• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

McConnell unloads on Trump: 'Morally responsible' for provoking mob

Got a link to that, the link I had said it differently.
 
Can you believe this ****ing guy? First he not only voted to acquit. He even announced his intention to do so before the vote was even taken. Then once the vote is taken and surprise surprise, Trump is acquitted, he immediately comes out and says point blank that Trump was guilty as sin of having provoked the insurrection that he was charged with having provoked in the article of impeachment and that maybe somebody should arrest and try him. Right after he had just basically let him walk. Somebody stop that man! I won't! Republicans like McConnell is why the Republican party has descended into an anti-democratic bigoted cesspool of QAnon conspiracy theory loving crazies. Cause all he cares about is holding on to power. Whatever the means.
exactly

party above country
 
If people are saying that an impeachment trial is unconstitutional - it is saying that the last month in office POTUS has a "get out of jail free card" .And that is ridiculous.

It's a loophole we never had to address because we haven't had a situation like this one, so like many unprecedented scenarios before, government needs to sort it out.
 
McConnell has joined the ranks of tantrum throwing bad losers. Disgusting.
 
no, he was impeached as President, constitution requires that there be a trial, which this was.

There was no trial.
 
Are not both arguments speculation?

Mine makes more sense.

Not at all, a President, once he leaves office, is 100% a private citizen....the fact that seems to be lost on everyone.
 

Cool, so thank you for verifying it does not say FORMER PRESIDENTS in the impeachment clause, kinda what I thought already.
 
Not at all, a President, once he leaves office, is 100% a private citizen....the fact that seems to be lost on everyone.

The precedent has already been set. A former office holder in any of the election branches can be impeached, even if out of office.
There is no logical reason why Congress would impeach anyone else.

None. What would be the grounds?

The whole idea is absurd.
 
Cool, so thank you for verifying it does not say FORMER PRESIDENTS in the impeachment clause, kinda what I thought already.

That argument was thoroughly dismantled in the opening arguments.

You're beating a dead horse.
 
Not at all, a President, once he leaves office, is 100% a private citizen....the fact that seems to be lost on everyone.

...and what does that have to do with anything?

If you committed murder in Texas 20 years ago and now live in Arizona, don't you think Texas is going to want to try you for a crime committed in their state even though you are no longer citizen there nor a continuing threat to Texas? Yes, they will.

Trump was impeached as a sitting president. The fact that he was a private citizen when it came time for the trial is beyond moot.
 
...and what does that have to do with anything?

If you committed murder in Texas 20 years ago and now live in Arizona, don't you think Texas is going to want to try you for a crime committed in their state even though you are no longer citizen there nor a continuing threat to Texas? Yes, they will.

Trump was impeached as a sitting president. The fact that he was a private citizen when it came time for the trial is beyond moot.

Why the hell are you talking about a legal case, and trying to compare it to a political one?
 
That argument was thoroughly dismantled in the opening arguments.

You're beating a dead horse.

You realize Congress does not get to say what's constitutional right?
 
You realize Congress does not get to say what's constitutional right?

You realize that SCOTUS won't touch a lawsuit based on an action that is political in nature, especially where there is no rights issues, right?

Therefore, Congress's interpretation of impeachment regarding impeaching a former president ( while he was president ) but tried in the Senate post presidency ( deliberately by McConnell, since he could have tried it before Jan 20, but refused ) will not be challenged by SCOTUS. per the political question doctrine. (Google it, I've linked to it many times).

Therefore, your question is moot.
 
ol moscow mitch can bad mouth trump all he wants, bottom line is he didnt have the balls to vote to convict. bottom line end of story

I saw another republiCON senator last night: "He is guilty. Somebody who is not me should convict him."
 
It's a loophole we never had to address because we haven't had a situation like this one, so like many unprecedented scenarios before, government needs to sort it out.
Well hopefully the next ten years of his life will be spent in civil and criminal courts for all the crap he has pulled .
 
Why the hell are you talking about a legal case, and trying to compare it to a political one?

Funny, I have the same question for you .... what the hell does Trump's being out of office have to do with anything. He was impeached as sitting president. Its the Senate's task to determine if the charges are "true" (for the historic record), rise to the level that he should be removed and forever barred from holding office. Trump being a private citizen when the trial is held if moot.
 
Funny, I have the same question for you .... what the hell does Trump's being out of office have to do with anything. He was impeached as sitting president. Its the Senate's task to determine if the charges are "true" (for the historic record), rise to the level that he should be removed and forever barred from holding office. Trump being a private citizen when the trial is held if moot.

Removed from what?
 

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Saturday unleashed blistering criticism of former President Trump, blaming him for sparking the attack on the Capitol while also explaining why he didn't vote for a conviction.

McConnell also suggested that Trump could face criminal prosecution for his actions.
"There's no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people that stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president," McConnell said.”




i guess Mitch is not worried about Trump running in 2024. Too bad he did not have the courage to stand by his conviction. The Republican Party has been damaged severely an once again Trump made this country look like a failing and foolish empire with the help of the republican party
McConnel is just a two-faced, spineless politician. He says all this stuff, but didn't vote to convict Trump when he had the chance. He's just in it for Party and Power, nothing more.
 
Since McConnell felt that strongly, he should have voted to convict. How cowardly that he didn't.
It's pretty obvious he was politically posturing and thinks his Never Trumpers should be in charge of the GOP.
 
I don't know anything, I know the House gave it over on the 25th.....but let' say they gave it on the 18th, on the 21st, Trump was no longer President, what power does Congress have to impeach a private citizen?

Mitch is just butthurt that even after leaving office, Trump has more sway with the republican base then he does.
 
"Removed" obviously was not a concern; but barred from future office was.....

I guess it depends on how you read this,

" Article II, section 4 provides that officers impeached and convicted “shall be removed from office”; Article I, section 3, clause 7 provides further that “judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”

Bolded is mine, but it seems to read that when impeached disqualification follows AFTER removal, and without removal, you don't get to disqualification........ it's a moot point now, but an interesting discussion nonetheless.
 
McConnel is just a two-faced, spineless politician. He says all this stuff, but didn't vote to convict Trump when he had the chance. He's just in it for Party and Power, nothing more.
I couldn’t agree more. This is the swamp acting up
 
Not at all, a President, once he leaves office, is 100% a private citizen....the fact that seems to be lost on everyone.
 
Back
Top Bottom