrection,” accusing Trump of inspiring the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol. Trump in a speech that day called for supporters to go to the Capitol, but stressed they should stay peaceful.
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, the president reiterated his call for peace, saying, “we want absolutely no violence.”
Democrats have been trying to pressure Vice President Mike Pence and the Cabinet to remove Trump by invoking the 25th Amendment. A source told The Epoch Times that Pence doesn’t support the move. A House Republican on Monday blocked a resolution that called on Pence to invoke the amendment.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told colleagues in a recent letter that if Pence and a majority of the Cabinet don’t invoke the 25th Amendment, Democrats plan to move forward with another impeachment.
Trump told reporters outside the White House that, “for Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to continue on this path, I think it’s causing tremendous danger to our country and it’s causing tremendous anger.”
“I want no violence,” he added.
Later, after his arrival at the Joint Base Andrews prior to his departure for Alamo, Texas, Trump was asked about his responsibility for the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, in which a number of people lost their lives. Trump rejected the suggestion that he egged on the crowd to commit violence, saying that his speech was “totally appropriate.”
“They’ve analyzed my speech and my words and my final paragraph, my final sentence, and everybody to a T thought it was totally appropriate,” Trump said before boarding Air Force One.
In his speech on Jan. 6, Trump accused media and big tech of abusing their power and interfering in the election, while reiterating his claim that he was cheated out of an electoral win.
“All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical left Democrats, which is what they’re doing and stolen by the fake news media,” Trump said. “That’s what they’ve done and what they’re doing. We will never give up. We will never concede.”
While the president said, “We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” his remarks seemed to be in reference to political engagement and he later made clear that the day’s protest was to remain peaceful.
“We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated,” Trump said. “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
At the end of his speech, he urged people to “walk down Pennsylvania Avenue” and “try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
In Alamo, Trump is expected to deliver remarks about his immigration efforts
metmike: Another Witch hunt? This time they found a witch!
Should we burn the witch in front of family members and give them the finger to enrage them.............or let the witch go?
isn't it amazing....
on his first day in office, in the WH, some congress people already talked about impeaching him, and removing him from office... then came almost 3 years of Russia investigation... then came an impeachment, accusing him of doing something that Biden did...and now, with just a few days left, it's still impeachment time
Who is really the dividing force?
Sure, his mouth, his tweeting, his behavior, etc, have alienated a lot of people. However, it seems to me the bigger dilviding force in the country was the Democratic politicians... and most of all, the biggest dividing force in the country is our MSM. They never let a day go by without saying something bad about him
While all that was true before the election............it isn't now.
President Trump, during most of his 4 years had some extreme positives and extreme negatives that allowed each side to justify either supporting him or hating him.
And they both had some good points to support the position.
However, after losing the election, he completely lost touch with reality in a way that makes it clear to me, that he is suffering from a form of mental illness right now.
President Trump, if he were to go to a psychiatrist for an evaluation would likely get a clinically diagnosed case of Delusional Disorder, which is a form of mental illness.
Like with many disorders, they can get worse or better.
After his clear and devastating loss to Joe Biden, he has imagined circumstances that don't allow his mind to accept the reality.
Such a person should not be allowed to continue as president because they are mentally ill. However, with just a week to go in his term and the incredible risk of increasing the divisiveness of impeaching him to gain almost nothing while risking very little by letting him finish his last few days..... I still think that impeachment is a bad idea..........but totally understand that its justified. I have mixed feelings on this but want whats best to unify our country.
If he had more than a month to serve, I would strongly be for impeachment.
joj says: MM, I was not comparing Hitler to Trump. It's not even close. I was trying to wrap my head around the philosophy of Jesus, Gandhi, and Dr. King. I just can't get there. Evil must be combated. But no, Trump is not evil. He's just not to be trusted with power.
I expect Trump's political career to be over. My worry is that if we head into economic decline, he will be there to exploit people's suffering."
I think that you have made more solid and profound points than everybody else combined the last 2 months.
