Monday, December 9, 2019
CongressmanNadler / YouTube Ranking Member Jerry Nadler Questions Rod...

Judicial Committee Releases Thousands of Docs, Repubs Beg for More Time

It is Sunday, which means another Republican senator will make the rounds speaking in tongues about Ukrainian fictional drama. We hear that the Ukrainians are awful and corrupt people, and thus of course a president would ask these most awful and corrupt people to  announce a big investigation of, surprise! your biggest political rival. Never mind that Trump doesn’t say a thing about Ukrainian-American corruption on the phone. Ted Cruz, who according to Trump, had a father who supposedly killed JFK, and has a “dog” of a wife (actually his wife, aka mother of his three kids, is pretty great in my mind), stood up and played Trump ball. Ted Cruz, who is a very very smart guy, magnanimously said Russia did manipulate our election buttttt, so did Ukraine! His evidence is that the Ukrainian ambassador to the United States wrote an op-ed that favored Hillary! Oh the humanity. I am gonna disagree here. Writing an op-ed against the guy who favors Russia in a war against you, FFS, wouldn’t qualify as “election interference” in my opinion, or in anyone else’s who doesn’t have a Trump agenda.  Cruz should be embarrassed bringing Ukraine up when compared to hacking voting databases, sending money to the NRA, hacking the DNC at Trump’s invitation, viciously applying propaganda t Facebook and openly vowing to do it all again. Ted Cruz knows this. He is just a prominent member in a post-fact party. It is also a party of the “gotcha” opposition to anything not glowing to Trump. Trump has unquestioned “loyalty. ” (the only value Trump demands. Amazing that Trump doesn’t like dogs, a historically loyal animal. Though, Dogs do have a hall of fame BS meter in them). Republicans’ unquestioned loyalty has led to flip flop on their complaints without shame. (Shame is inherently fact-based.). Last week, Trump was calling upon Nancy Pelosi to get the impeachment done, quit stalling in any way. Today, Rep. Collins, one of the “most loyal” (and most without shame) is arguing that he and his party need more time to absorb the thousands of pages of supporting documents, released yesterday in the Judicial Committee report: Details via Rawstory: “The information Democrats released today is partial, biased and curated to support accusations that have, to date, been thinner than cotton candy,” Collins said in a statement Saturday.“Chairman Nadler has no choice but to postpone Monday’s hearing in the wake of a last-minute document transmission that shows just how far Democrats have gone to pervert basic fairness.” “It is impossible for Judiciary members to sift through thousands and thousands of pages in any meaningful way in a matter of hours.” Well alrighty then. Just the moment you can show me that Republicans have demonstrated even passing interest in the facts, I will support their call to delay …. No. Actually, that is not my answer, no matter how much they deserve it. I say, give them a continuance, Congressman Nadler. Give them five days or a week. We are dealing with a process that needs to appear as though both sides are interested in a search for truth. There is very little downside to granting it, and a big upside. For one, it gives Nadler an opportunity to demonstrate that one party is composed of adults who will listen to […]
TMZ / YouTube Will Donald Trump Be Impeached A...

New Yorker: ‘Impeaching Donald Trump Is Already A Win For Democrats’

