The Tragedy of Trump’s Second Impeachment

Подписаться 3,2 млн

Просмотров 1,4 млн

50% 1

⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
Even with Democratic control, the second impeachment trial looked a lot like the first.
🦅 Support the channel on Patreon (and Discord)! legaleagle.link/patreon
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)

Опубликовано:

5 май 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 7 тыс.

@LegalEagle 3 года назад

Hopefully my last Trump video for a while! 🦅 Support the channel on Patreon (and Discord)! legaleagle.link/patreon 🚀 Extended & ad-free versions on Nebula/CuriosityStream! legaleagle.link/extras

@ipyramid 3 года назад

Objection! We will never get enough of your Trump videos!

@ElSelcho77 3 года назад

Time to let him slip into obscurity. Or prison.

@bfunkt4313 3 года назад

Objection! Can you do a short on Georgia vs Hamilton? Thx!

@brimeetsbooks 3 года назад

Let’s hope!!

@brandc1977 3 года назад

We get it, you don't like Trump.. move on Already

@grillmadeofrecycledgrenade3197 3 года назад

The only trial in history where the jurors can openly admit on national television that they are incapable of remaining impartial and still be allowed to participate.

@nicholasfarrell5981 3 года назад

They did it the first time, too.

@octopusmime 3 года назад

so where do we go from here?

@LdyVder 3 года назад

@@octopusmime Stop voting for them, full stop. Too bad, people won't stop voting for bad people.

@0Clewi0 3 года назад

Sadly if they weren't allowed you will have the problem of not having the 67 jurors

@lc9245 3 года назад

@@LdyVder like Biden? Who suggested China dealing with the Uighur “different cultural norms”? “Bad”, is relative. You only call the ones blocking your political career “bad”. If everybody, including establishment supporters and Trump’s supporters, actually have more sympathy, we wouldn’t have this situation.

@shevek2954 3 года назад

Weird trial: the court was the scene of the crime and the jury was filled with witnesses, victims and co-conspirators.

@connormcconnell7881 3 года назад

Sounds like something out of a Phoenix Wright game

@TodayLifeIsGoood 3 года назад

@@connormcconnell7881 Damn right it does XD

@billbradley4878 3 года назад

We call it a trial but a more accurate description would be a congressional procedure.

@Pestilencemage 3 года назад

Or MORE accurate still: "kangaroo court where dems attempt to subvert democracy with massive hypocrisy, for the purpose of virtue signaling in a political stunt."

@18booma 3 года назад

@@Pestilencemage What's virtue signaling?

@patricks_music 3 года назад

McConnell: *holds off vote until Trump is out of office* McConnell: Doesn't vote for Trump's conviction. McConnell: "I would have voted to impeach him if he was in office." America:

@MustPassTruck 3 года назад

Pelosi withheld sending the impeachment to the senate too. Cocaine Mitch is a scum bag who is probably under pelosi's thumb.

@simonwinn8757 3 года назад

Kentucky: McConnell we are censuring you, don't take actions against Trump.

@jeffburns3240 3 года назад

The House sent the Articles of Impeachment after the inaugeration. No matter what McConnell said (about which is fair to criticize him not calling an emergency session), his statement had no impact on when the articles were delivered. That was on Pelosi and the House managers.

@josephrogers6537 2 года назад

@@MustPassTruck No. The House voted for impeachment on Jan 13th. McConnell refused to convene the Senate before the 19th. Pelosi couldn't send impeachment to the Senate that was not in order.

@MustPassTruck 2 года назад

@@josephrogers6537 Oh well, it was all a sham anyways.

@macanaeh 3 года назад

A real lawyer openly talking about jury nullification? We are truly in the end times

@hunterham9414 7 месяцев назад

Jury nullification has been around for a long time and has been used for good and bad. Used to not convict run away slaves, but also used to not convict lynch mobs.

@lucialamprey2690 6 месяцев назад

No. The end times are when the donkey can no longer kick insurgents in the teeth.

@SarcasticData 3 года назад

I can't think of a more poetic display of our political system than having a trial where the "jury" were also co-conspirators and had already announce how they would vote before it even began. I'm starting to think this whole "check and balances" thing isn't working as intended.

@boxingexpert5427 3 года назад

I agree with everything, it's a shame.

@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 3 года назад

So the fact that the prosecution *fabricated evidence* isn't what bothers you? The fact that people disagreed with this clown show of an impeachment is what bothers you?

@andrewmeyer8783 3 года назад

@@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 If you could send me a credible source explaining which evidence was fabricated I'd appreciate that

@adamknott7830 3 года назад

@@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 well it was a clown show, we just failed to convict that guilty clown

@boxingexpert5427 3 года назад

@@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 Everything is a perfect, everything is fabricated, everything is fake news, I'm surprised you can even type at this point.

@marknugent9851 3 года назад

“What’s a high crime? It doesn’t even have to be a crime. It’s just when you start using your office and you’re acting in a way that hurts people, you’ve committed a high crime.” -Lyndsey Graham, 1999

@marlinbundo2409 3 года назад

@@sandboxproductions_youtube "If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it" - Lady G

@tacokoneko 3 года назад

Lindsey Graham is our version of the Tiberius Claudius Nero (b. 85 BC, d. 33 BC) from the (very) late Roman Republic (not to be confused with Emperor Nero 100 years later). They both always choose whichever side looks like it's winning, bend down and lick the boots and grovel and fawn over whoever is in charge, and then as soon as it looks like someone else is becoming more powerful they immediately turn complete traitor, run to that person's side and do it all over again

@nickycharles9699 3 года назад

Lindsay Graham is one of the slimiest politicians 🤢

@______608 3 года назад

I swear....that guy is an absolute hypocrite

@grayaj23 3 года назад

@@tacokoneko 100% on point. He's even flopped twice since the election -- from taking a "now we'll be rid of the asshole, he's gone too far" back to "yes, this is his water that I'm carrying. I hope he notices me and smiles at me."

@claireleblanc5471 3 года назад

Two thirds majority? Thats what is needed? We can't get the current senate to come up with a two thirds majority to agree that peanutbutter exists!

@Arldavis 3 года назад

yeah a simple majority is a pretty low bar. If you're in a 50/50 gridlock, getting one more person on your side isn't too hard. But to convince the vast majority of people of something, takes much more effort, thus making a 2/3 majority a high bar.

@Tzizenorec 3 года назад

Impeachment is supposed to be hard, not just a partisan "we have a slight advantage, do it quick!" thing.

@mireillelebeau2513 3 года назад

Republican have nothing to do with politics and every thing to do with don't give nothing to the people of US

@Tzizenorec 3 года назад

@@mireillelebeau2513 You say this when Donald Trump sent out stimulus checks within the last year. _Libertarians_ are the party that won't ever give the people freebies, because unlike the Republicans or Democrats they put economics ahead of politics every single time.

@LC-sc3en 3 года назад

@@Tzizenorec if libertarians were economics over politics, they would have given much more in stimulus money. It is an economic fact that such payments in a time of recession speed up economic recovery.

@fabrisseterbrugghe8567 3 года назад

Eugene Goodman is DC born and bred and is still a District resident. In other words, he offered up his life for a political body where he has no representation. Truly a hero.

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

I suppose it could be construed that way. But I personally disagree.

@getbn6547 3 года назад

"Who said anything about murder? I just help my competition to retire". -Al Capone. Mass Murderer.

@JargonMadjin 3 года назад

It's funny because Al was arrested for tax evasion in the end

@wannabecar8733 3 года назад

Oversimplified

@jakublizon6375 3 года назад

@@wannabecar8733 Then elaborate... If you are able that is...

@titotheninja 3 года назад

@@jakublizon6375 its a youtube channel. its where the quote that pongo used comes from. wannabe wasnt saying the capone thing was oversimplified. oh and by the way, the oversimplified channel is excellent. i highly recommend it.

@janvanv 3 года назад

@PongoThomas neither does tRump.

@stairmasternem 3 года назад

I’ve never seen a trial held where the jury was made up of victims and friends to the one on trial, but here we are.

