GOV/MIL Main "Second Impeachment" Thread

Did The Democrats "Tank" The Second Trump Trial?

FRIDAY, FEB 12, 2021 - 13:53
Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in USA Today on the lack of a strategy by the House to secure conviction in the trial of former President Donald Trump. As I have previously noted, the House managers did an excellent job in their presentations and many of the videotapes rekindled the anger that most of us felt over the riot. They also reinforced the view of many (including myself) that former president Donald Trump bears responsibility in the tragedy that unfolded due to his reckless rhetoric. Yet, there was a glaring omission in the substance of the House arguments.

The managers did not lay out what the standard should be in convicting a former president for incitement of an insurrection and only briefly touched on proving any “state of mind” needed for such a conviction. That is why I have referred to their case as more emotive than probative. It lacked direct evidence to support the claim that Trump wanted to incite an actual insurrection or rebellion against the United States, as alleged in the article of impeachment. I do not believe that an acquittal was inevitable in this case, but it was all but assured by critical decisions made by the House in this impeachment. The unforced errors discussed below raise the question of whether the Democrats “tanked” the trial.


Here is the column:

The second trial of former President Donald Trump is shaping up to be a curious exercise designed more to enrage than convict. While legal eagles will be analyzing every move, what citizens really need is an Philadelphia Eagles fan to understand what is unfolding. In the NFL, it is called “tanking.” This year, there was a raging debate whether Eagles coach Doug Pederson was actually trying to win or just losing convincingly to secure a better draft pick. The House trial strategy has every indication of a tanked trial, but few are noting the glaring lack of a credible offense.

When it comes to football, tanking allegations arise when the inexplicable speeds along the inevitable. That point was reached this season when Pederson decided not to tie the game against Washington in the third quarter with a field goal and instead put Nate Sudfeld in the game over Jalen Hurts. The House may have reached that point when the managers seemed to be trying harder to make a better case for losing than winning. That was driven home by the selection of such managers as Rep. Eric Swalwell in the wake of his scandal with Chinese spy. Swalwell’s comments not only include disturbing legal claims, but highly personal and offensive remarks like mocking threats against Susan Collins, R-Maine. Swalwell declared “Boo hoo hoo. You’re a senator who police will protect. A sexual assault victim can’t sleep at home tonight because of threats. Where are you sleeping? She’s on her own while you and your @SenateGOP colleagues try to rush her through a hearing.” Pelosi picked not only a member who has viciously attacked Republicans but one of the Republicans most needed by the House in this trial. Sending in Swalwell made the Sudfeld substitution look like sheer genius.
If this was an NFL board of inquiry, three signs of tanking would standout.

The Snap
The first indication was the use of what I have called a “snap impeachment.” The House wanted to impeach the president before he left office, which was perfectly constitutional. I have long maintained (as I did as a witness in the first Trump impeachment hearing) that the House can legitimately impeach a president on his very last day in office if it has evidence of a high crime and misdemeanor. However, after Jan. 6 the House had time to hold hearings (even if only for a day or two) to create a record supporting impeachment. The House leadership refused despite the urging of some of us that no impeachment had ever been submitted with no record of a hearing, investigation or formal opportunity for a president to respond.

It was an ironic moment. In the last impeachment, I criticized the House leadership for impeaching Trump on the thinnest record in the shortest time in history. It then outdid itself by impeaching him a second time with no record and no hearing. Even a day of hearings would have reduced the serious prudential concerns of senators, but the House pushed through a snap impeachment on a muscle vote. That left the House with no record despite being denied witnesses in the prior impeachment by the Senate

The Article
The greatest indication of tanking was the language of the article itself. Even a single day of hearings would have allowed experts to discuss the potential impeachable conduct and the crafting of articles of impeachment. There was credible impeachable offenses in Trump’s conduct on January 6th and its aftermath. Instead, the House leadership insisted on impeachment for “incitement of insurrection.” The House is not alleging reckless or negligent conduct leading to a riot. It is alleging incitement to actually seek rebellion or overthrow of the country. The article specifically refers to section 3 of the 14th Amendment in its prohibition of anyone holding office if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States. Even moderate senators who condemned Trump for his speech would be highly unlikely to convict on such an article.

The House made it easy on those seeking acquittal. It could have crafted an article that would appeal to broader bipartisan support. Instead, it sought the most extreme language alleging incitement to an actual insurrection — virtually guaranteeing a partisan vote and likely acquittal.

The House also included language that only strengthened the expected challenge facing the House in seeking a trial for a former president. The article declared Trump “has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office.” Yet, the House was virtually certain that he would already be out of office when he came to trial. The language magnified concerns over the constitutionality of retroactive trials. Not only does the Constitution refer to the trial as deciding whether to remove “the President” but the article itself refers to the purpose of such removal to protect the nation. While the article mentions disqualification from future office, the article is crafted around an urgency that would become a nullity in a matter of days.

The Record
What occurred next was familiar to NFL fans suspicious of tanking. Nothing happened. The House made it to the endzone of a Senate trial and then stopped on a dime. The House demanded witnesses in the Senate but then let weeks pass without calling any witnesses that would be relevant to proving Trump’s intent or state of mind. It could have created a public record and locked in testimony in case the Senate, as expected, declined to call witnesses or severely limited witnesses.

Thus, weeks passed as key witnesses gave public interviews. Yet, the House refused to put them under oath in hearings. Why? A dozen witnesses could have testified and the record could have been referenced or incorporated in the trial. These are witnesses like former Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller and his two closest aides, Kashyap “Kash” Patel and Ezra Cohen describing what Trump said and did during the critical period, including discussions of the use of National Guard. Most recently, a senior aide said that Trump was “loving watching the Capitol mob” on television. The witnesses are doing everything short of wearing sandwich boards outside of the House asking to be called, but the House has refused to create a record. If it called hearings, the House would have reduced the concerns over the use of a snap impeachment and dramatically strengthened its case. Instead, the House preferred no record.

The House brief in the Senate further highlighted the lack of direct evidence on Trump’s state of mind. It laid out an emotionally charged but legally incomplete case for the Senate. To convict, the House needs to show Trump was more than reckless. It crafted the article as inciting an actual rebellion or insurrection, not mere negligence. Instead, the House plans to show clips of damage and interviews with rioters to show how Trump’s words were interpreted rather than intended. The thrust of its case is a parade of horribles from that day, a narrative that will harden the minds of many but change the minds of few. Without such evidence, the Trump team will be able to hammer away at similarly reckless rhetoric used by Democrats, including members of the “jury.”

