Agnostic.com

4 4

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office
under the United States.

Regardless of the Senate vote on impeachment, Trump will be tried and convicted of insurrection. Per the code, cited above, whoever gives aid or comfort to (e.g., voting to not convict) anyone guilty of insurrection is also guilty.

Senators have three choices on the impeachment vote, convict, acquit, or absent. A vote to convict, while the right thing to do, could cost some of them reelection. A vote to acquit could send them to prison and bar them from public office (federal per the sited statute, federal and state per Section 3 of the 14th Amendment).

Obviously the path of least resistance is to be absent. Conviction only requires a two thirds vote of those present. As long as a single Republican shows up so the Senate has a quorum of 51 present, they can vote.

mcgeo52 8 Jan 27
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

4 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

Sometimes it's surprising how little our politicians know of the law and even more surprising how seldom the actually follow it.

More and more the job of a politician is to stay in office and reap the perks. Originally, when people felt strongly about an issue they threw their hat into the political ring to make a difference. "As a citizen-lobbyist for environmental and educational issues, Murray has said a state representative once told her she could not make a difference because she was just a "mom in tennis shoes".[citation needed] The phrase stuck, and she later used it in her successful campaigns for Shoreline School District Board of Directors (1985–89), Washington State Senate (1989–93), and United States Senate (1993–present). Murray was successful in gathering grassroots support to strike down proposed preschool program budget cuts." [en.wikipedia.org]. Now that mom in tennis shoes has risen to one of 2 powerful women from Washington senators. [oregonlive.com]

Problem is, once ensconced into office staying there becomes paramount and the original vision of making a difference is lost and power has taken over, for too many and it seems the norm for Republicans.

0

I'm trying to understand why there hasn't been a slew of seditious conspiracy charges. I did a little digging and found one legal scholar respond to this question with "And bigger questions are, you know, why go down that path? What are prosecutors really trying to achieve when there's other charges?"

This is problematic, right here in my mind. "What are prosecutors really trying to achieve?" This goes back to a topic I was recently learning about. WHAT EXACTLY does that EVEN MEAN? The only goal of any prosecutor worthy of their position is the fair and equitable pursuit of justice. Am I wrong? This expression uttered by this legal scholar sounds like the very embodiment of a process inherently corrupted by personal politics, the antithesis of justice! And the fact that this statement is spoken openly and NOONE QUESTIONS IT, is indicative of the sheepthink most people engage in quite frequently without even realizing it!

It's my understanding seditious conspiracy has been in process in certain places in just the last couple days. But what do we say? "No problem!" I believe that this willful negligence to enforce our own laws is a crime itself and should demand prosecution of everyone not doing their job. "Conspiracy by Negligence of Official Duty" Is it codified in law? Get a lot of these people out of office**, get new ones in who have good head on their shoulders and take us to a better place!

** "Get a lot of these people out of office" ONLY by lawful means, never any other way.

About your “The only goal of any prosecutor worthy of their position is the fair and equitable pursuit of justice. Am I wrong?”

Yes. Prosecutors argue tp convict.

@yvilletom What are you saying that differs from what I said?

The case is still very much in the investigation phase. People are being charged with relatively minor offenses at this point just to allow law enforcement and the courts to keep track on them.

Further charges may, or may not, be filed depending on how far up the food chain the dependent is, and how cooperative they are.

The most serious charges (e.g., insurrection, seditious conspiracy) are also probably awaiting the Senate accepting the nomination of the Attorney General.

1

Essential to convict him

bobwjr Level 10 Jan 27, 2021
0

I wonder if all 52 senators are aware of these small details.

I would be willing to bet that ALL 100 Senators are very much aware of these details, or will be by the time the vote is taken to convict.

Corporate America has voiced a strong displeasure with the attempted coup. I seriously doubt that stance will weaken as the evidence comes out in the Senate trial.

The 45 Senators voting against the trial were not voting to acquit. They were voting to give themselves an out so they would not have to go on the record. To acquit will take 34 Senators willing to thumb their noses at corporate America, and all of the campaign contributions that represents.

And those 34 Senators have to actually show up and go on the record with their votes because it only takes two thirds of those present to convict. If 25 of them simply did not show up, it would only take 51 votes to convict.

I would not be surprised to see a number of Senators absent when the vote is taken. I would be surprised to see any Senator vote to acquit.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:572261
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.