Trump lawyers call for immediate acquittal in legal, political defence

By Steve Holland and Karen Freifeld

 

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the American Farm Bureau Federation's Annual Convention and Trade Show in Austin, Texas, January 19, 2020. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday rejected the Democratic-led House of Representatives' impeachment charges and called for their immediate dismissal by the Republican-led Senate in a memo offering a legal and political case against his removal.

 

The 116-page Trial Memorandum sought to undercut charges that the Republican president abused his power and obstructed Congress, and constituted Trump's first comprehensive defence before his Senate trial begins in earnest on Tuesday.

 

"The Senate should reject the Articles of Impeachment and acquit the president immediately," the memo concluded.

 

Trump, only the fourth of 45 American presidents to face the possibility of being ousted by impeachment, is charged with abusing the powers of his office by asking Ukraine to investigate a Democratic political rival, Joe Biden, and obstructing a congressional inquiry into his conduct.

 

Democrats say Trump abused his power by withholding U.S. military assistance to Ukraine as part of a pressure campaign and obstructed Congress by refusing to hand over documents and barring administration officials from testifying, even when subpoenaed by House investigators.

 

Trump's defence argued neither charge constituted a crime or impeachable offence, that he was within his rights as president to make decisions about foreign policy and what information to give Congress, and that the House pursued a flawed and one-sided process before impeaching him on Dec. 18.

 

"House Democrats settled on two flimsy Articles of Impeachment that allege no crime or violation of law whatsoever - much less "high Crimes and Misdemeanours," as required by the Constitution," it said. "They do not remotely approach the constitutional threshold for removing a President from office."

 

The memo's executive summary asserted that the House Democrats' "novel theory of 'abuse of power'" was not an impeachable offence and supplanted the Constitutional standard of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanours."

 

It rejected the obstruction of Congress charge as "frivolous and dangerous," saying the president exercised his legal rights by resisting congressional demands for information, also known as subpoenas.

 

It also accused the House Democrats of conducting a rigged process, said they succeeded in proving only that Trump had done nothing wrong and argued, as the White House has repeatedly, that this was an effort to overturn Trump's 2016 election victory and to prevent his re-election in November.

 

While the Republican-controlled Senate is highly unlikely to remove Trump from office, it is important for him to try to diminish the Democratic accusations to limit political damage to his bid for a second term.

 

In part of his legal filing, Trump's lawyers cast their arguments in unabashedly political terms.

 

"They want to use impeachment to interfere in the 2020 election. It is no accident that the Senate is being asked to consider a presidential impeachment during an election year," the memo said.

 

"Put simply, Democrats have no response to the President's record of achievement in restoring prosperity to the American economy, rebuilding America's military, and confronting America’s adversaries abroad," it added.

 

In their own filing with the U.S. Senate on Monday, the House impeachment "managers" who will make the Democrats case for Trump's removal to the Senate said he had "jeopardized our national security and our democratic self-governance."

 

"President Trump maintains that the Senate cannot remove him even if the House proves every claim in the Articles of impeachment. That is a chilling assertion. It is also dead wrong," they wrote, arguing that despite Trump’s "stonewalling" the House had amassed "overwhelming evidence of his guilt."

 

Trump's team says he was well within his constitutional authority to press Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy last year to investigate Biden and his son Hunter as part of what Trump says was an anti-corruption drive. The Bidens deny any wrongdoing and Trump's allegations have been widely debunked.

 

While Trump's legal papers laid out extensive arguments as to why Trump did not commit a crime, the General Accounting Office, the watchdog arm of Congress, said last week that Trump did commit a crime by withholding U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, money that was ultimately sent after a brief pause.

 

Seeking to show he is still conducting presidential business despite the trial, Trump is scheduled to leave late Monday for Davos, Switzerland, to join global leaders at the World Economic Forum. Some advisers argued against his making the trip, where he will meet Iraqi, Pakistani, Swiss, Kurdish and EU leaders.

 

As a result, he will be in the Alps when the Senate on Tuesday engages in a potentially bruising battle over whether witnesses should be allowed to testify in the trial and whether new documents could be introduced, as Democrats wish.

 

No president has ever been removed as a direct result of impeachment. One, Richard Nixon, resigned before he could be removed. Two, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate.

 

(Reporting by Steve Holland and Karen Freifeld; Writing by Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Ross Colvin, Daniel Wallis, Bernadette Baum and Tom Brown)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-21

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

So who should we believe, the new Dershowitz or the old one?

