Congressional Staffers Call For Impeachment Conviction Of Trump In Letter To Senators

Rachel Maddow shares a letter signed by over 270 congressional staffers asking U.S. senators to please convict Donald Trump at his upcoming impeachment trial and prevent him from from running for office ever again. Aired on 01/30/2021.
» Subscribe to MSNBC:

About The Rachel Maddow Show: Through her unique approach to storytelling, Rachel Maddow provides in-depth reporting to illuminate the current state of political affairs and reveals the importance of transparency and accountability from our leaders. Maddow seeks to explain our complex world and deliver news in a way that's illuminating and dynamic, connecting the dots to make sense of complex issues. Maddow also conducts interviews with individuals at the center of current news stories to provide important perspective.

MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, Meet the Press Daily, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace, Hardball, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and more.

Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com:
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter:
Find MSNBC on Facebook:
Follow MSNBC on Twitter:
Follow MSNBC on Instagram:

#Impeachment #Trump #MSNBC

Congressional Staffers Call For Impeachment Conviction Of Trump In Letter To Senators

61 comments

    1. …Serving , should be an honor…and shouldn’t be a battle ground…which your life, on the line…that former clown president, should be charged.. I my self , would file a law suit..some how..some way…and sue the skin off of someone.. Really!… MY GREAT, GREAT GREAT GRANDCHILDREN’S GREAT ,GREAT GRANDCHILDREN, WOULD NEVER, WANT FOR, NOTHING..EVER!

    2. Come on, MSNBC, can you live without Trump? Your coverage/viewer count on Biden has no match to your coverage/viewer count on Trump in the past week. 24/7 no stop since Jan 20th.

    1. @TheBlueStig – If you want to stop money from influencing elections, the solution isn’t to ban elections… it’s to ban money from influencing elections! citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment

    2. @Ricky Tenderkiss It really isn’t about the money, it’s about the ease of illegally tilting things in one direction by using any number of methods that were blocked just 10 years ago. Methods such as easily hacked machines illegally connected to the internet, allowing HIGHLY questionable registrations from illegal locations, not checking ID’s, allowing “translators” in the booth at the same time as the voters, refusing to remove deceased names from the registrations, and one of the biggest things was “early voting” that lasted for nearly two MONTHS. That amount of time allowed many people to travel to other counties and other states using stolen ID’s to vote again.

      Trim it back to just one day, check and SCAN everyone’s ID (magnetic strip on the back of all ID) to prevent multiple votes, and most importantly get rid of Nancy Pelosi’s new voting bill, because she wants to allow people to vote online with no signature at all, no ID at all, AND she wants 16 year old kids to vote.

  1. How do we start an all across America petition to make it into law that there needs to be term limits. We have to find a way around our own Congress because they’re not going to bring it up ever.

  2. House and Senate jobs Till Death Do Us Part – that’s why we need Term Limits NOW !!! Why should it be a lifetime job?

    1. @H P – We already have term limits, they’re called ELECTIONS.

      Every election, citizens choose whether or not their elected representative will serve another term.

      The time frame for how long someone holds office is determined by voters. As it should be.

      But if you want to get big money out of democracy, support campaign finance reform! citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment

    2. @Ricky Tenderkiss I assume you believe that presidents should also be able to have multiple terms as long as people are voting for them. You can’t just redefine a term to mean what you like. Presidents have term limits — only two terms. That’s what term limit means. Again, I’m not even American and live in a country without such limits. If I know this why on earth don’t you?

    3. @Paul pvhl – In fact, in the USA we lived _without_ a presidential term limit… for over 150 years!! There wasn’t a presidential term limit enacted in the USA until 1951, which was enacted by constitutional amendment… and it was probably an over-hasty move: the GOP were simply angry that FDR had served four terms and had ushered through democratic passage of massive improvements to the USA, upsetting their gilded constituency.

      The reason a presidential term limit had to be enacted by constitutional amendment (the 22nd) is because the Founding Fathers had _already_ extensively discussed the idea of term limits (although they called it, if I recall correctly, “office rotation” or something like that), and they had soundly *_rejected_* the idea!

      They realized that only having inexperienced congresspeople in office would mean they’d be too easily influenced by powerful outside forces: at the time, they primarily feared wealthy foreign monarchies, but today the concern would be powerful conglomerates… Koch Industries and the like. And in fact, where there are term limits, that’s exactly what happens: outside money alone determines the result of those elections, along with what legislation gets passed. It’s all lobbyist money, all the time. Locals lose control completely.

      And there’s a good argument for again removing presidential term limits, too, which is: citizens _do_ tend to make the correct decision in the end. For example, US citizens voted out Trump after only one term… Trump lost by the second-widest margin in nearly a quarter century. And by looking at the popular vote of 2016, we can surmise the majority of US citizens never wanted Trump to be president in the first place!!

      To restore choice to citizens, we should: get rid of gerrymandering; get rid of voter suppression; eliminate the electoral college; enact wide-reaching campaign finance reform. Supporting the For the People act would accomplish many of those goals. And a constitutional amendment getting dark money out of campaigns would very definitely restore power to individual citizens where it belongs: citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment

    4. ​@Ricky Tenderkiss You’re preaching to the choir and saying nothing I don’t already know — but go ahead, it’s good to hear. Your restoration list didn’t include removing term limits.

