Ilhan Omar to introduce articles of impeachment

[Alli]

If jurors in any other trial had left the proceedings for hours at a time, they’d have been thrown off the jury or charged with contempt. And yet, this is what we got from the R senators today. Half of them couldn’t even give you a decent recap of what was said today.

 

[Eraserhead]

I wish I could believe that. A lot of these Proud Boys and Oath Keepers aren’t exactly doddering old men. Hell, a couple of Halloween ago I had a roughly 18 year old Trick-or-Treater whose “costume” was a TRUMP 2020 FUCK YOUR FEELINGS sweatshirt.

There were a few thousand of them in Washington DC with maybe tens of thousands more in the rest of the country. Hitler had a million in the SA out of 65 million Germans. The US doesn’t have 5 million oath keepers

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Column: At Trump impeachment trial, Democrats are rudely making an overwhelming case for conviction

At Donald Trump's impeachment trial, Democrats are rudely making an overwhelming case for conviction by unfairly showing Republicans that Trump is unquestionably guilty. It's unfair to me and other Republicans.

www.chicagotribune.com

 

[SuperMatt]

If jurors in any other trial had left the proceedings for hours at a time, they’d have been thrown off the jury or charged with contempt. And yet, this is what we got from the R senators today. Half of them couldn’t even give you a decent recap of what was said today.

Doesn’t the constitution state they need to be in their desks for the trial?

 

[Huntn]

That reminder that this isn't the court of law
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360008242550640640/
Because if there were, there would be penalties for jurors & defense attorneys doing such things.

Unfortunately duplicitous individuals such as Cruz & Graham are fully aware and/or don't care.

Because this procedure is political, conducted by a political body, it is severely compromised from the start. There is no oversight to keep it on track. If half the Congress want to violate their oath of office in hearings like this, the only equalizer is not immediate, it is delayed judgement from the citizens and/or idiots from the home districts of representatives. If you can imagine, if we collectively elect anti-republic, anti-democratic people to represent us, we are voting for a change in our government for the good or bad depending on your perspective.

The worst is when people are motivated not just by selfishness, we are all selfish, but when they decide that their selfishness, benefit to themselves as a minority, can disenfranchise a majority, and Trumps the ideals the country was founded upon.

 

[Huntn]

Column: At Trump impeachment trial, Democrats are rudely making an overwhelming case for conviction

At Donald Trump's impeachment trial, Democrats are rudely making an overwhelming case for conviction by unfairly showing Republicans that Trump is unquestionably guilty. It's unfair to me and other Republicans.

www.chicagotribune.com

This is great!
As a proud Republican member of the U.S. Senate, I would like to formally express my disgust — disgust, I tell you! — at the way my Democratic colleagues are conducting themselves during this ridiculous, illegal, unfair and unconstitutional impeachment trial of Donald Trump, America’s forever president, blessed be his name.
As an impartial juror, my right to believe only what I want to believe is being trampled by these radical leftist Democrats. They keep shoving direct and consequential evidence in my face in a blatant attempt to get me to acknowledge what actually happened during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The House impeachment managers know full well I have already impartially made up my mind that Trump is both innocent and handsome, yet they continue to rudely make an overwhelming case for conviction and belligerently force me to reckon with my own outlandish hypocrisy.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

This is great!
As a proud Republican member of the U.S. Senate, I would like to formally express my disgust — disgust, I tell you! — at the way my Democratic colleagues are conducting themselves during this ridiculous, illegal, unfair and unconstitutional impeachment trial of Donald Trump, America’s forever president, blessed be his name.
As an impartial juror, my right to believe only what I want to believe is being trampled by these radical leftist Democrats. They keep shoving direct and consequential evidence in my face in a blatant attempt to get me to acknowledge what actually happened during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The House impeachment managers know full well I have already impartially made up my mind that Trump is both innocent and handsome, yet they continue to rudely make an overwhelming case for conviction and belligerently force me to reckon with my own outlandish hypocrisy.

I like this part.

It’s outrageous! You can’t draw a straight line between two points. You need at least two other points, one of which is former President Barack Obama and another that is antifa.

 

[Pumbaa]

I like this part.

It’s outrageous! You can’t draw a straight line between two points. You need at least two other points, one of which is former President Barack Obama and another that is antifa.

But... But... But her e-mails!?

In any case, the Chewbacca Defense is probably the best strategy in the long run. Confuse the voters to avoid consequences for senators’ votes to acquit.

