Trump lawyers portray impeachment trial as Democratic witch hunt

[Kelsall]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

If this is a criminal case, former President Trump would have to appear in court and swear under oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. Now that will be entertaining and hilarious even for the judge. 

Actually the accused in a criminal trial is not required to testify.

[connda]

I've no dog in this fight.  I don't like either side to the two party duopoly.
But!
If the powers to be go down this road they set a precedence.  Impeach a President who is no longer the POTUS, then you've set the precedent to start "impeaching" former government officials from the president on down.

Now do I care?  No.  I just lean back and watch the new 21st century version of Loony-Toons play out in real time. It's entertaining.

[Walker88]

8 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

 

Unless there is an audio file of the call, it is easily disputed.  Having witnesses eager to testify under oath means nothing as was shown in a dispute over election results. 

 

Anyone who has US citizenship can call themselves and American whether or not they support President Trump.

 

To quote former DirFBI James Comey,, "Lordy, there are tapes".

 

Yes, there are tapes, as well as a call McCarthy made to CBS TV where he described the call he had made to 45. The McCarthy-CBS call was live as the terrorists were still storming the Capitol.

 

45 did not care that the Capitol was under attack and members of Congress as well as the VP, were at risk. He did nothing, though later he did say of the terrorists, "We love you".

 

The (R)s abject hypocrisy is clear in what they did on that day, 6 Jan.  They kept calling 45 to ask him to call off the terrorist mob. Had they not believed he had them under his control, they would not have made that request.

 

The (R)s, who will vote to acquit KNEW 100% that 45 was responsible. Now they are just cowards, afraid to get his ire up.

Edited February 13, 2021 by Walker88

[J Town]

9 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Actually the accused in a criminal trial is not required to testify.

Yes, but in a criminal trial, witnesses can be brought forth. As it stands, if Kevin McCarthy is put on the stand and the other witnesses to the phone call between the former president and McCarthy is documented, then the former president would be just plain screwed.

 

And tell me, honestly, why do you defend this traitor to the US? It could not be more obvious he organized this attempt to stop the perfunctory electoral vote count in order to maintain power. Can you really say this terrorist attack would have happened without the former president's provocation?

[connda]

21 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

If this is a criminal case, former President Trump would have to appear in court and swear under oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

Then you have no clue as to the nature of the Fifth Amendment.   Go look it up.
If you are an American, then you are rather ignorant.  But they don't teach "Civics" any longer in High School, so I'd give you a pass.  If you didn't take Amercian Civics classes, or if you're not a lawyer or versed in American History, then  you probably are ignorant (in other words - not knowledgeable) of either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or SCOTUS rulings.

Fifth Amendment pertaining to your assertion:

[No person] ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Edited February 13, 2021 by connda

[J Town]

6 minutes ago, connda said:

I've no dog in this fight.  I don't like either side to the two party duopoly.
But!
If the powers to be go down this road they set a precedence.  Impeach a President who is no longer the POTUS, then you've set the precedent to start "impeaching" former government officials from the president on down.

Now do I care?  No.  I just lean back and watch the new 21st century version of Loony-Toons play out in real time. It's entertaining.

Would you propose a criminal should be let go without accountability? If you post on this subject, you have a dog in the fight. It's called your opinion.

[zhounan]

From the title it is clear that this article is based on ideological prejudice.

 

Where did that dear old ethical, courageous and independent journalism go!

[Eric Loh]

22 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Actually the accused in a criminal trial is not required to testify.

I am sure his defense lawyers will exercise that rights knowing his inability to tell the truth and perjure himself. 

[J Town]

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

I am sure his defense lawyers will exercise that rights knowing his inability to tell the truth and perjure himself. 

It's turning out the defense lawyers are cut from the same cloth, misrepresenting (lying) and misdirecting. The response to the question "Do you think [the former president] lost the election?" was too much for even those senators present to stomach. Audible groans forced the gavel to come down for order in the chamber.