White House counsel Pat Cipollone stated Friday that the White House would not cooperate with the House impeachment inquiry and admonished the Democrats to cease and desist, in a letter to Jerrold Nadler. Cipollone called the inquiry “baseless” “a charade” and admonished Nadler “not to waste even more time with additional hearings.” In issuing the letter today, the White House is holding fast to it’s stance that impeachment is a “hoax” and it’s decision to stonewall until the matter gets to the Senate, at which point Mitch McConnell is expected to raise and lower the gavel and that will be that. Be that as it may, don’t lose sight of the good that the impeachment inquiry has done and how it does in fact constitute a galvanizing force in American politics, which will be of great importance in the upcoming election — and this despite the fact that polls are showing little to no movement of the anti-Trump needle since the hearings began. The New Yorker: If Trump is to be defeated next year, his opponents will have to maintain that [level of] energy [from 2018] and build upon it. To do so, Ezra Levin, the co-founder and co-executive director of the Indivisible movement, which now has more than five thousand affiliated local groups, insists, it was utterly necessary for the Democrats to react to the shocking Ukraine revelations by issuing the ultimate congressional rebuke to Trump. Speaking hours after Speaker Nancy Pelosi confirmed that the House Democrats would go ahead and file articles of impeachment, Levin said, “I see only positive sides to this. I see a system that is working. For all the millions of people who got involved with politics after 2016, it shows that all the hard work they did mattered. That is going to get them involved again in 2020.” From this perspective, the key thing isn’t whether the Senate actually removes Trump from office. Levin, who is also the co-author of a new book, “We Are Indivisible: A Blueprint for Democracy After Trump,” said that he wasn’t making any predictions about the outcome. But he added, “It was vital to demonstrate that elections do have consequences and that the Democrats will use their power to stand up to Trump.” If Pelosi and her colleagues had refused to launch an impeachment process, Levin went on, “it would have been enormously demoralizing for all these people who were newly engaged after 2016.” […] To that point, Levin noted, participating in an impeachment trial may well create problems for a number of Republicans who are up for reëlection in purple and red states where Trump’s disapproval ratings are underwater. Pointing to Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Maine, Montana, and North Carolina as examples, Levin said, “These are all places where you are going to have a Republican senator forced to take a hard vote. It will be very helpful to Democrats that Senator Gardner, in Colorado, or Senator Ernst, in Iowa, or Senator McSally, in Arizona, cannot just hide behind nicely written tweets. They are actually going to have to register a historic vote and stand by it.” An old teacher of mine said, “You can never go too far wrong by doing the right thing.” In this instance of fighting back against the corruption of Donald Trump and […]
Marc Nozell / Flickr joe biden...

Trump Trial Looms and Biden Could Take Trump Down at Trial

The trial of Donald Trump will be the most substantial seismic moment of the decade. The impact will ripple through the next three generations. As the trial begins, the nation will come to a standstill. American citizens are the ultimate jurors and will render their verdict in November, regardless of what Republican senators do. At stake is literally the direction of democracy, with Republicans wholly at ease kicking it to the corner to beat “leftists” they believe are taking “their” country away. They see defeating us as their highest patriotic duty and will proudly tear the fabric of democracy apart to do it. “If conservatives are forced to chose between conservatism and democracy, they’ll abandon democracy, not conservatism.” Conservative David Frum The trial’s verdict is far less important than the nation’s reaction to what they hear. Removal is the goal, but if the nation recoils from a president so damned reckless that he’s willing to use the most corrupt foreign powers to choke off an election, the voters’ might rise up in a wave similar to 2018. No one really knows how this will go. It is impossible to predict what evidence might emerge and its impact. This is especially true given that criminal proceedings have begun against two key players, and one is looming against Rudy. Meanwhile, Joe Biden may be busy blowing a massive opportunity. The Republicans keep threatening to call him as a witness. Yesterday, in answering a question, Biden said he will not voluntarily appear. Obviously he is leaving open his choices if he is subpoenaed. But he’s making a massive mistake and needs to reverse it as fast as possible. He needs to come out and say: “If called, I will do my duty and appear.” He has an opportunity for which most candidates would sell their staff. He has a chance to show the country how a leader should respond when called to be accountable. He has a chance to say: “I am certainly not the issue. This is not about me. But unlike the president, I will not hide. I will be upfront with the American people. The American people hold the power in this country. I owe the nation no less. The president is cowardly hiding, hoping to rip that power from the people and impose his will. He needs secrecy. It is reprehensible. I will be there if called, I always will. He never will.” That answer would terrify the Republicans. In front of a nation watching like a Super Bowl, Biden has a chance to demonstrate how an adult that loves democracy treats the process. Fearless. By shaming Trump, he has an opportunity no one else has. Joe is not my candidate, but I’ll be damned if I smear the Democrat that has a good shot at being our nominee, our hope, going into November. That being said, he is making a massive mistake and needs to reverse it, today. He needs to lead, and set an example. The contrast with Trump would be overwhelming. On one side is there, unafraid. The other is a man who has ordered everyone to ignore Congress and the people, a man who hasn’t turned over one document, a guilty coward. Biden can even admit he might have had poor judgment, and then rip the […]

