On Wednesday, the House of Representatives impeached President Donald Trump a second time, 232-197, for “incitement of insurrection” in the aftermath of a violent mob attack on the US Capitol last week.
The House made accusations against the president of engaging “in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States,” and pointedly noted Trump’s statements to his supporters at a rally held at the Ellipse right before they marched to the Capitol building after Trump asked them to march “peacefully.” The Democrats always leave that part out.
“There, he reiterated false claims that ‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide,'” the impeachment article reads.
“He also willfully made statements that, in context, encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the Capitol, such as: ‘if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.'”
Legal authorities like Alan Dershowitz apply the “Brandenberg Test” to speech to determine whether inflammatory statements are protected under the First Amendment, or could be restricted and considered “incitement.”
The Cornell Law School provides a two-part test that is derived in Brandenberg vs. Ohio (1969),determines that the government may prohibit speech if it is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and is “likely to incite or produce such action.”
Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, a Trump appointee at the US Agency for Global Media who has experience prosecuting protesters for incitement, wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece Sunday that Trump’s “critics want him charged for inflaming the emotions of angry Americans,” but William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution said that alone does not satisfy the elements of any criminal offense.”
Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News senior judicial analyst argued that “the essence of criminal incitement is immediacy.”
“On January 6, because there was time for more speech to rebut what the president said, his words are protected,” Judge Napolitano explains. “He cannot be prosecuted or even sued for them.”
Meanwhile, Director of the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute, Ilya Shapiro, said that the legal standard isn’t as relevant because “impeachment is inherently a political judgment.” In other words, just like the first impeachment of this president, the Democrats’ articles of impeachment didn’t meet the standard of any crime, but impeachment is a political process. The words are “high crimes and misdemeanors” but the Democrats get away with it by the process being political while at the same time they lie to the American people and say that the president committed high crimes and misdemeanors. The Founding Fathers never dreamed that such degenerate, low life people would be elected to Congress. It just so happens that crooked members of Congress can impeach a president who did absolutely nothing wrong.
“The standard for impeachment — high crimes and misdemeanors — is whatever Congress makes it out to be,” Shapiro said. “But fundamentally, it relates to a serious breach of the public trust. Not all crimes are impeachable offenses. If the president was jaywalking and got a ticket, that’s not impeachable. And not all impeachable offenses are crimes.” Trust me, the Democrats would impeach Trump for jaywalking. They impeached him for a normal diplomatic phone call with the president of Ukraine, and they impeached him again, this time for incitement when there is no evidence he incited a riot.
William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, argued as well that a sitting president’s actions can be impeachable, even if they aren’t criminal.
“There are actions that, while not strictly speaking illegal, are violations of the responsibilities that someone undertakes when he enters into a particular office of trust and confidence,” Galston said. “The article of impeachment should be read – this is my bottom line – as accusing the president of violating his oath of office by doing what he did. That’s a constitutional standard, but not necessarily a legal standard.”
Except the president didn’t violate his oath of office. He simply asked supporters to “peacefully” march to the Capitol building and let their voices be heard. How many past presidents called for marches? How many members of Congress called for marches? The president is still a citizen and he has the right to ask for people to peacefully march, and that is exactly what he did. He didn’t incite a riot.
In fact, the FBI has now confirmed that the riot was planned days in advance by leftists in ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter. The FBI issued a warning a day before the Capitol riot that extremists were planning an uprising in Washington, a plot the schemers described as “war” to concur with the Congressional certification of Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory, that he stole. Does that sound like Trump supporters? Trump held about 60 rallies and not a single time where Trump’s supporters the cause of violence.
“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence,” reads a section of the report, according to the Post, which goes on to describe detailed plans for the attack: “An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating ‘Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled.” Does that sound like Trump supporters? Not on your life.
So then I guess Chuck Schumer should be expelled from the Senate over the time he publicly threatened two Supreme Court justices, which was far worse than anything Trump said on January 6.
Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said after the House’s impeachment vote, the “Senate process will now begin at our first regular meeting following receipt of the article from the House,” which is January 19, the day before Trump leaves office.
“Given the rules, procedures, and Senate precedents that govern presidential impeachment trials, there is simply no chance that a fair or serious trial could conclude before President-elect Biden is sworn in next week,” McConnell said in a statement Wednesday.
There is a question of if it is Constitutional to try a president once he leaves office. On January 20 at noon, Donald Trump becomes a private citizen once again. The Senate cannot try a private citizen for removal from office, because the private citizen is not in office at the time. But the Democrats will likely try Donald Trump anyway because they want to convict him so that he cannot run for office ever again.
The Democrats are mean and evil people.