🔹Impeachment requires a majority vote in the House.
🔹Impeachment is followed by a Senate Trial.
🔹Conviction requires 2/3 of the Senate.
After conviction, preventing Trump from holding office again requires a simple majority vote.
(Thread) Over the Cliff Notes: Impeachment #2
Let’s start with the Article of Impeachment itself: https://t.co/KRiPGstRwi
The charge: Incitement of Insurrection.
Spoiler: This is a slam-dunk in the impeach-and-convict department, and will create a moment of truth for the GOP.
🔹Impeachment requires a majority vote in the House.
🔹Impeachment is followed by a Senate Trial.
🔹Conviction requires 2/3 of the Senate.
After conviction, preventing Trump from holding office again requires a simple majority vote.
The Constitution specifically says that a criminal trial may be appropriate AFTER impeachment and removal.
Defendants in a criminal trial have special protections because they stand to lose their liberty, property, or even their life.
Therefore certain requirements for a criminal trial, such as the requirement that allegations be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, do not apply.
Notice the 14th Amendment doesn’t give the procedure for determining when Section 3 applies.
In other words, it gets complicated.
Now, for a close look at the charge of Incitement of Insurrection.
Additional facts can come out at the trial, which is sort of what trials are for.
This is particularly true when a crime was actually televised and members of the Senate conducting the trial were witnesses.
On January 6, Congress and the VP were carrying out the duties given in the 12th Amendment.
Just before the insurrection, Trump addressed a crowd and, among other things, said the following:
Trump's conduct followed his efforts on Jan. 2 when he “urged” Georgia SOS Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn GA’s presidential election results and “threatened” Raffensperger if he failed to do so.
They don't want the truth to come out.
They don't want to acknowledge their complicity or discredit their own propaganda machine.
Who is getting strong-armed now?
https://t.co/48Y3SLnvZf
According to a GOP source on conference phone call yesterday, Kevin McCarthy warned members not to verbally attack colleagues who vote for impeachment because it could endanger their lives.
— John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) January 12, 2021
He was president when the Article was drafted. One requested remedy is that he can't hold office again.
The idea that a president can commit a heinous act during the final days of his presidency and thus escape accountability makes no sense.
https://t.co/61q0aUL53T
Do you think it would create any kind of problem\u2014if the trial were to begin after January 20th\u2014that the resolution refers to Trump as President of the United States?
— David Waldman-1, of Yorktown LLC\u2122 (@KagroX) January 12, 2021
More from Teri Kanefield
It looks like 45 Republican Senators voted against holding an impeachment trial for Trump.
I hope nobody had high hopes that the GOP would do the right thing.
The GOP remains the Party of Trump and is hardening into an extremist anti-democratic
They are the anti-rule of law, anti truth party. https://t.co/e6EME39xNn
Fortunately, they're outnumbered.
Not by much, but they're outnumbered.
Hi, everyone.
A lot of these doomsday comments are annoying me.
Have you all learned nothing over the past few years?
You might want to duck because, I'm about to go on a tear . . .
The same people telling me we're doomed and democracy is dead are probably the same people who told me (1) Trump would make himself dictator (2) The Supreme Court would keep him in office and (3) he would never leave the White House.
Nobody owes you a democracy . . .
My mantra the past 4 years: democracy will survive if enough people want it to, and are willing to do the work.
Did the doomsday people happen to see that the vote was 55-45 in favor of holding a trial?
I think the problem is there has been so much peddling of hope porn. . .
I hope nobody had high hopes that the GOP would do the right thing.
The GOP remains the Party of Trump and is hardening into an extremist anti-democratic
They are the anti-rule of law, anti truth party. https://t.co/e6EME39xNn
Fortunately, they're outnumbered.
Not by much, but they're outnumbered.
They clearly aren\u2019t the party of LAW AND ORDER
— DWUK (@UKfriendlyguy) January 26, 2021
Hi, everyone.
A lot of these doomsday comments are annoying me.
Have you all learned nothing over the past few years?
You might want to duck because, I'm about to go on a tear . . .
The same people telling me we're doomed and democracy is dead are probably the same people who told me (1) Trump would make himself dictator (2) The Supreme Court would keep him in office and (3) he would never leave the White House.
Nobody owes you a democracy . . .
My mantra the past 4 years: democracy will survive if enough people want it to, and are willing to do the work.
Did the doomsday people happen to see that the vote was 55-45 in favor of holding a trial?
I think the problem is there has been so much peddling of hope porn. . .
This is what he wants to do.
No matter how this trial plays out, the US will remain divided between those who choose truth, Democracy, and rule of law and the millions who reject these things.
1/
The question is how to move forward.
My mantra is that there are no magic bullets and these people will always be with us.
Except for state legislatures, they have less power now than they have for a while.
2/
The only real and lasting solutions are political ones. Get Democrats into local offices. Get people who want democracy to survive to the polls at every election, at every level.
It’s a constant battle.
3/
Maybe I should tell you all about Thurgood Marshall’s life to illustrate how hard the task is and how there will be backlash after each step of progress.
4/
Precisely. That's why Thurgood Marshall's life came to mind.
We are still riding the backlash that started after the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
That's why I keep saying there are no easy
No matter how this trial plays out, the US will remain divided between those who choose truth, Democracy, and rule of law and the millions who reject these things.
1/
Wouldn't he just use this to repeat his Big Lie and have GOP echo him?
— Thel Marquez (@theljava) January 31, 2021
The question is how to move forward.
My mantra is that there are no magic bullets and these people will always be with us.
Except for state legislatures, they have less power now than they have for a while.
2/
The only real and lasting solutions are political ones. Get Democrats into local offices. Get people who want democracy to survive to the polls at every election, at every level.
It’s a constant battle.
3/
Maybe I should tell you all about Thurgood Marshall’s life to illustrate how hard the task is and how there will be backlash after each step of progress.
4/
Precisely. That's why Thurgood Marshall's life came to mind.
We are still riding the backlash that started after the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
That's why I keep saying there are no easy
Yep. My relatives continue to support Trump and make false equivalencies as justification. I\u2019ve found it impossible to present factual information that changes minds. Trump\u2019s emotional appeal registers with them: that things were better before civil rights advances.
— Martha Brockenbrough INTO THE BLOODRED WOODS (@mbrockenbrough) January 31, 2021
KM asks why the GOP leadership is terrified of losing.
(Both Lindsay Graham and Matt Gaetz said if the GOP loses this election, they'll never win again.)
GOP is a minority party. If they lose power, they lose the ability to manipulate systems to keep minority control.
1/
The fear is also explained by Richard Hofstader, who wrote the classic work⤵️
Hofstadter reviewed American politics from before the founding of the nation through McCarthyism. He noticed a pattern among an impassioned minority on the fringes of the political spectrum.
2/
He called their behavior the “paranoid style” in politics.
Those embracing the paranoid style of politics believe that unseen satanic forces are trying to destroy something larger in which they belong.
3/
According to Hofstadter, the “something larger” to which they belong is generally phrased as “the American way of life.”
They “feel dispossessed” and that “America has been largely taken away from them and their kind.”
4/
They therefore adopt extreme measures. They will stop at nothing to prevent what they see as an impending calamity.
Remember, Hofstadter published this in the early 1960s.
5/
(Both Lindsay Graham and Matt Gaetz said if the GOP loses this election, they'll never win again.)
GOP is a minority party. If they lose power, they lose the ability to manipulate systems to keep minority control.
1/
Does their life end if they lose an election? Is it worth a complete loss of integrity??
— KM (@Kyarmot) November 10, 2020
The fear is also explained by Richard Hofstader, who wrote the classic work⤵️
Hofstadter reviewed American politics from before the founding of the nation through McCarthyism. He noticed a pattern among an impassioned minority on the fringes of the political spectrum.
2/
He called their behavior the “paranoid style” in politics.
Those embracing the paranoid style of politics believe that unseen satanic forces are trying to destroy something larger in which they belong.
3/
According to Hofstadter, the “something larger” to which they belong is generally phrased as “the American way of life.”
They “feel dispossessed” and that “America has been largely taken away from them and their kind.”
4/
They therefore adopt extreme measures. They will stop at nothing to prevent what they see as an impending calamity.
Remember, Hofstadter published this in the early 1960s.
5/
Reading recommendation: Rand Corp, "The Russian Firehose of Falsehoods Propaganda Model," includes advice on how to counter a rapid and continuous stream of lies.
https://t.co/1Jg5CvgrJC
1/
The liar has a “shameless willingness” to tell outrageous lies that lots of people know are lies.
The liar doesn’t care about consistency.
He doesn’t care if it’s obvious he’s lying.
https://t.co/C08paJsKTT
In fact, that's the whole point.
Putin perfected the method.
2/
It seems to come naturally to Trump.
@TimothyDSnyder tells how reporters were often so astonished by Putin's outrageous lies, that they focused on the lies instead of Putin's latest atrocities.
The lies became the news.
The actual news gets pushed off the stage.
3/
The goal is the “disruption of truthful reporting and messaging.”
https://t.co/C08paJsKTT
That's why Trump really wants an actual trial, and why he was so annoyed with the Supreme Court (and other courts) refusing to hear the case.
He wants a stage for the lies.
4/
From the Rand study: The Firehose of Falsehood technique “entertains, confuses and overwhelms the audience.”
I think the "entertainment" part applies to the GOP leadership who know Trump is lying but cheer the lies because they are so destructive.