@stairmasternem 3 года назад

@ItsYoBoy Kris Fields Doesn’t help impeachment has more common with Whose Line Is It anyways then it does a real trial.

@hazukichanx408 3 года назад

Well, if we don't let the powerful cover each other's asses, we'd force them to behave with a tiny bit of accountability, maybe perform competently at their duties to avoid being removed from office! _Can't have THAT in the good ol' USA!!_

@HeartFeathers 3 года назад

It's like if a jury was stacked with abused spouses and stockholm syndrome victims of the accused.

@stairmasternem 3 года назад

@@HeartFeathers to quote Robert Evans, it’s like stacking the jury with the family of the victim of a horrific murder and the people who sold the bone saws used.

@geraltrivia6148 3 года назад

@ItsYoBoy Kris Fields Whose Line Is It Anyway is an improv show where the rules are made up and the points don't matter.

@TheRhetoricGamer 3 года назад

Jury nullification particularly bugs me. "I know we democratically voted on the rules for trying this case, but I don't agree with the rules, so I'm going to ignore them and vote however I want."

@thebolas000 3 года назад

"Screw the rules! I have opinions!"

@CaseyDplays 3 года назад

It's a way to allow a vote against rules that should have never been in place in the first place and has been used to strike down laws that were either unfairly applied or simply unconstitutional while at the same time preventing a person from suffering the consequences of unjust laws at the last possible moment for them. It also requires a jury to agree by a majority at least that this is what should be done. I believe it has its place as a proper legal tool. However, it was certainly not applied correctly in the impeachment trial as it's pretty clear the framers meant impeachment to apply after one left office and their is no good reason to argue that shouldn't be the case. At lower levels though, their are many laws that were designed to punish one group and not another for the same actions. That's were jury nullification is needed.

@nickcollins1052 10 месяцев назад

One reason I've heard for what it is necessary is in cases of spousal abuse where the victim snaps and murders their abuser but in an act of cold blood not as legal self defense. So shooting your husband in the head while he's asleep vs shooting him as he's beating you on the ground. The law does not protect the victim from being charged with murder so without jury nullification a person could go to jail for murder when they were simply doing what was necessary for their safety (and potentially the safety of the victim and abuser's children who could also be victims.) Getting out and leaving those kinds of situations can be very difficult and dangerous for victims so the death on the abuser is some times the only way to be free and safe. So a jury who has heard all of the horrific acts of abuse the victim went through can chose to nullify.

@KnakuanaRka 5 месяцев назад

As others have mentioned, the intended use of jury nullification is to act against laws that are unfairly written, unconstitutional or unreasonable (like disproportionate punishment for minor drug crimes), or to protect someone whose behavior is sympathetic and considered moral for reasons not considered by law (like someone who kills an abusive spouse to escape them in a situation not covered by self defense). Compared to how someone else put it, it’s more “Screw the rules, I’m doing what’s right/they don’t deserve it!”. But I do agree that its application here is harmful and inappropriate.

@EpicScizor 2 месяца назад

It's also totally legal, especially in impeachment, since the law puts no requirements on the jury to follow law in their decision-making; in fact that is the jury's purpose, since otherwise the judge and lawyers are perfectly capable of handling the legal dimensions by themselves. In impeachment, the requirements are even looser, since at the end of the day it's just a 2/3rds majority vote. All the other stuff is legal theatre and a way to ensure that Congress is informed of the facts of the case.

@skulldinosaur1792 3 года назад

I couldn’t help but laugh when the personal injury lawyer said “PhillY-delphia. Hard pronunciation of “ee” sound 😂😂😂

@briannamcfarland5974 3 года назад

I assume he was starting to say "Philly", then realized that was too informal for a trial, but it was too late and it ended up sounding silly as heck

@RoxxyKaosGG 3 года назад

As a Philadelphian, I'm pretty sure he's just dumb as a brick.

@katrand5357 3 года назад

And also that he was completely confused about how his understanding of the law cannot be applied in an impeachment process. Yep, Trump always hires the best people

@user-pn1fe6sg2w 3 года назад

Judge: "Candidate number 32, are you able to be impartial or have any objections if selected to serve on the jury for this trial." Jury Candidate: "Yeah I can be impartial. The defendant and I go way back and I know he couldn't have done it." Judge: "Okay be back for the trial in two hours."

@jonathandnicholson 3 года назад

The judge and juror also made clear that he was not going to be impartial.

@TheRAINMan059 3 года назад

The Senate is a political body, no Senators are impartial. They're not a real jury and not a single one of them would get through a legitimate jury selection.

@jonathandnicholson 3 года назад

@@TheRAINMan059 Right. I just found Leahy being judge and juror uniquely absurd - a judge voting against/for their own ruling. There were other problems with the impeachment and, for me, this has exposed other problems with the process generally.

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

@@jonathandnicholson yeah it seems sort of ridiculous when you put it like that, shouldn’t this be a process enacted by the Supreme Court along with quite a large jury of actually impartial jurers?

@jonathandnicholson 2 года назад

@@aaronbozigian4310 An interesting proposition. One I have thought about for a couple of days, too. A constitutional change would be required which I have no problem with a change per se because The Constitution does outline the process for constitutional change. Any bias should be towards the rule of law meaning the law as is not the way one would like the law to be. However, people are (be they judges, jurors or politicians) fallible and as a result some people will make mistakes as politicians are supposed to wield political power and have other considerations than just the rule of law. A total lack of bias from political interpretation or opportunism is not possible. That said one should still genuinely try to follow the good, just and right. I only disagree in practice than theory.

@Were_Cookie 3 года назад

not to be confused with the second first impeachment

@Robert_McGarry_Poems 3 года назад

At least third... Clinton, and A. Johnson.

@jmanius1 3 года назад

@@Robert_McGarry_Poems i dont think that was what they were saying at all lol

@QemeH 3 года назад

The second first impeachment overall was Judge John Pickering (for _Drunkenness and unlawful rulings_ in 1803), the second first impeachment of a US president was Bill Clinton (no explanation needed, I think).

@mouseprotector5081 3 года назад

@@QemeH Johnson was Impeached. Cause he was a traitor

@BrianHolmes 3 года назад

Johnson, Clinton, and twice for Trump. All were acquitted by the Senate. 4 presidential Impeachments have successfully occurred in the US House of representatives, 4 times the parties sided politically and acquitted. Trump is the first to have members of his own party join in the charge to convict.

@Delta47_11B 3 года назад

5:55 "Senators can do whatever they want based on whatever reason they want". That is where the government is stepping out of line.

@gregdaweson4657 3 года назад

the house doesn't even technically need a reason to impeach someone, just a simple majority party-line vote.

@bfkbfk1 3 года назад

Thats quite literally stated in the constitution my guy

@themilkman7664 2 года назад

That is so out of context, like that was not what he meant when he said that

@gengarzilla1685 Год назад

Then their constitution is deeply flawed. Shocker.

@thomasholden500 3 года назад

I got dismissed from a criminal trial jury for making eye contact with the defendant during a smoke break.

@yesiamyes9657 2 года назад

Ur lying

@ferdinandiofbulgaria9485 2 года назад

@@yesiamyes9657 actually a case can be made if the eye contact was malicious, such as a glare or some other emotional face. It could show how biased the juror already is to said case, but the defendant would need one hell of a good lawyer for that to work. It is extremely unlikely to have happened, but not impossible.

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

@@ferdinandiofbulgaria9485 or if the eye contact was particularly seductive in nature …

@omatofi Год назад

@@aaronbozigian4310 gave 'em a 😏 and got dismissed for being too saucy in the courtroom

@pandamandimax Год назад

Criminal defendants do not get to go smoke with the public? Would never be put together w/ a jury member

@Tvillian 3 года назад

As a North Carolinian this may be the first time I've heard "Richard Burr" and "Reasonable" in the same sentence

@ju1cycrackfa1ry 3 года назад

Richard Burr is not reasonable.

@williammiller3277 3 года назад

Cunning and calculating may be closer to the truth.