 

[shadow puppet]

What the blazes does David Schoen think he's accomplishing? He looks desperate. The extended Trump clips make the 45th look even worse and these repetitive "fight" clips are ridiculous.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360290717126586394/

 

[JayMysteri0]

I think what annoys me is these guys keep making stuff up that belongs in the TF Guy thread.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360314490944954381/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360315541009944581/

 

[Alli]

What the blazes does David Schoen think he's accomplishing? He looks desperate. The extended Trump clips make the 45th look even worse and these repetitive "fight" clips are ridiculous.

And the fact that they have had to alter the audio and video on every clip they’ve used is also concerning. What in hell did they do to the video of Jerry Nadler? They somehow made him look like he weighed 300 pounds. And adding spooky music to the soundtrack? I believe that was to cover the real audio cause the actual audio was damning.

 

[shadow puppet]

I turned it off. They aren't going to convict. So many GOP won't even attempt to listen so didn't show up. It's a joke.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1358854940131794947/

 

[Alli]

And just like that, the defense rests. WTF. I would understand if Trump didn’t pay them.

 

[JayMysteri0]

Hear! Hear!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360297762412056577/

 

[shadow puppet]

I am so angry right now.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360322101052399619/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360327736410202117/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360328681802133506/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360325812575174659/

 

[JayMysteri0]

Lawyer like client

Trump lawyers keep accusing Democrats of manipulating evidence. But they’re doing that themselves.

Trump’s defense team is twisting words out of their context.

www.vox.com

One example Trump’s lawyers homed in on pertains to comments Michigan state Rep. Cynthia Johnson (D) made in early December saying, “This is just a warning to you Trumpers … be careful, walk lightly.” The implication is that Johnson’s comments are just as bad as Trump encouraging a mob of his supports to descend on the Capitol while Congress was certifying his Electoral College loss, therefore Democrats don’t have a leg to stand on when accusing Trump of inciting insurrection.

But an examination of the context of Johnson’s remarks reveals that her comments were not at all what Trump’s lawyers made them out to be. Johnson made her “be careful” comments in response to threats she received from Trump supporters after a hearing in which she pushed back on lies about election fraud that Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was pushing.

Media Matters’s Eric Kleefeld laid out the relevant context in an article from December:

Johnson spoke bluntly at last week’s state legislative hearing, telling House Oversight Chairman Matt Hall that the witnesses presented by Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani should’ve been sworn in: “You’re allowing people to come in here and lie. And I know they’re lying.”

Following that hearing, she became the target of almost 100 racist and threatening phone calls, with multiple callers saying that she would be lynched and one woman telling her, “You should be swinging from a f------ rope, you Democrat.”

Johnson responded with a video posted Tuesday on Facebook, announcing that a woman who threatened her had been tracked down by the FBI and state police: “So, this is just a warning to you Trumpers — be careful, walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough.”

So, instead of threatening Trump supporters, Johnson’s comments were actually aimed at getting them to stop threatening her. In context, they actually reveal one of the ways in which Trump’s rhetoric incited his followers in the weeks leading up to January 6.

 

[User.45]

Also, when you go on to discuss the impeachment and don't have a fricken clue & need talking points

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1359919631687954440/

...and you're a juror...

It's tragicomical. She's a newcomer and you can hear she's uncomfortable with the situation because of some rudimentary remnants of a spine. It's also ironic. If she's uncomfortable with it, she shouldn't go on MSNBC where she'd def. be confronted. And if she's confronted she shouldn't refer to precedent as something to define constitutionality. Sad and pathetic.

 

[Eraserhead]

I am so angry right now.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360322101052399619/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360327736410202117/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360328681802133506/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1360325812575174659/

I don’t think what the Republicans do matters - see https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/democrats-have-won-the-impeachment-trial-already/36563/

 

[iMi]

The argument that Trump is entitled to first amendment protection in his case is absolutely ridiculous. If I said, "I believe all Nazis should be killed on the spot," that would be a protected, free speech. I am expressing personal opinion, perhaps one that is unpopular, but still very much an opinion. If I said to a large group of people, "Let's round up all the Nazis and kill them on the spot," that would be a specific, targeted threat toward a specific group of people. That would be incitement to violence. That's not a protected, free speech.

What's so hard to understand about this?

 

[iMi]

And just like that, the defense rests. WTF. I would understand if Trump didn’t pay them.

I would be surprised if he did, because that is literally what he does. If I was arrested for pissing on Trump's grave, I wouldn't call these guys, let alone a representation before the Senate. Then again, they are arguing a case that is a slam dunk in favor of the prosecution.