“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,” Dershowitz said on CNN at the time. “You don’t need a technical crime.” ????

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alan-dershowitz-impeachment-abuse-of-power_n_5e255a6ac5b674e44b9ad92e

who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,

 

So, Trump withheld money for Ukraine? 

Then, very shortly afterwards, released the money.  So where's the crime?

 

Clearly Trump poses no threat to ANYone's liberty in the US, since the likes of CNN and other rabid-dog cable networks have been (and are) free to attack him every single day of his presidency (from Day 1).

 

Trump has a great team assembled. 

Personally I find it ludicrous that one of the most pampered privileged morons in the history of the planet plays the victim he has been bilking investors and vendors for decades he got caught dead to rights trying to extort another nation at war depending on the USA all to slander a political opponent just hold a real trial with witnesses facts and all the rest enough with the troll in chief

1 hour ago, blazes said:

who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,

 

So, Trump withheld money for Ukraine? 

Then, very shortly afterwards, released the money.  So where's the crime?

 

Clearly Trump poses no threat to ANYone's liberty in the US, since the likes of CNN and other rabid-dog cable networks have been (and are) free to attack him every single day of his presidency (from Day 1).

 

Yawn, there doesnt have to be a crime.

 

withholding aid to have a political rival investigated is impeachable.

 

Note aid was released after he was told he was caught.

If there's nothing to hide, just bring on the witnesses. Let all the truth come out.

 

Like the decal says in the rear window of his supporter's pick up trucks, "get 'er up and get 'er done".

Donald doesn't like the game so like any spoilt brat he wants to take home his bat and ball and tell MUMMY and Daddy  (The American People) that it was the other kids (Democrats) fault because they would play by his rules.  LOCK HIM UP!!!!

2 hours ago, blazes said:

who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,

 

So, Trump withheld money for Ukraine? 

Then, very shortly afterwards, released the money.  So where's the crime?

 

Clearly Trump poses no threat to ANYone's liberty in the US, since the likes of CNN and other rabid-dog cable networks have been (and are) free to attack him every single day of his presidency (from Day 1).

 

Suppose a traffic cop stops you and asks for a bribe to release you but you tell the cop that you won't pay and a witness overhears the exchange. Knowing the exchange was overheard, the cop releases you, without receiving the bribe. Isn't the cop still guilty of soliciting a bribe, which is a crime? Isn't the cop guilty of abusing his power?

1 hour ago, Ricohoc said:

Trump has a great team assembled. 

Yep.  He drained the swamp into his pocket.

2 hours ago, blazes said:

who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,

 

So, Trump withheld money for Ukraine? 

Then, very shortly afterwards, released the money.  So where's the crime?

 

Clearly Trump poses no threat to ANYone's liberty in the US, since the likes of CNN and other rabid-dog cable networks have been (and are) free to attack him every single day of his presidency (from Day 1).

 

   Where's the crime?  It's against US law to solicit foreign interference in aid of an election.  Trump clearly was trying to bribe Ukraine into digging up dirt on his strongest political opponent at the time, Biden.  It really couldn't be clearer--no money until you get me something damning on Biden.  That, folks, is illegal.  Which is why Trump then obstructed justice trying to keep the truth from coming out.

23 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

Yep.  He drained the swamp into his pocket.

Possibly even draining his pocket, unless he's getting the gov't to pay these goons.  He'll have to start selling his failing real estate sites or going back to doing money laundering for his Russian pals.

 

 

5 hours ago, candide said:

So who should we believe, the new Dershowitz or the old one?

“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,” Dershowitz said on CNN at the time. “You don’t need a technical crime.” ????

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alan-dershowitz-impeachment-abuse-of-power_n_5e255a6ac5b674e44b9ad92e

There is also an "old Ken Star" and a "new Ken Star".

12 minutes ago, neeray said:

There is also an "old Ken Star" and a "new Ken Star".

Yes, the prurient Ken Starr who faithfully and at length documented Clinton's oral-genital (10) and oral-anal (1) sexual activities in his "special prosecutor" pornographic writings and the pussy-grabber-defender Ken Starr in his latest incarnation. Living proof that lawyers are purely (and I use that term advisedly) "guns for hire"

3 hours ago, blazes said:

who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,

 

So, Trump withheld money for Ukraine? 

Then, very shortly afterwards, released the money.  So where's the crime?