@Tvillian 3 года назад

@@democrrrracymanifest okay that one works

@k.roserette 3 года назад

As a fellow North Carolinian I’m at 100% certain that the only reason Burr voted to convict is because he’s about to retire and no longer has to betray basic sense to appeal to his base

@waynehanley72 3 года назад

He's not my senator. I wouldn't have voted for him, BUT ... he's one of the few Republicans who actually fulfilled his or her constitutional obligation, so he has my respect for that. And his written explanation is bang on what it should have been for the majority if they had actually been non-partial jurors like they swore they would be. The majority of the Senate determined they had jurisdiction and that the impeachment was constitutional and the evidence was pretty convincing!

@russcarter9983 3 года назад

"B team of lawyers"? You are being awfully generous.

@andromidius 3 года назад

For sure. This was literal bottom of the barrel. Trump has gone through more lawyers then anyone in history.

@nonyabizness.original 3 года назад

@fair view IF they're so bad? ypu clearly did not watch the trial. they did not beat the house managers. the votes were pre-publicized for sll if us to see. my dog could have represented trump and he would have still been voted not guilty.

@tophers3756 3 года назад

@fair view they "beat" them because the GOP are spineless cowards who have admitted privately to reporters they're scared of violence from Trump supporters.

@nonyabizness.original 3 года назад

@fair view oh hun, try to keep up. we're discussing the latest impeachment trial here.

@j.e.g.9513 3 года назад

@fair view What kind of a coward are you? All you can do is think of revenge because of how spineless you are. IF what you said is true, then they should be impeached, if they were president. two wrongs DON'T make a right.

@gushiperson 3 года назад

Devon is on the verge of losing his s*** at the 30 minute mark. I hear you man.

@TesserId 3 года назад

When McConnel argued for postponing the trial, we knew damn well what he intended to do.

@TheSecondVersion 3 года назад

This guy is gong down in history as "The Unprecedented President That Was Never Un-President'ed" (by impeachment at least)

@ApproximatelyBees 3 года назад

Pack it up Lin Manuel Miranda

@barryhomeowner9293 3 года назад

@@ApproximatelyBees I wanna see a version of Hamilton saying 'Donald Trump' instead. But you can just stop at 'How does a bastard'

@lshe97 3 года назад

Top 10 Headlines by Leslie Knope for Shauna Malwae-Tweep.

@rekrn12345 3 года назад

Most acquitted president in history. Most innocent president in history.

@johndemeritt3460 3 года назад

@@rekrn12345, I think you're a bit confused. "Acquitted" is not the same as "innocent". Trump is the President who has the record for failure to convict in impeachment trials, but given his record of publicly agitating his base to believe that no election outcome other than a Trump victory could possibly be fair, the assertion that he's the "most innocent" President ever is laughable. Remember: Trump was telling his supporters that he would win a fair election and that any other outcome would be the result of fraud before his original campaign in 2016. And he's been repeating that line ever since.

@theunpretentiousvegan8593 3 года назад

I've never been so hyped to listen to a lawyer talk about Constitutional Law.

@Don-C.L. 3 года назад

It's quite "unpresidented" lol. A lot of precedents has been set-- both good and bad. The future can only tell what will be in store for us.

@godlessblessings7020 3 года назад

I LUV it too, very engaging !! Does he teach a *MASTER CLASS* ??

@angeliaparker-savage5401 3 года назад

Yeah, he'd be a great instructor, wouldn't he?

@godlessblessings7020 3 года назад

@@angeliaparker-savage5401 THX, YEP! you bet!!

@paahl1572 3 года назад

You and me both!

@ktlynn177 Год назад

"When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very different rules." ... "Unless it's me."

@HatTheFatCat 2 года назад

Imagine if you showed the first 5 seconds of this video to someone in early 2016. They'd probably think it was some dystopian alternate history.

@seanshameless0 3 года назад

My kids are gonna use this video to study for their history test in 20 years

@thegdpwhytea439 3 года назад

Maybe a bit further away than that!

@grizzlybears 3 года назад

@@thegdpwhytea439 if further than it would prob be their grandkids

@halkun7191 3 года назад

Yeah for real though. This case is gonna be on a future DBQ in AP gov/AP History. Lol

@SlothinAintEasy 3 года назад

Aw. You think were going to last another 20 years. Wish i had that optimism.

@1313fina 3 года назад

@@halkun7191 *chills in remembered horror*

@adamgreene187 3 года назад

It's hard to have any faith whatsoever in the law after all of this.

@JoshSweetvale 3 года назад

This isn't just the law. It's politics It'd be like blaming car travel if a containership plowed through a bridge. Ok, the law is flawed, but this disaster isn't primarily caused by the law's flaws.

@ricky18redblack31 3 года назад

Really, I've gained more faith. Got little hope now that Trump been acquitted. Really stupid how Nancy has a hate boner.

@redhot2976 3 года назад

@@ricky18redblack31 Why do you have more hope? That acquittal was so full of shit, it had manure bursting from the seams.

@bob89377 3 года назад

great. Hold your representatives accountable. They are the reason this happened the way it did. They have much more power to enact laws than the president as well. Don’t lose faith, use the tools we have to fix it.

@skeetsmcgrew3282 3 года назад

Laws have always been a joke, especially laws regarding politicians. You think any black man got a fair trial for the first, oh 50 years after the civil war? And in the south, 100 years? What about the fact that money buys you better lawyers who are more able to get you out of jail? Justice is a vague, arbitrary concept created to keep people as passive sheep. If you make people believe there is a fair and balanced system, you can turn everyone who gets out of jail a saint and everyone who goes to prison a monster. Us vs. them

@ignitionfrn2223 2 года назад

2:40 - Chapter 1 - Does congress have jurisdiction over late impeachments ? 8:35 - Chapter 2 - The text 9:20 - Chapter 3 - How does the constitution describe the accused in an impeachment trial ? 14:10 - Chapter 4 - The house arguments 25:15 - Chapter 5 - Incitement 29:10 - Chapter 6 - Impeachment is a bill of attainder 31:40 - Chapter 7 - The 1st amendment prohibits impeachment for words - Chapter 8 -

@slicingonions4398 Год назад

His cultists still say he argued for a peaceful protest despite all the evidence to the contrary including his very own words.

@jackf1003 3 года назад

McConnell while Trump was president: "You should not impeach a sitting president" McConnell after trump left office: "It's not the senate's responsibility to convict him"

@kks3886 3 года назад

Mad?

@samuelblackthorne9122 3 года назад

I dont think he ever said any of those things. The original argument being that Trump was being imoeached for reversing action by the Obama administration via his authority over foreign aid. This was putting the cart before the horse of impeaching as Eagle says in the first few seconds "Former President Donald Trump". If he did commit a crime he is subject to the judicial not legislative branch.

@jackf1003 3 года назад

@@samuelblackthorne9122 McConnell did say what I quoted. The first impeachment came and went. he was acquitted. however, the purpose of the second was to prevent him from running from office again. Impeachment is not just removing from office, it's also for prevention. McConnell kept this at his desk until long after Trump was out of office. The case was already sent to the senate. He waited more than 2 weeks. He even said he wanted to delay opening arguments. It has nothing to do with the judicial branch. If he is charged with crimes now, yes it is in the hand of the judicial branch. The senate had the articles, so the case was already there. It was just a delayed vote. just because he is out of office, doesn't mean the part preventing him from office is dropped. that's what the vote was on because he was no longer president. The impeachment was not a criminal case. this was strictly in the legislative branch's hands.

@irrelevant_noob 3 года назад

@@kks3886 anyone SHOULD be. If you're not, it just shows how prejudiced you are.

@TiagoJoaoSilva 3 года назад

Samuel Blackthorne Since John Quincy Adams that it's understood that any action done while in office can be impeached at any time, even years later. Well, it was understood, I should say.

@christophertaylor87 3 года назад

The whole time I was watching the impeachment trial I was thinking “I can’t wait for the LegalEagle video on this”

@jimmyhuckabay4120 3 года назад

Agreed 👍.

@moparfan2015 3 года назад

I just thought I will skip watching it and wait for the LE video on it haha

@yodaflyz 3 года назад

I watched what I could on the first day live when they where still debating if they could conduct the trial but sadly most of the actual trial happened while I had to be at work so I couldn't fallow everything. Legal Eagle did a good job of helping me get cought up with what I missed, especially as I don't trust the mainstream news.

