We’d also be done with him if he’d been prosecuted for the crimes. Even though they were fairly minor, like trying to usurp the will of the people and overthrow democracy, it would have done the trick.
If you mean the 34 felonies, that judge effectively said his punishment would be nothing. Which is very fun by the way - when has a non rich person gotten to shrug off dozens of felony convictions? He was never charged, as far as I’m aware, in connection to the coup attempt.
Gonna get real pedantic here. It’s passé that “impeachment” is the part the House of Representatives does, then the Senate gets their vote. If 2/3 of the Senage agree the person did the bad, this means they are “convicted” by the Senate which automatically leads to removal from office. So, a conviction in reference to the broader “impeachment” process comes with very real consequences, by definition.
Yes, you’re right, an acquittal does mean not convicted. Even when the general attitude among the Republicans wasn’t that the impeachment findings were wrong, just that it wasn’t a big deal to them (mainly concerning the first time, but I guess also the second since storming the Capitol wasn’t enough to change their mind). So again the message was sent that he had free reign.
We’d also be done with him if he’d been prosecuted for the crimes. Even though they were fairly minor, like trying to usurp the will of the people and overthrow democracy, it would have done the trick.
He was prosecuted and convicted, just never actually sentenced.
If you mean the 34 felonies, that judge effectively said his punishment would be nothing. Which is very fun by the way - when has a non rich person gotten to shrug off dozens of felony convictions? He was never charged, as far as I’m aware, in connection to the coup attempt.
Impeachments without a result are also convictions without consequences. If anything they showed him he could do whatever he wanted, so he has.
Gonna get real pedantic here. It’s passé that “impeachment” is the part the House of Representatives does, then the Senate gets their vote. If 2/3 of the Senage agree the person did the bad, this means they are “convicted” by the Senate which automatically leads to removal from office. So, a conviction in reference to the broader “impeachment” process comes with very real consequences, by definition.
Yes, you’re right, an acquittal does mean not convicted. Even when the general attitude among the Republicans wasn’t that the impeachment findings were wrong, just that it wasn’t a big deal to them (mainly concerning the first time, but I guess also the second since storming the Capitol wasn’t enough to change their mind). So again the message was sent that he had free reign.
Definitely don’t disagree with you there.
Thats true too.