5/
https://t.co/1Jg5CvgrJC
1/
The liar has a “shameless willingness” to tell outrageous lies that lots of people know are lies.
The liar doesn’t care about consistency.
He doesn’t care if it’s obvious he’s lying.
https://t.co/C08paJsKTT
In fact, that's the whole point.
Putin perfected the method.
2/
It seems to come naturally to Trump.
@TimothyDSnyder tells how reporters were often so astonished by Putin's outrageous lies, that they focused on the lies instead of Putin's latest atrocities.
The lies became the news.
The actual news gets pushed off the stage.
3/
The goal is the “disruption of truthful reporting and messaging.”
https://t.co/C08paJsKTT
That's why Trump really wants an actual trial, and why he was so annoyed with the Supreme Court (and other courts) refusing to hear the case.
He wants a stage for the lies.
4/
From the Rand study: The Firehose of Falsehood technique “entertains, confuses and overwhelms the audience.”
I think the "entertainment" part applies to the GOP leadership who know Trump is lying but cheer the lies because they are so destructive.
5/
January 6th will be a freak show. Biden will become president because the only way to stop it would be for the House to agree, and that won't happen.
Going forward, the GOP becomes even more dangerous and radicalized.
A few hopeful points:
The GOP could very well lose control of the Senate.
Because these GOP Senators will force a vote, the GOP may fracture, with moderates forced out. While this radicalizes the party, they lose
A few reasons. As @ProfBrianKalt points out, refusing to seat them because they say the election wasn't valid gives credence to the lie that the election wasn't valid.
Moreover, there's no authority to refuse to seat an elected rep for telling lies. .
. . . which is what refusing to seat them would amount to.
The Democrats say, "You are doing really bad things so we won't seat you."
See the problem with that?
(1) It's illegal. The House doesn't get to decide who is seated. The states send their own reps.
moreover . . .
(2) If you say, "The House gets to refuse to seat a person who tells a lie about the election," where does that lead?
If things continue this direction, the political divide will not longer be liberal v. conservative.
The divide will be pro- democracy v. anti-democracy. . .
Going forward, the GOP becomes even more dangerous and radicalized.
What do you see as an outcome of this Teri?
— AnimalsIntuit (@copplestonearts) January 2, 2021
A few hopeful points:
The GOP could very well lose control of the Senate.
Because these GOP Senators will force a vote, the GOP may fracture, with moderates forced out. While this radicalizes the party, they lose
What do you see as an outcome of this Teri?
— AnimalsIntuit (@copplestonearts) January 2, 2021
A few reasons. As @ProfBrianKalt points out, refusing to seat them because they say the election wasn't valid gives credence to the lie that the election wasn't valid.
Moreover, there's no authority to refuse to seat an elected rep for telling lies. .
Why won\u2019t the Dems in Congress give some consequences? Like refusing to seat those participating in sedition?
— Teacher Sarah (@cmommy77) January 2, 2021
. . . which is what refusing to seat them would amount to.
The Democrats say, "You are doing really bad things so we won't seat you."
See the problem with that?
(1) It's illegal. The House doesn't get to decide who is seated. The states send their own reps.
moreover . . .
(2) If you say, "The House gets to refuse to seat a person who tells a lie about the election," where does that lead?
If things continue this direction, the political divide will not longer be liberal v. conservative.
The divide will be pro- democracy v. anti-democracy. . .
More from Politics
You May Also Like
"I really want to break into Product Management"
make products.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get a startup to notice me."
Make Products.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE PRODUCTS.
Courtesy of @edbrisson's wonderful thread on breaking into comics – https://t.co/TgNblNSCBj – here is why the same applies to Product Management, too.
There is no better way of learning the craft of product, or proving your potential to employers, than just doing it.
You do not need anybody's permission. We don't have diplomas, nor doctorates. We can barely agree on a single standard of what a Product Manager is supposed to do.
But – there is at least one blindingly obvious industry consensus – a Product Manager makes Products.
And they don't need to be kept at the exact right temperature, given endless resource, or carefully protected in order to do this.
They find their own way.
make products.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get a startup to notice me."
Make Products.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE PRODUCTS.
Courtesy of @edbrisson's wonderful thread on breaking into comics – https://t.co/TgNblNSCBj – here is why the same applies to Product Management, too.
"I really want to break into comics"
— Ed Brisson (@edbrisson) December 4, 2018
make comics.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get an editor to notice me."
Make Comics.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE COMICS.
There is no better way of learning the craft of product, or proving your potential to employers, than just doing it.
You do not need anybody's permission. We don't have diplomas, nor doctorates. We can barely agree on a single standard of what a Product Manager is supposed to do.
But – there is at least one blindingly obvious industry consensus – a Product Manager makes Products.
And they don't need to be kept at the exact right temperature, given endless resource, or carefully protected in order to do this.
They find their own way.
