Mediaboss Marketing

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., is one of seven Republicans who voted to convict former President Donald Trump during the most recent impeachment trial. Pool/Getty Images hide caption

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., is one of seven Republicans who voted to convict former President Donald Trump during the most recent impeachment trial.

Sen. Ben Sasse is one of seven Republicans who crossed party lines to vote to convict former President Donald Trump during his historic second impeachment trial.

The effort fell 10 votes short of the 67 needed to convict but served to fortify the junior senator from Nebraska's bona fides as a conservative with an independent streak and put him further at odds with party leaders back home.

In a wide-ranging interview with NPR's Morning Edition on Tuesday, Sasse said the Republican Party is in a battle between what he calls "conservatism and short-term-ism."

He added that the GOP must plan for the future and how, in his view, impeachments are not about the individual office holder, but about the behavior the nation wants presidents to exhibit while occupying the White House.

"Not a 20-minute Twitter agenda"

"Is this still Donald Trump's party?" host Steve Inskeep asked Sasse.

"If you look at polling in the short-term, it surely appears that way," Sasse responded.

Sasse believes the party must take a broader view about where it ultimately wants to go.

"I think it's important to give a frank assessment of where the party of Lincoln and Reagan is right now," he added. "I think there's a whole bunch of stuff the party of Lincoln and Reagan needs to do to persuade people we have a 2030 agenda, not a 20-minute Twitter agenda."

On Trump's 57-43 acquittal over the weekend, the most bipartisan Senate impeachment vote in history, Inskeep asked the senator if the Constitution had been upheld.

Sasse side-stepped that direct question and said he wished more of his Republican colleagues would have voted to convict Trump. He then focused on what he believes the larger role impeachment trials serve.

"In my view, impeachment trials are not chiefly about one man. They are that, but they're primarily a public declaration of what the oath of office means and what kind of behavior we want of presidents in the future," he said.

Sasse leaves the chamber as the Senate voted to consider hearing from witnesses in the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump. J. Scott Applewhite/AP hide caption

Sasse leaves the chamber as the Senate voted to consider hearing from witnesses in the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump.

"Obviously there are a lot of people frustrated with me"

Prior to the impeachment vote, Sasse had already rubbed party leaders the wrong way in Nebraska. He released a video on Feb. 4 that took direct aim at the Nebraska GOP State Central Committee after reports surfaced that state party officials were considering censuring him, a formal and public measure of disapproval.

"Let's be clear, the anger in the state party has never been about me violating principle or abandoning conservative policy," Sasse, who was reelected to another six-year Senate term in the fall, said in the video. "The anger has always been simply about me not bending the knee to one guy."

Inskeep asked what else he's been hearing from constituents and GOP leaders in Nebraska.

"Obviously there are a lot of people frustrated with me in Nebraska, but I think a lot of them also have the six-and-a-half-year history with me where they know that though I'm a very conservative guy, I'm pretty independent-minded," Sasse said.

"I don't think they're very surprised, but obviously there is a move at county and state levels across the country to have the Republican party focus, even more, on the personality of Donald Trump. And I don't think that's healthy."

Domestic extremism and Trump voters

Sasse, who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, was also asked about domestic extremism. And given that many Trump supporters believe the election was stolen, is the U.S. properly prepared for more attacks like what was carried out at the Capitol last month.

The senator was quick to note that he was not lumping "the hundreds of violent mob rioters" that attacked the federal seat of government with the 74 million Americans who cast ballots for the former president.

While Sasse acknowledged a "huge share" of Trump voters believe "the lie that the election was stolen," that does not mean Trump supporters are would-be insurrectionists.

More broadly, he said, with technological advances like smartphones, it is easier for people who follow fringe movements and were previously geographically isolated to "find communities with a lot more confirmation bias."

"I do think that domestic radicalization is an issue we have to look at," Sasse said.

"And I don't think it's primarily about an ideological spectrum. I think it's primarily about the decline of place and about the evaporation of thick communities of people you actually break bread with," he said. "So, I think there's a lot more work we need to do."

Sasse added that he believes there also needs to be better intelligence to filter out people who use heated rhetoric on social media, but are not inclined to act on those comments, from those who would carry out violence.

NPR's Catherine Whelan contributed to this report.

Original post:
Sen. Ben Sasse On The GOP's Future Beyond Donald Trump - NPR

The 14th Amendment of the US Constitution bars from office those who "engaged in insurrection" against the United States. Photo / AP

Former President Donald Trump's acquittal by the US Senate in his impeachment trial may not be the end of the line for efforts to keep him from seeking the presidency again.