Fox’s Napolatino Predicts Trump Will Testify on His Own Behalf at Trial

This won’t come true because I haven’t been a good enough person for Santa to deliver this present to me. Having said that, it is fun to ponder, kind of like buying a lottery ticket just to sit and think about what you’d do with a few hundred million. Fox’s Judge Andrew Napolitano predicts that Trump will testify on his own behalf at his senate trial. Please, god, yes. Per a transcript in The Hill (and not interpreted by John Solomon) Bill Hemmer asked Napolitano who might testify on behalf of Trump, given that Trump hasn’t allowed anyone to testify yet. “Himself,” said Napolitano. The Judge states it will be the biggest political showdown in modern history, with 200 million people watching, in a trial overseen by the Chief Justice. Trump and his ego simply won’t be able to resist. Before you all laugh along with me, do note that unlike a real trial, Trump has this jury stacked. He might well believe he cannot possibly lose in this context, and will want to go all in on the matter. He is arrogant enough that – with a stacked jury – he might well think that he will finally show everyone that he can “own the libs.” It really could happen. I confess that I hadn’t thought through the fact that Trump will have a hard time presenting any sort of “defense,” since he hasn’t allowed anyone come to the capitol yet. If Trump were to call witnesses like Mulvaney or someone, they would be exposed to cross-examination. Thus, Trump is likely to act like a criminal and plead the 5th, basically, not put on any defense. Just assert that the Democrats didn’t prove their case. But if Trump thinks this matter is guaranteed, because he owns the Republican jurors, he might be stupid enough to walk his ass into the trial, fully expecting his stable genius-nature to walk on over the Democrats. On the one hand, yes, the Republicans are near certain to vote on Trump’s behalf no matter what. So what’s the risk? On the other hand, you know the risks. If Trump testifies, schools will close. People that could care less about politics will be listening in, and it is entirely possible that Trump will fall on his face under cross-examination. Yes, Trump has his “base” that believes he’s been terribly maligned. Yet how many of those people actually know what happened in the scandal? I will tell you the number isn’t many. Republicans have brilliantly spread so much bullshit in so many directions that their own voters truly don’t know what this scandal is about. The only thing of which they’re sure is that all this is terribly unfair to “the president.” (They will never refer to him as Trump, it is always “the president.”) So there is risk that too many people will watch. Trump will then inform those people, aka voters, as to what actually happened, and have a lot of people staring at each other uncomfortably, including senator-jurors. Sounds delicious. But I have been doing more thinking lately, as the trial gets closer and closer. I worry. Without regard to Trump testifying, if the Republicans still clear Trump, look the ever-living fck out. We will be living in the type of fascist dystopian […]

Mr. Attorney General? Zero Plus Zero STILL Equals Zero!

