Incitement of Insurrection.

[Mr Spinkles]

I have read in multiple reports Trump refused call in the National Guard (Pence did) and he showed no concern or worry for what was going on. But why would he? Those terrorists are "special people" and he "loves them." And apparently while those hooligans were in the Chambers they were asking "where's Pence?" Amd we knew before hand Trump was seriously butthurt over Pence refusing to overturn the election.

From NYT:

In his opening, Mr. Trump claimed that he “immediately deployed the National Guard” to “expel the intruders,” despite accounts from people familiar with the events saying he had resisted those calls and that it was, in fact, Mr. Pence who had ordered the National Guard to deploy.


“The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy,” Mr. Trump said, a day after he had ended a video telling the rioters to “go home” but ended with, “I love you.”

 

[Sunstone]

Not only did he incite insurrection, he is *continuing* to do so by every means possible.

Good gods! Who on earth could have seen that one coming?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Good gods! Who on earth could have seen that one coming?

People don’t seem to understand that Trump is like the monster in a B horror film. Just when you let your guard down because you think he’s been incapacitated, that’s when he gets up and renews the attack in an encore of terror. He doesn’t stop.

“Thank goodness that’s over” is not the sentiment we need right now. He is already starting to agitate again.

 

[Stevicus]

For some reason, this scene came to mind. I wonder if something similar is going on in the White House.

 

[pearl]

First, here's a question for you. Assuming (in much the same manner as 'assuming' the sun is up at noon) Trump is guilty of incitement to insurrection, can America as a nation muster the political will to anything about it? I mean, of course, anything that is likely to seriously hamper or prevent future demagogues from inciting people to insurrection using Trump's playbook?

I think only impeachment with conviction will assure Trump will never run again. He has created an 'army' that remains faithful to him. He has told them he 'loves' them, these 'people' who wore shirts with lettering,
6MWE” shirt, which stands for “Six Million Wasn’t Enough,”

Neo-Nazis, QAnon and Camp Auschwitz: A guide to the hate symbols and signs on display at the Capitol riots - Jewish Telegraphic Agency (jta.org)

The president of the United States of America told these 'people'
"I Love You'

 

[Polymath257]

I have read in multiple reports Trump refused call in the National Guard (Pence did) and he showed no concern or worry for what was going on. But why would he? Those terrorists are "special people" and he "loves them." And apparently while those hooligans were in the Chambers they were asking "where's Pence?" Amd we knew before hand Trump was seriously butthurt over Pence refusing to overturn the election.

Did you see the guy with the zip-ties? Those are essentially handcuffs. He was out to take someone hostage and, I have no doubt, would have been happy to kill a couple of people (Pelosi, for example).

 

[Polymath257]

I just want to stress that this is NOT over.

Among the far right, the storming of the Capitol is seen as a victory and the rhetoric has only escalated. Their goal is explicitly to kill members of Congress, security, and anyone who stands in their way.

This is an *active* insurrection. Trump moving to parler or making his own media outlet is just continuing the same game plan.

I dearly hope that the security response over the next few weeks (even after the inauguration) is strong and overwhelming. Otherwise, I am concerned we will see another, stronger, attempt to overthrow our government.

At this point, Trump is guilty of treason.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

They appointed a Supreme Court judge in a week. They could do this if they want to.

From what I've been reading in various articles:

Apparently, the Senate isn't scheduled to start its next session until Jan. 19, and to convene early would require the unanimous support of the entire Senate. Rumour has it that Mitch McConnell wants to steer clear of the whole mess, and doesn't want the spectacle of Republican Senators voting for or against conviction.

... so it looks unlikely that the Senate would even hear the impeachment until after Biden's confirmation.

Meanwhile, though, once Harris is sworn in as VP and the two new Georgia Senators take office, Chuck Schumer will take over as Senate Majority Leader and will be in a position to force a vote to convict Trump.

Most sources I've seen say that an official can be impeached and convicted after they leave office. While Trump's removal would be moot at that point, the Senate would still have the option of imposing penalties like:

- barring Trump from holding federal public office ever again
- cutting off his presidential pension
- taking away his lifetime Secret Service detail

Edit: so going back to my reply to the OP:

- I think a quick impeachment (by the House) is a near-certainty.
- I think a quick conviction - or acquittal - by the Senate is a near-impossibility.
- I think a conviction after Trump is out of office probably has an even chance of happening.

