Posted: 16 January 2021 at 10:31am | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
Well, that is an interesting thing to discuss.
Technically, heˋs been impeached for incitement of insurrection, specifically pertaining to the speech he gave on 6 January at the Ellipse in Washington, DC.
The point of the example was to elucidate possible differences in what he can or can't pardon himself and I could have used any hypothetical high crime or misdemeanour.
My example, was insurrection following the 2020 Election -- I think it is the repeated lie that the election was stolen that created the conditions for a violent assault on the capitol.
The House's articles of impeachement seem to focus to a large degree on his speech on 6 January, which I think it's hard to convict on. Trump can argue his words on 6 January could not possibly have caused people to plant pipe bombs, load their vans with molotov cocktails, etc. which were all premeditated acts, not things incited in the passion of the moment.
The articles of impeachment also cite the phone call to Brad Raffensperger and only mentions in passing with one line 'prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the the certification of the 2020 Presidential election'
It was this last bit that I think should have been the real focus. It was his repeated bollocks claims post-election that are more to blame than the speech itself on the day of the assault.
|