Prickly City by Scott Stantis for February 16, 2021

Once again, Carmen and Winslow’s roles are reversed.

And the only reason he was out of office by the time of the trial is that his supporters dragged their feet until he was (out of office).

Apparently Scott Stantis does not understand the Constitutional provisions about impeachment.

Impeachment is a POLITICAL process relating to the holding of office.

There are TWO and only two penalties that attach to the impeachment process, though Article I Section 3 makes it clear that, separate and apart from the two penalties applicable to this POLITICAL process regarding the holding of office, all other criminal penalties are also available, separately, through the regular criminal justice system.

Stantis appears to understand one of the penalties, but is uninformed about the second.

The two penalties available regarding the holding of office are:

1. Removal from office. Clearly this no longer applies after one has left office and does not apply in the case of FORMER president Trump (though it is ironic that some of his supporters are saying that he is still the legitimate president, which would undermine their whole “removal from office” objection).

2. DISQUALIFICATION TO HOLD FUTURE OFFICE. This clearly applies to Trump, who has proven himself to be a threat to our democratic republic, election integrity and the general peace and public order. For all the talk of “law and order” and support for the “thin blue line,” when the poop hit the fan, turns out that Trump incites a lawless, violent mob to attack the United States Capitol building and KILL AND MAIM POLICE officers.

Who needs a time machine to change the future when you have Mitch McConnell…..

https://www.motherjones.com/mojo-wire/2021/02/mitch-mcconnell-delayed-trumps-impeachment-trial-now-he-says-the-delay-makes-it-unconstitutional/

1) There’s more to the penalty than removal: disqualification, which is quite relevant.

2) Impeachment of a former official has historically been done at least twice.

3) The current Senate debated the question and ruled the practice constitutional. Those Senators citing constitutionality as a reason for voting nay are in effect saying they don’t need to abide by Senate rules…

Now that it is settled that a former President can be impeached, there’s no reason not to impeach for a THIRD time! He must be kept out of office or next time he could tell his mob to bring guns. We’ll have to see what’s left of the GOP in the Senate after 2022.

Stantis is telling the same LIE that Moscow Mitch tells — that the ONLY reason to convict is removal from office.

Prohibition from holding federal public office is the other reason. I think it also carries forfeiture of pension and maybe SS protection, but I’m not sure about those.

.

Once Moscow Mitch established the LIE about removal being the ONLY goal, he freed himself from ‘carefully considering’ the facts of the case, or considering any facts whatsoever.

Doing so, he ensures the GOP becomes the POT.

.

#TraitorTrump

Weird indeed that Winslow calls Stantis stupid. It’s been abundantly clear for at least 2 weeks that the goal was disqualification. 14th amendment option still remains.

Stantisferlame

It’s never too late to do the right thing.

The trial was to change the Constitution but lawless republicans failed the test.

Fascist autocratic Republicans were fine with a dictator, they hate democracy.

The point was/is to establish criminal liability. Did that not occur to SS? Or anyone else?

It’s a comic strip!

In the libs case, there’s NO line. Weird to remove someone from an office that he’s not in and downright stupid to waste millions to keep yourself in the news. Liberalism is a rejection of reality.

This is what you call a straw man argument.

(apparently) Number 2 nails this one. A dead rattler can still kill you.

Throw something in the trash? You’re not done until you put the lid back on.

Weird how clueless some people are… are they unable to process information, or do they merely refuse to?

The penalty was prevention from holding public office again. But the laws and procedures are written so that first he had to be convicted, and that conviction did happen to carry a now redundant penalty of removal from office.

While Trump was in office, Republicans claimed that we couldn’t prosecute a sitting President. Once Trump was out of office, Republicans claimed there was no use prosecuting him… even while they also claimed that he was still President because the election was stolen…

There’s a fine line between weird and stable genius…