The US Senate could vote on the resolution to remove the president on the last day of his term, on January 19. It would not just be a symbolic issue, but it would be the legal way in which Trump would be left without the right to ever run again.
Legal? Only if the accusation made in the resolution against Trump was based on the president’s actions. It has? We live in an age where facts are no longer facts, but our interpretation of them. It is the main consequence that modern nihilism has deduced from the thesis “God is dead.” If an interpretation is voted by the people’s representatives, then it acquires the force of law. So, here we are in front of an absurd peak of democracy: we establish the meaning of certain facts by vote, we do not leave the debate free about it.
Did Trump want insurrection through his January 6 deeds? We can’t know what he wanted, but can we find out by vote ?!
This has to be an Everest of the absurd with democratic appearances.
Next, that is, from January 19 to 20, when is the transition to power scheduled for Joe Biden scheduled? Then will be the most tense hours in US history. Every citizen of the world will interpret that tension according to the rule wishfull thinking. No one is unsubjective.
The most honest thing, then, would be to reveal my own baggage of desires and present them as thoughts.
1. I believe that, in the future, democracy will no longer be able to claim legitimacy if the Absurd Vote of 19 January goes unpunished.
2. Punishment could take the course of the Insurrection Act, which, since 1807, has given the US president the power to defend the Constitution through the military.
3. This would no longer be about election fraud and non-fraud, but about defending democracy and the US Constitution, which does not allow the significance of alleged criminal acts to be established outside of justice.
4. Congressmen will claim that this is exactly what they wanted: for justice to rule on whether Trump wanted an insurrection or not on January 6.
5. The vicious circle is obvious and it can only be correctly described as a constitutional vacuum: the fundamental law of the USA did not anticipate the possibility of confronting two simultaneous insurrections, one of the president, the other of the Congress.
6. As a possible Supreme Court judge, I would suspect that lawmakers wanted to remove Trump’s right to run rather than punish some of his alleged insurrectionary intentions.
7. As a hypothetical president dismissed by the congressmen, I would test the fidelity of the Army towards democracy, because towards the Constitution, given the vacuum of anticipatory thinking on the concrete situation, I would have nothing to test.
This is the legal picture of the situation in the USA, without politicizing its presentation.
Source: Cotidianul RO by www.cotidianul.ro.
*The article has been translated based on the content of Cotidianul RO by www.cotidianul.ro. 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!
