Donald Trump acquitted in second impeachment trial

a reply to: wdkirk

I'm doing my part. I've started several Biden threads.

Granted, they are mostly "I told you so" threads, but they don't say a thing about Trump, just pointing out that Biden is doing exactly what we told you he would and not what you all thought he was going to.

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: 5ofineed5aladder
Honestly this website is turning into a trump love fest site and I'm not okay with that. Although I agree with most things said. It's getting ridiculous how much you guys rely on trump.
Who is the next candidate?

Agreed. Politics on ATS heavily favor Trump. Ill be glad if things chill out a bit now that the impeachments over.

Maybe it's just the quality of the arguments and the quantity of the proof 😎

Think about THAT for a minute or 2 😎

a reply to: Hellas

Can't be tried twice for the same crime. Now he can stop pretending and just go back to the White House. The Biden show is just about over.

Pelosi and her pals are so blinded by hatred they don't see their machinations strengthen Trump's hold over the voter base.

Every move they make to attack him, in contradiction to the Constitution, reinforces Trump's popularity.

Now the 14th Amendment is being thrown around. This will be attempt Number 3 to damage him. It is so obvious that this is about Trump personally that it's laughable.

They really are blind to how stupid and vengeful they look.

If they weren't they'd consider the optics. The world is watching. I'd pay to know Putin's real thoughts. He's the only world leader other than Modi that I respect.

It's real simple. The proof was there. Democrats turned down 10,000 Nat. Guard authorized by Trump on Jan. 3.

If they want to say he was instigating anything, that piece right there - that he authorized 10,000 Nat. Guard for the 6th - goes a long way to disprove everything.

And that's why they refused to get into witnesses. They knew both Pelosi and Muriel Bowser would be called and asked why they turned that help down on that day.

Did Trump count on his crowd? I think so. Did he want them to display anger? I also think so. Did he want them to crash the Capitol? No. That he authorized those extra troops and offered them should be proof enough. I think he wanted to display a large crowd that was passionate to underscore just how many people doubt the outcome of the election to show the seriousness of the rift in the electorate.

Dems never miss an opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot.

This impeachment found Dems GUILTY of cheating.
DOUBLE WIN for Trump.

originally posted by: ketsuko
It's real simple. The proof was there. Democrats turned down 10,000 Nat. Guard authorized by Trump on Jan. 3.

If they want to say he was instigating anything, that piece right there - that he authorized 10,000 Nat. Guard for the 6th - goes a long way to disprove everything.

And that's why they refused to get into witnesses. They knew both Pelosi and Muriel Bowser would be called and asked why they turned that help down on that day.

Did Trump count on his crowd? I think so. Did he want them to display anger? I also think so. Did he want them to crash the Capitol? No. That he authorized those extra troops and offered them should be proof enough. I think he wanted to display a large crowd that was passionate to underscore just how many people doubt the outcome of the election to show the seriousness of the rift in the electorate.

I think the real fear and reason for all that, is that if he chose to do what they accused him of, Washington would have fallen, and at the very least, his power would have been shown. Now what would happen moments after that, I don't know, as no plan seemed to exist, which is where I see the true failure of all this.

everybody gets a trophy ! 😃

So who gets to re-write History this time ? 😃


Raskin: Trump Second Impeachment a ‘Dramatic Success in Historical Terms’

a reply to: xuenchen

That Raskin is a real piece of sh#t. He's a snake among snakes.

It's fun watching Trump continue to beat the Dems with their own hammer...even when he's out of office.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: M5xaz

No criminal activity on Trump's part.

Is that what you think today's acquittal means? Funny that. Mitch McConnel said that the House Impeachment team proved their case, and that Trump is guilty as hell. "It's just that Trump aint prez no more, so we Senators can't convict him no more"

Of course, it was Mitch that refused to allow the Senate to try the case until after Joe Biden's inauguration.

Einstein, it was an UNCONSTITUTIONAL process from the get-go.

And NO, Senators DO NOT get to change the Constitution by themselves, that is also unconstitutional. The Constitution itself lays out the process for ANY change and that was NOT done.


For Criminality, look to the Clintons, starting with Hillary having classified information on an unsecured server.

a reply to: CthruU

What do you think is behind the red flags about Trump, as you say? Do you suspect anything specific?

I’ve wondered why he didn’t put out better evidence in the election fraud cases he brought. He could have showed the mathematical evidence- the algorithms that were used to make Biden pull ahead of Trump in those 6 key battleground states- but I don’t think they put that evidence in there. Why? And why didn’t he pardon Julian Assange? Those are two things that have had me wondering about him.

a reply to: KansasGirl

We don't have all the facts. As president he had much better information than we do.

Best not to judge him for that.

a reply to: network dude

Thing is that Democrats fear what they are planning. Now who is sitting in a heavily armed capitol right now?

a reply to: M5xaz

According to Mitch McConnell's address to the Senate regarding the acquittal, he said that the trial was unconstitutional because Trump was a sitting president at the time of the trial. Trump wasn't a sitting president at the time of his House impeachment, and at the time when Mitch McConnell held the Senate leadership he refused to allow a trial UNTIL Biden's inauguration. So, it was his decision to make sure Senators had a "constitutional argumenta" cover under which to acquit.


McConnell also said, during his official address, that the House Impeachment Managers proved their case, and that Trump is guilty as hell and did incite the violent attack on the Capitol and Congress. He went on to say that this case is the now under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You'll believe any old Turtle wontcha?

a reply to: Lysergic

What difference does it make whether or not I "believe" what Mitch McConnell said in a very public statement to the Senate, after it voted to acquit Donald Trump? He said what he said, whether or not I like, or believe, what came out of his mouth. It's HIS official story, not mine. I'm just a messenger.

Excellent.

Now hopefully we can accelerate the end of democracy