The first impeachment was centred around his use of his office to attempt to extort a foreign country into attacking one of his domestic political opponents, and then trying to impede the investigation.
The second impeachment surrounded his incitement of a mob to storm the Capitol and overturn a fair election that he lost.
I understand that these activities are no big deal for fascists, easily papered over by the bad-faith partisanship typical of the GOP (e.g. “those actions didn’t technically break any laws”) and by attemps at false equivalencies by people who claim to be fair-minded liberals . None-the-less, the facts and evidence and substance of the incidents that prompted both impeachments have been established.
Funny how he is now under indictment for dozens of crimes, crimes that dozens of people in his orbit have been indicted and even convicted for. But sure, maybe “unindicted coconspirator one” didn’t commit any crimes.
Or maybe the impeachment votes had nothing to do with whether or not he had committed crimes because one of the parties was never going to vote against their orange god.
You do understand impeachments are not criminal trials, right? They do not have to enumerate the laws broken the way a criminal indictment and trial must. Impeachments don’t do that because it is limiting, as an impeachment can be brought for charges like gross ethical violations that are not violations of criminal law. Impeachments have different rules about the process, evidence, and witnesses too. Not very different, but different
About that. Abuse of power is a crime, both on the federal and state levels. It is typically called abuse of office or abuse of official capacity. If you compare the accusations in the indictment to the federal law on abuse of office, they are the same.
Yeah, the whole “Trump didn’t break any laws” is a bit disingenuous. The purpose of an impeachment is removal from office. It isn’t a criminal trial, isn’t supposed to be a criminal trial, and doesn’t address illegal conduct like a criminal trial.
Though many lawyers are working on bringing those criminal charges and getting convictions. Undoubtedly based on the evidence the impeachments uncovered
That is the point we are discussing, right? That the Democrat’s impeachment of Trump was a big show just like the Republican’s investigation of Biden is. If the Republicans turn up proof that Joe took money to intervene for Burisma in Ukraine (which they have not), there is a small chance that some Democrats might vote against him. But short of that it is all a show.
The Democrats had their big show (first time) about Trump and Ukraine. But he didn’t break any laws, so they sent up an impeachment without any allegations of laws broken knowing that there was not a chance of conviction anyway.
Performance art is performance art. Meantime Bob Menendez still sits in the Senate and has a perfectly good explanation for why he has gold bars in his closet and it took how long to kick out Geroge Santos?
When the Democrats impeached Trump they had a lot of evidence. I’m guessing you didn’t bother to watch the impeachment trials in the Senate. But they did. Video, testimony, emails, ext messages, witnesses. The whole lot.
And that was in the impeachment trial in the Senate. The Republicans cannot find reliable witnesses, have no evidence at all, and can’t even get the articles for impeachment of Biden out of the damned house committee. They don’t even have enough, with a house majority (however slim) to even get to the point where the Senate holds the impeachment trial.
Was the Trump impeachment trial in the Senate a show? Hell yes, and a well done show too. Because a big part of impeaching Trump, particularly for the insurrection, was to show the world what he did and what really happened on 1/6/2020. No one voting for the articles of impeachment in the house or conducting and voting for the impeachment in the Senate had any illusions it would be easy. They knew they’d probably not convict. The Democrats also were not alone. Trump’s impeachments were not entirely partisan the way the attempts at impeaching Biden are. Multiple died-in-the-wool Republicans not only cooperated, they helped lead. It was a show but one with actual substance and evidence attempting to further an important goal and preserve US democracy.
In contrast, the attempts to impeach Biden are nothing but show. Smoke and mirrors and really terrible special effects. Witnesses who have very strong ties to Russia and get indicted for lying to the FBI. The GOP has nothing Biden because there is nothing to have. And they know it.
These two things are not the same.
Now, if you sincerely believe Trump didn’t do what the impeachment articles said he did and you really believe his impeachment trials were nothing more than political stunts, then I doubt there is a way to change your mind. There is reality and then there is fantasy.
Oh, and as for impeaching Bob Mendez, pretty sure senators cannot be impeached. And if they could it would have to be the house that brings articles of impeachment to a vote.
No. As far as I can tell you are the only person trying to “both sides” this. Saying that they’re both just performance art because politics is always somewhat performative is like comparing Hamilton to Real Housewives. One has a lot of thought and historical research to it, one is empty exploitation for clicks.
In this case, they’re engaged in a long-term campaign to smear Joe Biden ahead of the election on the orders of Donald Trump. As Rep. Jared Moskowitz dramatically pointed out, they don’t actually have evidence to proceed with an actual impeachment. It’s political theatre.