@samuelblackthorne9122 3 года назад

Me too, So I can watch a 40 min video of a Lawyer making arguments for a criminal proceeding at the impeachment of a private citizen. Trumps make several huge mistakes post election but trying to leverage toothless legislative proceeding against him after he is no longer president is a waste of the legislators time.

@andrewbogard2411 3 года назад

@@samuelblackthorne9122 the main point of the impeachment was to make it where he couldn't run for office again, because if he does and losses again he might try this crap again, i do hope he gets criminal charge brough up against him but i doubt it because he has so many fervent supporters

@gabadaba5436 3 года назад

Jury nullification is basically: "yeah they did it, but its not worthy of conviction" Thats basically what happened here

@matthewshedlock70 2 года назад

or we don't think, or can't prove they did it, but we're saying they did it anyway. Which does make me yearn for the option of 'Not Proven' like in scots law, which is the same thing as you described but actually written in law and accepted as an alternative to Guilty and Not Guilty.

@UndertakerU2ber 2 года назад

Jury nullification can also include cases like Derek Chauvin’s, where radical activists lie under oath during the jury selection process to get appointed so they can pursue political agendas by calling a fentanyl overdose a “murder.”

@GoldenSunAlex Год назад

@@matthewshedlock70 'Not Proven' in Scots law is incredibly problematic and widely panned though. You do NOT want to start going down that rabbit hole. It's history is full of innocent people being penalised despite never being committed of a crime, running essentially on 'trust me bro, I know he did it.'

@KnakuanaRka 5 месяцев назад

Yeah, it’s meant to apply to cases where the existing rules are unfair, unconstitutional or unreasonable (like excessive punishments for minor drug crimes) or situations where someone’s behavior is sympathetic for reasons not covered by law (such as someone killing an abusive spouse to get away from them).

@realPinkfong 2 месяца назад

Did what? He told everyone to go home.

@JustinBenjaminOnline 2 года назад

"There is is no interpretation of the Constitution where that can possibly be correct." Maybe on the Bill of Attainder, but on the question of if the Constitution can contradict itself, it can and absolutely does. It is only through the creative ad hoc reconciliation of judges that the illusion of a logically consistent US Constitution is maintained.

@expertoflizardcorrugation3967 2 года назад

To be fair. that's the weight the word "Interpretation" is holding there. It's a lot of weight for one word, even one as mighty as he.

@gemanscombe4985 2 года назад

Creative ad hoc reconciliation is why SCOTUS has "Supreme" in its name. It's to make it stick. The Court never admits error. It simply reverses prior rulings. "Stare decisis" matters ... until it doesn't. The justices who rule on the Constitution are imperfect beings who wrestle with a document written 240 years ago by other imperfect beings steeped in other traditions. It's sociology in the garb of Euclidean geometry.

@sal52112 3 года назад

"Futile gestures are worth doing because it's the right thing to do." That's great. 👍

@PjotrV1971 3 года назад

To quote a movie: "Sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand."

@billrumbley 3 года назад

The essence of character is doing what is right when nobody is looking, there are no consequences for failing to do what is right, and there is no reward for doing what is right.

@sameash3153 3 года назад

Unfortunately, thats the argument Hawley and Cruz made. They knew their vote on the 6th wouldn't do anything, they went on CNN and said basically "look, it's all I can do"

@Pretzil43 3 года назад

Mitch (spineless) McConnel: "We can't have the trial now, let's wait for him to be out of office" "We can't impeach him now he's out of office, it's now a criminal matter and I 100% think he's guilty" Next: "We can't convict him in a criminal court, he was already found not guilty by the senate"

@kerbe3 3 года назад

I wouldn’t be surprised. Disappointed, but not surprised.

@12jswilson 3 года назад

Criminal court has a different standard of proof that it would probably be hard to convict him on (for this)

@ActivelyVacant 3 года назад

@@12jswilson But it also has an established set of rules that the jury isn't making up on the spot.

@bsrcat1 3 года назад

The Senate is NOT a court. Therefore double jeopardy is not applicable and he can go to trial in both civil and criminal courts in multiple states.

@Karajorma 3 года назад

Mitch wants Trump gone as badly as the Democrats do. But he doesn't want to take the blame for it cause it will cost him votes. So he's hoping that Trump will get convicted while he can claim that it's unfair.

@dwaynezilla Год назад

Now that was a dose of sanity that I needed. Funny how many people are afraid to say it.

@nutmegdoesstuff1339 Год назад

Honestly shout out to the one guy from north carolina for being like "Yeah I came in here planning to vote against due to the timing precident, but the fact that we're here is an agreement that that isn't inherently enough, and the case has been made well enough that I have to vote for."

@nameless5646 3 года назад

"Nobody is above the law" has been said many times for the last few years but at this point it is pretty clear that this is not the case in America.

@GamingMasterAnthony 3 года назад

If you’re famous, innocent until proven guilty unless you’re a famous male that doesn’t fall in line with the establishment. Then it’s guilty until proven innocent and even then guilty still. This goes for both sides of the isle. (Not saying trump wasn’t guilty, not saying he is. Just pointing out a fact)

@diegosena891 3 года назад

@Moe Myers Oh? Have some evidence to back up that claim? Also your golden boy payed more taxes to China then the US. www.businessinsider.com/trump-has-bank-account-china-paid-taxes-there-nyt-2020-10

@WhiterLiar 3 года назад

Every single “undocumented immigrant” is obviously above the law. And yet the Democrat party keeps saying “nobody is above the law” while they systematically allow millions of people to break our immigration laws with no consequences. In fact - they are often rewarded for breaking our immigration laws. So there’s that.

@PRubin-rh4sr 2 года назад

No one really is, the law enforcers however...

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

Every person in that room is above the law in this country, if they know the right people ofc.

@fiddley 3 года назад

Short answer: Rules don't matter, politicians gonna do what they want.

@vuvuvu6291 3 года назад

"Grab her by the _democracy_ . You can do anything you want..."

@arcadeinvader8086 3 года назад

hide yo laws

@kx7500 3 года назад

Gotta love capitalism, baby!

@cubeman9766 3 года назад

By that logic we should impeach biden And that will go though since its not based of propaganda

@kx7500 3 года назад

@@cubeman9766 lol stay triggered fascist.

@DraQuul 3 года назад

I really enjoy how well you break down complicated issues so that they are more understandable to us laymen!

@lanetorty7529 Год назад

Its honestly inspiring to hear about, and see people like eugeen goodman (i apologise for the errors....). It brings this sort of hope in humanity, that there are people out there, in any proffession, not just law enforcement, that truely belive in doing the right thing. Somewhat like a hero almost

@carlrobison6065 3 года назад

The Constitution was written during a time when Honor and a person's Word were much more important than today. Words like "Impeach" and "Misdemeanor" had different meanings. To have a person impeached would mean his word was no longer good, a misdemeanor would be a bad act...

@JinKee 3 года назад

Makes you wonder if any of the crazy stuff that is happening now would have happend in the days of Alexander Hamilton?

@danielp3289 3 года назад

@@JinKee the law was used to keep human beings as slaves and Hamilton got killed dueling with pistols... their time too had crazy stuff.

@thatsweetlilthing2 3 года назад

That was not the meaning of those words. People have lied and acted in bad faith for as long as humans have been around. Acting like there was ever honor is a dream, not reality.

@carlrobison6065 3 года назад

@@thatsweetlilthing2 Absolutely! Human nature is after all, human. But before there was such a thing as a FICO score (or an ability to check it for that matter) a person's reputation was important. Even today if you, for example, had a reputation of not paying your lawyers, A-team lawyers would drop/deny you representation. The fact that people have acted in bad faith is the reason people of 250 years ago needed terms like Misdemeanor.

@JinKee 3 года назад

@@thatsweetlilthing2 "Honor is not dead so long as he lives in the hears of men"

@thatAC130 3 года назад

When I think about it, its amazing how secure the White House is advertised to be, with windows stopping rounds from most conventional munitions, platoons of Secret Service and other government troops defending the building, and escape routes and bunkers to help defend the president. However, it seems none of that is present when it comes to defending the Congressional Building.

