De-tails….
After all the hand-wringing and the incessant media circus, America has finally put Donald Trump's second impeachment trial to rest. It's one of the most intense and dramatic episodes in U.S. history, as the government and populace remain as divided as they've ever been.
In many ways, the ongoing trial represents truly unprecedented events in the American timeline. For one thing, it's the first time in the nation's history that a president has been impeached twice by Congress.
That is significant because it proves that a particular contingent of the U.S. Congress has refused to let go of its vendetta against Trump. In past impeachment trials, including the one against Bill Clinton, an acquittal would generally be the end of the formal actions against that president.
This was not the case when it came to Donald Trump, who was the Democrats' constant political target for the full four years that he was in office. The amount of time between the two impeachment trials wasn't even that long, as the first trial took place as recently as December of 2019.
During the first trial, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives adopted not just one, but two articles of impeachment against the president: "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress." Trump was fully acquitted of these charges on February 5, 2020!
Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are serious charges but they pale in comparison to the charge of "incitement to insurrection," posed by the Democrats during the second impeachment trial.
That leads us to a second historically unprecedented aspect of the second impeachment trial: it's the first time in America's history that a president has been impeached by Congress after leaving office.
That facet of the trial is particularly important because it makes the entire exercise seem pointless. Why would a group of politicians continue to pursue charges against a president after he's already packed up his belongings and gone home?
Is it just an act of vengeance and spite or is it an expression of justice after the fact? These questions weighed heavily on the minds of Congress and the public as the impeachment trial was underway.
There are several crucial differences between the first and second impeachment trials because the charge of "incitement to insurrection" conjures up much more vivid imagery than "abuse of power" and "obstruction of Congress."
The charges surrounding the first trial were complex and difficult for many onlookers to fully comprehend. They involved phone calls and situations that allegedly took place in far-away geographies, as well as complex issues that simply didn't trigger an emotional response from the American public.
On the other hand, the second impeachment trial had a direct emotional impact and involved events that took place right here on American soil. There was video footage that was played on the mainstream media news channels over and over – particularly the most sensational scenes.
"Unprecedented Insurrection" was the headline emblazoned on corporate media news channels in reference to Donald Trump's supporters who protested at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. For the most part, they were protesting the injustices and irregularities surrounding the November 2020 election.
There were definitely injustices and irregularities: dead people's votes being counted in Biden's favor, votes for Trump being dumped or just disappearing without a trace, electronic voting machines' "glitches" overwhelmingly in Biden's favor, and much more.
Many American voters felt that their votes simply weren't counted and the anger was building to a breaking point. Thousands of law-abiding Trump supporters traveled from all parts of the country to peacefully support the president's claim that he won reelection. By and large, there was no intention on their part to violate the law.
Many Trump supporters felt, and still feel, disenfranchised. They wondered if the ruling elite in Congress is even listening to the people, who put them in the halls of power in the first place. They chose to express their right to protest at the nation's Capitol Building on that fateful day.
The media didn't focus on any of that, instead choosing to play and replay the scenes of violence inside the Capitol building. The three days that preceded January 6th were largely peaceful and the majority of the protesters didn't perpetrate any violence at all – but that's evidently not the news story the media wanted to present to the public.
Moreover, at the massive Stop the Steal rally on January 6, only one agency was initially on hand to protect senators and representatives and their staff: the Capitol Police. Their chief had requested reinforcements days before, he said, only to be rejected by Senate and House security officials.
Courtesy: Washington Post
Only a few hundred Capitol Police officers stood behind barricades as tens of thousands of Trump supporters gathered at the Capitol's East Front. Any suggestion that Trump's base of support was thin – or that the security detail at the Capitol was adequate – is clearly disproven by images like this one.
Meanwhile, President Trump issued a rousing and compelling speech near the Washington Monument. In this speech, which lasted for about an hour, Trump urged his supporters to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
Oddly, the "peacefully and patriotically" segment of Trump's speech was omitted from many television news segments. It could easily be the most important line from the president's speech that wasn't in the videos shown by news organizations.
Later, during the second impeachment trial, Ohio U.S. Representative Jim Jordan would point out the inconsistency of indicting Trump based on his speech. "Democrats last summer – Democrat members of the Congress – said there needs to be more unrest in the streets, while there was unrest in the streets, and somehow that's not incitement?" Jordan asked.
"But when the president says, 'Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard,' they're going to impeach him? This is what Americans so despise. There are a lot of things they hate about this town [Washington]. They hate when we spend their money on crazy things. But what they mostly hate is the hypocrisy and the double standard that the elite in this town get to have," Jordan continued.
The media also largely neglected to report on the measures Trump took to quell the violence at the nation's Capitol. From the Rose Garden on that day, Trump quickly proposed to take "swift and decisive action to protect our great capitol, Washington, D.C."
"I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel, and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults, and the wanton destruction of property. We are putting everybody on warning, our 7 o'clock curfew will be strictly enforced," he said.
Back at the Capitol, it quickly became evident that the security detail was wholly inadequate. There was no shortage of finger-pointing and mutual accusations, though there were also consequences:
- The security failure led to the resignation of Congress' three top security officials within a day
- D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton is drafting a bill to create a national commission to study how some of the protesters overtook the Capitol
- Allegedly, the Defense Department had declined to send in D.C.'s National Guard
- Reports emerged that both House and Senate security leaders had failed to listen to the Capitol Police
- As protesters blew through barricades with little done to stop them, it was ultimately revealed that congressional security leaders and city police had not adequately planned for the possibility of civil unrest
The media was quick to blame Trump instead of those entrusted with protecting the Capitol in the first place. Videos of violence inside the Capitol building were shown repeatedly across news channels and popular social media sites, including Facebook and Twitter.