That is why, with the start of the trial, there is growing suspicion of a tanked trial. The House will present a case long on emotions and short on evidence. Trump will then be acquitted and Democrats will look to picking up new talent in the 2022 draft.

If "Fight Like Hell" Constitutes Incitement, Every Political Candidate In America Is Guilty: Sen. Cruz

FRIDAY, FEB 12, 2021 - 9:40
Authored by Janita Kan via The Epoch Times,

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on the third day of the impeachment trial criticized House managers for failing to show how former President Donald Trump “incited” the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol.


Cruz said that while the House managers’ presentation was “designed to be emotional and powerful,” it only makes the case that a “terrorist attack” occurred at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He said that the prosecution team presented “virtually no argument” on how Trump’s conduct meets the legal standard of incitement.

“The House managers focused a great deal on the president, using words like ‘fight or fight like hell.’ Well if that constitutes incitement, then every single political candidate in America is guilty of incitement,” Cruz told reporters, according to the Capitol pool.

Click to expand...

“Because I guarantee you all 100 senators in that chamber have stood on the stump and said we need to ‘fight or fight like hell.'”

Click to expand...

House Democrats have spent two days during the trial laying out evidence in an attempt to support their claim that Trump incited an insurrection on Jan. 6. Impeachment managers attempted to rely on multiple sliced up clips and audio of Jan. 6 as well as parts of Trump’s Jan. 6 speech and other remarks to make their case. However, their presentations failed to include new revelations or conclusive evidence to substantiate the allegations.

The House managers’ presentations have been praised for making powerful statements but also drew criticism from Democratic commentators who pointed out that their arguments were “getting too repetitive” and should have been shortened.

On Thursday, the House managers wrapped up their arguments and urged senators to convict the former president.

“We humbly, humbly, ask you to convict President Trump for the crime for which he is overwhelmingly guilty of. Because if you don’t, if we pretend this didn’t happen, or worse, if we let it go unanswered, who’s to say it won’t happen again?” House impeachment manager Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) said in his closing remarks.

Click to expand...

“When President Trump stood up to that podium on January 6, he knew that many in that crowd were inflamed, were armed, were ready for violence. It was an explosive situation. And he knew it,” he added, without providing concrete evidence to demonstrate how Trump would have known.

Click to expand...

David Schoen, Trump’s impeachment defense attorney, told reporters on Thursday that he did not think the Democrats were able to link Trump to the Jan. 6 incident and added that it was “offensive” to open up old wounds.

“I think they’re making a movie. You know, they haven’t in any way tied it to Donald Trump,” Schoen said.

Click to expand...

“And I think it’s offensive. Quite frankly, it’s antithetical [to] the healing process to continue to show the tragedy that happened here that Donald Trump has condemned, and I think it tears at the American people, quite frankly.”
“They’re showing the same repetitive videos. [Making] points that don’t exist,” he added.

Click to expand...

Schoen and Trump’s other attorney, Bruce Castor, on Friday are expected to present their concluding arguments to the Senate, who will then have to vote whether to convict the former president. To convict, two-thirds of the Senate or 67 votes are needed. Democrats are unlikely to obtain the requisite number of votes as 44 Republicans on Tuesday have indicated that they believe the trial is unconstitutional.

Speaking about strategies the lawyers could take, Cruz said that their job now is to make clear how the impeachment managers have not carried out their burden of proof, and have not demonstrated that Trump’s conduct satisfied the legal standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors” required for conviction under the U.S. Constitution.

“And any standard that is put forth and certainly any standard that House managers have tried to put forward on its face would equally condemn multiple comments from multiple Democrats, whether it is [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi calling police officers storm troopers and Nazis, whether it is [Senate Majority Leader] Chuck Schumer threatening to ‘unleash the whirlwind’ on Supreme Court justices,” he said.

Click to expand...

The Texas senator said he believes the trial could wrap up on Friday or Saturday.

Democrats Caught Using Fake 'Evidence' At Impeachment Trial

FRIDAY, FEB 12, 2021 - 8:31
Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

Democrats were caught Wednesday using fake evidence during their impeachment clown show, and were forced to withdraw it, proving that they don’t care about the truth, and only about trying to punish President Trump.


Impeachment managers led by Rep. Raskin charged that following the Capitol storming on January 6, Trump called Senator Mike Lee by accident when he really meant to speak to Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville.

Impeachment manager David Cicilline said “He dialed Senator Lee by accident, and Senator Lee describes it that he had just ended a prayer in the Senate chamber.”

Cicilline then charged that Trump asked Tuberville to “make further objections” to Biden’s election vote count, while Senator Lee “stood by.”

It soon emerged that then entire claim was bullshit, when Senator Lee confirmed it never happened.

“Statements attributed to me moments ago by the impeachment managers, statements relating to the contents of the conversations between phone calls involving Trump and Senator Tuberville, were not made by me, were not accurate,” Senator Lee said.

Click to expand...

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359664867192561673
.32 min

As Lee shouted at him, Raskin admitted that the claim was fake and agreed to withdraw it.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359674846062469120
.36 min

Earlier in the hearing, Rep. Eric Swalwell used a photoshopped tweet in an attempt to add extra weight to a post Trump re-tweeted about supporters ‘fighting’ for the country.

Chaos in the Senate: Democrat Impeachment Managers Withdraw Statements Falsely Attributed to Sen. Mike Lee After Schumer Intervention

JOSHUA CAPLAN and MATTHEW BOYLE10 Feb 20215,301

Video on website 8:00 min

Chaos erupted at the end of the second day of the second impeachment trial of now former President Donald Trump as House Democrats were forced to withdraw from the record a statement a GOP senator said was falsely attributed to him after Senate Democrats lost control of the proceedings while they sought to wrap up for the day.

