Impeachment now certain

You can't make this stuff up. it would be laughed out of any pitch meeting for a bad direct-to-tv dramatic movie about a criminal presidency.

Now representing Trump in his impeachment trial.

• Ken Starr - The guy who argued a president should be removed from office for lying about having sex will now argue illegally witholding aid from an allied nation at war to extort them into announcing criminal investigations of the president's political opponent and then obstructing the congressional investigation into that act is not impeachable conduct. Why him? Almost certainly because he said something Trump liked on Fox "News".
  
• Alan Dershowitz - Jeffrey Epstein's compatriot and defender of scum across the country. What do you want to do when you're the president of the United States under impeachment for your corrupt criminal acts? Hire the guy who was buddy buddy and defended the notorious sex trafficking pedophile that oh, was also your friend because hey, why not remind people of that too while you're at it? Why him? Probably because, again, he said something Trump liked on Fox "News".
  
• Pam Bondi - The former Florida State AG who dropped an investigation into Trump's fraud university after Trump made a sizable donation to her election campaign coffers. Because if you're going to be arguing things like "there was no quid pro quo!" you really want someone who is extremely familiar with the concept of a quid pro quo since they engaged in one with you really publicly to cover up some of your OTHER criminal misconduct.

You can't help but get the strong impression that Trump really does think the presidency is a reality TV show and he's trying to produce it for dramatic effect to get better ratings. Ooh! This will be a real twist! The audience will love it! they'll never see it coming! I bet we get picked up for another season after this!

The GOP isn't even being subtle about their cover up.

Trump is sooooo innocent and the evidence against him is sooooo non existent and ridiculous that they:

-Don't want to allow any cameras so nobody can see how innocent the trial shows Trump is.
-Want the arguments to be gong on at 2am so nobody is awake to follow along with how innocent Trump is.
-Don't want to call any witnesses to say how innocent Trump is.
-Don't want to look at any evidence that says how innocent Trump is.

Because he's so... so... so... innocent. Which we're all going to see because when this is all over they're going to vote that he's innocent! See!?!? I mean all that evidence and testimony stuff is irrelevant if we just SAY he's innocent!

The entire leadership of an entire political party in the United States is just openly complicit in enabling criminal misconduct by a president of their party at this point and being *brazen* about it. And I have no doubt the Trump fans on this board will cheer it all on.

In the meantime, Trump's DOJ is openly defying court orders now. Let's hear some more from the "the proper thing is to take this to the courts" camp. How about it Peter? You still around? What happens when Trump says the courts have no jurisdiction over him AND he's allowed to order total non compliance with Congressional impeachment actions? And the entire GOP Senate appears ready to say that's a thing he's allowed to do?

What do you have then?

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/do ... interview/

Oooh, possible signs of some cracks in McConnell's control. Looks like he had to make a last minute change to his proposed trial rules that eased up on the attempt to force arguments to extend into the early hours of the morning and to exclude all evidence not voted into the record.

If he had the votes locked down he wouldn't have had to do that at the final hour. Perhaps a small tiny glimmer of hope for the survival of the US as a functional constitutional republic yet...

gcomeau wrote:Oooh, possible signs of some cracks in McConnell's control. Looks like he had to make a last minute change to his proposed trial rules that eased up on the attempt to force arguments to extend into the early hours of the morning and to exclude all evidence not voted into the record.

If he had the votes locked down he wouldn't have had to do that at the final hour. Perhaps a small tiny glimmer of hope for the survival of the US as a functional constitutional republic yet...

(wryly...) a tiny sliver More seriously, there is going to be a lot of repair work to do once this is worked through.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:

gcomeau wrote:Oooh, possible signs of some cracks in McConnell's control. Looks like he had to make a last minute change to his proposed trial rules that eased up on the attempt to force arguments to extend into the early hours of the morning and to exclude all evidence not voted into the record.

If he had the votes locked down he wouldn't have had to do that at the final hour. Perhaps a small tiny glimmer of hope for the survival of the US as a functional constitutional republic yet...

(wryly...) a tiny sliver More seriously, there is going to be a lot of repair work to do once this is worked through.

Don

-

Yeah, the most likely scenario is they think putting up a symbolic appearance of some concession to fairness up front will let them get away easier with quashing all evidence and testimony then voting to acquit later.

But one can dream...

And yeah, the damage from all of this is going to take a generation bare minimum to repair.

As expected, the GOP is unanimously voting against every single call for witnesses or evidence.

They know Trump is guilty. They can't allow the public to see that evidence and testimony presented in the trial and then watch them vote to let him get away with it.

The House committee never had legal subpoena authority. Boo Hoo.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... ent-flaws/

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The House committee never had legal subpoena authority.

Yes, they did.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The House committee never had legal subpoena authority. Boo Hoo.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... ent-flaws/

I believe it's Nixon v United States from 1974 that codifiex it, but the precedent goes back a long way.

To (roughly) quote SCOTUS, the house's power to investigate is as fundamental and constitutional as it's power to legislate, and that the subpoena is a fundamental tool of investigation.

So Trump just told reporters at Davos he's comfortable with how the impeachment trial is going because, and I quote, "Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material."

That's the second article of impeachment he just confessed to on television. His withholding of the relevant evidence from the Congress in order to obstruct their investigation.

As usual, the GOP will squeeze their eyes shut, cram their fingers in their ears, and pretend this didn't happen while they go on Fox News which will also pretend this didn't happen and tell all their gullible sheep that the impeachment is a WITCH HUNT!!!"