When Caligula appointed his horse as a senator of Rome, it wasn’t because he was insane, it was to troll the senate by suggesting a horse could do their job.
Same thing here.
So if those 74-million voters don’t get the President they want they’re disenfranchised? Tough titty.
Schoen’s got some serious dry mouth going on. He’s licking his lips every 2.3 seconds…
Long after their service has ended? It’s been three weeks.
Hmmm… my cat does that before she’s about to throw up. Somebody better stand by with the garbage can.
But at least he’s not sniffing, amirite?
It’s the best Trump can do at this point. Remember how many lawyers have quit working for him in just the past month.
It’s hard to find lawyers willing to work without guarantee of payment.
Yeah. We all know Trump likes to watch TV about himself. Wonder if this guy speaking is going to be out of a job tonight and Trump will be shopping for yet another lawyer…
Ah, but he was probably speaking “metaphorically”, right? He didn’t really mean physically arrest him, right? Right? [/sarcasm]
Might have to happen after New York gets done with him.
Yes, but Caligula appointed a horse, not an ass…
They had that president for four years. Now 81 other voters get the guy they wanted.
It really is, isn’t it? And I turned on Fox after the Democrats finished their presentation and it took a long time for them to start pissing me off.
Chris Wallace dominated the conversation and he sounded just like a Democrat, praising every one of the presentations as well as the decision to run that video presentation during the procedural phase of the trial.
He was smiling, smirking almost…he think he really doesn’t like Trump. Then they had Jonathan Turley on, who ranted a little bit about how he wrote that article they quoted 20 years ago and he’s changed his mind for some unspecified reason, probably IOKWARDI. But it was still lame.
That pissed me off a little, so I changed the channel. I still flip over to Fox every now and then to see what they’re up to, but I turn the channel for the sake of my health when they start to piss me off. Usually I don’t make it a full minute, but I made for a while today.
Let me bravely state for the record that I am fully on board with the idea that citizens who instigate insurrection be barred from running for office.
That was my feeling when I heard that. So, if we follow that line of reasoning, all the McCain voters were disenfranchised in 2008, all the Gore voters were disenfranchised in 2000, all the Bush Sr. voters were disenfranchised in 1992, and so on. Yet, while there may have been grumbling, all those voters accepted the result, and moved on. And voted the next time they could. If you can vote, you’re not disenfranchised.
But now, voters are being “disenfranchised” if their candidate doesn’t win? Tough titty indeed.
Except for those three precedents mentioned upthread.
By that thinking, we have 66-million voters who disenfranchised in 2016. I guess he’s advocating eliminating the EC going by popular vote.
Schoen keeps talking about how divisive the decision to impeach was. As if nothing that’s happened during the previous four years wasn’t deliberately divisive?
So the headline on CNN at the moment is:
“The former president’s defense lawyers say the reason for the trial is to prevent Trump from running for office again.”
Is this the gist of what Trump’s lawyer said? Really?
Because yes. Yes that’s actually rather the point. If a president has incited a violent mob to attack legislators who are certifying a valid election… All because he does not like the fact he lost the election… and he is trying to destroy the process of the peaceful transition of power using a violent mob…
Then yes, he should be barred from ever running again. To belabour the case: THAT’S THE ENTIRE FUCKING POINT OF THIS TRIAL. And this is their “defense”?
It’s like a criminal defense attorney saying to the jury… “OK, let’s just ignore the facts of the armed robbery, in which my client was actually on video holding up the bank teller. The only reason for this trial is that the prosecution wants to put my client in jail!!! Can you believe that?! So you should let my client go, because the prosecution are meanies.”
I’m sorry, are you suggesting that the former president’s lawyer is making a … completely hypocritical argument? Why, I never! I say, I never! [faints]
Schoen also keeps trying to argue this as if it is a criminal matter and the “Defendant” is entitled to all the same protections under the law as a criminal defendant. That’s disingenuous as hell. Trump will not be deprived of his “life or liberty.” Only deprived of running for office again.
Why is this guy putting his hand on his head when drinking? I thought this might be the Jewish lawyer holding his kippur on as he tips his head back but it doesn’t look like he’s wearing one.
I’ve said before that Republicans – I’m assuming the guy’s a Republican because he’s saying all this with a straight face – are quite capable of talking out both sides of their ass at the same time.
If Trump didn’t want to be constantly under the threat of impeachment, he shouldn’t have committed so many impeachable offenses.
You gotta love the argument that the impeachment in the house was rushed, but the senate is proceeding without all the information and a full investigation. So basically the president can do whatever it is that he wants for at least a few months before he leaves office as that’s a dead zone of accountability. As intended by the founding fathers, I guess.
Damn that Nancy Pelosi! She should have sent the articles of impeachment to the Senate ASAP! Because we know Mitch would have jumped on the case like it was a SCOTUS nomination.