@godlessblessings7020 3 года назад

THANK YOU, I thought I was the only one that noticed!!

@cericat 3 года назад

Buildings, there's 3 office buildings attached to Congress just for senators plus others. So yeah the defenses are kind of lacking even given the size of the area they need to secure. CHOB was one of those that needed to be evacuated due to bomb threats.

@bradmiles1984 3 года назад

They could of had many times the officers they had but the captain of the DC police said it would of been bad optics. The Sgt at Arms for the house also shot down declaring an emergency to get the guard ahead of time because of optics. They made it into a political thing instead of doing the right and safe thing. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sund-riot-national-guard/2021/01/10/fc2ce7d4-5384-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html

@gregdaweson4657 3 года назад

it was fudged by the cops for a political photo-op.

@mcalsip 3 года назад

@Bold Oh come on, you don't actually think a drone strike was ever an option.

@jonathanzegers5583 3 года назад

"Nebraska... is quite a judicial thinking place" Sen. Sasse, Republican from Nebraska, votes to convict. "Not like that!!!"

@Captain_Flynt 3 года назад

Being from Nebraska, sasse is an irresponsible jackass, but he gets points for doing the right thing for once

@miaweiner4234 3 года назад

So basically, since it wasn’t a criminal trial but a political one, defence lawyers only had to persuade and/or confuse the “jury” with any kind of rhetoric and fallacies in order to win. No need for objectivity or logic.

@bradmiles1984 3 года назад

It was a criminal trial it wouldn't of made it that far since he wouldn't of met the legal definition for incitement even LE said that in a previous video.

@epajarjestys9981 Год назад

@@bradmiles1984 *wouldn't have. Learn your own language dumb anglo-subhuman. Seriusly, how can a whole nation be collectively so extremely dumb? It's just disgusting.

@losmanzani6849 3 года назад

His defense team could have just said he did it and the vote would probably not have changed.

@Frisbieinstein Год назад

"Yah he did it. So what? Like I care or something...."

@BLOODKINGbro 3 года назад

Business CEO still goes to prison for crimes they commit whether they are the current CEO or they have resigned. I see no reason why it should be different for the president.

@kamdenmadan3289 3 года назад

Proabably since they are charged in criminal cases, not political cases like the impeachment trials are.

@shanez1215 3 года назад

Do they though?

@bauefrenchmen3126 3 года назад

Neither will repubs now that a dems in office, remember the majority voted thry can impeach after they leave office so expect republicans too just to raise a middle finger for losing and to make a mockery of the rule of laws since to them they only apply to political enemys and the poor.

@Goldievoi 3 года назад

Just gonna give a pat on the back to whoever wrote the script and did the editing. The clip mentioning Hamilton (the real one) before the LMM joke was perfection.

@gabrote42 2 года назад

13:44 The whole video is fascinating to an outsider like me but I love the specific highlights you make

@mabadeer1094 3 года назад

"Eugene Goodman, American Hero". It just feels right.

@lukedetering4490 3 года назад

He was a GOOD MAN

@alphanum001 3 года назад

@@lukedetering4490 Yup, his name checks out

@fatdamon4167 3 года назад

Mitt Romney is destroying this country. If Eugene led the rioters directly to Mitt Romney, I'd consider him a hero for saving our country from the future damage Romney will cause.

@stevenyukabacera160 3 года назад

Bit on the nose to literally call him Goodman, but it's not even in the top ten of weirdest events in 2021 I guess

@gwillis01 3 года назад

I totally agree Mr. Goodman was a hero who was cool under pressure

@wamsang7818 3 года назад

Al Capone: "Who said anything about murder? I just drive my opponents "underground"" Press: "So murder" Al Capone: "WOOOAAAAAHHHH" ~Oversimplified (obviously)

@matthewfinnerty6747 3 года назад

A man of culture i see

@thaghost909 3 года назад

I've watched that video like 20 times now.. It just won't leave my autoplay list.

@que3817 3 года назад

Great example of trumpspeak.

@therivernile. 3 года назад

Please post the link to that video if you have got it. :) and thanks in advance

@nitroflareyt4276 3 года назад

@@que3817 this is from a RU-vid video about prohibition meaning it has nothing to do with Trump

@cmser 3 года назад

13:34 Supremely honorable mention. Why the media never praised that person is beyond me. (I do not know name nor identity of guard so I wish no offense to anyone by making assumptions)

@ValentijnEnJack 3 года назад

Your outro was amazing. Thank you!

@SerenityGene 3 года назад

One set of rules for the ruled and another set for the rulers.

@dimasakbar7668 3 года назад

As Carl Schmidt say, (paraphrased) rulers are sovereign not because the ability to make rules, but because of ability to make exception to such rules (i. E. Ability to tanscend the law)

@deusexaethera 3 года назад

Rules only apply to people who can't afford different rules.

@DrPonner 3 года назад

@@deusexaethera isn’t capitalism great?

@merbst 3 года назад

This precise situation has a name: "The Crime of Apartheid" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

@philippak7726 3 года назад

It's why we have the quote "if this place was in anarchy, then it wouldn't just be poor people dying"

@SynthApprentice 3 года назад

Oh snap, I didn't even think about how the trial date was decided! McConnell set the date himself, and then just turns around and uses the lateness of the date as his reason to vote for acquittal? That's just super underhanded.

@bradmiles1984 3 года назад

If they wanted a better date maybe they should of transmitted the articles of impeachment faster. Pelosi hung onto them for awhile before sending. The whole process on both sides was all political theater.

@shadenox8164 3 года назад

@@bradmiles1984 Nah. They still would have delayed it. Pelosi was trying to get support for witnesses.

@sijdnsd6460 3 года назад

Legal Eagle isn’t 100% correct about McConnell. First, both Schumer and McConnell had equal power as Georgia just happened. Next, the senate was already at recess before the impeachment was made. Albeit that McConnell could have brought them back with Schumer’s approval, it still would have not happened since the formalities in Congress would not all the trial to start until 1 hour after Trump was gone even if McConnell brought them back.

@dorianr4770 3 года назад

it's what he did with Garland and Coney Barrett

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

A politician doing something underhanded!? Blasphemy of the highest order!

@lucisferre6361 3 года назад

Thanks much, counselor! I appreciate your uber-informative videos and with your knowledge base and perceived professionalism you are a reliable & trustworthy source of sometimes-esoteric legal knowledge. Thanks again!

@PassionIsVita1 3 года назад

A great summary of the impeachment trial making it easy to understand for us non Americans not as familiar with American constitution. P.s I love your passion in this video

@erikkennedy8725 3 года назад

Gop literally ignored the first day of the trial. Only reason the defense was there was to provide an excuse.

@johndoe-ek1qs 3 года назад

Not even, the Republicans were quite capable of making up their own before the trial began.

@HeadCannonPrime 3 года назад

The defense could have been a bugs bunny cartoon and they wouldn't have voted any differently.

@johndoe-ek1qs 3 года назад

When asked for his defense, Donald could have: flipped a double bird and yelled: F-YOU! with the votes going exactly the same way.

@samuelblackthorne9122 3 года назад

Because Trumps defence lawyers where actusly hired to work against Trump during the election lawsuits, by McConnell and the Govenor of Georgia. Trumos been fairly quiet on tje whole deal under the threat that McConnell amd his gang will vote against him. But Trump is also secure against them because they know if they openly oppose Trump it will fully split the party.

@darianistead2239 3 года назад

Trial was decided before it started regardless of fact

@MarcillaSmith 3 года назад

Especially when you consider how ready Democratic leadership was to throw in the towel

@SchmCycles 3 года назад

Actually, we won't know the verdict for at least two years because the real jury is the voters and we will see if the trial has any impact on the 2022 election. The senators who voted against conviction probably are gambling on the outcome of the independent commission or being able to block there being one.

@darianistead2239 3 года назад

@@SchmCycles Well actually we do. It's evident voters are bias, regardless of fact too lol..

@AricHaldan0782 3 года назад

@@SchmCycles by that logic we would know the people's verdict from the 2020 presidential elections. Trump lost that one, but still had major support.