Specifically, the incident that distracted from the Democrats’ case against Trump began when Democrat impeachment manager Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) recalled public reporting that then-President Trump allegedly called Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) by accident when he supposedly meant to call Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) while senators were in a temporary holding room after being evacuated from the Senate floor during the Capitol riot on Jan. 6.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359667751363743745
5:25 min

Cicilline said from the well of the Senate as he made his case to senators to convict Trump on the House-adopted impeachment article:

Shortly after 2 p.m., as the siege was fully underway, then-President Trump made a call. This is the first call we are aware he made to anyone inside the Capitol during the attack. He didn’t call the Vice President to ask how he could help defend the Capitol. He didn’t call the next two in line of succession to the presidency to check on their safety or well-being. Instead, he attempted to call Sen. Tuberville. He dialed Sen. Lee by accident. As Sen. Lee describes it, he had just ended a prayer with his colleagues here in the Senate chamber. The phone rang. It was Donald Trump. How Sen. Lee explains it the phone call goes something like this: ‘Hey Tommy,’ Trump asks. Sen. Lee says, ‘this isn’t Tommy’ and he hands the phone to Sen. Tuberville. Sen. Lee then confirmed he stood by as Sen. Tuberville and President Trump spoke on the phone.

Click to expand...

On that call, Donald Trump reportedly asked Sen. Tuberville to make additional objections to the certification process. That’s why he called.

Click to expand...

Lee was clearly of the belief that that characterization of events and of comments–as attributed to him in particular–was inaccurate. As the Senate moved to wrap up business on the impeachment trial for the day, Lee sought to have those Cicilline comments stricken from the record:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359669592612864006
5:42 min

This led to a remarkable moment where Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT), the president pro tempore of the U.S. Senate who is also presiding over the impeachment trial of Trump since Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts declined to preside, given that Trump is no longer in office, made an unclear ruling apparently rejecting Lee’s motion. Lee then appealed his ruling and sought a vote in the Senate to override Leahy, and after several confusing moments the Senate began voting on Lee’s objection to Leahy’s unclear ruling. After a couple senators’ names were called when the clerk began calling the roll of Senators to vote on Lee’s objection, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke up and intervened to stop the vote. Schumer used a tactic called noting the absence of a quorum–essentially pausing the Senate’s formal business as televised for the nation while senators and staff handle a dispute or negotiation off camera–to “work this out.”

Moments later, they came back into action and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD)–the House Democrats’ lead impeachment manager–admitted that Cicilline’s characterization of Lee as it related to the Trump-Tuberville phone call, while based on news reports, was inaccurate, and then he withdrew the matter from the record himself without a Senate vote.

“The impeachment manager Mr. Cicilline correctly and accurately quoted a newspaper account which the distinguished senator has taken objection to, so we’re happy to withdraw it,” Raskin said.

“It’s not true,” Lee shouted, speaking over Raskin.

Raskin continued explaining why the House impeachment managers were willing to withdraw the comments attributed to Lee. a withdrawal he said was “on the grounds it is not true.”

“We’re going to withdraw it this evening without any prejudice about the ability to resubmit it if possible and then we can debate it if needed,” Raskin continued, adding as Lee shouted over him: “This is much ado about nothing because it is not in any way critical to our case.”

As Raskin walked away from the podium, Lee shouted back at him: “Well, you’re not being cited as a witness, sir!”

Schumer then came back out to recess the Senate impeachment trial until Thursday, saying that each side of the dispute has put this matter aside for now and may debate it later if needed.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359670731680980994
2:26 min

These fireworks on the Senate floor closed out the first full day of opening arguments in the impeachment trial of Trump in the Senate, the second such trial Trump has faced. He was acquitted last year in his first impeachment trial. While this mistake by House impeachment managers is unlikely to change any votes in either direction–it is pretty widely known Trump seems headed for another acquittal–this drew the attention away from the core facts of the case being offered by the managers and onto personal drama in the U.S. Senate, a clear boon to Trump’s legal case.

It draws attention to the fact that Leahy, not Roberts, is presiding over the trial while also serving as a juror–and a witness, since he is a senator and was there on Jan. 6–meaning that a Democrat senator and political opponent of the accused, Trump, is serving as judge, jury, and witness in a trial. That’s a point Trump’s lawyers attempted to drive home earlier on Tuesday when the constitutionality of whether there even should be a trial was debated in the impeachment court before a vote took place that allowed the trial to proceed. Six Republican senators joined all Democrats for a 56-44 vote to rule that it is constitutional to hold an impeachment trial of a former president, a positive sign for Trump given that that 56 votes is nearly a dozen less than the 67 votes needed to convict Trump in the trial. Also, just because a senator voted to proceed with the trial does not mean they will vote to convict Trump in the end, and it is increasingly unlikely Democrats will flip 17 GOP senators to back conviction.

Nonetheless, House Democrat impeachment managers and Senate Democrat leadership proceeded with the trial–despite its near-certain outcome–with opening arguments from the House Democrats beginning on Wednesday. They will continue their opening arguments on Thursday, and perhaps into Friday. After that, Trump’s lawyers will respond with their opening arguments.

It remains unclear if the Senate will hear from witnesses or have other trial parts beyond the opening statements. During Trump’s first impeachment trial, he was acquitted fairly quickly. This trial could proceed just as quickly, but it might take longer depending on what Democrats decide to do. Every day Democrats are spending on this they are wasting time that could be used on the floor of the U.S. Senate to pass legislation addressing the various crises the nation is facing like the coronavirus pandemic or confirming President Joe Biden’s appointees.

During their opening arguments on Wednesday, the House Democrat managers laid out their case against Trump by presenting tweets, news reports, videos, and photos that Delegate Stacey Plaskett from the U.S. Virgin Islands said proved he “fanned the flame of violence, and it worked.”

She and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) provided a timeline of the Capitol attack, showing models of the insurrectionists’ progress through the building alongside security, as well as cellphone and media footage of the scene.

In one previously unreleased security video, then-Vice President Mike Pence and his family can be seen being whisked away from an area near the Senate chamber by Secret Service officers as rioters entered the hallways nearby.

Plaskett’s presentation also showed a fresh angle of the scene as Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman led a group of rioters away from the Senate chambers and toward a group of officers.

John Thune Open to Censuring Donald Trump

56 Pete Marovich/Getty Images
SEAN MORAN12 Feb 2021245

Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the second-ranking Senate Republican, said Friday he could support a resolution to censure President Donald Trump.

Thune, the Senate Republican whip, told reporters that he could support a resolution to censure Trump depending on how the resolution was framed. He added that the resolution would have to be “effective.”

“I know there are a couple of resolutions out there … I’ve seen a couple of resolutions at least that I think could attract some support,” Thune said.

Asked by reporters if he could support one of the resolutions, the South Dakota Republican said, “Yeah.”

