Are Trump protests finished?

[demographic]

Well, Mich McConnell seemed pretty convinced of Donalds guilt, he just claimed they couldn't convict him after he was out of office.


"WASHINGTON — Senator Mitch McConnell said he believed that Donald J. Trump was undeniably guilty of a “disgraceful dereliction of duty” on Jan. 6, when he incited and then failed to do anything to halt a deadly assault on the Capitol.

“There’s no question — none — that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day,” Mr. McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, declared Saturday afternoon in an anti-Trump diatribe so scathing that it could have been delivered by any of the nine House prosecutors seeking a conviction.

But minutes before he spoke, when it came time for the most powerful Republican in Washington to hold Mr. Trump to account on the charge of causing the riot, Mr. McConnell said his hands were tied. It could not be done, he argued. He voted to acquit.

“We have no power to convict and disqualify a former officeholder who is now a private citizen,” Mr. McConnell, who said he reached that conclusion after “intense reflection,” said as he delivered a lawyerly explanation on the limits of Senate power.

Offering his most damning condemnation of Mr. Trump to date, Mr. McConnell accused the former president of spreading lies about a stolen election that he knew would stoke dangerous acts by his followers — though the senator said little about his own refusal for weeks to recognize President Biden’s victory, which helped create the conditions for Mr. Trump’s claims to continue to spread, unchallenged by top Republicans."

[wheelnut]

It will be interesting to see what happens next. Let’s see if they go after him for his business dealing or leave him be.

They’ll probably get him for tax evasion, it’s the usual American way.

[Yambo]

Well, Mich McConnell seemed pretty convinced of Donalds guilt, he just claimed they couldn't convict him after he was out of office.


"WASHINGTON — Senator Mitch McConnell said he believed that Donald J. Trump was undeniably guilty of a “disgraceful dereliction of duty” on Jan. 6, when he incited and then failed to do anything to halt a deadly assault on the Capitol.

“There’s no question — none — that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day,” Mr. McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, declared Saturday afternoon in an anti-Trump diatribe so scathing that it could have been delivered by any of the nine House prosecutors seeking a conviction.

But minutes before he spoke, when it came time for the most powerful Republican in Washington to hold Mr. Trump to account on the charge of causing the riot, Mr. McConnell said his hands were tied. It could not be done, he argued. He voted to acquit.

“We have no power to convict and disqualify a former officeholder who is now a private citizen,” Mr. McConnell, who said he reached that conclusion after “intense reflection,” said as he delivered a lawyerly explanation on the limits of Senate power.

Offering his most damning condemnation of Mr. Trump to date, Mr. McConnell accused the former president of spreading lies about a stolen election that he knew would stoke dangerous acts by his followers — though the senator said little about his own refusal for weeks to recognize President Biden’s victory, which helped create the conditions for Mr. Trump’s claims to continue to spread, unchallenged by top Republicans."

I wonder, just a little bit, what Mich McConnell's stance will be, as a senior Republican politician, when Trump decides he's going to run for president again next time round as a Republican.

I just wonder.

[demographic]

Dunno, thats one hell of a U turn if thats his plan.

Stranger things have happened though, especially in US politics so I guess we'll see over the next few years.

I suspect the Republicans in general (as opposed to the 15 or so % of them that love everything Donald says) just want to move on from whats basically an international embarrassment and try to win the next election.

Nailing their colours to the Donald mast just prolongs the defeat in the election to every day they whine about it. I suspect the Democrats are happy to let them do that.

We'll see I guess. <shrug>

[irie]

Dunno, thats one hell of a U turn if thats his plan.

Stranger things have happened though, especially in US politics so I guess we'll see over the next few years.

I suspect the Republicans in general (as opposed to the 15 or so % of them that love everything Donald says) just want to move on from whats basically an international embarrassment and try to win the next election.

Nailing their colours to the Donald mast just prolongs the defeat in the election to every day they whine about it. I suspect the Democrats are happy to let them do that.

We'll see I guess. <shrug>

Trump won't see it as a U turn.

Trump is a narcissist and will see it as trying to get back what was wrongfully taken from him.

I wonder, just a little bit, what Mich McConnell's stance will be, as a senior Republican politician, when Trump decides he's going to run for president again next time round as a Republican.

I just wonder.

Me too.

[DEADPOOL]

Showing videos of riots and the disgusting behavior of the rioters is hardly evidence that Trump instigated it though is it. It's simply evidence of rioting and disgusting behaviour.

You would have thought that when impeaching Trump they'd have had some real evidence that he was guilty of the charge but the didn't. I'd say the Democrats failed miserably considering the options.

Sadly it appears the truth is more mundane. They gave up once the defence insisted on having some semblance of a legal argument by introducing witnesses. I appreciate this is being flagged as if that was just to stop this charade being mired even further in confusion but no, it is because the entire impeachment relied on hearsay, rhetoric and emotion.

For example, five people died at this violent insurrection right? Including a police officer murdered in the line of duty.

Err. Turns out no. Two of these violent, dangerous invaders died from having a heart attack, another one got trampled in the rush (allegedly, even that might not be true) and the police officer died of a stroke, after going back to the station, a day later.

Only one person ended up being killed during the riot, she was shot in the chest.

Why is this important? Well, it's not. Not anymore. The carnival is over, the fat lady sang, end of story. The picture painted by the media narrative will be firmly etched in the minds of those who read the stories, watched the news, believed the hype. It's only later that the truth emerges and then of course, it's too late.