 

And ONE of the lawyers is an AMBULANCE CHASER!!! At this point, I guess the former president has to settle for anyone who will represent him, and I would bet dollars to donuts they insisted on being paid up front.

[Dave0206]

9 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

The last 4 years has been a democratic witch hunt, 'healing' the country with yet another impeachment is just the latest vindictive hypocritical attack.

yes you are quite right republicans had full control for first 2 years of the trump presidency they bent over backwards to be an all inclusive party!!!.

trying to repeal obama care (with what we still do not know).plus anything else that obama did.

Mcconnel always consulted dems on everything.

i can not for the life of me figure out what the majority of trump supporters think they are fighting for the 1%?

Because i am sure health care for all plus a $15 min wage would help a lot of them.

i read 91% of the cash  the top 500 companies in america benifited from the tax cut went to stock buy backs.

No dribble down benifit to the workers zero.

If you are struggling to put food on table pay rent plus medical insurance i do not think checking you're share portfolio will be high on you're daily priority list?

So i can only think play the bogey man trick you're life is <deleted> because mexicans or any foreigner darker the skin the better.

Meantime my daughter  will get chinese patents i will get my maga hats made cheap where ever.

Im such a great business man with bankruptcies galore with record of non payments to contractors.

but hey if i can screw over many imagine how well i can run a country if jeffrey archer wrote the book we would laugh at the thought.

[Walker88]

20 minutes ago, connda said:

I've no dog in this fight.  I don't like either side to the two party duopoly.
But!
If the powers to be go down this road they set a precedence.  Impeach a President who is no longer the POTUS, then you've set the precedent to start "impeaching" former government officials from the president on down.

Now do I care?  No.  I just lean back and watch the new 21st century version of Loony-Toons play out in real time. It's entertaining.

 

 

Ah, he was impeached while still POTUS. Impeachment is the bringing of charges, a function of the House.

 

The charges are then tried in the Senate, but impeachment has already happened.

 

The reason the trial is necessary is because without holding 45 accountable, a precedent is set that an outgoing, loser POTUS can do whatever he wants to try to overthrow the election in his last few weeks in office, and if he fails, as 45 did, he isn't held liable for trying to subvert democracy.

 

45 is a clown, lacks discipline, and is incompetent. The next POTUS who tries---as the (R)s are setting a precedent by claiming "He's already out of office so forget it"---might be brighter and more competent. He may succeed in overthrowing a free and fair election.  The Senate trial and ideally a conviction is a deterrent to future criminal activity by another POTUS.

[Eric Loh]

22 minutes ago, connda said:

Then you have no clue as to the nature of the Fifth Amendment.   Go look it up.
If you are an American, then you are rather ignorant.  But they don't teach "Civics" any longer in High School, so I'd give you a pass.  If you didn't take Amercian Civics classes, or if you're not a lawyer or versed in American History, then  you probably are ignorant (in other words - not knowledgeable) of either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or SCOTUS rulings.

Fifth Amendment pertaining to your assertion:

[No person] ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

144 constitutional lawyers called Trump 1st amendment defense frivolously illegally. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/us/politics/trump-impeachment-defense.html

[connda]

12 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

 

 

Ah, he was impeached while still POTUS. Impeachment is the bringing of charges, a function of the House.

7 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

144 constitutional lawyers called Trump 1st amendment defense frivolously illegally. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/us/politics/trump-impeachment-defense.html

The charges are then tried in the Senate, but impeachment has already happened.

 

The reason the trial is necessary is because without holding 45 accountable, a precedent is set that an outgoing, loser POTUS can do whatever he wants to try to overthrow the election in his last few weeks in office, and if he fails, as 45 did, he isn't held liable for trying to subvert democracy.

