Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine abandons effort to censure Trump over Capitol riot, citing lack of support
Source: USA Today
We dont have enough support on the Republican side because they dont want to bar Trump from running from office and I dont have enough support on the Democratic side because for most of my colleagues, its impeachment or nothing, Kaine said Tuesday.
The Virginia senator said Wednesday he was discussing a censure resolution with his colleagues as an alternative to impeachment to condemn Trumps role in the deadly attack on the Capitol Jan. 6.
Kaines resolution was seen as acknowledgement that the Senate is unlikely to convict Trump. In order to convict Trump, the Senate needs two-thirds of a majority meaning that Democrats need 17 Republican Senators to vote with them.
Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/02/sen-tim-kaine-drops-effort-censure-trump-place-impeachment/4353543001/
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)cilla4progress
(24,766 posts)nt
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)IronLionZion
(45,528 posts)if that fails, then censure
cilla4progress
(24,766 posts)Don't give them an out - it's like caving right at the beginning!
Maybe later as a compromise but, sheesh...!
arlyellowdog
(866 posts)NRaleighLiberal
(60,019 posts)samsingh
(17,601 posts)no one cares about censure. It's irritating to think that some people would have been satisfied with it thinking it makes a difference.
Miguelito Loveless
(4,474 posts)and you feel a slap on the wrist and a vigorous finger wag will make it all better.
iscooterliberally
(2,863 posts)running for office. -
WTF? - We can't have unity or bipartisanship with republicans. They don't even want to give off the illusion that they are Americans anymore.
FBaggins
(26,758 posts)I'm sure that there would be plenty of Senators in favor of censuring Trump (including many republicans).
The real problem is that his plan was to use censure as a trigger for the 14th Amendment to ban Trump from running for office again (essentially achieving the benefit of conviction in the impeachment trial with a much lower threshold than that required by the Constitution).
While there were even a couple of law professors floating this trial balloon... it wasn't close to constitutional. That's why it lacked and support.
LiberalFighter
(51,085 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,287 posts)That's an opinion piece, but it makes sense. A14 Sec3 does not tie disqualification to impeachment. It ties it to insurrection among other seditious behavior. It doesn't say 2/3. So a simple majority should do.
And that author thinks states themselves could invoke A14 Sec3 in 2024 even if the Senate doesn't raise it now. They could keep Trump off their ballots.
So we won't convict slimey, but we're not required, if we play some cards right, to a redux.
FBaggins
(26,758 posts)Ask yourself a simple confirming question:
If McConnell decided to accuse Obama of fomenting an insurrection in October of 2012... and 51 Senators agreed... would you accept that Obama could no longer run for reelection?
Of course you wouldn't.
A14 Sec3 does not tie disqualification to impeachment. It ties it to insurrection among other seditious behavior.
And Sec5 gives Congress the power to enact that through legislation (not by a "sense of the Senate" vote). They long ago did so and insurrection is a crime. You have to be convicted of that crime in order for 14A to apply.