Trump: Convicted or Acquitted?

[Guinan]

Will Trump be convicted or acquitted? Vote in the poll and let's see if we can get a consensus here on CF of the trial's possible outcome. You can opine on his impeachment trial, if you would like.

 

[super animator]

How do you convict someone that is out of office? Isn't that a moot point?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

How do you convict someone that is out of office? Isn't that a moot point?

No, it's not moot. He can be prevented from running for federal office via a conviction. Of course, him being convicted of federal crimes such as RICO and serving a prison sentence would prevent that, too.

I personally don't think he will be, however. I'll be shocked if he actually is.

 

[SkyWriting]

How do you convict someone that is out of office? Isn't that a moot point?

Crimes of insurrection or political purpose don't vaporize when the politician resigns. There are still political punishments available.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Will Trump be convicted or acquitted? Vote in the poll and let's see if we can get a consensus here on CF of the trial's possible outcome. You can opine on his impeachment trial, if you would like.

He won't be convicted because there are not enough votes. Impeachments are one of the poorest ways to discover the truth about the guilt or innocence of the person being accused. The person accused might well be totally guilty and be free of consequences or be completely innocent and convicted falsely all based upon political calculations and not upon factual evidence. If one is serious about punishing wrongdoings one does not impeach when it becomes possible to prosecute. Impeachment is only useful while a person is still in office and the justice system cannot prosecute. The impeachment process is not supposed to be a punishment based law enforcement system it is meant to remove people from office so that the person can be prosecuted. Congress is meant to be a legislative body not a law enforcement or Judicial body. Whenever possible , which is 99% of the time, Congress should avoid taking on judicial or law enforcement roles and leave them to their proper branches.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Crimes of insurrection or political purpose don't vaporize when the politician resigns. There are still political punishments available.

Wouldn't criminal punishments be more impressive? Why waste time and money just to show the world how vindictive one is?

 

[SkyWriting]

Wouldn't criminal punishments be more impressive?
Why waste time and money just to show the world how vindictive one is?

There is no legal merit to either question.

This is not a debate forum we are discussing.

 

[grasping the after wind]

There is no legal merit to either question.

This is not a debate forum we are discussing.

There is no ethical or moral merit to the idea that vindictiveness is a reasonable use of the impeachment process and no legal merit to the idea that mind reading is good, solid, objective evidence.

 

[SkyWriting]

There is no ethical or moral merit to the idea that vindictiveness is a reasonable use of the impeachment process and no legal merit to the idea that mind reading is good, solid, objective evidence.

So your claim of vindictiveness is your legal view based on solid evidence?

What about insurrection to overthrow the election results? Fact based that?

I know your pain. I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace.

We have to have law and order. We have to have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt. It’s a very tough period of time. There’s never been a period of time like this where such a thing happened where they could take it a way from all of us: from me, from you, from our country.

This was a fraudulent election, but we can’t play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens. You see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel, but go home and go home in peace.
President Donald Trump

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Wouldn't criminal punishments be more impressive? Why waste time and money just to show the world how vindictive one is?

They can do both.

Not only that but if the House and Senate feel the president has overstepped his bounds and committed an impeachable offense then they have a sworn duty to uphold the constitution and hold the president accountable for his actions. Holding someone to account isn’t about vengeance, it’s about upholding the law.

 

[rambot]

How do you convict someone that is out of office? Isn't that a moot point?

The murder already happenned; Why try someone?

Just because a job title changes, doesn't mean you didn't commit impropriety while you held that position.

I haven't yet figured out why we should simply NOT prosecute Trump for improper things like in office.

The Emoluents clause nonsense is another CLASS CASE. What a GREAT way to set up nepotism and profiteering from your highest office. I mean really. All any president needs to do is LITERALLY anything they want, and then just keep kicking the legal consequences a bit further down the road until their term is done. Then, once out of office, they can't be tried.

It's so strange. I always thought their were amazing checks and balances in place in the US when it comes to application of power. But it truly seems like a LOT has changed in the last 4 years. I don't KNOW if it's just that I'm older, but it truly seemed like Trump got away with a lot to these regards.

 

[rambot]

oh yeah...and there's no way he'll be found guilty.

I honestly can't remember the last time a Republican was held accountable for some impropriety from their party. But it's not something I look closely at.
I mean, the last few Republicans that were held accountable, were held accountable by a COURT and the Republican party has just been crying about their innocence or (as on CF) just TOTALLY ignoring their guilt.

The last democrat I can think of was Al Franken. And frankly, he was held to an outrageously high standard given the behaviour of his political opponents.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Trump should of been convicted the first . But Republicans rather please Trump supporters. And for Trumps last terrorist act he called his supporters to do . He should be convicted. But. I doubt Republicans can do the right thing.

 

[super animator]

How do you convict someone that is out of office? Isn't that a moot point?

The murder already happenned; Why try someone?

That is not remotely the same. The senate trial is a completely political process not a legal one.

 

[Guinan]

Personally, I think Trump will be acquitted because I don't think that the Republican politicians in his pocket will vote to convict him. He definitely incited violence and egged his supporters on during his first speech when he told his supporters, "We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.” He also said, “We want to go back, and we want to get this right because we’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed, and we’re not going to stand for that.” He complained about the Republicans who wouldn't stand with him in his attempts to overturn the election. He called them "weak" and "pathetic." He riled up his supporters in his first speech at the Capitol with more false claims that the election was stolen.

 

[rambot]

That is not remotely the same. The senate trial is a completely political process not a legal one.

All the more reason to try. Because really impeachments are not solely about the person holding the office. Impeachments are meant to maintain the integrity of the office of President. Otherwise a president can run roughshod and then leave office and not be held accountable.

 

[Strathos]

There's no way they'll convict him if they didn't last time.

 

[trunks2k]

He won't be convicted, I think Republicans have made it clear that they have no intention of voting guilty. However, I expect there to be a few Republican votes in favor, which AFAIK would be the first time an impeached president had guilty votes from his own party.

 

[durangodawood]

R senators wont convict. Most of them are intimidated by the Trump core of R voters.

 

[Arcangl86]

He won't be convicted, I think Republicans have made it clear that they have no intention of voting guilty. However, I expect there to be a few Republican votes in favor, which AFAIK would be the first time an impeached president had guilty votes from his own party.

Second time. Romney voted to convict last time.