We’ll see what the treacherous McConnell does this time.
Meanwhile, it’s not entirely clear that a Senate trial after he is out of office is even constitutional. I’m not sure at what point they have to challenge it though.
And of course, we have a Court headed by John Roberts...
The Constitution is only a relic in a glass case, it has no relevance or meaning anymore.
Article I says: "The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside
Donald Trump is not the President of the United States. Therefore, the conflict inherent in having the Vice President preside is eliminated, I believe Vice President Harris will be in the chair.
67 votes is a high barrier. The Republican caucus MUST KNOW that if they provide the necessary 17 votes to convict that it will be the end for them - but it is very worrying that they are showing signs of thinking we can go back to Jeb and Mitt.
And you just KNOW that if Trump could (miraculously) be convicted WITHOUT 17 Republican votes (he can't), that McConnell et al would be very, very relieved when 49 Democrats + only 2 Republicans voted to ban him from office in the future. THAT sentence, following conviction by 67 votes, only requires 51.
At the outset!
The irony here is Madame Antoinette's reliance on Belknap post-resignation trial, who was a hero of Republican Reconstruction and had prosecuted the KKK. Driven them from the Army.
The Senate trial devolved into an imbroglio where no less than Custer pointed fingers at Belknap AND US Grant's brother Orvil (for a no-work cartography contract from Interior).
She wants Trump in the stocks, it ain't never gonna happen. Trump has what Belknap never had - presidential immunity.
Unless Miotch wises up and whips his caucus into an immediate Dismissal, what's gonna happen is that SCOTUS and no less than Queeg Roberts will be forced to address the immunity 'gap' between Nixon v. Fitzgerald and Clinton v. Jones.
If Alan Dershowitz is correct, and I have no expectation that he’s not, whatever the House did is unconstitutional on its face, and is, therefore, null and void.
McConnell doesn’t HAVE to do anything but laugh in Schumer’s putrescent face.
They snakes make/change the rules when needed.
>>I’m not sure at what point they have to challenge it though.
Donald Trump doesn’t have standing, he is no longer president