@ishoottheyscore8970 3 года назад

Even if it wasn't, even if some republicans felt that the prosecution didn't adequately show how the language Trump used was incitement and not just rhetoric (and intended as such), there is no way to get around the impression that the votes were decided more by allegiances than by fact

@dionettaeon 3 года назад

Isn't it a crime to, in any sense, rig a trial (even as it's not a criminal one), and can't Mitch McConnell be tried for that? He used the scheduling that HE set as his excuse for acquittal, that has to have some legal weight against him.

@petitechaos883 3 года назад

You made all the points that I was screaming through the trial. I’m sure we were in the same boat screaming we can’t use Bradenburg because this isn’t a criminal case. But if we did, it’d certainly hold water that he violated and failed that test set out by SCOTUS. My lawyer friends and I all had a group text going to complain about the legal arguments but also make fun of Van der Deen for being the epitome of a personal injury attorney.

@JimMulvaney 3 года назад

I love explaining to people that "acquittal" is not the same as "not-guilty"... again and again and again... 🙄

@xerikl 3 года назад

And it's also not the same as guilty. What's your point?

@JimMulvaney 3 года назад

@@xerikl in this 2nd impeachment trial it actually does because the majority found him guilty. The acquittal is just a technicality. In a criminal court case, you would be right.

@Mich-jk2ze 3 года назад

What is he guilty of?

@ricky18redblack31 3 года назад

@@Mich-jk2ze existing Or so some people say "inciting violence on the Capital on Jan 6" Even tho he said peacefully and that people where gonna show up and already there... But of course there are instances where other Government Officials did the same thing but was swept under the rug. Some wants you to harass your fellow citizens if they do not comply with their agenda.

@JimMulvaney 3 года назад

@@Mich-jk2ze Inciting the events of Jan 6th. def. Incite: encourage or stir up violent or unlawful behavior.

@mrtb7676 3 года назад

It's like that episode of Red Dwarf in which Rimmer is staring down the barrel of defeat in a game of checkers against a scutter, so he just stalls until the scutter has to go back on duty and therefore forfeit the game.

@ludiprice 3 года назад

The annoying thing was that, even though this wasn't a legal trial, the defense kept using legal arguments that had no relevance to the impeachment trial. I'm no lawyer, but even I was frustrated by this tactic.

@lafayettevi9801 3 года назад

Haven't been here for a bit, Love the new set

@CJsbro1 3 года назад

Also before i watch this i just want to say it's so horrifying how we let this stand. And how Mitch can come out and agree 100%, but still stand on an already decided argument. It's like if Congress passed a tax law, but those who opposed the law wouldn't pay because they disagreed with it.

@zomasm8907 3 года назад

"A miscarriage of justice" still managed to feel like an understatement somehow.

@kx7500 3 года назад

Yeah because it was completely open and intentional

@inefffable 3 года назад

GASLIGHT OBSTRUCT PROJECT

@spykeking1989 3 года назад

I feel like the term miscarriage implies an accident. This was an abortion of justice. Which is ironic, given the conservative view of those... Yeesh

@bobbakian7369 3 года назад

@@spykeking1989 was thinking the same

@Vohlfied 3 года назад

@@spykeking1989 Lines right up with their views on abortion. Not "Pro-Life", but "Anti-Woman".

@stephenchurch1784 Год назад

A year later and the FBI are having a slumber party at mar-a-lago. It's starting to look like justice may be served

@MikeDCWeld Год назад

The Senate Select Committee on January 6th just officially recommended the DOJ pursue charges against Trump.

@NelCelestine 3 года назад

Never fails to amaze me that 14 more people voted for guilty than not but the less votes won. "The majority of people think this is wrong!" "Yes well, the minority think this is ok." American Government- "I guess it's ok then." -head desk-

@Abedeuss 3 года назад

I mean, fewer people voted for him in 2016 than his opponent and yet he still won... sort of a theme going on here.

@boxingexpert5427 3 года назад

@@Abedeuss pretty much

@ZackofSpades 3 года назад

I mean, that's how Trump got into power in the first place. "Screw the majority, we have a system to exploit" is pretty much the staple of Republican politics and business.

@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 3 года назад

Do you understand how a normal criminal trial works? A normal criminal trial requires the jury to reach a *ONE HUNDRED PERCENT* consensus before voting someone guilty. You could have ~8.3% of the jury prevent a conviction despite the will of the other ~91.7%, because voting someone as guilty is something that we as a society believe should be done with absolute certainty. So why should an impeachment conviction require a simple majority? You seem to have absolutely ZERO clue how EASY it would be to abuse impeachment if it only required a simple majority. Every single time the Senate majority party was different from the party of the President, even if their majority was extremely slim, you would end up with the President getting impeached. Do you think for a second that Republicans would have hesitated to kick Obama out of office if an impeachment conviction just required a simple majority? And then they'd kick out Biden, and so on and so forth, until they got someone they liked. It would make impeachment into even more of a ridiculous political tool than Pelosi already has.

@thingswhynot 3 года назад

@@nmotschidontwannagivemyrea8932 false equivalence

@TheKrakenfist 3 года назад

"Sometimes even futile gestures are worth doing because it's the right thing to do." Time to smash that like button.

@mileator 3 года назад

Honestly. I was raised with this value, and when that time arose, I did my due dilligence, and the real world knocked me on my ass... I'm not sure this value holds water anymore.

@chelseanoble263 3 года назад

@@mileator There will always be people who value the moral high road. Please continue to be one of them; many are forgotten in their own times, but history remembers them as the truly great.

@SunYat-sen 3 года назад

This was not the right thing to do. Trump is old news. Must I remind you that Joe Biden promised us that he would put an end to systemic racism, destroy the coronavirus, solve global warming, distribute the vaccines, regain America’s credibility on the world stage, stop school shootings, and everything else. We have so many problems right now but all these clowns want to do is play pussy foot with each other. Impeaching Trump served no purpose other than as a middle finger to the Republican Party.

@axel7445 3 года назад

The right thing to do is focus on the country not on old news. I think it's better to stop trying to stroke your own ego and start getting solutions to current issues.

@mikoto7693 3 года назад

@@SunYat-sen It should have been a stopgap to prevent T***p from running again or holding any office. Useless politics couldn't even get that right.

@salimufari 3 года назад

I'm reminded of the family from the Tom Hanks comedy "The Money Pit" where the sellers used context of tongue in cheek word play. Then once the house was gutted & left a condemnable shell they quoted the dictation of the recorded conversation. The most ridiculous context while technically correct.

@beachboardfan9544 3 года назад

2:30 Nope! It shouldnt be like that, "politicians are going to be politicians" shouldnt be a thing. They shouldnt be above the judicial system. Hold them to the same laws as everyone else.

@lee1130fromtwitter 3 года назад

Nothing mattered. There wasn't an impartial jury. The end

@21kiwi24 3 года назад

Correct. Every one who voted the same way as their entire party should be fired. Which was only 1 party.

@Jay_Frank 3 года назад

@@21kiwi24 That would be firing 93 senators lol

@dbdchristopher 3 года назад

@@Jay_Frank oh you mean every Republican

@Jay_Frank 3 года назад

@@dbdchristopher No, using 2/1 kiwi's logic All senators except 7 Republicans would be fired.

@danielevans7439 3 года назад

@@Jay_Frank almost, except the other republicans did not vote the same way as their “entire” party. Thus, only the democrats would be fired. In retrospect, I’m surprised there wasn’t a democrat that did a sympathy vote. That’s what they do in reality shows, and I can’t really tell the difference between this and that.

@corwin32 3 года назад

Ironically, Mike did, in fact, have the courage to do what he needed to do. Shame so few others can say the same.

@lc9245 3 года назад

Yeah, the courage to turncoat once your coat lost the election. Come on, you really think the established republicans have integrity? Right after they got hounded on for 8 years under Obama for their nonsense. It’s as if the politicians wasn’t serving different corporate interests and they both want Trump, who’s an uncontrollable beast to be out. I’m astounded that shows like House of Cards don’t wake people up from politics.