 

45 is a clown, lacks discipline, and is incompetent. The next POTUS who tries---as the (R)s are setting a precedent by claiming "He's already out of office so forget it"---might be brighter and more competent. He may succeed in overthrowing a free and fair election.  The Senate trial and ideally a conviction is a deterrent to future criminal activity by another POTUS.

Whatever.  Let the system take whatever course it takes.  I really no longer care.

[helpisgood]

12 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

144 constitutional lawyers called Trump 1st amendment defense frivolously illegally. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/us/politics/trump-impeachment-defense.html

 

  Good link, thanks!

 

Here's two which explain that there are exceptions to the "free speech" clause, among which are "fighting words."  Such words would include incitement to violence.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions#Fighting_words

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words

Edited February 13, 2021 by helpisgood
typo

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, J Town said:

I know it's a lesson in futility, but I'm gonna ask anyway:

 

Can you back that up with facts?

 

Just watch the hearing.

[Walker88]

8 minutes ago, connda said:

Whatever.  Let the system take whatever course it takes.  I really no longer care.

 

Perhaps it is of no import to you, but there are many people, not only Americans, who hope that the 245 year grand experiment in democracy that is the US continues, and isn't derailed by conspiracy loons and a corrupt, self-serving, willfully ignorant, psychopathic, narcissistic Snake Oil salesman and his cowardly sycophants.

 

Some of us even went into harm's way for that nation, and it disgusts us that such a miserable person could bring its continued existence to the brink. Some of us are funny in that way, as we feel an obligation to our colleagues who were with us and did not return.

 

There are things in life that demand good people take a stand against evil. I need not repeat the famous Edmund Burke quote here, as it is well known.

 

45 is evil. He must be crushed and dumped into the dustbin of history along with other tyrants. We are only lucky that 45 is so incompetent that he failed, though failure is something that has followed him since he inherited his father's fortune. Beat him when he's down, just to be sure he's gone for good, as well as sending a warning to other wannabe tyrants.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, connda said:

I've no dog in this fight.  I don't like either side to the two party duopoly.
But!
If the powers to be go down this road they set a precedence.  Impeach a President who is no longer the POTUS, then you've set the precedent to start "impeaching" former government officials from the president on down.

Now do I care?  No.  I just lean back and watch the new 21st century version of Loony-Toons play out in real time. It's entertaining.

Right. You're definitely nonpartisan. 

Trump faces likely setback in Georgia recount, drops Michigan lawsuit - Page 4 - World News - Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa

Edited February 13, 2021 by placeholder

[OneMoreFarang]

56 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

 

Perhaps it is of no import to you, but there are many people, not only Americans, who hope that the 245 year grand experiment in democracy that is the US continues, and isn't derailed by conspiracy loons and a corrupt, self-serving, willfully ignorant, psychopathic, narcissistic Snake Oil salesman and his cowardly sycophants.

 

Some of us even went into harm's way for that nation, and it disgusts us that such a miserable person could bring its continued existence to the brink. Some of us are funny in that way, as we feel an obligation to our colleagues who were with us and did not return.

 

There are things in life that demand good people take a stand against evil. I need not repeat the famous Edmund Burke quote here, as it is well known.

 

45 is evil. He must be crushed and dumped into the dustbin of history along with other tyrants. We are only lucky that 45 is so incompetent that he failed, though failure is something that has followed him since he inherited his father's fortune. Beat him when he's down, just to be sure he's gone for good, as well as sending a warning to other wannabe tyrants.

Good comment!

 

But what do you think should be done about those over 75,000,000 Americans who wanted 4 more years of Trump? And they wanted that after they saw for 4 years the everyday lies, the stupid tweets, and, and, and.

If you are an American maybe you understand how those people "think". For many of us outside of the USA it it very difficult to even try to imagine why so many people voted for that guy again.

Idiots exist all over the world. But in most countries people don't vote for them to be their leader.

 

 

[Andy from Kent]

 

And in the end #45 was correct all along.