If Trump chooses to run for the White House in 2024, opponents are likely to call on a constitutional provision adopted after the Civil War to try to stop him. The Supreme Court could have the final say.

The Constitution's 14th Amendment disqualifies from future office any former elected officials and military officers who "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against the United States. Ratified in 1868, the language in Section 3 of the amendment was aimed at former Confederate civilian and military leaders.

But it could be applied to people who incited or took part in the January 6 attack on the Capitol, legal scholars said, noting that a congressional commission to investigate the attack and lawsuits against Trump could help make clearer his role in the deadly insurrection that day.

"If Trump runs again in 2024, I think it's very likely that we'll see efforts to keep him off the ballot on 14th Amendment grounds," said Daniel Hemel, a University of Chicago law professor.

But there is a lot of uncertainty about how it might happen and whether Congress or just state officials would be involved.

The drafters of the 14th Amendment wanted to keep former officials who joined the Confederacy from resuming public service, without an explicit vote from Congress restoring their eligibility. Section 3 was enforced for several years at both the state and federal level, according to Gerard Magliocca, a professor at the Indiana University Robert H McKinney School of Law. But in 1872, by a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate, Congress lifted the prohibition against most who had been barred from office.

Since then, it's fair to say, the provision has fallen into disuse. "Nobody talks about it really," said Laura Edwards, a professor of legal history at Princeton who has studied the 14th Amendment. "You haven't had to talk about it since the Civil War."

At least two Democrats in Congress say they are working on it. Democrat Steven Cohen said he is drafting legislation he hopes to unveil in the coming that weeks that would allow enforcement of the constitutional provision against anyone with ties to the violence at the Capitol last month. The bill would authorise the Justice Department to bring cases against would-be candidates and designate a federal court to handle any efforts to keep candidates off the ballot, Cohen said.

The Capitol riot to try to keep Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's Electoral College victory "was about as heinous and reprehensible an act since Benedict Arnold," Cohen said, referring to the Revolutionary War general who was a traitor to the American cause.

19 Feb, 2021 01:34 AMQuick Read

20 Feb, 2021 09:15 PMQuick Read

20 Feb, 2021 01:29 AMQuick Read

20 Feb, 2021 11:44 PMQuick Read

Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement that she is working on a measure "that would prevent traitorous men such as Donald Trump and others from ever serving in a government they once sought to topple".

Legislation would require Biden's signature. Congress also could pass a resolution declaring that Trump and perhaps others are disqualified from future office, though, as Hemel pointed out, "that non-binding resolution would be worth no more than the paper it's written on".

Even if Congress does nothing, though, state elections officials, or even state courts, might say that Trump cannot appear on their ballots because he engaged in insurrection, the professors said.

With or without congressional involvement, that matter would inevitably head to the courts, said Elizabeth Wydra, president of Constitutional Accountability Centre. "But I think that's okay, testing out a constitutional provision that has not often been used," Wydra said.

Judges would have to answer three questions, Magliocca said.

First, was there an insurrection? Trump's lawyers argued in the impeachment trial that there wasn't, but Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has called the events of January 6 a failed insurrection, and the term was repeatedly used by Democrats in the impeachment process as well as widely used by the media. Merriam-Webster defines insurrection as "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government".

Second, did Trump engage in insurrection? Here, too, Trump's team and the House prosecutors differ. The answer could depend on more information that could emerge from a congressional investigation of the January 6 riot, a lawsuit filed this week by Democrat Bennie Thompson against Trump or the court case over Trump's disqualification, Magliocca said. "We need a lot more development of the facts," he said.

Third, is Trump even covered by Section 3? The section doesn't explicitly mention the presidency, but Magliocca is among legal scholars who believe Trump could be barred.

If the presidency were excluded from the provision, former Confederate president Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy's top military commander, Robert E Lee, would have been barred from most offices but not the presidency, he said.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court probably would be asked to weigh in and possibly in the heat of the presidential campaign since the issue probably would arise only if Trump announced his candidacy and sought to qualify for the ballot.

That development might not please Chief Justice John Roberts, who presided over Trump's first impeachment trial. Roberts has been eager to keep the court out of cases related to Trump's baseless claims of election fraud, which were overwhelmingly rejected by courts and state elections officials, and partisan political controversies when possible.

"I don't think the potential to give the chief justice heartburn is a reason to avoid enforcing the Constitution, but I'm sure he would be very unhappy to have this land at his court," Wydra said.