Thune’s comments arise as the Senate continues to hold the second impeachment trial against Trump. It remains unlikely that the Senate could convict Trump, as 17 Senate Republicans would have to vote to convict.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) drafted a resolution that would censure the 45th president. The Virginia Democrat also included language in the resolution citing the 14th Amendment that Kaine hopes could be used to prevent Trump from running for president again.

Kaine expressed doubt that his resolution would gain any traction.

“It’s only live if people want to do it, and it has to be bipartisan, and I don’t think Republicans want to put a hurdle in Donald Trump’s way. There’s some Republicans who do but not enough,” he said on Friday.

Thune said that a resolution citing the 14th Amendment would not gain his support, however.
“I don’t think … those will go anywhere,” he said.

Democrats believe that a censure remains an insufficient tool to hold Trump accountable; Democrats believe that Trump incited an insurrection on January 6 as Congress certified the 2020 presidential election.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) called on the Senate to close the second impeachment trial against Trump.

“They chose an impeachment trial. We should vote, and this should be done with,” Johnson said.

One Republican senator said Republicans and Democrats have not expressed “much interest” in censuring Trump.

Report: ‘At Least a Dozen’ Republican Senators Walked Out of Impeachment Trial
8,820 Mandel Ngan / Getty
JOEL B. POLLAK12 Feb 20213,151

At least a dozen Republican Senators reportedly walked out of the Senate impeachment trial on Thursday, after lead House impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) tried to argue that years of Trump rallies were incitement to violence.

National Review reporter John McCormack reported several Republican Senators left the chamber during part of Raskin’s presentation, and missed the subsequent argument of Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), who argued that Trump was a future danger.

Raskin tried to claim that Trump’s speech on January 6 incited the Capitol riot because he had spent years encouraging supporters to commit acts of violence, or condoning past acts of violence, often using specific coded language to do so.

Specifically, Raskin claimed Trump had incited violence against public officials in the past. He tried, for example, to link Trump to the plot uncovered (by the Trump administration) to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer last fall, though one of the alleged plotters was a Black Lives Matter supporter, and another plotter had an anarchist flag and hated police.

Raskin also claimed, falsely, that Trump had praised neo-Nazis who rioted in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 — a familiar lie known as the “very fine people” hoax.

In fact, Trump said the neo-Nazis should be “condemned totally.”

Byron York of the Washington Examiner reported Friday morning that Raskin’s tactics had “turned off Republicans”:

Sens. Cruz (TX), Graham (SC), and Rubio (FL) reportedly conferred with Trump’s defense lawyers on Thursday.

Trump Defense Team Plays Clips of Election Objections from 2017

KYLE MORRIS12 Feb 202132

Former President Donald Trump’s impeachment defense team showed video clips of congressional Democrats objecting to the counting of electoral college votes in 2017 on the third day of impeachment hearings.

“Not only President Trump’s speech on January 6, but indeed his entire challenge to the election results, was squarely focused on how the proper civic process could address any concerns through the legal and constitutional system,” said Trump attorney Michael T. van der Veen. “The president brought his case for state and federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, the legislatures, the electoral college, and ultimately the U.S. Congress.”

“In the past, numerous other candidates for president have used many of the same processes to pursue their own election challenges,” van der Veen continued. “As recently as 2016 the Clinton campaign brought multiple post-election court cases, demanded recounts, and ridiculously declared the election was stolen by Russia.”

Van der Veen then shifted focus to current Democrats serving in Congress who had previously objected to election results, specifically in 2017, following the election of Trump.

“Many Democrats even attempted to persuade the electoral college delegates to overturn the 2016 results,” van der Veen said. “House manager [Jamie] Raskin objected to the certification of President Trump’s victory four years ago with many of his colleagues. Remember, it was Joe Biden that had to gavel them down.”

Those featured in the montage of clips include lead House impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), as well as Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Maxine Waters (D-CA), all of whom objected to certain electoral college votes from certain states in 2017 that were awarded to Trump.

Impeachment Manager Throws Down Race Card in Response to Video Montage of Democrats Using the Word “Fight” – ‘Many of Them Were Black Women’

By Cristina Laila
Published February 12, 2021 at 5:16pm

The Democrats got absolutely destroyed by Trump’s defense lawyers on Friday.

The Democrats demonized President Trump for using the word “fight.”

Trump’s attorneys responded Friday with a collage of clips from each of the Democrats in the room using the word “fight.”

The Democrats are hypocrites.

Since the Democrats don’t have a real answer to Trump’s defense team, they threw down the race card.

“It was not lost on me”: House impeachment manager Stacey Plaskett whined.

Plaskett pointed out that Trump’s attorneys showed videos of Democrats using the word “fight,” many of them were Black women and people of color.

“I thought we were past that. I think maybe we are not,” she said.

When in doubt, use the race card.
WATCH:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1360345413824491522
1:02 min

“Does a Politician Raising Bail for Rioters Encourage More Rioting?” – GOP Senators Question Democrat Impeachment Leader Over Kamala Harris’s Rioters Bail Fund

By Jim Hoft
Published February 12, 2021 at 7:29pm

During the left wing riots of last spring and summer, Kamala Harris promoted a bail fund to get people who were arrested in the riots bailed out of jail.
Kamala Harris supported this.


The Minnesota Freedom Fund helped bail out several accused and convicted criminals — at least one with a markedly violent history and at least one pedophile

One of the criminals bailed out of jail thanks to Kamala Harris went on to rape an 8-year-old girl.


It’s one of those inconvenient stories that the liberal media loves to ignore.

On Friday during the sham impeachment trial Republican Senators Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Roger Marshall, and Kevin Cramer, sent this question to the desk about Kamala Harris’s previous actions: “Does a politician raising bail for rioters encourage more rioting?”

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1360334734782590981
1:10 min

The double-standard presented by the left is truly disgusting.

Boom!
Trump impeachment attorney Michael T. van der Veen dropped a bomb on Democrats Friday during their sham political impeachment.

Van der Veen reminded the American public, “One of the first people arrested was a leader of Antifa.”

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1360346926579933188
.39 min

The Gateway Pundit previously reported–

Antifa-Insurgence leader John Earl Sullivan was arrested in Utah after the US Capitol riots.
As reported previously Antifa protester John Sullivan was caught on video posing as a Trump supporter during the rioting at the US Capitol on January 6th.


Footage obtained by the Gateway Pundit from militant Black Lives Matter and Antifa activist John Sullivan’s Discord server shows the so-called “civil rights activist” reveling inside the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6 as he damaged federal property.

Sullivan has maintained in multiple interviews that he regularly attends protests only to record what’s going on, but did not actively partake in the insurgence in Washington. This is a lie. He is a leader of the Utah Antifa-BLM movement and has been previously arrested.

“It’s just recording, solely, and not being active in it,” he told Fox News last week.



Sullivan also organized an Antifa-Insurgence rally on January 6th at the Washington Monument at 11 AM before they stormed the US Capitol.

The mainstream media refuses to report these facts.

Hillary’s words bite democrats in the ass… Pelsoi busted by past quotes…

Posted by Kane on February 12, 2021 7:49 pm
View: https://youtu.be/Afe5dC9fpEo

1:50 min
Short clip played today by Trump’s defense team

Ron Johnson was pleased, to say the least…
Posted by Kane on February 12, 2021 6:21 pm



View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1360326983104798722
.32 min

Jonathan Turley — ‘Trump lawyers landed a haymaker on Raskin and Swalwell’…
Posted by Kane on February 12, 2021 6:21 pm

View: https://youtu.be/MJpgApiVcDQ
2:27 min

Trump Defense Video Collection… ‘Democrats are guilty of inciting riots, promoting violence’… [Boxed Set]
Posted by Kane on February 12, 2021 6:30 pm
All 4 of these videos were used by the Trump team today

View: https://youtu.be/2oi0uUoFTig
3:59 min

View: https://youtu.be/OlGc9s73sJU
9:11 min

View: https://youtu.be/1JPIYWCWJYo
1:10 min

View: https://youtu.be/Afe5dC9fpEo
1:51 min

The ‘Sound And Fury’ Of Trump’s Impeachment Trial Signifies Something Sinister For America
Trump isn’t really on trial here, everyone who voted for him is.

By John Daniel Davidson
FEBRUARY 12, 2021

Twitter had some fun Wednesday night when NBC’s Andrea Mitchell tried — and miserably failed — to correct Sen. Ted Cruz on the source of the famous Shakespeare quote from Macbeth, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” The Texas senator had used it to describe the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump now underway in the Senate.

Mitchell, who studied English literature at the University of Pennsylvania, thought the quote came from William Faulkner. “@SenTedCruzsays #ImpeachmentTrial is like Shakespeare full of sound and fury signifying nothing. No, that’s Faulkner,” Mitchell tweeted, apparently unaware that Faulkner borrowed the phrase from the Bard.

Mitchell’s literary ignorance unleashed a mini-tempest on Twitter, including Cruz chiming in with the full quote from Macbeth. To her credit, Mitchell apologized to Cruz — but not without humble-bragging that she “clearly studied too much American literature and not enough Macbeth.” Yes, clearly.

Amusing as this little spectacle of elite ignorance was, it calls to mind something sinister about the Trump impeachment trial, which is indeed “full of sound and fury,” but doesn’t signify nothing. It signifies that Democrats, by putting a former president on trial for something he did not do, are trying to destroy not only Trump but the entire Republican Party, and tar everyone who voted for Trump as a traitor. The former president is not really on trial here, the movement he represents is.

Impeachment Managers Allege Guilt By Association
How do we know? Because not a shred of evidence has been or will be presented that connects Trump to the thing for which he is purportedly on trial: incitement of insurrection. The Democrats’ entire case is one of guilt by association. A ragged band of radical Trump supporters attacked the Capitol, therefore Trump himself is to blame.

To make this case, Democratic impeachment managers have had to rely on emotional appeals rather than facts. On Wednesday, they gave lengthy and dramatic presentations about the mass protest and subsequent riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, showing previously unseen security footage of rioters breaching the Capitol building.

The footage was at times intense, as riot footage usually is, but the presentations that accompanied the footage did not reveal anything new because that was not their purpose.

Their purpose was to elicit emotional responses from the Senate jurors and the media, which they predictably did.

During a dinner recess, Sen. Mitt Romney (who else?) told reporters he hadn’t realized just how much danger he was in until he saw footage of a Capitol Police officer leading him away from the mob. “It was obviously very troubling to see the great violence that our Capitol Police and others were subjected to,” Romney said. “It tears at your heart and brings tears to your eyes.

That was overwhelmingly distressing and emotional.”

Romney was of course playing the part Democrats have assigned him. The point of the footage, paired with over-dramatized narrations of events by impeachment managers, particularly Del. Stacey Plaskett who went through the events of Jan. 6 in detail, was to depict Trump as the true leader of the mob, commanding and directing them from his perch in the White House.

“Make no mistake, the violence was not just foreseeable to President Trump, the violence was what he deliberately encouraged,” Plaskett said. “He fanned the flame of violence, and it worked.”

Another impeachment manager, Rep. Joaquin Castro, went a step further, claiming that Trump “left everyone in this Capitol for dead” — seemingly taking a cue from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who recently accused Cruz of attempting to have her murdered.

On Thursday, impeachment managers delved more deeply into Trump’s role that day, but again failed to present any new information that would suggest Trump planned, supported, or even knew about the attack that a small group of his supporters pre-planned for Jan. 6.

Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette tried to make a case that the handful of rioters who attacked the Capitol (out of a much larger protest numbering in the tens of thousands at least) were doing so because they thought they were following Trump’s orders. Tellingly, House Democrats never called on any of these people to testify in the House impeachment hearing, so DeGette was reduced to quoting a few statements rioters posted on social media or made to the press.

But here’s the thing: it doesn’t matter if some of the rioters thought they were carrying out Trump’s orders. After all, it’s no more Trump’s fault that these people are idiots than it’s his fault they decided to attack the Capitol. Unless Democrats can produce some evidence that Trump gave the rioters instructions or direction, we’ll have to rely on what we know Trump said, which was to encourage the protesters to march to the Capitol grounds “peacefully.”

Lacking anything more than this, Democrats finally fell back on the sinister heart of their case against Trump: all Trump supporters, not just the rioters, are traitors simply for supporting him. Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, the lead impeachment manager, argued that Trump had previously “inflamed and incited a mob,” citing a peaceful protest at the Michigan Capitol in Lansing on April 30 against strict COVID-19 lockdown orders imposed by Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

At that rally, several protesters carried firearms into the state capitol, as allowed under Michigan law, without incident. Apart from a single arrest — someone got really drunk and tried to rip a flag out of a protester’s hands — the protest was entirely peaceful and orderly.

Yet Raskin showed images of the Michigan rally next to images of the mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol in what amounted to a shabby attempt to impugn any and all conservatives who might have at some point protested at a capitol building or expressed opposition to an elected Democrat.

And that’s really the point of this exercise. Trump is out of office, a new administration has taken power, but Democrats won’t let go of their “insurrection” narrative, not because there’s any truth to it but because it’s politically useful. Some on the left are dumb enough to come out and say it, like MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who on Thursday morning said Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley is “responsible for the insurrection,” along with Cruz and Sens. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio.

What do all these Republicans have in common? They all think there were problems with the 2020 election. If that’s the bar for being guilty of insurrection, then Trump’s guilt is shared not just by Hawley and Cruz and the others, it’s shared by millions of Americans across the country.

Understand what’s happening here. There’s almost no chance Trump will be convicted by the Senate, but this impeachment theater is not as pointless as it seems. The sound and fury of Democrats signifies clearly that if you support Trump, you’re a traitor.

Ted Lieu said the quiet part out loud…
Posted by Kane on February 12, 2021 4:21 am

Bannon: We will never concede

Rumble video 2:33 min

Steve Bannon — ‘We Will Never, Ever, Ever Concede’

Two fantastic clips from yesterday’s War Room evening show

“Sir, let me make sure you understand something. Ted Lieu and Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and every distributor and Twitter and all of it: We will never concede,” he said. “We will never say this election was not stolen.”

“We will never ever ever ever concede. Do you understand that?” Bannon added. “And you know why? Because you stole this election and you bragged about it on the cover of TIME magazine.”

Kassam: Ted Lieu said the quiet part out loud

Rumble video 2:19 min

Ted Lieu said the quiet part out loud

Ted Lieu Admits Democrats Are Using the Military to Enforce Political Speech

Alan Dershowitz calls out Democrat Jamie Raskin for SPECIFIC hypocrisy during phony impeachment
FEB. 11, 2021 4:40 PM BY THE RIGHT SCOOP • 80 COMMENTS

Alan Dershowitz called out his former student, Democrat Jamie Raskin, for his duplicitous use of the first amendment that protected his own father:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1359962915793682438
.29 min

Dershowitz makes the point that Jamie Raskin’s own father took the Pentagon Papers from Daniel Ellsberg after he stole the and gave them to the New York Times. But Dersh says that Marcus Raskin was saved from felony prosecution by the first amendment. He note that this is the same first amendment that Jamie Raskin is now trashing, saying it doesn’t apply to Trump.

“You can’t say first amendment for me and my father and not for President Trump. The first amendment to all or to none, there’s no distinction.”

A lovely point made by Dershowitz, which is just one more reason (I lost count how many) we know that this impeachment trial is absolute garbage. It’s exactly what Hawley said it was this morning, a personal political vendetta and nothing more.

I noticed the house mangers do not take part in the prayer or the pledge of allegiance? Is this telling, or what? Why? I find it odd, and concerning.

“They’ve Won!” – Harvard Law Professor Cheers Trump Legal Team After Friday Beatdown (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft
Published February 12, 2021 at 10:32pm

President Trump’s attorneys took the floor of the US Senate on Friday in defense of President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial.

Trump Attorney David Schoen ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED the House Managers when he took to the floor of the US Senate.

At one point Schoen played video of the Democrat lawmakers lying about a Trump tweet.
Schoen then played a 13 minute montage of Democrats doing the exact same thing they accused Trump of doing!


Following the proceedings on Friday Senator Ron Johnson praised the Trump attorneys saying, “The president’s lawyers blew the House manager case out of the water. They legally eviscerated them.”

Johnson is right. Today was a shellacking.

Following today’s proceedings Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, cheered today’s performance telling Newsmax, “They’ve won!”


Via Pro-Trump News:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1360321083866497024
1:53 min

Trump Lawyer’s Closing Video Brilliantly Uses Clips Of Unhinged Democrat Lawmakers To Expose Why They Really Want To Impeach Trump [VIDEO]

By Patty McMurray | Feb 12, 2021

In the final moments of the phony Trump impeachment trial, Trump lawyer Bruce Castor revealed the real reason Democrats are desperate to impeach him.

It’s not because they believe he incited the people involved in the Capitol siege, that theory has already been debunked. It’s already been proven that the US intelligence community was aware that an attack was planned on the Capitol building days in advance of January 6.

The unhinged group of Democrat lawmakers aren’t trying to remove a president who has already left the White House, from the White House…they’re trying to ensure that America’s most popular president is stripped of his right to run again in 2024.

Democrats are trying to impeach Trump because they fear him.

Watch Castor’s closing statement accompanied by testimony of Democrat lawmakers who explain in their own words why they want to impeach Trump here:

Rumble video on website 2:05 min

BREAKING: Mark Meadows Breaks Silence, Reveals What’s Next For President Trump
by Jonathan Davisabout 9 hours agoupdated about 6 hours ago



Tens of millions of Donald Trump’s supporters want to know what the former president is going to do with his post-White House life, and his last chief of staff, Mark Meadows, provided some insight into those activities on Thursday.

Simply put — Trump isn’t going anywhere, and if I were a Republican who voted to impeach him, I’d be filling out job applications right about now.

The Washington Examiner noted:

Former President Donald Trump “plans to stay in the arena,” according to one of his top White House aides.

Mark Meadows, who was Trump’s final chief of staff, spoke about plans for the future Thursday in a radio interview with host Sebastian Gorka, who himself is a former White House adviser.

He offered rare insight into what Trump is up to these days, more than three weeks removed from the White House and now facing a Senate impeachment trial.

Meadows, who said he spoke to Trump on Wednesday and Thursday, said Trump “continues to put America first, but he also plans to stay in the arena.“

“America and the 75 million voters are not done with Donald Trump and all he did for the country,” Meadows added.

Trump’s supporters got a taste of what his plans would be moving forward after meeting last month at his Mar-a-Lago resort home in West Palm Beach, Fla. After the meeting, his Save America PAC announced that Trump had made a deal to help Republicans win back the House majority (and, hopefully, the Senate).

But other than that, Trump has been lying low during the sham impeachment, the second one in as many years, as he continues to live rent-free in the heads of deranged Democrats. He’s been booted off all of the left-wing social media platforms as well, so it’s not like he’s got ready access to ‘the world.’

Speaking of which, there has been some talk that Trump may try to start his own social media platform as well, which would be about the only way he’ll ever get back online.

“I would expect that we will see the president reemerge on social media,” top campaign adviser Jason Miller said when asked what Trump plans to do next, Breitbart News reported earlier this month. “Whether that’s joining an existing platform or creating his new platform, there are a number of different options and a number of different meetings that they’ve been having on that front. Nothing is imminent on that.”

All options are on the table,” Miller continued without elaborating. “A number of things are being discussed. Stay tuned there because you know he’s going to be back on social media. We’re just kind of figuring out which avenue makes the most sense.”

Breitbart adds:

Potential existing alternatives that Trump could join include Parler, who the then-president’s campaign officials reportedly met with last summer to discuss Trump joining the platform, or Gab, another platform that has successfully battled blacklisting by Silicon Valley and financial institutions. If Trump seeks to build his own platform, that would be a massive undertaking and require lots of investment and technological infrastructure. But with his personality and supporters—75 million Americans voted for him in 2020, the most votes a sitting president has ever gotten in history—fueling it, it could end up being successful.

Trump himself teased a new platform.

“The tech companies are very dishonest about that and about free speech,” Trump told Breitbart News in August. “It could be a big problem for them at the appropriate time.”

Graham Reveals He Spoke With Trump, Informed Him Impeachment Won’t End With Conviction

February 12, 2021
by Martin Walsh


Written by Martin Walsh
OPINION
This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion

It was reported earlier this week that former President Donald Trump was not happy with how his defense team performed at the Senate impeachment trial earlier this week.

Two people familiar with the former president’s reaction to his defense on Tuesday reportedly told CNN that “Trump was almost screaming as his attorney Bruce Castor made meandering arguments that struggled to get at the heart of his defense team’s argument — which was supposed to be over the constitutionality of holding a trial for a president no longer in office.”

South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham revealed he spoke with Trump on Wednesday night and informed him that the trial will end without the former president being convicted, Bloomberg reported.

Graham said, “The bottom line is I reinforced to the president, the case is over … It’s just a matter of getting the final verdict now.”

Referring to the widely panned presentations of his attorneys, Graham said he told the former president he thought Schoen “did a pretty good job.”

Graham predicted that at least 44 Republican senators will vote for acquittal, leaving the Democrats well shy of the 67 votes necessary for conviction.

The impeachment trial for former President Donald Trump kicked off in the Senate on Tuesday, beginning with debate over the constitutionality of the House prosecuting a president who has already left office.

After four hours of arguments by each side, the Senate affirmed by a vote of 56-44 that it is constitutional to try a former president.

Below are the six Senate Republicans:

• Mitt Romney
• Susan Collins
• Lisa Murkowski
• Pat Toomey
• Ben Sasse
• Bill Cassidy

Trump’s lead counsel Bruce Castor opened his arguments with praise for the impeachment managers’ “outstanding presentation,” adding that no member of the Trump team will voice anything but a condemnation of the rioters on Jan. 6.

Castor argued Democrats want to convict Trump because they fear he’ll run again in 2024.

Toward the end of his speech, he conceded: “We changed what we were going to do on account that we thought that the House managers’ presentation was well done.”

David Schoen, another attorney for Trump, also went scorched earth on Tuesday during his opening remarks of the Senate impeachment trial, arguing that Democrats are only using impeachment as a tool for revenge.

“They want to put you through a 16-hour presentation over 2 days focusing on this as if it was some sort of bloodsport. And to what end? For unity? For accountability? Not for any of those!” he began.

“For surely there are much better ways to achieve each. It is again for pure, raw misguided partisanship that makes them believe playing to our worst instincts is good. They don’t need to show you movies to prove that the riot happened here. We will stipulate that it happened and you know all about it,” he said.

“This is a process fueled irresponsibly by base hatred by these house managers and those that gave them their charge, and they are willing to sacrifice our national character to advance their hatred and their fear that one day they might not be the party in power,” he added.

Democrats Furious After Seeing 15 Empty GOP Seats at Impeachment Trial

by travis13 hours ago13 hours ago



Democrats will never let go of their obsession with President Donald Trump.

This much is clear, as they are moving forward with their sham of an impeachment trial of President Trump.

That’s not enough for them though, as they are demanding that Republicans take their theatrical song and dance just as seriously.

Apparently several Republicans chose not to show up to the trial, and Democrats aren’t happy about it.

CNN’s Manu Raju says he counted up to 15 vacant GOP seats.
Democrats are now having a full blown meltdown.

How seriously are Republicans taking this second impeachment? CNN's Manu Raju counted 15 empty chairs on the GOP side. How seriously are Republicans taking this second impeachment? CNN's Manu Raju counted 15 empty chairs on the GOP side. - Flipboard
— Lawrence Lomenzo (@llomenzo) February 12, 2021

Click to expand...

Just popped into the chamber and in my time there I saw 15 empty GOP seats. (Didn’t see Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul. Also saw Jim Risch in the basement on his phone.) Thom Tillis was visible in the GOP cloakroom reading his phone.

Bernie Sanders was slumped over.
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

CNN reported his findings:

How seriously are Republicans taking this second impeachment? CNN's @mkraju counted 15 empty chairs on the GOP side of the aisle.

(Because of the pandemic, senators are not actually required to be there, unlike the first trial.) pic.twitter.com/jxryKtUwYU
— The Recount (@therecount) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

While many democrats and media members are freaking out over the apathy of this impeachment nonsense, most everyone else recognizes that it's a complete waste of everybody's time.

Forbes has more on the sense of apathy towards this trial:

As many as 15 seats of Republican senators were empty during the first few hours of the trial Thursday, compared to just a handful of Democrats who were outside of the chamber, according to pool reports.

Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) were both away from their desks, for instance, while Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) was in the basement on his phone, CNN’s Manu Raju reported.

Many within the chamber were preoccupied with other activities: Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) were reading papers, while, according to CNN’s Jeremy Herb, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) “had a blank map of Asia on his desk and was writing on it like he was filling in the names of the countries.”

On both sides of the aisle, a general malaise was setting in, with many senators reportedly appearing to struggle to stay awake, including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.).

Even Trump’s lawyers were checked out, with David Schoen and Bruce Castor reportedly not taking notes and Schoen even leaving the chamber to speak to reporters and participate in several TV news interviews.

Asked by Raju why he was breaking from the trial to do interviews, Schoen said impeachment managers’ arguments are “more of the same thing,” labeling their use of footage of Capitol rioters citing Trump as their inspiration, “offensive, quite frankly.”