What did Fozzy the Bear say when he saw William Barr? Ewoka-woka-woka! I don’t get it. What the hell is it with Trump appointees and free travel at our expense? When a Trump cabinet appointee’s ass hits his leather chair, his first phone call is to the White House travel office to hunt up a private government jet to head off to the fleshpots of Rio to check out deforestation. If the Department of the Interior is so concerned about the quality of the snorkeling waters of the Caribbean, why are they pushing for more off shore drilling? In response to rodent squealing and bovine bleatings from the GOP minority following the Mueller investigation, the DOJ Inspector General opened an official investigation into the origins of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016. The basic points of inquiry were the proper use of FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page, the FBI’s reliance on or lack thereof of the Steele dossier, and reports of FBI attempts to infiltrate the Trump campaign in 2016. But that wasn’t good enough for The Mango Messiah. After all, the DOJ AG didn’t owe Trump anything, and who knew what he would say. So His Lowness got on the blower to Tubby the Ewok, and told him to hand pick somebody to do the job right. Which is how a serious, career, apparent straight shooter named John Durham got the job of ensuring that the tally came out right. And since you can’t get good help these days, Tubby decided to ride shotgun over the whole meshugass. Which of course meant racking up oodles of GAO frequent flier miles. Off they went into the wild blue yonder, to places like Great Britain France, Spain, Italy, and Australia, meeting with government intelligence officials, and trying to fit their square information into Barr’s little round holes. If there was a scandal there to find, then Tubby was the one to find it, and if there wasn’t, fuck it, he’d invent one. And it was all hush-hush and James Bond-ish with Barr suddenly disappearing without any official word that he had even left his tree. But alas, all good things must come to an end, including restful junkets under the disguise of an official government investigation. Next Monday, the DOJ Inspector General is expected to release his official report, and it’s pretty well guaranteed to give Tubby, and his boss, Jabba the Trump, a severe case of the sadz. The report is widely expected, based on snippets already leaked to the press, to tell The Cheeto Prophet that he’s full of shit. No, Obama didn’t tap his phones in 2016. No, the FBI didn’t treat the Steele dossier like a newly found book in the New Testament. No, the FBI didn’t trample all over Carter Page’s civil rights. No, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok didn’t do anything wrong in telling each other what a piece of shit Trump was. And worst of all, it’s going to contain a little something that hasn’t been reported on much yet, but which will make Barr look like a total asshole if he does as expected, and disputes the report. It was reported that in preparing his report, the DOJ IG reached out to John Durham, Barr’s hatchet man investigator, and asked him if he had found any […]
Fox News / YouTube Rep Devin Nunes blasts DOJ FBI...

New Ethics Complaint Slammed Down Against Devin Nunes

It sure appears that Trump and his closest “advisors” rely heavily upon the presumption that nothing they do will ever see the light of day as evidence, and if it does they will just deny that reality’s existence, or application to this reality. It is the only explanation for how Nunes sat through the committee hearings without blurting out: “Before we go any further, I’d like the record to reflect that I’m ass deep in this shit.” Now it appears that Nunes might actually have to explain himself, as a new ethics complaint was filed against him Wednesday afternoon: “The House Intelligence Committee’s Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Report dated December 3, 2019 used a subpoena to obtain phone records which plainly demonstrate that ranking member Devin Nunes (R-CA) has an actual conflict of interest with an ongoing impeachment hearing he oversees … “That is because Rep. Nunes is currently engaged in overseeing aninvestigation in which it appears he is a fact witness, and which may examine his own activities and meetings with agents and lawyers of the President who solicited foreign election assistance, as well as potentially into his own contacts with foreign government officials.” The rule itself couldn’t be vaguer: “A member must behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.” Now, because I personally don’t use “creditably” as a word, I looked it up: “Worthy of belief: a creditable story.” Guilty. With such a ridiculously general standard, it is no wonder that few complaints are filed. Still; “Under House Intel Committee rules, Rep. Nunes could have known that record production had revealed his phone contacts with the persons under subpoena before the general public was informed with the release of the Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report,” the complaint continues. “Yet, the Congressman never disclosed his potential conflict of interest overseeing the investigation to the public, nor did he recuse himself from any of its activities, including the drafting of an official 120-page HPSCI Minority report.” There is no doubt Nunes now has a terrible conflict of interest. We know what Trump thinks of “recusals.” Recusal is for pusssss, it’s a doctrine reserved for countries that follow laws. And now we move into troubled waters. Because Trump has near torpedoed the entire idea of a “conflict” or that recusal should ever be considered. He has normalized having conflicted interests as part of the American political landscape. Can you imagine Trump not having some kind of personal conflict in something? Do we even have laws or rules anymore? It seems perilous, in part because it is so obvious. When Nunes was caught, when the records came to light, he went on Hannity to say that he might have spoken to Parnas, but denied “knowing” Parnas. Turns out, Nunes spoke to the guy he doesn’t know at least four times. I don’t see anything in the media about Nunes resigning in shame, do you? Trump has forced the entire right into a corner where no facts or crimes matter. Nunes can say “I don’t know a guy” in spite of records showing at least four phone calls minimum, and no one on the right cares. It is like they have a group suicide pact they have with Trump, whereby if none of them turn on each other, they […]

