![]() At a time when there is an absolute need for clarity and fairness, delivering a decision resulting from proper procedures based on an independent process, what we saw was heightened partisanship for political gain. He lives in Montreal.īased on the arguments presented by both sides, it is clear that the rule of law has been shortchanged. A jurist, he has intervened in many constitutional and Charter cases. Serge Joyal, Privy Councillor, is a retired senator, former MP and Minister of the Crown. 6 and those leading up to the insurrection at the Capitol constitute high crimes and misdemeanours. By that standard, the presentation convinces me that “I think he should be impeached.” Clearly, the events of Jan. A senator will either think that Donald Trump should be impeached or they won’t. The burden of proof required is ill-defined, if at all, and appears to be merely how a senator views the House Managers’ presentation. The House Managers’ “evidence” overwhelmingly establishes both incitement and insurrection. ![]() His guilt is established by both his acts of incitement and his non-action to prevent or stop it while it unfolded before him in real time. And they desensitized America to their gravity. This evidence demonstrates not only premeditation but foresight and knowledge on the part of the former president about how his supporters would interpret and act upon his lies and statements. This timeline involved documented actions and statements of the former president that primed and conditioned his supporters to believe in him, his false narratives and to engage in violent acts at his invitation. The House Managers established a timeline of events that predated Jan. The power, detail and breadth of the credible and cogent “evidence” presented by the House Impeachment Managers leads to an unquestionable finding of guilt. He is Anishinabe and lives in Ancaster, Ont. Harry LaForme, retired judge, Ontario Court of Appeal, is currently senior counsel with Olthuis Kleer Townshend, LL.P. They include constitutional experts, a retired member of the Canadian Senate who has advocated before the Supreme Court, a former appellate judge, a courtroom lawyer, a former lawmaker and a businessperson with a background in community-building. The Globe and Mail asked eight distinguished Canadians to act as jurors on Mr. Trump because he was no longer in office. Trump was “horrified” by the attack, which it described as being carried out by a small group of extremists of the left and right. Trump has been acquitted, but it is not over. Trump, before, during and after the attack on the Capitol had begun, including a dereliction of his duty to try to stop it as soon as it had started. It cited a broad pattern of conduct by Mr. The prosecution said the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech, existed to protect democracy, not to halt the peaceful transfer of power. Trump had used figurative language in common use among Democrats – the word “fight” – and that the “sham impeachment” was a terrible precedent that could rebound on the left, if Mr. The defence said news reports are not actual evidence. Trump’s tweets and what the prosecution called “common sense.” The facts as the House Impeachment Managers saw them came mostly from news reports, videos, Mr. The prosecution’s case was based on inferences about Mr. Saturday’s verdict hasn’t settled the debate among Canadians about his alleged abuse of office and the appropriate consequences. Senate voted 57-43 for conviction however, 67 votes were needed for Mr. Trump was acquitted of inciting an insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. The prosecution said Donald Trump knew exactly what he was doing, and the defence said he was misunderstood.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |