Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) on Tuesday said that he has dropped his effort on a bipartisan resolution censuring former President Trump, citing lack of support from his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Kissing your sister is a hard sell.
“I don’t have enough support on the Democratic side because for most of my colleagues, it’s impeachment or nothing.”
Respectfully, and I am surprised Senator Kaine does not know this better, the impeachment already happened. Trump was impeached.
The Senate trial, now even more than the first trial was, is about getting Republicans, through voting to acquit, to show all Americans their support for Trump’s crimes and their commitment to nihilism and lawlessness. Voting to acquit proclaims to all Americans whom Trump attempted to rob, “I don’t care about your vote.”
This is all the ammunition Stacey Abrams needs to expand Fair Fight Action in to every state of the union, transforming all red states into battlegrounds and all battlegrounds into blue states.
This was a bad idea from the start. No one should give Republicans the ability to be on both sides of this. If they want to say insurrection against Congress and the murder of police is totally kosher they should own that. They shouldn’t be given the chance to condemn the insurrection without actually holding anyone accountable.
Kaine needs a primary challenge for this alone.
Hi! To find out what I can do, say @discobot display help.
Way to read the room (or floor, in this case), Tim.
A swing and a miss for the Feckless Caucus.
A Democrat of Old.
Rhyming alternative.
Because we can’t convict, we might as well not hold a trial.
That might make sense for a prosecutor in a courtroom where jurors are impartial. But the jury is not impartial. Everyone knows what Trump did. The Senate trial convicts Senate Republicans. That’s the point.
Kaine’s reasoning is uncourageous and blind to the strategy.
To be honest I didn’t think he was still in office.
Why can’t you hold a vote to censure The Loser when the gutless GOP Coc–er, Republicans refuse to convict him ?
He’d be quite at home in the editorial board rooms of major newspapers: old white dudes (and a few old ladies), who think that society can’t get along without them, and their sagacious counsel, and stuck in time in 1985 with Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill hand in hand skipping through the Elysian Gardens of Bipartisanphilia.
You could if you wanted to give Republicans a way to be on both sides of the issue. The point is forcing them to hold Trump accountable or prove that they hate America. By allowing them to censure Trump they get to pretend like they give a damn without actually doing anything. A censure resolution has no actual impact. Its a strongly worded letter that’s weaker than any first year lawyer writing a cease and desist.
Why are you holding back?
“We don’t have enough support on the Republican side because they don’t want to bar Trump from running from office and I don’t have enough support on the Democratic side because for most of my colleagues, it’s impeachment or nothing,” Kaine said Tuesday.
Does censure allow them to ban someone from ever holding office again? That’s what Kaine seems to be indicating here. If so, this makes a lot more sense than I previously understood it.
Actually, they probably won’t have the guts to censure him, either. That’s what I’D be looking for.
" Kaine Backs Off Bipartisan Effort To Censure Trump After Lack Of Support"
Makes you wonder who he ran this idea by,and they said great idea Tim.
From what I understand it can, but if they did Trump would destroy those Republicans who did. So go all the way, the Republicans will just have to suffer either way.
Exactly, 67 votes is besides the point at this time. Censure allows the GOP to put all their problems on Trump’s shoulders like he’s the issue within the party, while an actual impeachment trial forces the GOP to put their names and stamp of approval on Trump’s actions.
The trail exposes the party as the real cancer with Trump as nothing more than a symptom of its rot.