You made a several above.
1. Yes, Jesus, Gandhi and Dr. King are the examples of perfection when dealing with issues like this. It's easy for me to quote them.......so much harder to actually do what they advise and did themselves.
2. Yes, Trump is not evil but his desire for power and especially the desperation from his loss of it......... has caused him to act in such a dispicable way that we can no longer trust him. I'm no psychiatrist but am confident that this loss has pushed him into mental illness described above.
3. Yes, on him possibly exploiting future events to benefit himself. If the economy tanks for instance(I think this is where your coming from) I can envision him comparing it to his pre-COVID economy or his economic policies. I could potentially agree with it if it involves something legit about taxes or energy or shutdowns(or I might not agree with the position). But the last person that I want to hear tell us about it is Donald Trump.
The last person that I ever want us to hear anything about is Donald Trump.
This loss has turned a very mild form of mental illness that allowed him to still function at a high level of effectiveness, applying some of his abilities to accomplish positive things............into a serious clinical from of Delusional Disorder.
In order for such a person to recover/get better, they usually need professional treatment but the most important requirement, is that they have to acknowledge there is a problem and want to get better.
Because of his massive ego and narcism, he is not capable of the humility needed to get better.
This is why I assume that his future opinions and statements will likely be coming from a untreated, diseased stricken brain.
This probably, mainly sounds shocking to people that still believe that the election was stolen.
I don't think that everybody that thinks that is delusional. They just put their trust in a delusional persons word and many, many convincing sounding sources on the right that were motivated by politics to twist and manufacture facts. then repeat the false narratives and fake news relentlessly in unison/collaboration with all the other far right sources until people going there thought it was real.
sound shocking to me because those crass words describing
Trump had not been used for all the people that gladly tried to run a Presidential coup 4 years ago, Those words are never used to describe Harris, biden and co when telling 74 m Trump votesr they are Nazis and much less, sub-human and as Larry says "f==ck them all".
Now comes the left to shut down all debate if they can and they will with the various arms of the dem party like ,big tech, big media, big pharma so I am not too sure why you all feel so giddy but this country is not exactly in a giddy type of place
I hear you.
I also find it interesting that just a few days ago, Mr. Schwarzenegger was quoted here on this forum. He mentioned the events in Germany, in the 1930s
hasn't anyone noticed that there is some similarity between 2021 USA and Germany in the 1930s? Maybe not... it's not part of history taught in US schools.
Like then, we have one party who considers another group of citizens as "subhuman", as "scum"
Like then, we are slowly evolving into a society where all news is censored. A while back they gave opposing sites derrogative names..."alt-right".. or "far right'" or "conspiracy theorist sites". But now they are being shut down., one after another. Eventually, the only news and opinioins we will be allowed to hear is the government propaganda.
Just a few days ago, the daughter of McCain said that Trump supporters should be locked up in Gitmo
A few days earlier, a (left-leaning) person called into Foxnews. They discussed 'unity". The caller said (if I remember correctly) "We don't want to unify with you conservatives, we want to destroy you"
Yes,I do see some similarity between here in the 2021 USA, and the 1930s Germany.... and it's not Trump who is the Nazi.
If Mitch votes to convict and enough GOP follow suit with the Democrats, is that Unity?
Just asking? Lighten up everyone. :-)
I'll bet that Trump gets impeached.
When Trump came out for upping the checks from $600 to $2,000 check, he made Mitch and company look bad.......because they had negotiated the amount down to a paltry $600.
They have nothing to gain by supporting Trump anymore, other than maybe keeping his supporters happy.
The best thing that could happen would be for Trump to resign.
Best thing for the country for sure. If he is going to be impeached, it actually could be more appealing for him to not let them remove him from office.
However, that seems extremely unlikely with his huge ego. I think he wants to play the role of martyr. Somebody treated unfairly for 4 years and this is just the culmination of the abuse/Witch hunts and this plays well to his never give up on Trumpsters.