      I’ve been working for decades on a governance cultech (my term: a ‘culture that enables a technology that enables a culture’ loop) that incorporates everything in your list and more and hope to introduce it soon to whomever is waiting for it as I am. We can do so much more than any founding father imagined, if people of goodwill locally and globally work together with what we have learned and what we’re capable of, if we can learn to walk together in love, hope, and faith, primarily for each other; all other paths lead to destruction given coming technology. There are so many different ways groups can implement true community in a land of freedom, in a land of social-caring (and even where these are lacking), though we have stop attacking other goodwill community implementations because they’re not our own particular choice.

      But we have to agree on what is true and what is false, investigate where there is no agreement, and minimize the power of proven liars and the new breed of psychological manipulators — soon we will be completely unable to tell if a video or audio bite is real or fake, and one photo can launch a war. These are serious times. We are still on a ledge.

      Some of my music (completed version coming soon): https://youtu.be/5lGmx1tRUDA?list=PLqMVSt3ueyI-vLq6zr26P3FXTedQnsr6p

    5. @Paul pvhl – I refer you back to my first reply to you. I covered artificial term limits, and how all they do is limit voter choice.

      If people want to remedy corruption in democracy, the solution is not to limit democracy — it’s to limit money’s influence over democracy!

      Support campaign finance reform, and specifically, support a constitutional amendment to counteract the Roberts Court’s ridiculous Citizens United ruling. The Restore Democracy Amendment is one such proposal: citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment

  3. The Senators do not care one bit about this letter! In one ear, out the other. They only care about their seat as a U.S. Senator and they will do whatever it takes to keep that seat. They will break their oath, again, to make sure they stay in power.

    1. @Do is Enterprises
      please, cite the video/tweet where either politician told people to “rise up and make a mess ( riot ) in the streets”

      beside this video is about a letter from Congressional STAFF
      .. neither Maxine Waters nor Nancy Pelosi is a staff member, they are Representatives
      .. I would wager that 98% or more of staff NEVER gets on to national media .. never makes a speech

    2. @Jacque Roberts presided over the last impeachment trial because the SC head is supposed to but this one is unconstitutional so he said he would not be a part of it. The conviction would fail on several grounds, it is a waste of time, money, and further divides the country proving how corrupt the Demoncrats are.

    1. ​@rich w Yep, Layoff Republican senators! They can go repair the country’s infrastructure and clean out toilets!

  4. How about congress remembers that their job was designed to be unpaid and they were expected to have real jobs instead. There is a reason the term is public SERVANT

    1. @mike sixx ? I was on your side (I think), I’m just asking all of you to calm down, _all_ of you, if everyone’s angry what do you think the odds are that anyone’s gonna change their minds on anything? Edit: I mean like literally everyone but there isn’t like an @everyone or anything

    2. @Mediocrity this comment section was doing just fine until leftists decided to try and poison it with their lies

    3. @mike sixx You mean you were able to practice your hypocrisy under the guise of faux-moral superiority until you were caught out and had to start bleating false moral equivalency….PS “compensated for their services by law” clearly entails payment for their work not just reimbursement of expenses. And of course, you think servants shouldn’t get paid…That’s going to work really well when they’re in charge of lawmaking affecting their own businesses or other employment that you say they should have to have then…The original conflict of interest or bribery incentive…

    4. @Alan Flint cry some more. All of that said nothing of substance and just reinforces my point about you. The thing is the founding fathers believed in the duty of man. None of the modern ones believe that

    5. @mike sixx Oh, you think I ‘m crying over your lack of knowledge and over-inflated self-importance? ROFL Think again. The founding fathers also had recesses to allow travel to and from the capital by sail and/or on horseback. And modern society and technology has created the need for full time, paid lawmakers to monitor and make law and represent the people. Or would you rather be controlled only by an elite of super wealthy that don’t need to be paid with no experience of real world stresses and issues affecting ordinary people? Another sheer Trumpian “genius”…

    1. Not convicting Trump because he’s not in office basically gives any outgoing president the ability to do literally anything they want to with no repercussions.

    2. @Justin Whittington agree and if the president isn’t healed up to his doing then why are there laws that everyone must obey

    1. @John K They both lie. This comment doesnt specify who exactly is lying. This is because they are one in the same. Their narratives are different but the story is the same. Wake up.

    2. @Hunter Hyatt You are very intelligent and way ahead of almost everyone. Thank you very much and have a nice day.

    1. How do you know they knew what they were signing? I doubt many of them read beyond a fifth grade level. They might think they were signing up for gym times.

    2. They’ve already gone on record repeatedly showing they are traitors to Democracy, with no negative consequences to themselves.

    1. Staffers don’t vote on the floor of the house but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a say about safety in their workplace, unionise America!

    2. @Vic Maz as I do agree about the safety of anyone that is not currently committing a crime. I will say punish those involved. And by saying that you cannot punish in anyway those who only agree with the President in congress and the Former President Trump himself. For two legal reasons, first the constitution uses the words from office. But Former President Trump is just that a Former President who is not in office to be removed from! Second is the fact that his speech calls for peaceful and patriot protest. Those words are not to riot and the President has been condemning the riots all of last year unlike the Democrats!

  5. Keep in mind that is these “little people” that lubricate the grinding gears of governance (or, rather, the myriad cogs in the machine); politicians merely pontificate.

  6. The country nees to focus on integrity, morality AND term limits or we’ll keep getting more useless politicians that are a national security threat or worse. Lets see some consequences AND changes to the broken system.

  7. Eloquent, impassioned and moving letter. Too bad the GOP Senate members have neither heart nor soul. I fear your plea will fall on deaf ears.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.