Impartial Justice #2

 We hear daily that there’s no chance the Republicans will vote to convict Trump for inciting insurrection on January 6th. 

After January 6th; however, many Republican Senators had a different story:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
“The mob was fed lies,” McConnell said on the Senate floor nearly two weeks after Jan. 6. “They were provoked by the president and other powerful people. And they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

“The call to march down the Capitol — it was inciting,” Cramer said. “It was pouring fuel on a spark.”

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)

“I think it was a tragic day, and he was part of it.”

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)

“Certainly encouraging people to go to the Capitol and some of the sort of             implied suggestions I think are, you know … they just encourage the                         wrong behavior.”

         Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). 

          “If anything he urged, in a very emotional situation, very inappropriate action by                   people that appear to be his supporters.”

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
“It’s past time for the president to accept the results of the election, quit misleading the American people and repudiate mob violence,” he said on the night of Jan. 6. He also cited “the senators and representatives who fanned the flames by encouraging the president.”

Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.)
“We witnessed today the damage that can result when men in power and responsibility refuse to acknowledge the truth,” he said on Jan. 6. “We saw bloodshed because a demagogue chose to spread falsehoods and sow distrust of his own fellow Americans. Let’s not abet such deception.”

Only Toomey voted to proceed with the trial as Constitutional. 

What happened between January 6th and the actual impeachment trial to change the opinions of these Senators? As I listen to the House Managers putting together a cohesive and damming report of Trump’s history of incitement along with the actual words of the insurrectionists saying they were there because of their president and they were awaiting his orders. I find it incredibly hard to believe that anyone could not draw a straight line from Trump’s rhetoric to the tragedy of January 6th - certainly not if they were trying to deliver the “impartial justice,” of their oath. 

Were these Senators seated for a legal trial, they would be removed for their prejudice. 

Since they have taken an oath to be impartial, they should at the very least be charged with perjury.

 

 

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Character House

  When I was a child, I found a book my mother had bought through a book club. It was called Little Britches . The story was narrated by a boy about nine years old, and I was close to that age, so I read it with interest. The author Ralph Moody wrote about his relationship with his father growing up on a ranch in Colorado . He went on to write several more books about his coming of age in the early 20 th century, and I have them all. I read them aloud to my children when they were growing up, and every now and then, I revisit them.   The first book recounted an episode when Ralph lied to his father about something he wanted. The father punished him, but he also told him a story which resonates with me even today. He told Ralph that a man’s character is like his house. When a man lies to get what he wants, it’s like tearing the boards off his house and burning them to keep himself warm. Eventually he will have destroyed his house for selfish reasons, and a man with a ruine...
Read more

Impartial Justice #1

  As I have been watching the second trial of Donald J. Trump, I have been overwhelmed by the mass of arguments meticulously planned and well delivered by the House Managers. Yesterday the impactful video showing the real time juxtaposition of events on January 6th and then, the arguments concerning the constitutionality of the trial seemed to have the weight of truth behind them. It seemed to me that anyone who was listening would come to the conclusion that the January 6th insurrection was not only instigated by Trump, but also had precedent to be a constitutional trial. Trump's defense team gave an incoherent and disorganized defense of their stance that the trial was not constitutional.  Then the vote came: 44 senators voted that the trial was not constitutional . Even though 56 Senators voted that it was, I could not believe that 44 voted against the overwhelming evidence presented by the Democratic Managers. How could this be? Later, I was struck by what  Senat...
Read more