One other possibility, Magliocca suggested, is that the specter of having to testify in court about his actions on January 6 could be enough to keep Trump from running in the first place.

Visit link:
Donald Trump 2024 may be stopped by 14th Amendment of US Constitution - New Zealand Herald

Glenn Ickler| Guest Columnist

Its the most amazin thing Ive seen in the last four years, my Uncle Fud said, as we sat eating Aunt Duds fresh-baked cinnamon rolls in their kitchen at Chigger Mountain Farm.

What is so amazing? I asked, after licking a dab of frosting off my upper lip.

Sen. Mitch McConnell and the twice-impeached former president both made statements that were true, Uncle Fud said.

Are you sure? That is a very rare act for McConnell and a total no-no for the twice-impeached former president, I said.

It was in all the papers. And what makes it even better is that they both told the truth on the same day. Whats more, it was about each other, he said.

I did read that, I said. McConnell, who has been the Chief Traitors biggest lickspittle and enabler for four years, wrote a column for the New York Times after the latest impeachment trial, and he said: There is no question former President Trump bears moral responsibility. His supporters stormed the Capitol because of the unhinged falsehoods he shouted into the worlds largest megaphone. His behavior during and after the chaos was also unconscionable, from attacking Vice President Mike Pence during the riot to praising the criminals after it ended.

Right, said Uncle Fud. But then, of course, he took the cowards way out and voted to acquit the man he said was morally responsible, usin the excuse that he thought the impeachment of a president already out of office was unconstitutional.

Which isnt at all amazing, said Aunt Dud.

It certainly isnt, I said. McConnell has been supporting the Chief Traitors unhinged falsehoods ever since the first set of lies he told at his inaugural in 2017.

But the twice-impeached former president fired right back at the man whod been his genuflecting right-hand man in the Senate, Uncle Fud said. He wrote: Mitch is a dour, sullen, and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again. He will never do what needs to be done, or what is right for our Country.

An absolutely perfect description of Mitch McConnell, written by a man who benefited from the spineless obeisance of that dour political hack for four years, I said. I cant believe this. For the first time ever, I am in agreement with both McConnell and the Chief Traitor.

No two despicable political scalawags have ever spoken about each other in more accurate terms, Aunt Dud said. I didnt think either of them had it in him to be so truthful.

Of course, the twice-impeached former president went right to lyin in the rest of his statement, Uncle Fud said. He said he will be supportin candidates who are brilliant, strong, thoughtful, and compassionate. He wouldnt recognize one of those if it bit him in the butt.

All those traits were completely absent in his administration, Aunt Dud said. And he might be coming back to run in 2024.

The vote for acquittal by 43 senators caused conservative columnist George F. Will, a former Republican, to wonder if the Republicans will allow their louts to rule the party, I said. He listed the members of the partys Large Lout Caucus as Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), Ted Cruz (Tex.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), and Ron Johnson (Wis.).

Ooh, what a creepy lineup that is, Uncle Fud said. Theyre all lookin for the votes of the seditionists, white-supremacists, neo-Nazis, Confederate flag wavers, thick-skulled thugs, petty thieves, misbegotten muttonheads and savage police beaters that smashed their way into the Capitol, murdered a policeman and threatened the lives of everyone in the building on Jan. 6.

The louts who have presidential ambitions Cruz, Hawley and Rubio will regret their votes to acquit the Chief Traitor if he runs for the Republican nomination in 2024, I said. In a Morning Consult poll, 54 percent of Republican voters said they would support him.

Its time for Congress to invoke Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, Aunt Dud said. Section 3 bars from public office those officials who engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States. The evidence shown at the impeachment trial made it crystal clear that the former president violated his oath of office and sparked an insurrection.

If James Madison was alive, Ill bet hed wish that hed made weaseling out of a conviction vote more difficult when he wrote the Constitutions impeachment clause, I said.

And if President Abraham Lincoln was alive, Ill bet hed have resigned from the Republican Party and started a new one with the few respectable Republicans that are left, said Uncle Fud. Seein a Confederate flag inside the Capitol would have made him explode.

Imagine what would happen if the Chief Traitor died and encountered President Lincoln in the afterworld, I said.

Impossible, said my Aunt Dud. You have to have had a soul to go where Lincoln is spending eternity. You have to have shown at least a crumb of concern for somebody besides yourself. Theres no way that the twice-impeached former president will ever get anywhere near the eternal resting place of Abraham Lincoln.

Glenn Icklerof Hopedale is a retired newspaper editor.

