Impeachment but non-removal

[NiftyNiblick]

We have a good numbers of "contributors" to this very forum, trumpanzees all, who would be purged in Draconian fashion if America were still a functioning nation.
The fact that they're still posting here rather than preparing to be crushed by the wheels of justice may be interpreted as a sign that America as we know it is no longer regarded the long term solution for this continent.
They will face justice still, but the process will change the nation.

I remember the Cuban revolution.
Castro had anti-revolutionary Batista loyalists shot to death on television. I saw it with my own eyes.
That was a very humane way to deal with them, but it also marked the beginning of a new Cuba.

In this nation, it's the revolutionaries who lost last week.
They will eventually be dealt with, harshly, but an all-new America will be the result.
The old one has obviously failed.

[anatta]

How many constitutional and institutional norms are going to be run over [by democrats] in the age of Trump?

No need to be a constitutional scholar to understand that the primary purpose of impeachment is removal from office. Otherwise, what’s the point? Impeachment becomes a censure vote with a ribbon tied around it.

That’s what Impeachment 1.0 was—a House censure vote with a ribbon tied around it. It was barely mentioned by the Biden campaign because by then it didn’t mean anything. What if you whiff on a Senate conviction *twice* on the same President?

I’ve said this before: Democrats clearly can’t help themselves, but they are going to run afoul with moderates with this impeachment push. There’s no point in it. Trump is out of office in 48 hours. Not all voters loathe Trump and you never know, you might even need a few disaffected Trump voters in the midterms. I have a strong hunch you’re going to need more than a few. This is NOT the way to get them.

the problem is the media gives it credence - so moderates just go "blah"
and do not get the assault on the Constitution. Maybe when the Dems start to pack the court they'll pay attention..

[ThatOwlWoman]

It is to stop him from serving office in the future and it removes his collecting his benefits.

Bingo. Both are worthy goals.

[ThatOwlWoman]

the problem is the media gives it credence - so moderates just go "blah"
and do not get the assault on the Constitution. Maybe when the Dems start to pack the court they'll pay attention..

Funny how "packing the court" is okay when RWers do it.

[anatta]

It is to stop him from serving office in the future and it removes his collecting his benefits.

exactly/ just another fascist play by Dems.. Let the people decide on their own future

[Phantasmal]

Funny how "packing the court" is okay when RWers do it.

At least they will put qualified people in those positions. I was always shocked by the young, inexperienced judges they installed. I look for many to be impeached because they are in over their heads.

[ThatOwlWoman]

At least they will put qualified people in those positions. I was always shocked by the young, inexperienced judges they installed. I look for many to be impeached because they are in over their heads.

That and they haven't the wisdom or experience to not let their bias show.

[anatta]

Funny how "packing the court" is okay when RWers do it.

so you dont know the definition of "packing"... no problem im in a good mood to explain

Packing is increasing the number of judges in a forum (like SCOTUS) .
you are probably confusing that with a later term appointment

[anatta]

At least they will put qualified people in those positions. I was always shocked by the young, inexperienced judges they installed. I look for many to be impeached because they are in over their heads.

impeach ! impeach! *squawk* Polly want a cracker?

[Phantasmal]

That and they haven't the wisdom or experience to not let their bias show.

Exactly

[ThatOwlWoman]

so you dont know the definition of "packing"... no problem im in a good mood to explain

Packing is increasing the number of judges in a forum (like SCOTUS) .
you are probably confusing that with a later term appointment

Sorry, you are wrong. It means both adding # of judges, or choosing those that fit a bias.

"The practice of changing the number or composition of judges on a court, making it more favorable to particular goals or ideologies, and typically involving an increase in the number of seats on the court:" -- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/court-packing

[moon]

It will be a travesty of American justice if the apricot anarchist isn't jailed.

[anatta]

Sorry, you are wrong. It means both adding # of judges, or choosing those that fit a bias.

"The practice of changing the number or composition of judges on a court, making it more favorable to particular goals or ideologies, and typically involving an increase in the number of seats on the court:" -- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/court-packing

composition means what? It doesn't mean a regular appointment

FFS stop watching fake news - it's right in your definition "typically involving an increase in the number of seats"

[ThatOwlWoman]

It will be a travesty of American justice if the apricot anarchist isn't jailed.

I agree with that. But our justice system is already pretty travestied-up. Rich people, particularly white ones, seldom are punished to the extent that low-income, non-whites are.

[ThatOwlWoman]

composition means what? It doesn't mean a regular appointment

FFS stop watching fake news - it's right in your definition "typically involving an increase in the number of seats"

"Composition" = make-up. You're playing semantics games now.