@rosco3 3 года назад

@@lc9245 don't care for the reasons, actions matter and at least he did what he should/could.

@corwin32 3 года назад

@@lc9245 I don’t care if he did it with joy in his heart, a patriotic tear in his eye, or a like a sulky toddler who doesn’t want to go to bed. He did the job that was required of his position. That is all I ask.

@filipwolffs 3 года назад

@@lc9245 I'll take the corrupt immoral politician who opposes the wannabe-dictator because he's too dangerous over the corrupt immoral politician who thinks they can use the wannabe-dictator for their own benefit.

@NewPaulActs17 3 года назад

@@corwin32 i both pitied and was proud of pence when he said the final count

@colosine 3 года назад

What a waste of taxpayer money, and what a kangaroo court that whole thing was

@drmadjdsadjadi 3 года назад

Objection: Impeachment by the House is not a punishment. Conviction by the Senate also is not a punishment. The only possible punishments from the impeachment process are removal from office, prohibition from holding future office, or both removal from office and prohibition from holding future office. Civil and criminal penalties are separate from these and may occur regardless of the result of the political impeachment process.

@DanielLee1 Год назад

Isn’t another possible punishment the loss of pension?

@drmadjdsadjadi Год назад

@@DanielLee1 Loss of a pension is not a punishment that is imposed by the Senate upon conviction. Instead it is an automatic civil penalty based on statute. Given that the loss of pension is not something within the control of the Senate but instead is something imposed by the entirely of Congress and signed into law by the president, they are again not considered “punishment” any more than civil death (restrictions on liberty imposed by legislatures rather than handed down as part of the punishment determination by a judge or jury) Granted, It is a technical distinction but, nevertheless, still an important one. Only the Senate convicts and only the Senate decides on punishment. They cannot remove a President from office but still allow him to keep his or her pension, so it is not considered a punishment within the meaning of the Constitution. Instead it is considered a civil penalty since the statutory requirements to receive a pension can be changed at any time and for almost any reason by Congress if they so choose and the changes become law.

@michaelt4007 3 года назад

Democrats: So he’s guilty? Mitch McConnell: Yup. Democrats: And so he should be taken as guilty? Mitch McConnell: Yup. Democrats: So if you think he’s guilty, and he should be taken as guilty, you will vote guilty? Mitch McConnell: That makes sense to me. Democrats: Then vote guilty. Mitch McConnell: He’s not guilty.

@stolenname94 3 года назад

Correct he was not guilty

@thenamedoesnotmatter 3 года назад

@@stolenname94 his patsies made sure of that. Hopefully local criminal charges can lock him away, or his $3M or more dollar debtors will come to collect all of his bone marrow.

@crimsoninferno9056 3 года назад

Sounds like Dems. were talking to a politician.

@t.estable3856 3 года назад

@@stolenname94 No, he's guilty. He wasn't let off because he was innocent, but because he was "No longer in office", because partisan politicians voted to delay the trial until after he had left office, then voted against impeachment because he was no longer in office.

@stolenname94 3 года назад

@@t.estable3856 ok so where is your evidence he incited violence? Doctored footage won't help you here sorry about that. How about we talk about billions of dollars in damges including federal property caused by the likes of antifa and blm both openly supported by the Democrats. The after if we have some time lets talk about Democrats making death threats to trump and his voters and other Conservatives. I've got time to 🔥 so come at me.

@richardzippler3330 3 года назад

So this is a crime boss being judged by his own gang members .oh Justice in America.

@samuelblackthorne9122 3 года назад

Exactly which is why its the Judicial Branch and not the legislative branch that punishes criminals. Eagles argument would be great in a court but even if they unamously voted to convict him trump as Eagle states in the first few seconds is no longer the president and thus the imeachment is void.

@NateROCKS112 3 года назад

@@samuelblackthorne9122 did you even watch the video? The Constitution allows for impeachment of ex-officials.

@Xarai 3 года назад

@@samuelblackthorne9122 thats not how impeachment works it would prevent him from running office it would mean he no longer gets secret service no longer have 1 million travel annually no longer receives 200k annually from us either

@dracoargentum9783 3 года назад

@@samuelblackthorne9122 His Loser WAS impeached while he was still president, it was the acquittal/conviction that happened afterward, his loss of office has no baring on his acquittal/conviction. Due to the number of statements made WITHIN THIS VIDEO that you argue against, in favor of His Loser, whether or not you watched the video, you are just trying to absolve His Loser.

@bradmiles1984 3 года назад

With the case being represented by a rival gang.

@ash-vs6tr 3 года назад

Dude the defense was so shitty that I couldn’t sit through ten minutes

@Jaymus71490 3 года назад

He destroyed the senate and proved handily that evidence had been tampered with. Was brilliant.

@markritchie1601 3 года назад

As a lawyer was that just horrible to watch? Setting aside the US wholly abdicating any claim of any moral character, or ethics, or even spine in the case of Republicans; was it painful to watch Drumf's lawyers as a professional who takes pride in his craft?

@JLF201 3 года назад

This is one of those videos where I wish I had more options than just like or dislike. I want to promote this as something others should watch in the fight against misinformation. There are too many people who are ignorant and loud about it, spreading nonsense. Here we have an intelligent man explaining what the impeachment trial really was, including legal insight and the strategies of both sides. Thank you for shining your light into the darkness to enlighten those who are willing to spend a little time learning.

@veronicacovatch1601 Год назад

In no way do I support Trump's words/actions on 1/6/20 BUT now that all that "disinformation" you mentioned has been proven to be truths, I see everything much clearer.

@makkapakkap8627 3 года назад

he called me a legal eagle im blushing

@evolution__snow6784 3 года назад

😳

@Ekvitarius 3 года назад

He says that to all the viewers!

@gymnastoman1 3 года назад

We’re his eaglets

@andygunner3571 3 года назад

I am interested to hear your legal opinions on the doctoring and selective editing of evidence used in the impeachment trial?

@GFlCh 3 года назад

Andy, don't hold back, say what you mean! Certainly the bulk of the Senate Republicans and Trump's defense team did some doctoring and selective editing of evidence but don't hold it against them, it's just the Republican way. And the Democrats in the House and the Senate may have done some of that as well. But all of that is irrelevant because they were NEVER going to get 67 votes to convict... the Republican Senators as a whole are just not that principled. Like McConnell said/did, Yeah he did it and he should be held responsible for it, but just not here and not by me... so I voted to acquit him anyway.

@andygunner3571 3 года назад

@@GFlCh I agree all sides did that and it was not good if anything it further divides people. I think all the evidence should be laid out in its entirety for people to make up there own minds. Not to mention all the other ramifications of what happened including a platform being “ cancelled “ for allowing the riots to be planned, when in fact that happened on another platform all together. There is too much misinformation on both sides but the majority appears to come from one side. At least we agree that Mitch McConnell is spineless and doesn’t not stand by his own principles. If only the Republicans could be a strong opposition to the Democrats then maybe good policy and laws would be created to benefits all Americans not just the few.

@ellenspear50 2 года назад

The tragedy of his second impeachment is that he was still around to be impeached again. He should have been booted out soundly the first time.

@mwduck Год назад

LOL!!

@roysterc.4612 3 года назад

Man I know nothing about law, just here to listen to someone who can actually talk.

@roguedogx 3 года назад

0:23 I will still never understand how anyone could have someone could be a juror on the trail for someone who tried to have them killed, and vote to let them off the hook. Part of me wants to know if how many senators would change their mind if they had actually died, but the price for the knowledge is too high.

@GSBrofly 3 года назад

Btw that cop that they claim was killed with a fire extinguisher, didnt happen. 0 evidence of blunt force trama. Had a stroke

@roguedogx 3 года назад

14:03 it truly is an absolute miracle, how little the blood shed was. still not great, but it could have been so much worse.

@GSBrofly 3 года назад

If you dig a bit, there are plenty of videos of people handing over people getting out of hand over to the cops, stopping them from smashing windows, etc

@ClothesCat 3 года назад

Americans are a funny people.

@matthewmcgee1434 3 года назад

@@GSBrofly that wasn’t confirmed, but Ok. Also, if he did die from a stroke, it was almost completely the rioters fault, because they prevented him from getting medical assistance.