Why Are Democrats NOT Using Turley’s Words AGAINST Trump?

We roasted Turley and his coif on a spit yesterday for his disingenuous argument that the House was moving forward without sufficient evidence to impeach Trump. Deservedly so. Yet in my anger, I didn’t focus near enough on those portions of Turley’s testimony that – much to his chagrin – could be used aggressively against Trump. I am wondering how it is that the Democrats seem to be making the same mistake by leaving much of Turley’s testimony unaddressed. First, as we see in Jennifer Rubin’s column, Turley did admit that Trump’s reference to Joe Biden in the call to Zelensky was not only not “perfect,” but also “highly inappropriate.” This must be a critical focus. It IS “highly inappropriate” to reference the Bidens specifically. Indeed, in the memo, Trump makes no mention whatsoever to Ukrainian corruption, and  only mentions the Bidens. The Republicans cannot deal with questions about why Trump never mentions Ukrainian corruption on the call: this answer is amazing — Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) December 5, 2019 Collins had no answer because no good answer exists. Turley’s admission allows Democrats to pound on the fact that Trump never talked about Ukrainian corruption. Trump focused solely upon the Bidens, which even Turley acknowledges to be utterly indefensible. Turley’s thesis is that Democrats don’t have sufficient evidence yet to impeach Trump, and we vaporized that pinata yesterday. The flip side, though, is that withholding military aid for a favor, the quid pro quo, is an impeachable act (“could be”)  if proven. according to Turley, the Republicans’ own witness. Democrats need to be shouting into microphones that even the Republican expert agreed that a financial quid pro quo for military aid is something worthy of possible impeachment. Schiff needs to have a press conference reminding people that we “prove” things at trial, which is in the senate, and have no doubt that they intend to prove that a quid pro quo existed. He can stand back from the microphone and say: “And when we do prove it beyond a doubt, even the Republicans’ witness admitted that such an act is worthy of possible impeachment. Democrats must also do what we did yesterday, and that is use Turley’s argument about insufficient evidence as the justification for demanding testimony from Mulvaney, Giuliani and Bolton. We are sitting here acting as though no direct evidence exists, when it most certainly does exist. It is just that Trump has blocked  everything.  Bear in mind, in U.S. v. Nixon the SCOTUS unanimously ruled that executive privilege doesn’t apply to secretely recorded tapes of people having intimate conversations with the president, tapes of people speaking who did not even know they were being recorded! Yet we’re acting as if Trump’s universal privilege blanket is in some way to be “respected.” Trump’s assertion of universal privilege or “absolute immunity,” especially in light of Nixon, is near impeachable in and of itself. Why are Democrats not unified around one or two key points today, admitted by the Republicans’ own witness? To me, it appears Democrats lack aggression in their messaging. This might have been what caused some pullback in impeachment polling during the first week of testimony before Congressman Schiff. It should not be allowed to happen again, and the Democrats have the Republicans’ own witness’s position to fall […]