 

[fantome profane]

From what I've been reading in various articles:

Apparently, the Senate isn't scheduled to start its next session until Jan. 19, and to convene early would require the unanimous support of the entire Senate. Rumour has it that Mitch McConnell wants to steer clear of the whole mess, and doesn't want the spectacle of Republican Senators voting for or against conviction.

... so it looks unlikely that the Senate would even hear the impeachment until after Biden's confirmation.

Meanwhile, though, once Harris is sworn in as VP and the two new Georgia Senators take office, Chuck Schumer will take over as Senate Majority Leader and will be in a position to force a vote to convict Trump.

Most sources I've seen say that an official can be impeached and convicted after they leave office. While Trump's removal would be moot at that point, the Senate would still have the option of imposing penalties like:

- barring Trump from holding federal public office ever again
- cutting off his presidential pension
- taking away his lifetime Secret Service detail

Edit: so going back to my reply to the OP:

- I think a quick impeachment (by the House) is a near-certainty.
- I think a quick conviction - or acquittal - by the Senate is a near-impossibility.
- I think a conviction after Trump is out of office probably has an even chance of happening.

Agreed on all points. When I pointed out how quickly they got a Supreme Court Justice through that was to show that they could do this if they wanted to, not that they would do it. The only thing I will add is that the odds of Trump being removed will increase if Trump continues to act in a way that encourages violence and puts peoples lives in danger. The only one who can convince the Senate to convict Trump is Trump.

 

[crossfire]

Did you see the guy with the zip-ties? Those are essentially handcuffs. He was out to take someone hostage and, I have no doubt, would have been happy to kill a couple of people (Pelosi, for example).

What do you think they would have done if they found AOC? "Teach" her a lesson?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Agreed on all points. When I pointed out how quickly they got a Supreme Court Justice through that was to show that they could do this if they wanted to, not that they would do it.

Sure. What I was getting at was that even if the will of the House and Senate is overwhelmingly in favour of a quick impeachment and conviction, it only takes one dissenter to throw a monkey wrench into the works.

The only thing I will add is that the odds of Trump being removed will increase if Trump continues to act in a way that encourages violence and puts peoples lives in danger. The only one who can convince the Senate to convict Trump is Trump.

I think the odds of Trump being removed are effectively nil at this point.

I've already touched on impeachment. The other way to remove him - via the 25th Amendment - isn't going to happen either because of what's happening with Trump's cabinet.

The 25th Amendment requires the VP and the majority of the cabinet to support impeachment. The problem is that the cabinet members who are troubled by Trump's recent actions keep resigning, so increasingly only Trump's die-hard loyalists remain.

This means that the worse his behaviour gets, the more the rats will leave the sinking ship, and the harder it gets to achieve that majority support for removal among the remaining cabinet members.

 

[Revoltingest]

More incitement of insurrection....
Fury as Maxine Waters tells Minnesota BLM protesters 'we've got to get more confrontational' | Daily Mail Online

 

[Thief]

Incitement of Insurrection. Is Trump guilty of his? Will he be impeached for it?

No....he is innocent

unless you want to follow down the line
and arrest ALL that ever agreed with him

 

[Kooky]

More incitement of insurrection....
Fury as Maxine Waters tells Minnesota BLM protesters 'we've got to get more confrontational' | Daily Mail Online

What standards for "incitement" - and "insurrection", for that matter - are you applying here?

 

[Revoltingest]

What standards for "incitement" - and "insurrection", for that matter - are you applying here?

Speech designed to inspire more violence.
What are your standards?

 

[Kooky]

Speech designed to inspire more violence

"More violence..." than what?

 

[Revoltingest]

"More violence..." than what?

I recommend answering a prior question before
posing a new one.
Otherwise, one might get the mistaken impression
that this is akin to the kid's game of asking "Why?"
after every answer, ie, no intent to converse.

 

[Stevicus]

What standards for "incitement" - and "insurrection", for that matter - are you applying here?

I think it's a common standard in the case of any speech which incites violence or creates a clear and present danger.

 

[Aštra’el]

More incitement of insurrection....
Fury as Maxine Waters tells Minnesota BLM protesters 'we've got to get more confrontational' | Daily Mail Online

I can respect many sides of human nature, beautiful and terrible alike, but I can never respect hypocrisy.

 

[Kooky]

I recommend answering a prior question before
posing a new one.

I recommend phrasing your statements more clearly and precisely.

But you are, of course, free to continue with vague insinuations while levying caustic sarcasm at people for having the gall to request further clarification.
You're a free man and I'm not the boss of you.