 

 

He said  ""I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" Trump remarked at a campaign stop at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa. "It's, like, incredible."

 

Absolutely incredible!!!

[ExpatOK]

23 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Good comment!

 

But what do you think should be done about those over 75,000,000 Americans who wanted 4 more years of Trump? And they wanted that after they saw for 4 years the everyday lies, the stupid tweets, and, and, and.

If you are an American maybe you understand how those people "think". For many of us outside of the USA it it very difficult to even try to imagine why so many people voted for that guy again.

Idiots exist all over the world. But in most countries people don't vote for them to be their leader.

 

 

It's easy. Supporters of President Trump don't sit around watching CNN all day. They are patriots who believe in the US and will continue to fight for freedom and liberty. They also believe in fair elections.

Edited February 13, 2021 by ExpatOK

[Jingthing]

36 minutes ago, Andy from Kent said:

 

And in the end #45 was correct all along.

 

 

He said  ""I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" Trump remarked at a campaign stop at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa. "It's, like, incredible."

 

Absolutely incredible!!!

Yes, he was right.

But as long as he's alive, the consequences of his horrible behavior may still "kill" him with 1000 cuts.

Much of the world wants nothing to do with his business brand anymore.

He's already cut off from all more legitimate social media. 

His banking relationships are shot.

He faces potential criminal indictments from multiple jurisdictions, including potential felonies carrying long prison terms.

Failing all that, his place as the worst president in American history is pretty much guaranteed. 

[Jingthing]

44 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Good comment!

 

But what do you think should be done about those over 75,000,000 Americans who wanted 4 more years of Trump? And they wanted that after they saw for 4 years the everyday lies, the stupid tweets, and, and, and.

If you are an American maybe you understand how those people "think". For many of us outside of the USA it it very difficult to even try to imagine why so many people voted for that guy again.

Idiots exist all over the world. But in most countries people don't vote for them to be their leader.

 

 

I understand in the historical context. There is always a significant percentage of populations that can potentially be seduced by strong man authoritarian leaders. No need to think. Just blindly follow the great leader. Yes, Americans before thought it couldn't happen in the USA. Well, it did, and because of his continuing followers, the nightmare isn't over yet. It could take decades to shake it off. His toxic insurrectionist movement makes McCarthyism seem like a stroll in the park. 

[tomazbodner]

Amazing. Trump's lawyers are using same vocabulary as Donald...

[watthong]

As an American, I could only think of Trump as the virus, or rather the Thing as in "The Thing" where a kind of virus has inhabited, and from hence started to transmit itself to other (human) beings. Trump is evil incarnate for sure, but why do so many people become his disciples, including lawsmakers sitting in Congress? 

 

As big a shock as seeing planes plunging into World Trade Center on 9/11, was the sight of insurgents marauding through the Rotunda/Statutory Hall of the Capitol on 06/01. For a moment I had to pinch myself whether I was in the middle of a nightmare. But no, I was watching the certification of the electoral vote by the Congress, the last step before we swear in our new president. No, this is real, broadcast live from the other side of the world. Then came a moment of panic: if I am seeing the insurgents filing into the Capitol (not much violence or breaking in had been shown by then) with relative ease and feral glee, in other words, no resistance whatsoever, then have we "lost" it? Am I going to witness next the execution of lawsmakers one by one ISIS style, right there on the floor of Congress? 

 

I have lost a dear friend since the day Biden won Pensylvania. I texted my friend in California, a coworker back in the day I was working as a clerk for DHS. We kept in touch, he was still at the old job while I'm living the life of a retiree expat. I asked, "Are you celebrating yet?" Then came the curt reply, "Not so soon." Soon followed a stream of MAGA mis-info, replete with screen shots of OANN news broadcast, photoshopped pic of Biden standing in a cemetery evoking the dead to go and vote, about the election being stolen, by Chinese agents interference, etc. I said to myself, oh no, not him, he's smarter than that. But no, I had not gotten to know my friend well, I realized, we hadn't talked much about politics in the past, but as we had worked together to get unionized, I thought we were in the same frame of mind, politically. Helas, not so, and since then all I could have gotten out of him has been mono-syllabic.