 

Clearly Trump poses no threat to ANYone's liberty in the US, since the likes of CNN and other rabid-dog cable networks have been (and are) free to attack him every single day of his presidency (from Day 1).

 

If you go into bank, rob it and give the money back after 1 week or so...did you commit a crime or not?

 

A consortium of high powered high salaried lawyers and all they can do is regurgitate the same old obfuscating and diverting dross with no new evidence to defend the indefensible. Might as well have the old team of Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and Giuliani. 

So similarly, attempting to bribe a police officer is a crime...regardless of whether the bribe is accepted or not. Trump attempted something illegal (and an abuse of his power), but claims no crime as the money was ultimately rightfully paid out. The crime is the attempt to sidestep the law (and abusing the power of his office) for personal gain. 

The defence team dont even bother to defend him, they just say its wrong to impeach. They never talk about what he did.

4 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The defence team dont even bother to defend him, they just say its wrong to impeach. They never talk about what he did.

"allegedly" did.

33 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The defence team dont even bother to defend him, they just say its wrong to impeach. They never talk about what he did.

Exactly.  Their plan is to have the whole thing tossed out as a non-issue on Constitutional technicalities.

And they want to have it over by the State of the Union (Feb. 4th) so the guy with the orange face paint can turn it into a victory celebration. Mitch is trying to set time schedules as if he's staging a television show, which, ummm...  He's putting a lot of effort into controlling what the public sees.  Someone might get the impression Team Trump has something to hide.

 

The speedy timetable prompted complaints from Democrats, who see the possibility of 12-hour days and midnight arguments as an attempt to cover-up the trial. A House Democratic aide indicated that 12-hour days or arguments beginning at 1 p.m. would ensure that arguments stretch deep into the night, possibly until 2 or 3 a.m. when breaks are factored in.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/20/senate-republicans-plan-speedy-trump-trial-101262

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 20206 yr by bendejo

2 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

"allegedly" did.

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." - Aldous Huxley

9 hours ago, candide said:

So who should we believe, the new Dershowitz or the old one?

“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,” Dershowitz said on CNN at the time. “You don’t need a technical crime.” ????

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alan-dershowitz-impeachment-abuse-of-power_n_5e255a6ac5b674e44b9ad92e

Dershowitz on impeachment reversal: 'I am much more correct right now' ????

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/20/politics/dershowitz-impeachment-much-more-correct-cnntv/index.html

55 minutes ago, Dap said:

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." - Aldous Huxley

“I am against justice … whenever it is carried out by a mob.”
― Mokokoma Mokhonoana

3 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

"allegedly" did.

No. He admitted it and mulvaney confirmed it. There is no dispute to what he did.

30 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

“I am against justice … whenever it is carried out by a mob.”
― Mokokoma Mokhonoana

Doing their constitutional duty.

 

Justice is considering all the evidence. Cover up is refusing to hear it.

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

No. He admitted it and mulvaney confirmed it. There is no dispute to what he did.

There is also no dispute to whether what he did is a constitutionally criminal impeachable offence. It is not.

 

Of course Trump's legal team is calling for an immediate acquittal.  Pelosi and her pals have submitted a half-baked case against a man who did nothing illegal, nothing wrong.  Her crowd is now calling for the Senate to finish doing the job that they themselves could not do!

 

Trump 2020 guaranteed!

Edited January 21, 20206 yr by Kelsall

14 hours ago, candide said:

So who should we believe, the new Dershowitz or the old one?

“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty,” Dershowitz said on CNN at the time. “You don’t need a technical crime.” ????

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alan-dershowitz-impeachment-abuse-of-power_n_5e255a6ac5b674e44b9ad92e

 

And the Democrat controlled Senate forgave Clinton's deliberate lying and didn't remove him.

 

So why would they think the Republicans would do any different now?

7 hours ago, Dap said:

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." - Aldous Huxley

Let me choose which facts to present and I can make you think anything I wish. - MSM executive.

 

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

And the Democrat controlled Senate forgave Clinton's deliberate lying and didn't remove him.

 

So why would they think the Republicans would do any different now?

Well let me see and compare lying about a bj from a leagle age woman bad bad bill in the dog house with you!bad bad boy!now donald extorting a country at war with something that doesent belong to you betraying the constitution and the oath of office willfully obstruction of congress and the law and inviting foreigners to interfere in our elections all to slander a rival there is no comparison as to the severity of the offence