Popular words Witness to the charge: Trump

If I were to shoot someone standing in the middle of Fifth Avenue (New York), I wouldn’t lose voters either, he said five years ago, even at the Republican pre-election campaign meeting in Iowa, Donald Trump. Maybe once in his life, unfortunately telling the truth.

If I were to shoot someone standing in the middle of Fifth Avenue (New York), I wouldn’t lose voters either, he said five years ago, even at the Republican pre-election campaign meeting in Iowa, Donald Trump. Maybe once in his life, unfortunately telling the truth. The holding and reception of last week’s presidential lawsuit last week proved this. The vast majority of Republicans – legislators and voters – stand by it. Deputies have been debated and dismissed by MPs and senators who, as individuals, admit that Trump’s lamentation of “big election fraud” is a big lie. But to quote a cynical Hungarian secretary of state: he succeeded. Two-thirds of Republican voters believe and sacredly believe that the presidency was “stolen” from Trump (and from him) and that Biden entered the White House in an illegitimate manner. In vain is the corpse on the concrete of Fifth Avenue and the smoking gun in Trump’s hands. That is, the constitutional prosecution was hopeless for the second time. For good reason, a presidential expert was not settled for 130 years after the first attempt, and it also took decades, despite the fact in the constitution that even the head of state could be held accountable. The American Founding Fathers pursued illusions in this regard as well as the electoral system, which has now distorted democracy. It was also conceived as a body that judged impartially and wisely reviewed the decisions of voters (perhaps deceived by a demagogue). Just as after the indictment in the House of Representatives, the Senate was intended to be an impartial jury that only counted the facts. However, the formation of parties could soon sober up naive dreamers. After all, out of barely four so far, he was the first president to sue Trump, in which a verdict called a bipartisan party was born, as seven of the former president’s party were willing (in other words, dared) to plead guilty. Yet among the Republican senators, there were plenty more who had morally condemned Bill Clinton’s Democratic Party for persevering with their president for two decades. Now, however, several of them have been spectacularly fraternized with Trump’s lawyers for being expelled from a court jury. But why give an appearance if some Republicans did not pay attention during the indictment, read something, and let them know in advance that they would vote for the president’s dismissal (even though he had sworn an impartiality at the opening)…) considered naive (it was voted by ten Republicans anyway). Despite its pre-enveloping outcome, this presidential lawsuit was necessary and useful, and even inevitable. Even if they were confronted with such a hypocritical argument that Trump’s departure from the White House made him useless. Typically, even the Senate Republican (now a minority) leader, Mitch McConnell, justified his acquittal immediately after the vote by stamping the presidential violation with serious words: when the House of Representatives voted to prosecute, he still stood in the way of the majority. procedure, even though there was a week left until Trump left, and now, right, it didn’t take that long to conduct the Senate proceedings. But the new Democratic majority – existing in both houses – simply could not leave, at least symbolically, unpunished, the number one guardian of the rule of law to trample on law and incite mobs to legislators approving the change of president. After all, there was a “smoking gun” for them as evidence, if not in Trump’s hands, but in his words on video and Twitter. The Democratic team that brought the indictment backed up almost every claim with a Trump quote. In the Senate Hall and, of course, on the screens of the country, the former President, in his own words, he repeated, confirmed the legitimacy of all accountable statements. The instigator of the siege of the Capitol proved the accusation against himself. After all, he called the mob into the capital on January 6, the day of congressional approval of the presidential election, in addition to the fact that “wild” developments are to be expected. He spoke to them before they marched to the Capitol, and he rebuked them, repeating that “great theft” could not be left to the extent that they had to show “strength” and “fight hell” if they did not want to lose.

Avoiding the topic of fraudulent elections as a hot porridge, but of course not disputing the unfounded claim of their principal for the world, Trump’s surprisingly substandard defenders tried to involve him (one of them in Philadelphia’s services). Anyway, they followed the ancient advice to the defenders: if the law is by your side, refer to it, if the facts, then to them, and if none, beat the table. The siren tracker also swayed and yelled. And they presented a ten-minute video montage in which a line of Democrats, including their leaders, mentioned the word “fight”. With the fast cuts, it sounded like a snare fire, but not convincing. But what would have meant the same meaning for the word inciting political struggle and for sending the true combat-ready (and partly armed) mass with that term to the Capitol ?! Yet fighting for a law is different than fighting against lawmakers to prevent the legitimacy of a candidate who defeats Trump (by a majority of seven million votes). That is, the acceptance of the principle of American democracy, the peaceful transfer of power. If a Democrat from his or her Campaign Assembly participants could hear that they had to fight for something or something, they hardly remembered what was incited to Congress at the Trump meeting, who came to the capital from the outset to block a constitutional act. And it was already pushing the boundaries of the comedian that his defenders were able to communicate a serious picture: he could say anything, Trump only exercised his constitutional right to free speech. And the prosecutors then, after the defense was over, cut their thorns to the table. As a crown witness, a Republican MP told a report told to several after the siege about Trump’s amazing response to the fighting conditions on the Capitol. Republican leader Kevin McCarthy has finally achieved it – the siege is reportedly enjoyed on TV! – President to do something. Trump said earlier that congressmen would be anti-fascists, to which McCarthy told him that his adherents were terrorizing lawmakers, to which a creepy – and, of course, confessional – response came from the White House: because they were obviously more upset by the election than you. to which the minority leader cursed himself). That is, the president not only confessed to the besiegers, but did so when TVs reported his vice president’s escape from the senate room. But Trump didn’t care that Pence – and so many other legislators – were in danger. Well, that could have been embarrassing for his defenders, who had previously claimed that the president was alarmed by the violence, and he didn’t even know that his vice president was in trouble: as if the besiegers hadn’t heard or seen “hang up Pence!” his cries, captions, and even the gallows carved for him with the loop on the screen. Her defenders, of course, panicked when prosecutors suggested hearing the MP as a witness. Although the lady had already told many of this, she reached the news threshold nationwide only after she wanted to justify why she voted to be indicted for being a Republican. Trump’s lawyers had a good idea of ​​the impact this confession would have on all screens in the country. They began a wild bargain that then they would quote hundreds of leading Democrats as witnesses. And that would have made the presidential officer a sea serpent, even draggable until spring. It was probably Biden who had already intervened in the background at this time, who finally wanted to draw attention to his programs. This is how the compromise was reached: the woman’s exposition was attached in writing to the presidential lawsuit and she refused to summon witnesses (which could obviously have even led to a court time-out). In the final vote, there was no chance of the two-thirds required for condemnation, but the 43 Republican senators who voted for the dismissal did not dare to deny the president’s guilt, but referred to his constitutional objections. That is, Trump was acquitted, but not really acquitted of the – well-proven – charge that today’s number one Republican, McConnell, called “practically and morally responsible” for the siege of the Capitol, ominously referring to the possibility of prosecuting an individual. And the leading conservative paper, The Wall Street Journal, points out that Republicans shouldn’t forget this if the fallen president might really try to run in the election again. Trump, of course, was in a hurry to declare victory in his usual way, but in the end, the famous cry of Piraeus was also uttered after a victorious battle.

Source: Népszava by nepszava.hu.

*The article has been translated based on the content of Népszava by nepszava.hu. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!

*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.

*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!