 

The feeling I had was that a dear person has been body-snatched by the Trump virus, and now he's a Trump zombie, I mean, a MAGA fan. I can't really explain how that happened (to him), but I figure the circumstances of everyday life in the US must have become unbearable for a certain segment of the population (70 plus millions of them) to the point when Trump gave them the cool-aid, they took it as manna from heaven. Maybe to folks outside of the USA it's hard to imagine what makes a Trump zombie, but one thing we all have experienced with is how it feels like to encounter one: their words usually come in rabid-style delivery (a la Ashley Babbitt) and you can't argue for long with them without having to re-examine your own sanity (I'm sure many on this forum could share same experience!) I'm praying for Prez Biden in his efforts of rebuilding our country, in tatters after 4 years of Trumpism and ravaged by undeterred covid. Vaccination, economy stimulus, equality, health care and education to name a few. Aide toi et Dieu t'aidera (pardon my French) = Help yourself and God will help you, America.

Edited February 13, 2021 by watthong

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

It's easy. Supporters of President Trump <snip> also believe in fair elections.

Apparently not.

[mrnaturally]

17 hours ago, J Town said:

Is any of this a surprise? Let me say this now - anyone who finds the obviously coming acquittal a victory is celebrating a traitor to the country and an attack on democracy.

No doubt, hes a traitor and a dispicable <deleted>. He and his low life syncophants need to be given the Pence treatment, en masse.

[Scott]

A post to social media and reply removed. 

 

18) Social Media content is acceptable in most social forums. However, in factual areas such as news, current affairs and health topics, it cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or government agency, and must include a weblink to the original source.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Trump's lawyers argued that his remarks, including a fiery speech that day urging supporters to "fight like hell" to stop the election certification, were protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which ensures the right to free speech.

I caught a bit of the video presentation showing Democrat politicians using "fight" multiple times very satisfying ( apparently it went on for over 11 minutes ). It completely demolished, IMO, the claim that Trump using it was "evidence" of incitement.

I thought the Trump defence lawyer did an amazing job of cutting through all the rhetoric, and showing what a, IMO, sham this impeachment is.

After hearing him, I can not believe that any GOP senator ( apart from the few that already came out against him ) will vote to convict.

The Democrat presentation is IMO long on emotion, and short on facts to prove that Trump intended the demonstrators to commit insurrection.

The lawyer crying and the one telling stories about what his daughter said- makes good theatre, but a trial isn't, or should not, be run on emotion. IMO they have not provided any evidence that Trump said, before the demonstration, that the demonstrators should commit violence, or even invade the building.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, rooster59 said:

If Trump is acquitted, the Senate could decide to censure him or even vote to bar him from holding public office again. Asked on Thursday about pursuing the latter option, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said that decision would have to wait until the end of the trial.

Seriously. I'm pretty sure that the constitution would have something to say about barring private citizens from standing for office. I understand that it can happen when the person was convicted in an impeachment, but that's not what is claimed in the quote. I'd be surprised if it happened.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, connda said:

Then you have no clue as to the nature of the Fifth Amendment.   Go look it up.
If you are an American, then you are rather ignorant.  But they don't teach "Civics" any longer in High School, so I'd give you a pass.  If you didn't take Amercian Civics classes, or if you're not a lawyer or versed in American History, then  you probably are ignorant (in other words - not knowledgeable) of either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or SCOTUS rulings.

Fifth Amendment pertaining to your assertion:

[No person] ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

As pointed out by the Trump defence, there was no due process in the impeachment ( as they rushed to get it through while he was still president ). As he said, they want the senate to do their job for them. When Trump is acquitted it'll be on them for denying due process, IMO.