[wheelnut]

... it is because the entire impeachment relied on hearsay, rhetoric and emotion.

You're right. It did. Which was kind of the point.

[OBO]

Trumps attorney comes across as a decent human being...worth listening to the end.

[Mussels]

Interesting version of events, I'm surprised they didn't cut him off earlier.
I guess that showed that it was all just a political circus without the integrity expected in a real court.

[Horse]

Sadly it appears the truth is more mundane. .

For example, five people died at this violent insurrection right? Including a police officer murdered in the line of duty.

Err. Turns out no. ... violent, dangerous invader died from having a heart attack,

Was it true that one guy's heart attack was triggered by self-inflicted tazer to the testicles?

[Cousin Jack]

Sadly it appears the truth is more mundane.

Yes.

President lost.
President threw a hissy fit.
President did a fair number of very questionable things.
President's supporters (lunatic fringe division) had a riot.
President's hope of overturning election were dashed.
President's impeachment trial failed.


I think that is a fair summary

[demographic]

Was it true that one guy's heart attack was triggered by self-inflicted tazer to the testicles?

Just checked Snopes and it sez No.

[Horse]

Was it true that one guy's heart attack was triggered by self-inflicted tazer to the testicles?

Just checked Snopes and it sez No.

Amazing. The facts are hidden and the web sites with the truth are taken offline, again.

Oh, hang on, did you say 'no'?

[demographic]

Its a conspiracy I tell yeh!

[DEADPOOL]

Sadly it appears the truth is more mundane.

Yes.

President lost.
President threw a hissy fit.
President did a fair number of very questionable things.
President's supporters (lunatic fringe division) had a riot.
President's hope of overturning election were dashed.
President's impeachment trial failed.


I think that is a fair summary

Nope that's called spin. Two can play at that.

Mainstream media and big tech conspired to criticise Trump and promote Biden for years prior to and during the election
FBI and CIA also conspire under the direction of Obama/Hilary Clinton to invent Russian collusion
FBI, mainstream media and big tech bury a story about Hunter Biden being paid $100's of millions by the CCP
President did a number of very questionable things (hey you got one!)
President denied any opportunity to expose electioneering, vote rigging, ballot harvesting and fraudulent counting procedures
Number of states change the law on ballot counting procedure(s) (illegally and unconstitutionally) to allow the above
President holds a rally where more people attend than the entire Biden campaign could attract in a lifetime (I give him 6 months before the embalming fluid wears off)
Extraordinary lack of policing during a mass rally apparently at the direct request of Nancy Pelosi (yes, this is probably breaking news, more to come I should expect)
What little security was present basically allow a large crowd to enter the Senate and unsurprisingly, they cause mayhem
No one is killed except one woman, shot dead in a crowd, others died after experiencing "medical emergencies"
Trumps impeachment was based on nothing and came to nothing

I think that's a more accurate summary.

[wheelnut]

Some quite bizarre conspiracy theories going on there

And Trump’s impeachment achieved the same thing that Nixon’s and Clinton’s impeachments achieved.

[DefTrap]

"Allowed a large crowd to enter the senate". Listen to yourself.

In the same way that you think conflating one definite death into five 'possibles' is egging the pudding, you must see that adding in a few extra layers of horseshit does absolutely nothing for the main thrust of your argument?

If you were to say "the media gave trump a hard time" then I'd probably agree with you, there's just no proof for any of the rest of it.

[DEADPOOL]

"Allowed a large crowd to enter the senate". Listen to yourself.

In the same way that you think conflating one definite death into five 'possibles' is egging the pudding, you must see that adding in a few extra layers of horseshit does absolutely nothing for the main thrust of your argument?

If you were to say "the media gave trump a hard time" then I'd probably agree with you, there's just no proof for any of the rest of it.

Yes I agree with your implied criticism of "allowed a large crowd to enter the senate", it does sound bad when you put it like that.

That's why I actually said, "What little security was present basically allow a large crowd to enter the Senate". I.e. the net effect of a surprisingly low level security is the primary cause for a large crowd being able to barge into an unprotected building.

All you have to do is give it a little thought. When our security services understand there is the potential for a large crowd to gather anywhere, they take appropriate steps to mitigate any potential issues. Things like football matches, extinction rebellion and even gay pride marches will all attract additional crowd control tactics.

So what steps were taken prior to the rally which had been very highly publicised for some time? What steps did the homeland security or the FBI or whoever suggest should be taken? More importantly, on whose authority was the level of security so lax? Was it a "normal" level of policing for such an event? What do you think?

[Horse]

But minutes before he spoke, when it came time for the most powerful Republican in Washington to hold Mr. Trump to account on the charge of causing the riot, Mr. McConnell said his hands were tied. It could not be done, he argued. He voted to acquit.

I wonder, just a little bit, what Mich McConnell's stance will be, as a senior Republican politician, when Trump decides he's going to run for president again next time round as a Republican.

I just wonder.

Trump recognises loyalty:

Former President Donald Trump has launched a scathing personal attack on fellow Republican Mitch McConnell.

"Mitch is a dour, sullen, and unsmiling political hack," said Mr Trump, "and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again."

[demographic]

That is indeed a fair assessment of Mitch McConnell but reading through it I can't help thinking that no way on earth did Donald come up with that combination of words used to describe him.