Trump Says He Asked for Favor on Behalf of America, Not Himself

As we all know, the memo (it is not a transcript) from the “perfect call” referenced the critical line: “I need you to do us a favor, though,” as Trump spoke to Zelensky. It is Trump’s demand for the deliverable, the investigation of Biden. Now, today, Trump wants you to know that he was acting on “our” behalf. Yes, Trump was just looking out for you: ….”I would like to have the Attorney General (of the United States) call you or your people…..” This, based on what I have seen, is their big point – and it is no point at a all (except for a big win for me!). The Democrats should apologize to the American people! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 5, 2019 And it only took him three months to come up with this explanation! Bravo. Moreover, Trump forgets to add in his tweet that he also wanted Zelensky to speak to Rudy Giuliani, who is not a government official, does not work for us, but is Trump’s “personal lawyer.” The tweet is totally credible. Totally. The Tweet does, however, demonstrate why we so desperately need Bolton and Mulvaney’s testimony. We are arguing about the meaning of one word in a document that I am not convinced is an accurate a reference. I can easily see some words twisted; take out a “me” and insert “us,” leave out a clause of a sentence, reword a different sentence and “voila,” the perfect call. It would explain where Trump came up with the “perfect call” meme, would it not? If the White House went under an intense review of the memo and slyly altered just a few things, changing “me” to “us,” and leaving out just a couple clauses, one can see them convincing themselves it was “the perfect call,” especially compared to how it originally read. One can almost see a few people, including bad lawyers, talking about it after alterations: “There, it’s perfect now, it looks just fine …” and Trump picking up on it. I do not want to get too far out in speculation because none of the witnesses noted anything too obvious missing from the memo. Moreover, I don’t find Trump using the word “us” to be in any way less condemning. Trump thinks of himself as the King of the United States, and thus I can easily see where Trump would believe that Zelensky is doing the United States a favor by destroying Biden and doing Trump’s personal bidding. Given that Trump subsumed the entire nation into his ego, saying “us” doesn’t mean a thing to me. Regardless, the focus on the word “us” screams out for greater discovery into the evidence. I want to hear from Bolton and Mulvaney, even though I do understand the House’s reasoning. I feel like they’re just pushing ahead into a known outcome, and a dangerous aftermath. There has been some discussion about calling Mulvaney or Bolton at the trial in the senate, especially since Trump has talked about calling Schiff and Hunter Biden. That is some high stakes pool, there. As a general rule, you never ever call a witness if you don’t know the answer to every question you are asking, and can prove it should the witness choose to lie. Still, it does need […]

Have No Doubt, Prof. Jonathon Turley Is Full of S**t

Jonathon Turley will likely go down as history’s greatest concern troll. Have absolutely no doubt that Turley is a hired gun, called by the Republicans to help get Trump’s ass out of the sling while acting as if he’s maintaining some kind of intellectual standard and honesty. He is not. Anyone who supported the impeachment and removal of Bill Clinton, but not Donald Trump, is someone who is only out to hurt Democrats, period. If you didn’t believe it before today, you have far more evidence now. Turley wants you to believe that he is coming at you straight, no agenda at all. He just wants more evidence, and thinks that the “thin file” and rushed procedure are objectionable. His argument might have some weight if the Democrats specifically chose to only call the non-political staffers around Trump (Vindman, Taylor, Yovanovitch), while leaving the testimony of Bolton, Mulvaney and Giuliani waiting at the curbside. But Turley knows damned well that Trump has blocked, and will block, every single individual and document that he can. Facts are Trump kryptonite. In effect, Turley wants the Democrats punished for not having more evidence, knowing that Trump is going to take a year, minimum, in litigating each and every piece of evidence and individual that might come before the committee. Meanwhile, in the background, Trump will busily rig the fcking 2020 election and then – if he wins – declare the entire proceeding “Null and Void” because “the voters have spoken.” IF Turley were being intellectually honest, he would blast Trump for his blatant obstruction of the proceeding. It would be “semi-honest” to say; “Congress, you are going too fast. But, Mr. President, you are obstructing the proceeding without any good faith justification.” But Turley isn’t saying that, only Congress has done wrong, in his eyes. He got caught on it, too. In this questioning by Congressman Neguse, one can see the bullshit flow from Turley’s eyes. Transcript via Rawstory: “And you’re aware that President Trump has refused to allow his chief of staff or White House counsel to testify in this inquiry, correct?” “Yes, but various officials did testify and they are remaining in federal employment,” said Turley. So Turlely is expecting Congress to give Trump bonus points for not firing these people the moment after testifying? And, point of order, but Vindman was sent packing back to the Pentagon, and Ambassador Yovanovitch was fired prior to even testifying. “Am I right that President Clinton provided written responses to 81 interrogatories from the House Judiciary Committee and during that impeachment inquiry?” said Neguse. “And you’re aware that President Trump has refused any request for information  the president submitted by the president in this impeachment inquiry?” “I have, yes,” said Turley. At which point Turley did not die of embarrassment . “Are you familiar with the letter issued by White House counsel Pat Cipollone on October 8, written on behalf of President Trump, in effect, instructing executive branch officials not to testify in this impeachment inquiry?” “Yes, I am,” said Turley. The “You Can All Go Blow Me” letter? Yes, I have heard that it was issued. So? So what is Congress supposed to do when the president tells Congress to go blow itself? “And am I correct that no president in the history […]
Guardian News / YouTube Five times Donald Trump refused to...