Another element which actually allows him to do this is the fact that they have already had 2 impeachments of Trump.
The one in 2017 went nowhere.
The 2nd one 2019/20 got him impeached by the House.
Both were pathetic, political attempts to destroy him.
But here we go again. Impeachment #3 this time.
If this were the first time, one might say that the dems waited until they had an impeachable offense.
But because of the 2 prior impeachments(attempts) it makes it look like the Democrats are more concerned with impeaching Trump rather than applying justice. or doing whats best for the country.
To summarize. There are currently no impeachable offenses. The dems have never proven impeachable offenses. (Hearsay and supposition is not evidence, even in an impeachment of a president you hate). There is no time to complete an impeachment before Trump's term is complete.
And I had to laugh at Joj's request that we lighten up. His tone has hardly been light in this or most other threads related to Trump.
If Mitch votes to convict and enough GOP follow suit with the Democrats, is that Unity?
Just asking? Lighten up everyone. :-)
NO Just answering
Ok, sorry to offend with my joke.
Trump lied about fraud and was slammed at every court hearing. Then he held a rally on the back of that lie and told everyone to march to the Capitol and fight like hell. Now, he may not have intended the ensuing result, although reports are that he was giddy about it and couldn't understand why his staff was not. But were it not for his unprecedented attempt to overturn the will of the people, none of this would happen.
If that isn't impeachable, what is?
Here is the first thing needed for healing.
Republicans have to declare that Biden won fair and square. (a majority have not)
and there goes joj with all his evidence.....but seems to call it "reports" wow does anyone remember that Russian 13 million dollar report that Hillary paid for that started this entire mess of impeachment talk???? Pathetic, this whole mess is pathetic and Obama, biden, Clinton clapper, brennan and commey should be so damn proud right now as should a huge percent of the left.
And there it is again. The liberal idea of unity is for everyone else to just shut up. Then there will be peace in the valley.
In spite of the fact that I have explained, numerous times, using constitutional reference, that evidence of a crime is required for impeachment, JOJ will rely on anonomous reports of the president being "Giddy". I need to see the paragraph, passage, statute that outlaws "Giddyness" assuming it even occured. Crappy behavior, if true, but if illegal, it can be applied to most democrats on the hill on a reguar basis.
Finally, as there is far more "evidence" on Hunter's laptop and accompanying testimoney than there ever has been against Trump, using JOJ's standards for "evidence". we need to commence impeachment hearings on Biden as soon as he takes office.
Hunter Biden is president? Who knew?
Great answer. But there is evidence that the "Big Guy" refered to several times in assorted emails is Biden. This is corraborated by testimoney by involved parties. Nothing conclusive so far, but far more "evidence" than was ever found against Trump.
Have to agree in this case that the Republicans have to ALL come together with 1 voice and tell the country that Biden won fair and square if we want unity on that issue.
On impeachable offenses, joj describes it perfectly. If this wasn't impeachable, then what is?
OK, maybe colluding with Russia but he didn't do that (-:
On Hunter Biden's corruption. Yes, he is not Joe Biden but we see Joe Biden's influence almost every step of the way.
Joe did more than enable it, he was the reason for the big stuff and played some key roles, without him, it could not have happened.
He lied about not discussing it with Hunter.......which is no big deal except that somehow, lying about it means that we are supposed to believe him.
On impeachable offenses, joj describes it perfectly. If this wasn't impeachable, then what is?
We've had a lot of discussion on evidence of late. Let's continue.
Where is the evidence to support impeachment of Trump? What laws has he broken?
Unless you feel laws need not play a role in impeachment.
If you want a specific law Tim, then here it is:
Regardless of specific laws, the way that Trump has acted, the last 2 months makes him completely unfit to be president.
He took the results of a legal election, the epitome of our democracy and tried to use lies and propaganda and his influence to convince people to overturn the results so that he won instead of lost.
If that isn't an abuse of power for self serving interests at the expense of our democracy, then what is?
