1. Trump won't be convicted in the Senate, so the House impeachment is meaningless.
2. Trump won't be prosecuted by the DOJ because his speech did not break any laws.
3. It makes no sense for the senate to even hold a trial on Trump when the president is Joe Biden?!
4. Its just more partisan bullshit instead of fixing SS & Medicare and the Budget, and the economy, etc.
Oh, it's partisan to take a coup attempt seriously?
I've given 2 reasons why impeaching him regardless of who is president is a good thing.
As to prosecution. You might be right although the language in the statutes dealing with insurrection can be interpreted in a way that makes Trump responsible. It comes down to if a prosecutor can prove intent. I don't know if they can make that stick but neither can you.
1. It was a protest of election fraud "stop the steal" before some idiots attacked Congress. If it was a coup attempt they would have had guns instead of flags.
2. Very good. I saw top DOJ lawyers say that what Trump said is not prosecutable. I believe them. Can you point to any language in the speech that proves intent of insurrection? Didn't think so.
1. A protest is peaceful. When there's violence they call it a riot. When that riot is political in nature they call it an insurrection when that insurrection is trying to achieve the installment of a usurper to the elected leader it is called an attempted coup.
COUP | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
2. You saw top lawyers who as of this moment are still working for this president saying it is not prosecutable. Before any actual investigation into intent was done by the way.
As to what I can show.
(27) ‘You’ll never take back our country with weakness’ - Trump encourages supporters before protest - YouTube
I can show that the government response when the violence started was delayed. I can show Trump tweeted that the protest was gonna be wild and I can show that even when they rioted he didn't initially condemn them. There is of course other possible information that I'm not privy to that might be helpful in proving intent. The point is neither of us knows if a prosecutor can make a case for intent.
1. A coup is what the democrats have been doing to Trump for 4-years:
Trump's presidency was a miracle in itself, the biggest upset in US election history. Hillary and the DNC actually colluded with and paid Russians for "dirt" on Trump, the "Steele Dossier". Obama used the power of the DOJ, FBI, CIA and other Federal agencies to illegally spy on and setup Trump for failure. Operations Crossfire Hurricane and Razor, the Mueller Investigation, Russian Collusion Hoax, the MSM's constant 95% negative coverage and "fake news", Never-Trump Republicans, the Lincoln Project, globalists of every stripe, the entrenched Deep State who all oppose Trump's policies, the planted leakers and whistle-blowers, and the RINOs who'd rather shill for K-Street than work for main street. Then add to all of that the outright hatred shown by the House democrats toward Trump, to the point of "non-crime" Impeachment Articles, twice!! Yeah, I'd say all of that qualifies as a "coup".
2. The top DOJ lawyers worked for Barr, not Trump. Stop dreaming about "intent". Hillary's bathroom server didn't prove intent, so Trump has nothing to worry about.
The Justice Department does not plan on seeking incitement charges against President Trump for his actions at the rally that led up to Wednesday's attack on the Capitol.
abcnews.go.com
1. So you object to me asserting that breaking into the Capitol building. An action where a cop is beaten to death in order to stop the election certification can be called a coup although it fits the dictionaries definition of the word. But have no problem describing the process provided in the constitution for deposing an elected official as such? Can't say I follow the logic.
2. Yes and the DC attorney General IS investigating Trump for it. So if one lawyer claims something won't happen it seems weird that another is willing to try.
1. I don't object to you calling it a coup, you can call it anything you like. I'm saying that it wasn't a coup attempt, it was voters expressing anger at a crooked election. If it was a coup they would have had guns instead of flags.
coup d'état
a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.
Hint: no one made any moves to change the government, no one said "I'm in-charge" of the government. It was a protest that got out of control, nothing more. It was much less violent than the summer riots.
No one was paying attention that the election needs to be investigated.
– democrats spent four years calling Trump a “traitor” and a
“Russian agent”
– They called him
“illegitimate”
– They said he stole the 2016 election with Russian help.
– They impeached him for Biden’s extortion Burisma in Ukraine
– democrats denied the violence of Antifa and BLM
– For nine months that violence raged
– Nadler said it was a
“myth”
– Hoyer
denied Antifa was violent
– They said Antifa
doesn’t exist
– Antifa
raided and burned the Federal building in Portland while people were inside. No democrat even blinked an eye
– Antifa
vandalized Federal property in Philadelphia
– During the violence in Minneapolis, Kamala Harris was
asking for help bailing out the rioters
– Antifa/BLM burned the nation’s Capitol, including a Church, democrats weren’t especially bothered.
Remember this from Kenosha?
–
30 people have died in that mythical violence, among them David Dorn and Patrick Underwood.
– As Minneapolis burned in the background, Ali Velshi kept telling us it was “not unruly”
– Those mythical riots caused between
$1-2 billion in damages
2. The DC AG can investigate, and even indict, but the DOJ lawyers say no crime was committed.
More partisan abuse of power, no worries.
