Post-inauguration impeachment

I keep hearing/reading this. As if once he is no longer president he could not be then charged and prosecuted (in a regular court, so admittedly under a higher standard of proof) for illegal things he did while president. I don’t see how that follows.

IOKWARDI

I’m pretty sure he is not capable of assessing the truth-value of a statement. There are just statements he approves of, and statements that make him feel good, vs statements that make him angry, that he doesn’t approve of, and/or that make him momentarily uncomfortable until he rejects them.

He doesn’t approve of any statements that Biden won, that he lost, or that, if Biden wound up with more votes, he got them fairly, so he denies those statements and says the opposite, which sounds and feels better.

Go a step deeper (you’ll want to wear an old pair of shoes). Why are so many conservatives fighting Trump on this issue? Normally, they’re happy to blame any crime on the Democrats.

What happens if Trump succeeds in convincing people that there’s massive election fraud going on in this country? Suppose people decide we need safeguards against election fraud.

Which party benefits more overall from election fraud?

This is basically the key to understanding Trump, and it’s why simply calling him a “liar” is reductive and misleading.

Yeah. He’s delusional. I think at some a person can spew so much bullshit, they HAVE to start believing it. To seem honest, a con man must at least appear to believe in the con. Trump has conned himself into believing.

That, and his ego is so yuge that he simple can’t accept that he lost. Win by cheating? Well, that’s the Trump way and just shows that I’m a better cheater (almost typed Cheeto) than everyone else.

I agree with this, except for the first sentence. I think Trump is able to assess truth-value. It’s just that, due to his mammoth narcissism he (1) filters everything through his interminable confirmation bias and, even more, (2) he just does not think the rules that apply to everyone else apply to him. Most of the time I think he knows damn well he’s lying, but that just doesn’t matter, because for him and his - but not for you and yours or anyone else - truth v lie is irrelevant.

The key to understanding Trump is what happened right before the first Biden debate, when his kids, et al, walked into the room and promptly took off their masks, even though the house rules said people had to wear them and everyone else was. The rules that apply to other people, and that they will insist other people follow, don’t apply to them. And valuing truth over lies is just another one of those rules. That’s the Trump way.

What Republicans want is to make sure the “wrong people” don’t vote. They have no interest in stopping their own gerrymandering or other schemes. When you hear Republicans wanting more safeguards against voter fraud, what they mean is they want more voter suppression.

I understand that. My point is that the Republicans need voter fraud to win elections. They haven’t had a genuine popular mandate since Reagan.

So the last thing the Republican leadership wants is Trump yelling about voter fraud. He might actually convince some of the people in the Republican base that he’s right (some of these people are pretty stupid).

Normally the Republican leaders don’t worry about what the Republican base is saying. But if a significant number of people in the Republican base decide that voter fraud is a problem, the Democrats will be more than happy to throw their weight behind them.

Which was a yuuge headache in the lead-in to the Georgia runoff, since the party leaders realized that having DJT poison the well about the election itself would work against them.

The Republican establishment wants to game the system from within, not bring it crashing down. But they now face a base that was promised they’d see things crashing down and by God they’re going to bring something crashing down even if it crashes down on them!

The problem is a lot of people in the Republican base are not all that bright. They look at maps like this and say “But…how did we lose? We’re red and there’s more red.” And a lot of them live in small communities where everyone they see is a rural white conservative - just like they are. So they must be the majority, right? And it they’re the majority and they didn’t win, the other side must have cheated.

They don’t understand how there are more people living in a single borough of New York City than are living in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming combined.

And if they do grasp a little bit of that… They are pretty sure that those people should not be entitled to a vote because… reasons.

Because them folks don’t unnerstand how real workin’ people live.

The point the Dems are not making, and I don’t know why they aren’t pushing it harder, is that he was impeached while still President, it’s just that the trial itself is happening after he left office.

It would shut down the …har har next week the Dems will impeach Andrew Jackson…narrative.

Yes, I wish they’d make that point more often and more clearly.

Not sure if this is the right thread, but:

Trump (or his lawyer’s) say he won’t testify under oath at the impeachment trial. Can’t he be subpoenaed and forced to? If he were actually still president there might be an executive privilege argument, but he lost that on 2020/01/20 AFAIK.

From what I’ve read, it’s not a settled question. The Supreme Court has established that former presidents do still hold some degree of executive privilege after leaving office. But the issue of who has the final say has never been decided.

There was an issue of calling some members of the George W. Bush administration to testify when Obama was president. Bush invoked executive privilege and said that he retained the right to do so over his administration. Obama said that as the incumbent president, he had the final say on executive privilege and he could waive it even in regards to former presidents’ administrations. In that specific case, the issue was resolved through a negotiated deal so it was not established which position was right.

Trump might also plead the Fifth if called to testify. Could get even more complicated, given the courts’ traditional deference to the Senate in conducting impeachment trials.

And see:

Yep. The Trumpers are already beating those drums. It’s all about political loyalty. Truth has no place.

Yep. Make the debate rules so the person can’t be interrupted, then ignore that and continue to interrupt because they can’t stop you. Other side obeys the rule, you win.

Cheating is only bad when you do it badly. And Trump doesn’t do anything badly, right? So Cheating is just another way of winning, and winning is all that’s important.

Yes. Black people registering to vote = voter fraud. Democrats collecting ballots = voter fraud. Republicans collecting ballots = righteous people aiding democracy.

Different kinds of voter fraud in action. Preventing Democrats from being able to register, or kicking them off rolls, or imposing difficult voting conditions in their precincts (like limited voting sites, limited hours, etc), demanding photo ID to vote are all different than the kind of fraud they scream about. “Fraud” is pretending you are registered when you are not, or pretending to be someone you are not, or adding votes from dead people, or voting for someone else before they vote so their vote doesn’t count, or sending in dozens of mail-in ballots for people who don’t know you got one in their name. It’s not “fraud” to limit polling places, or purge voter rolls, or discourage poor people by making them have to take time off of work to travel to distant government offices to file paperwork. Those are “legitimate” efforts to aid the election process. :face_with_raised_eyebrow: :roll_eyes:

The Dems are definitely considering subpoening him, and they have threatened that if he refuses to testify that will be held against him. Since this isn’t a criminal trial, he doesn’t get that protection. His unwillingness to testify in his own defense can be seen as an inability to provide a defense.