Read this article:
Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump finally tell the truth - at least about one another - Milford Daily News

I never thought that the spineless, degenerate, almost all white Republican U.S. senators would prove their patriotism and vote to convict Donald Trump. Trump, of course, was impeached for inciting the heinous, murderous, sickening riot of January 6.

On that date, the seat of government was desecrated and our Constitution threatened by disciples of a man who seemingly follows the playbook of Adolf Hitler and his like. Most frightening of all, Trump was perilously close to getting away with bringing down our democratic Republic.

Thats right, those thugs were in that Capitol to reverse the peaceful transference of power in this country. That transition of power, based upon the peoples vote, is what true democrats around the world so admire about this country. Our short-lived democracy was threatened by a would-be fascist dictator who knew exactly what he was doing when he lit the fuse that incited an invasion of folks set on murdering the vice president. How do we know that? They erected a noose just outside the doors of the Capitol and they yelled that they wanted to find the very vice president who never wavered in his respect and adulation for the president, who, as I have said again and again, has no low.

Stop and think about where Mike Pence is now. As I write this article, Pence has done nothing to strike back at the man who unleashed the mob against him and threatened his life and the lives of his family. Pence was asked to break the law and nullify the presidential election and now has nothing to say. That gives you a pretty good idea of his character. Remember, this is a man who could have been president.

It was not by accident that the House impeachment managers, including the unbelievably persuasive and heroic Jamie Raskin, kept referring to Pence during their statements. They wanted to let the spineless Republican senators know what was at stake.

It didnt work they threw their Republican colleague, Pence, overboard. The whole thing left the Republicans in a very bad place.

What was really going on here was evident. This was a last-ditch effort by the former white male majority in this country to preserve its power in the face of growing diversity. They know, as we all do, that the Black, Latino and progressive communities in the United States pulled together, and, for the sake of their children and their childrens children, voted for change.

This can all be traced back to the Civil War. Lincoln was assassinated, and after that, the emancipated slaves were put into economic and social servitude. Now it would appear that there is a legitimate chance that things are actually changing, and that is what is so frightening for those who have held on to power for so long. They were backed by Republican senators who looked and talked like them. These senators will be written into the history books as traitors.

So is Donald Trump finished? Hitler wasnt after he went to jail. I say that he is. After all, a lot of people voted for his conviction, including a handful of courageous Republicans. The impeachment trial of Donald Trump illustrates the same divisions that have always existed in this country, but things are changing. Frankly, there are more people who are insisting on sharing.

Lets just see whether at least some of the senators who voted with Trump will have put themselves at risk. Look at the two Democratic wins in Georgia. People know whats right.

Yes, I knew what the outcome of the trial would be, but I am quite sure that we are on the way to a better country. Thank you to the incredible Democratic managers and to all those who agree that things will get better. America, have heart.

Read more here:
Alan Chartock: Is Donald Trump finished? It looks to me like he is - The Daily Freeman

UNITED NATIONS (AP) The Biden administration on Thursday rescinded former president Donald Trumps restoration of U.N. sanctions on Iran, an announcement that could help Washington move toward rejoining the 2015 nuclear agreement aimed at reining in the Islamic Republics nuclear program.

Acting U.S. Ambassador Richard Mills sent a letter to the U.N. Security Council on behalf of President Joe Biden saying the United States hereby withdraws three letters from the Trump administration culminating in its Sept. 19 announcement that the United States had re-imposed U.N. sanctions on Tehran.

Mills said in the letter obtained by The Associated Press that sanctions measures terminated in the 2015 council resolution endorsing the nuclear deal with six major powers, but restored by Trump in September, remain terminated.

Trump pulled the United States out of the agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, in 2018, accusing Iran of serious violations.

Biden has said the United States wants to rejoin the pact and the State Department said Thursday the U.S. would accept an invitation from the European Union to attend a meeting of the participants in the original agreement -- Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and Iran.

The Trump administrations decision to invoke a provision in the 2015 council resolution allowing the snapback of sanctions because Iran was in significant non-performance with its obligations under the accord was ignored by the rest of the Security Council and the world.

The overwhelming majority of members in the 15-nation council called Trumps action illegal, because the U.S. was no longer a member of the JCPOA.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the United Nations would not support re-imposing sanctions on Iran as the United States was demanding until he got a green light from the Security Council. He said there was uncertainty on whether or not former secretary of state Mike Pompeo had triggered the snapback mechanism

Go here to see the original:
Biden withdraws Trump's restoration of UN sanctions on Iran - Associated Press