(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.

1/ The basics:

🔹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.
2/ This is not a criminal trial.

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.
3/ An impeached president stands to lose his job and the ability to hold the job again.

Therefore certain requirements for a criminal trial, such as the requirement that allegations be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, do not apply.
4/ In addition to charging Incitement of Insurrection, the Article invokes the 14th Amendment (sec 3) and Trump’s duty to faithfully execute the oath of office. 

Notice the 14th Amendment doesn’t give the procedure for determining when Section 3 applies.
5/ Another part of the 14th Amendment — Section 5 — empowers Congress to enforce the entire amendment “by appropriate legislation.” But that would require the president to sign off on it, and might violate the ban on a Bill of Attainer.

In other words, it gets complicated.
6/ One judge has said a simple majority is all that is needed to remove under section 3 but that may have been incorrect, for reasons Chicago law prof. Daniel Hemel explains here: https://t.co/hx09waw3B5
7/ Under the impeachment clause, after conviction (2/3 of the Senate) a simple majority can remove Trump’s ability to run again for office.

Now, for a close look at the charge of Incitement of Insurrection.
8/ Note: The statement of facts don't have to be complete.

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.
9/ Facts given in the Article of Impeachment:

On January 6, Congress and the VP were carrying out the duties given in the 12th Amendment.
10/ During the proceeding months, Trump repeatedly lied and said the election results shouldn’t be accepted because they were the result of widespread fraud. 

Just before the insurrection, Trump addressed a crowd and, among other things, said the following:
11/ After being incited by Trump, the crowd did 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.
12/ The part about the repeated lies explains why Trump’s enablers are trying so hard to derail Impeachment, despite the seriousness of the crime.

They don't want the truth to come out.

They don't want to acknowledge their complicity or discredit their own propaganda machine.
13/ Flashback to Impeachment #1 when the GOP essentially put Trump above the law by ignoring the fact that Trump was strong-arming the Ukrainian president to open an investigation that would help Trump politically.

Who is getting strong-armed now?
https://t.co/48Y3SLnvZf
14/ Nah.

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
15/ What I meant in the first tweet by "slam dunk" and "moment of truth" is that when the facts are this clear, the party defines itself by how it responds.

More from Teri Kanefield

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. . .
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
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. . .
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/

More from Politics

I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.


Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel

He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:

He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:

He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.