That was bad enough. Then he got tens of millions of people that believed his lies (entirely because he is the president) so enraged that they rioted.
He may have used some verbiage along the way about staying peaceful in between his more powerful language telling people to act aggressively because the election was stolen from him.
I've always loved Geraldo and the way he describes it is perfect!
Fox News’s Geraldo Rivera is calling for President Trump to be impeached, accusing the president of lighting “a fuse that exploded in the U.S. Capitol” in the wake of the violent riot in the U.S. Capitol last week.
Rivera, who had previously been a close Trump ally, said in a video shared on Twitter Wednesday that he had a “eureka moment,” adding that “my loyalty toward Donald Trump, my old friend, was misplaced when it comes to what happened last Wednesday."
He also referenced a Tuesday tweet in which he described Trump as “a loyal friend hounded without mercy by Democrats intent on destroying him from day one.”
“That’s what happened, they hounded him from day one. But then he lost the election, and losing the election made Donald Trump crazy. It revealed the disfunction in him that I had refused to see,” Rivera said in the video.
"But in some cases, people with delusional disorder might become so preoccupied with their delusions that their lives are disrupted."
President Trump is mentally ill!
You believe he "incited a riot". In his speech, he asked for peaceful demonstration. More than once.
His off the wall accusations and presumptions were just that, but you can't argue that he incited a riot when, several times, he asked for peaceful demonstration.
This is all political theater and many are getting sucked in. He's out in a week. He'll never be able to come back. But even if that were not the case, he has broken no laws and this is political theater.
Why argue over the exact verbiage Tim?
There is no question what happened and why it happened and who caused it.
His insistence that the election was stolen for 2 months and the dispicable, dishonest tactics, abusing his power as the president, that he used that entire time is way more than enough evidence that he should be impeached.
You don't think this was impeachable?
He has the right to contest the results using legal challenges but he went so far beyond that..............making stuff up, losing every time after time after time.............then continuing to make stuff up and sell it to the American people as the truth because he is the president.
We need to get a person abusing his role as the president this way the heck out of office ASAP.
But I agree, with just days to go in this term, it might be counterproductive.
He's only got a few more days in the WH. He is most likely busy packing his belongings and playing a few rounds of golf.
you wrote: "..This is all political theater...."
this is exactly what it is.
I learned from a television-script writer in the family, that a good story has its beginning and ending connected, like a bridge. In this case, the story starts with Impeachment demands on his first day in office, and it ends with him being impeached on his way out... perfect! The script for the upcoming movie "Trump must go" practically wrote itself (with a lot of help from Trump himself).
However, while the current rush to impeachment, removal from office, etc, may be all political theater, in reality, it will probably alienate the 75 million people who voted for Trump even more. But maybe, that's what they want... more division, more unrest...
What did Saul Alinsky teach?
This would be a perfect environment for someone to set up a "false flag" event. Let's see what happens.
What is also being completely over looked is the massive
permanent, damage done to the confidence in our democratic process.........voting results.
President Trump is solely responsible for much of it the past 2 months.
Sadly, this is his legacy and what he will be remembered for the most. .........not any of the good things he did the previous 4 years.
Why argue over the exact verbiage Tim?
In discussion of legal matters, exact verbiage is often, if not always relevant. In matters of opinion, not so much. You're of the opinion that Trump caused the riots therefore he should be impeached.
I'll use your argument. IMO, Obama's speeches caused, or at least added to the Ferguson riots, among others. So, Obama should have been impeached, right?
Or, would we both be commiting a logical falicy in holding the president responsible for the actions of a mob?
The way the actual law works in this case. I'll never vote for Trump again. I suspect that is true for a vast majority.
Tim Obama did indeed have speeches that were far more incendiary than Trump. But that is nothing compared to what Obama and Biden in the summer of 16 right thru the inaguration of Trump when they were hip deep in the coup attempt with many deep staters. And if the justice was handed out equally to all in this country many of those people would be in jail right now