1/10 With respect, multiple straw men here:
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...

2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see https://t.co/9hN7SPKpVU
3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result
4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...
5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
6/10 They can do two, or four, or a dozen things at once if they have the will.

c) Assumption that "criminal authorities will do nothing" - at least w/ respect to Trump himself re: Jan 6 riot - is a pretty sound one. Pres. Biden & his DOJ may investigate Trumpian crime, but...
7/10 DOJ is exceedingly unlikely to indict Trump for his conduct on and before Jan 6 relating to election. Far too political-seeming a prosecution to be attractive to the new Administration.
8/10 d) And no, "citizens can't be trusted to evaluate" Trump. If you mean trusted not to re-elect him--it happened once & nearly a 2d time. We nearly lost democracy because of it. Trump is a demagogue. Source of his power, and his danger, is direct appeal to fear & hatred.
9/10 The risk someone of his ilk could use that power again & return to to White House is PRECISELY why Framers inserted disqualification remedy into impeachment provisions. They gave that prophylactic power to Congress, not electorate, to prepare for the present situation.
10/10 The Republican Party may be too compromised to do its duty when that duty stares it in the face. But let us not gin up specious excuses for their self-interested calculations.

More from World

Good question: what proofs has BDA provided of his authenticity?

Let's go through some of them.


- BDA predicted the Saudis would assassinate Suleimani. They did.
- He said the dog that got Badghadi's arm deserved a Medal Of Honor. The next day the President posted a joke image showing him giving the dog a MoH.

- He said one of his ops in Syria would severely disrupt a CIA drug trafficking operation. This was proved true within a few days:
https://t.co/Hranupwcxj
- He sent gold to Brazil to help pay for an anti-trafficking operation there. That op became public soon afterwards.

- On May 31 this year, he predicted the President would be giving a speech the next day. June 1, the President gives a surprise address at the Rose Garden.
- He predicted the US would be making diplomatic moves on Greenland. True.

- He said the US would be pulling all troops out of Afghanistan. This was confirmed within the month.
- He claimed earthquakes would be hitting Iran's nuclear facilities in December. Yep.
- There were FOUR facilities hit, not the three made public. Also true.

You May Also Like