Trump should be impeached for sedition

[still_one]

[LisaL]

1. There are lots of things he can be impeached for.

We still don't have enough Senators to convict him.

[MoonlitKnight]

2. Make Perdue and Loeffler go on record

Enough of this crap.

[Tribetime]

11. 👍

[SheltieLover]

3. Absolutely!

Get repuke senators on record before January runoffs!

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. Why bother with impeachment? Sedition is a crime that he can be prosecuted for after Jan. 20 nt

[still_one]

6. Before he starts a war

[bullimiami]

7. he should be charged with sedition among his other 100 crimes on jan 21.

[kurtcagle]

8. Sedition is not unreasonable

But the horse has already left the barn wrt impeachment. Trump was impeached, the Senate failed to do its duty, so the American people did theirs.

Impeachment and censure by themselves do very little, without both houses agreeing to work together. Once Trump was impeached, he became only the third president to have done so, He is also, ironically, the first Republican to be impeached (Nixon resigned before he could be impeached).

At this stage, the law is somewhat vague about what authority Trump has. There's an argument to be made that we need to revise the date that a president enters office to the first Tuesday in December after the vote is certified by the states, this year Dec 15. That still means that there's a month or so of potential BS that an outgoing president could cause.

As to sedition, it's difficult to define, as is treason. On the other, bribery, extortion, fraud, racketeering are all perfectly valid crimes for which we have ample evidence. Let Biden's DoJ do their jobs, let the states do theirs.

[crickets]

9. +1

[pecosbob]

10. A really sticky law that probably shouldn't be a law

President John Adams signed into law the Sedition Act of 1798, which set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment for "opposing or resisting any law of the United States" or writing or publishing "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the President or the U.S. Congress (though not the office of the Vice-President, then occupied by Adams' political opponent Thomas Jefferson). This Act of Congress was allowed to expire in 1801 after Jefferson's election to the Presidency; Jefferson pardoned those still serving sentences, and fines were repaid by the government. This law was never appealed to the United States Supreme Court (which had not yet established its right to invalidate laws passed by Congress) but opponents claimed it was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

A quick look at wikipedia will show that it has seldom been used and rarely has it resulted in a conviction. They used it on the US Communist Party in the 40s and 50s. They used it against Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Blind Shiekh in the WTC bombing. It was used against the Puerto Rican FALN in the 70s. They used it to stop war protesters during WWII where it withstood a Supreme Court review and tried again during Vietnam where it was thrown out of court. I think the Bush admin even tried to charge a whistleblower with this once. Another poorly defined law like our statute on terrorism...

[triron]

12. I have a better idea. Let's guess.