Trump’s Impeachment Defense

You’re new to Harry’s team aren’t you?  Yes  Then what makes you think that any of the slack I cut them transfers to you?   Charlton Heston   True Lies Emperor Numbus Nuttus has spent the last several weeks portraying the House Intelligence committee impeachment process as some kind of a star chamber kangaroo court of a sham, with no process of fairness. He has bemoaned the fact that he could have no lawyer resent to ask questions and could call no witnesses of his own. Trump has mis-characterized the process, which is akin to a grand jury in a criminal proceeding, where the prosecution only tries to prove there is reason to move forward, not to convict. But Trump’s only hope is to de-legitimize the process. Now the scene has shifted to the House Judiciary committee, which will decide whether or not to write up and vote to release actual articles of impeachment, as well as which articles to write up and vote to forward on to the fyll House. As such, Judiciary chair Gerry Nadler has invited Trump’s lawyer to participate to question witnesses, as well as  to call his own. This is what Trump has been screaming for for months, and his eager response was to flip Nadler double barrel birds. If Trump participates here, it legitimizes the process, and Trump is all-in on de-legitimizing it instead, One of the tactical choices every defense attorney faces at a trial is whether or not to call the defendant to the stand to testify. The risk is that the defendant, under vigorous cross examination, will end up doing himself more harm than good. But there are also times when a case is so daunting that the defense offers no case at all, preferring only to present a closing argument in rebuttal to the state’s case. The recent Roger Stone trial is a case in point where Stoner’s attorney’s presented no witnesses or evidence in his behalf. Trump’s defense so far has been basically the same, choosing to attack the process rather than the evidence itself. But if the House votes to approve articles of impeachment, then the process will move on to the Senate, and a jury trial, with the 100 Senators sitting as jurors. Every juror swears an oath when accepted as a juror. I’ve done it twice, while serving as foreman on a personal injury case, as well as a dental malpractice vase. Jurors swear that they will listen to the evidence as presented with a fair and open mind, draw no inferences from a single piece of evidence until retired to deliberate and to follow only the judges instructions when deliberating. Basically, jurors swear that they won’t be the same opinionated jerks in the jury room that they are all the rest of the time. There are already rumblings that Trumpenstein may continue the same strategy through the trial in the Senate, refuse to participate in protest of the process. But whether The $1 Store Caligula chooses to participate or not, that process will continue to its completion. One would think that with both his presidency, as well as his place in history on the line, that Trump would want to put on some kind of defense. And he will. Even if Trump doesn’t cross examine a single witness, nor […]

Follow Us


Recent Posts