And doesn’t it seem weird the Senate (and not the courts) decided what’s unconstitutional? Our current court would not agree with the Senate.
I would never put a kitty in that position. What kind of a monster did this! 
I gone from sadness watching this video to ROFL after the lawyer with the kitten filter.
The current court would probably have punted. The legalities here are pretty clear. This is entirely constitutional, even the GOPs own lawyers, judges and think tanks are pointing that out.
And the courts have repeatedly held that they have no constitutional role in determining the ins and outs of impeachment. Including this court, recently.
If there was any chance of that gaining any traction in an actual court we’d be watching a law suit not a procedural vote.
The only people saying this isn’t constitutional are the congressional GOP and Trump’s lawyers. And they’re doing it with legal citations that say its constitutional.
They’re just looking for a process argument so they can burn time without directly addressing the charges.
A procedural vote on the subject is just about telling them to shut the fuck up, and undercutting that attempt.
Heather Cox Richardson makes a compelling argument that votes like this one and Rand Paul’s motion last week are not proxies for the conviction vote. Of course GOP senators are desperate to vote against having to vote on conviction. They want to keep playing both factions of their voters. But when it comes down to the conviction vote itself, can they afford to alienate half of their voters? Especially when there is a third option - not showing up at all. When backed against the wall, only 45’s biggest fans like Ron Johnson and Ted Cruz will stick by him, while all senators like Collins and Toomey have to do to see 45 convicted without going on the record either way is to not show up.
yep, this is it. he’s covering his head while he drinks. he says that he didn’t wear his yamulke (sp?) because he didn’t want to “offend” anyone, which is sad, considering that religious freedom is a foundational principle of our country.
Oh, thanks to you and @subextraordinaire for the insight.
Now I feel kind of like a jerk for poking fun. I did not know this was a religious custom.
I will take it off the list I was compiling of “Republicans drinking water awkwardly.”
And also, yes, so sad that he felt he couldn’t wear a yarmulke!
I feel shame, too. You’re not alone.
It reminded me a bit of this story, and how ignorance of other peoples customs can lead to dangerous assumptions.
Not that you or I were going to anything harmful with our “awkward drinking” compilations, but it’s a good reminder…
There’s so much going on here… Who, exactly, is he afraid of offending? (Rhetorical question)
Also, they are already framing part of the defense in terms of “Trump was using protected speech, the rioters acted on their own”, which means drawing on the first amendment. Which also protects free practice of religion. Like wearing a yarmulke.
didn’t this happen in the house with the vote to remove greene from her committees? the first vote to consider it had maybe 1 republican vote, to actually remove her had 11 voting in favor.
something like that i think…
Yes. A real “portraits in courage” scenario. But for the impeachment conviction, it can work to our advantage. Cowardice actually helps convict 45.
17 Republican Senators to convict, or 25 taking a long liquid lunch.
If Trump does go down I don’t know that his base will make a distinction between “Republicans who voted to hold him accountable” and “Republicans who had a chance to save him and chose not to.”
Save him from what, though? Being removed from an office he no longer holds?
If they frame it as “walking out in protest” is that enough to fool the rubes? I mean, they fell for 45’s con; they aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed.
Not if their God-King frames it as a betrayal.
i learned something today, too – i just wish he had felt comfortable fully adhering to his faith.
Loyalty is no protection against that. Look at Pence - 45 asked him to do something that he couldn’t do, and not being able to do it was considered a fatal betrayal. At some point, they have to shake loose from him or he will destroy them all. They aren’t all idiots. At least some of them know that.
I dunno, man. There’s been precious little evidence of this. Collins sure did a bang up job on the last trial.
(Eta: I say this having had so much hope that this time they’d turn on him…only to have Lucy yank the football again.)