@partlycloudy7707 3 года назад

I am from Utah, where Mitt Romney is a senator. And while I have massive issues with him even being allowed to be out senator (when he was governor of another state for a long time) and my other disagreements with him, I do have to have respect for him actually standing outside the party lines to vote to impeach Trump.

@colepriceguitar1153 2 года назад

That make sme disrespect him more. Trump did nothing remotely impeachable.

@aaronbozigian4310 2 года назад

Although it’s possible that he did that for purely benevolent and selfless reasons it’s also a possibility that he gained something to do that, perhaps something monetary. In essence, it’s possible that he took a bribe. I wouldn’t discount it, after all aren’t all corporate donations and lobbying really just bribes? It is for this reason that our government has become broken and corrupted to its core, and if we want this country to retain some semblance of unity then we must endeavor to peacefully rectify this situation as soon as possible, before the mass frustrations of the citizenry boil over.

@joshuaroefs9279 Год назад

@@colepriceguitar1153 he tweeted to his supporters/the rioters that he was grateful for their support but to disperss and go home, that's a heinous crime. You know, like when aoc and other dems tweeted and made public statements supporting blm riots and the burning down cities, anti white hate crimes, homicides, burglaries and robberies and never once denounced any violence or even suggested they wanted the violent aspects to stop was perfectly fine and non problematic.

@memesredacted 3 года назад

My argument on this whole topic is that we know that the riot was planned in advance by people on Facebook and we know that there were people already attempting to breach the capitol before trump even made the "fight like hell" comment.

@MrPr1nglz 3 года назад

I would agree with you on that but add in the fact that despite Trump's appeals at proving election fraud being thrown out due to non standing evidence, he and the republican party kept propagating the false narrative of said accusations including rallies and advertisements to promote the ideas. Not only that but he stood by while the attack was going on and refused to call in troops to help disperse the crowd which makes him guilty just by association. It's no different than being a getaway driver in anticipation of a crime being committed. If not for the facts I stated among others I could list, I would completely agree with you.

@looney9105 3 года назад

well it's arguable that trump really didn't say, "GO RIOT, TEAR DOWN THE CAPITOL" it's annoying that these people did this because it makes other republicans look stupid

@MrPr1nglz 3 года назад

@@looney9105 Trump knew how his extremist supporters would react and why he chose the words that he did. If he was anticipating a peaceful protest then he wouldn't have had any issues going to the capitol with his supporters like he said he would instead of running back to the oval office watching it unfold. It's frustrating that Trump got off on a technicality but the GOP screwed themselves by not convicting because now Trump has the ability to run again with his own party splitting the GOP in half and dooming both into failure.

@looney9105 3 года назад

@@MrPr1nglz whether he anticipated the riot or not, in no way did he incite it

@MrPr1nglz 3 года назад

@@looney9105 Like I said: technicalities

@sundarbe 3 года назад

The whole impeachment things is like asking mafia henchmen to pass judgement on their boss, you don't have to be Sherlock to find what the outcome will be.

@ZesPak 3 года назад

Except that Clinton got impeached?

@sundarbe 3 года назад

@@ZesPak Impeached by the House has no effect unless the Senate convicts them. Trump was impeached twice by House.

@oxnyxws 3 года назад

Arguably a lot of pirate captains got taken out by their crews...

@bentos117 3 года назад

agree... a hard hit on USA reputation...

@jincyquones 3 года назад

If the GOP was on the other side of this issue, they'd be arguing that you could impeach people before they're even born. They don't care one bit about Constitutionality.

@tophers3756 3 года назад

Well, an embryo IS a person. /s

@Tzizenorec 3 года назад

How do you vote both major parties out of office, though? Seems like we're kind of stuck because our voting system creates a strong 2-party system.

@Khronogi 3 года назад

@@smashingthreeplates2171 Thats not something the democrats would do, stfu.

@Mich-jk2ze 3 года назад

Lol, no, you can’t assume that at all. No previous evidence says they would do that.

@Tzizenorec 3 года назад

@@smashingthreeplates2171 Not really a solution, because there's no plausible way the voting system gets changed at the federal level while the 2 parties are still in power. I've been musing about letting the electors discuss among themselves and change their mind at the last minute, though; that might work to break the 2-party system, since it's something that individual states are able to organize without federal consent. It would still be plurality voting, but it would be ~500 votes with a discussion beforehand rather than ~100 million votes mostly from people who take orders from their favorite media outlet. Much more tractable. (It's almost like the founding fathers wrote the solution to this problem right into the constitution, and we just haven't been using it.) Alternate voting systems could then be implemented at the state level to give the electors detailed instructions as to which outcomes they should prefer to which other outcomes.

@ibrahimbashir6780 3 года назад

"These depositions should be done IN person, IN my office, IN Philadelphia". 🤣🤣🤣

@katiehusband1505 9 месяцев назад

Honestly baffles me that so much legal stuff in the states comes down to mind reading what about 300 white men 200 years ago meant

@membou 3 года назад

IN my office, IN Philly-delphia...🤣 I don’t know why that made me laugh so hard

@johnladuke6475 3 года назад

Because it made it clear that he's just a small-town hack ambulance-chaser who thinks he's big-time because he has an *office* and it's in PHILLYdelphia. And then he found himself in the hallowed chamber of an august body of government and still thought he could intimidate US Senators like he does to his secretary.

@XXX3155 3 года назад

@@johnladuke6475 I wonder if he makes enough for a secretary

@JonPITBZN 3 года назад

"Philly-delphia." That's why. I snorted when I heard it.

@ZedF86 3 года назад

You'll be glad to know that the entirety of the senate laughed at that moment as well. He got rather upset and cried something to the effect of, "I've never laughed at you!"

@lukedetering4490 3 года назад

Because the way he said Philadelphia was really dumb

@danielallen3454 3 года назад

Question: Is there a penalty for a lawyer deliberately lying to Congress in the course of an impeachment?

@justserv 3 года назад

Agreed. We're talking about the fabricated Tweets right?

@TheExplorder 3 года назад

The lawyers aren't under oath. So, no.

@fisch37 3 года назад

I think there is... I'm not a lawyer though

@danielallen3454 3 года назад

@Todd Clark No, they didn't. Any discrepancies were due to having to source Trump's tweets after his account was suspended. The content of said tweets was not fundamentally altered in any way.

@theomegajuice8660 3 года назад

Is it not just perjury?

@Snagabott 3 года назад

I don't really know why McConnel made that speech after the impeachment and I honestly wish that he hadn't. He admitted openly that he understands the danger, but decided to ignore that and focus on non-existant legalistic problems and self-inflicted difficulties. He threw some strings on his shoulder and claimed to be tied up. Essentially he said: "I know it's wrong, but I don't care enough - or dare enough - to stop it"

@Altorin 3 года назад

That was not a B-Team. That was an F-Team at best and that's being generous

@XXX3155 3 года назад

Lawyers should use this as an example whenever someone complains about their billable

@ZrinNZ 3 года назад

Never knew about that officer. Eugene Goodman is good, man.

@SpiceIntolerance 3 года назад

Yeah he really did a lot heroic shit during the riot, it was real nice seeing him get a congressional gold medal during the impeachment trials and walk out with Kamala and her husband at the inauguration.

@sealogic4552 3 года назад

The only reason the insurrectionists couldn’t get into the chamber in time is because they were caught in the gravity field of Eugene Goodman’s enormous balls.

@SpiceIntolerance 3 года назад

@@sealogic4552 hahahaha Thank you dude, I haven’t laughed that much at a RU-vid comment in quite some time yet no true words have ever been said!

@derekstein6193 3 года назад

Seems he is what is says on the tin.

@iadorenewyork1 3 года назад

That was one of the best highlights of the impeachment week.

@AndrewRyan716 3 года назад

Nebraska, as you're going to hear, is quite a judicial thinking place

@sashasscribbles 7 месяцев назад

Wait.... here in the articles of impeachment the president is being explicitly described as "An officer of the United States" Wouldnt that be definitive precident when considering the insurrection clause? The defence against that case hinges solely on whether a president is technically an officer