With that, Democrats in Congress seized the opportunity to take action against Trump for the second time in four years. By that time, it was a completely different scenario than the first impeachment trial since he had already begun preparations to exit the White House during the second trial.
This brings up a crucial but underappreciated angle to the trial: it's the first time in U.S. history that a president would be impeached after leaving office. The opportunity to take spiteful action against Trump is the most obvious motive, but there's more to the story than that.
In particular, the Democrats are now taking action against Trump to prevent him from running for a second presidential term in the future. They knew full well that if the Senate voted to convict him, it could then invoke the constitutionally created sanction of "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States," meaning no 2024 comeback attempt.
However, the Democrats in Congress knew that they would have to act quickly if they were going to ram the impeachment process through in a timely manner. The House began debating impeachment as early as the morning of January 13 – an unusually quick start to a momentous impeachment process.
As expected, the House of Representatives voted largely along party lines to impeach Trump on the single article of "incitement to insurrection." Incredibly, the debate before the vote only lasted for two hours. Republicans complained about the speed of the process and the lack of the usual investigations and hearings.
Then came a surprise move that would change everything: in a stunning parliamentary maneuver, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul offered a resolution just before the scheduled swearing-in of senators for the trial, challenging its constitutionality on grounds that Trump had already left office.
It was a brilliant move, and many Republican senators, including Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, immediately supported Paul's position. This provided a very clear early signal that the 17 Republican votes needed for conviction in the Senate were not going to be available.
Trump's attorneys also rejected the constitutionality of the impeachment proceedings via an interpretation of the relevant constitutional language surrounding the issue of whether Congress has the right to impeach and convict an ex-president. Moreover, the attorneys rejected any causal linkage between Trump's speech on January 6th and the violent acts at the U.S. Capitol.
With that, it was effectively a foregone conclusion that the two-thirds vote required for conviction would not happen. The constitutionality argument made any attempt to convict him a non-starter, and everybody knew it but the trial pushed forward nonetheless.
In the extremely unlikely event that Trump would actually have been convicted, the Senate would then proceed to take up a resolution to ban him from future office. That would only require a majority vote, not a two-thirds vote, but this would end up being a completely moot point.
February 13, 2021 would prove to be impactful in American history, even if only for its symbolic significance. In the U.S. Senate, the party lines were drawn clearly and starkly as all 50 Democrats, with no exceptions to be found, voted to convict Donald Trump.
The Republicans were less starkly partisan, as seven of them voted "guilty" on that day. Even with that, there simply weren't enough votes to convict the former president. It was now official: Donald J. Trump was acquitted for a second time by the U.S. Congress.
The verdict brought an abrupt end to the fourth presidential impeachment trial in American history. As we would expect, there was much less coverage of the acquittal in the mainstream media than there was of the trial itself, despite the foregone conclusion.
Perhaps the only encouraging and heartwarming event during the trial was when Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman received a standing ovation during a break of the trial where it was announced he would receive the Congressional Gold Medal. It was a rare moment of unity among the politicians in attendance, but it wouldn't last long.
Interestingly, Joe Biden mostly distanced himself from the particulars of the trial. But while Biden remained silent, the words of Michael van der Veen, a personal injury lawyer from Philadelphia, would be heard loud and clear.
Van der Veen turned the incitement argument back on the Democrats – including the time when Biden said that he'd like to "beat the hell out of Donald Trump" if they were still in high school.
"History will record this shameful effort as a deliberate attempt... to smear, censor, and cancel not just President Trump but the 75 million Americans who voted for him. It is an unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance. This case, unfortunately, is about political hatred," Van der Veen declared.
Yet, as powerful as Van der Veen's words were, the most impactful statement came from Trump himself, who offered a characteristically forthright and irrepressible response to the impeachment proceedings just minutes after the "not guilty" verdict was announced.
"It is a sad commentary on our times that one political party in America is given a free pass to denigrate the rule of law, defame law enforcement, cheer mobs, excuse rioters, and transform justice into a tool of political vengeance, and persecute, blacklist, cancel, and suppress all people and viewpoints with whom or which they disagree," explained the former and possibly future president.
"I always have and always will be a champion for the unwavering rule of law, the heroes of law enforcement, and the right of Americans to peacefully and honorably debate the issues of the day without malice and without hate," Trump added.
In his statement, Trump opted not to mention the seven Republicans who voted to convict him. His focus, at this point, was not on considering the unfortunate acts of retaliation against him, but on the prospects of staging a comeback in the future.
While the politicians' attempt to end his public career had failed for the second time, Trump did not dwell on that. Instead, he told his supporters, "Our historic, patriotic, and beautiful movement to Make America Great Again has only just begun."
On top of that, Trump asserted, "In the months ahead, I have much to share with you." This settles any debate over whether Donald Trump will be back on the political scene – it's now beyond dispute that he'll be back and ready to make waves in Washington once again.
It's a fitting end and a perfect beginning for Trump, who tweeted "Go home with love & in peace" during the Capitol protests but has been painted by the media as an insurrectionist nonetheless. Will Trump get the last laugh against a political machine and a corporate-run media that's stacked against him?
Only time will tell, but Trump's been known to surprise the politicians and the media before and he could do it again. Running for office and winning after an impeachment trial would be unprecedented – but Trump's never been concerned about precedent since he has always blazed his own trail and will continue to change the course of history.