Click to expand...

Cue the meltdown from democrats...

15 GOP Senators refused to show up for today's impeachment trial session. Good. This just makes them and their party look bad. Hopefully they won't show up for the vote either, thus lowering the threshold for conviction.
— Palmer Report (@PalmerReport) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

Why are 15 GOP Senators even constitutionally allowed to miss the impeachment trial??

That should forfeit their right to vote on conviction!
— Jake Lobin (@JakeLobin) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

It is utterly disgraceful, and predictable, that 15 GOP Senators refused to attend the impeachment trial today.

Republicans hate justice.
— ReallyAmerican.com (@ReallyAmerican1) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

In criminal trials, jurors cannot get up and leave the courtroom. If they do, they would be held in contempt of court, face a possible fine, and if bad enough, jail time.

Today, 15 GOP Senators chose not to attend the trial. They should be held in contempt of Congress.
— Aaron Parnas (@AaronParnas) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

The 15 GOP Senators who couldn’t be bothered to stay in the room, should lose their ability to vote...
— NeuroPsychoPhD (@SethN12) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

With more on this story, here's The Hill:

Several Republican senators drew criticism Wednesday for appearing to pay only half-hearted attention to House impeachment managers' arguments as the trial stretched into its fourth hour.

Several whispered among themselves, while others chewed gum, doodled or struggled to stay awake.

The Republicans started paying closer attention when House impeachment managers began airing footage from inside the Capitol after it was breached in Jan. 6, including some that showed Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) staff barricading themselves in an office minutes before a group of rioters walked down a hallway.

But before that, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was spotted tracing the watermark of the Capitol on a legal pad while Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) appeared to read a magazine article and Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) gazed at a 2021 calendar. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) was studying what appeared to be a map of Southeast Asia.

Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) was described by one reporter in the chamber as appearing to struggle to stay awake while Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) didn’t seem to pay much attention to Rep. Joe Neguse’s (D-Colo.) presentation.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) popped snacks into his mouth under his mask and at one point walked into the cloakroom, emerging moments later with a glass of milk. Milk and water are the only beverages allowed on the floor under Senate rules.

Other Republicans were paying diligent attention. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) had four stacks of note cards on his desk. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) took careful notes while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) steadily watched the speakers at the podium.

A number of Republican senators arrived a few minutes late to the start of the second day of the trial. One reporter counted 33 seats empty when the proceeding started at noon. The chamber didn’t fill up until about 12:20 p.m.

Paul wasn’t seen on the floor for most of the first hour and a half of arguments though he was spotted in the cloakroom raising up his arms and appearing to speak loudly.

Click to expand...

Let's face the facts.
We all know this is a sham, even if some want to pretend it isn't.

Convenient that they left this out of the opening video montage at the sham impeachment trial.

“Patriotically and peacefully...”pic.twitter.com/rUoblpZXwS
— RSBN (@RSBNetwork) February 9, 2021

Click to expand...

Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 of the Constitution states, “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.”

The Chief Justice is not presiding and Trump is no longer in office.

This sham impeachment and trial are unconstitutional.
— Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) February 10, 2021

Click to expand...

I love seeing 15 GOP Senators LEAVING the phony impeachment trial!
— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) February 11, 2021

Click to expand...

“If it wasn’t for double standards, the Democrats would have no standards at all." - @DonaldJTrumpJr on the Democrats' sham impeachment. pic.twitter.com/SE59eBpi4J
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) February 10, 2021

Click to expand...

Are Democrats planning to steal the impeachment?

by Chris Hernandez
February 12, 2021




The tumultuous wake of the crime of the millennium, aka the irrefutable theft of the 2020 Presidential election, has left millions of Americans outraged and incredulous. In a land where justice for all has been a daily pledge of its citizenry and politicians for decades on end, patriots find themselves supine and bewildered by a thickly woven mat of corruption, deftly yanked from beneath their feet. Could it be that those very same perpetrators are preparing to kick Americans while they’re down and spit on them for good measure, thus adding insult to injury in the form of impeachment fraud?

All the hallmarks of their original heinousness are there. Note, for example, Fox News’ preemptive propagandizing, eerily evocative of an election night back stab that cost them a paltry 40% of their viewership. Meanwhile, the usual mob of mainstream media outlets are up to their old tricks, bum rushing any and everyone with their fake facts and false narratives, rearing back to hit people over the head, just as they did prior to the election with their over-weighted polls.

Video evidence be damned, anti-Trump political partisans easily duck and weave the frail counter punches to their attacks, impervious to such volleys. The legal groundwork for a second assault has even been laid in the same manner as with the election, allowing the attackers to sidestep, or simply trample over existing law with ad hoc distortions and misinterpretations.

On election night Trump supporters were standing tall, confident that their cause was righteous and truth would inevitably render them victorious. Still, they were unprepared for the impending sucker punch that would leave them doubled over in agony and gasping for air. At just the right moment, RINOs cunningly charged forth from the marshy undergrowth and bowled over hapless Trumpists sending them reeling, and there’s no reason to believe there do not exist more members of their herd lurking in wait to repeat the vicious tactic. Once again, gluttons for punishment in anti-impeachment camp are sanguinely remounting their high horse, utterly unprepared for yet another low blow.

As I illustrated in a previous article, it is simply folly to suspect the forces behind the impeachment won’t brazenly jump the shark once again. The fact that there have been absolutely no consequences in response to their heinous attack on our election can only serve to embolden and provoke such repeat offenses. Motives need not be obvious or thought out. Like a cowardly sneak attack from an Antifa thug on an unsuspecting elderly couple in a cafe, such wanton acts are often as senseless as they are violent.

Practically speaking, Trump poses no threat to a party that increasingly rules the country with an iron fist of absolute power. The 2024 election is an eternity away in such circumstances, and any Vegas odds maker worth a penny would not be wasting time contemplating the odds of whether Trump might win the epic rematch that would be the next election. Astute gamblers would certainly find it more profitable to spend their time calculating the likelihood that there will even be one.

Dems were losing bad so they went and changed the rules - now there will be witnesses.
UPDATE: US Senate Votes to Allow Witnesses in Sham Impeachment 55-45 — Five RINOs including Lindsey Graham Join Democrats in Vote


Pubs fire back -
Breaking: Trump Legal Team Asks to Call in Speaker Nancy Pelosi and DC Mayor Bowser to Testify on Inside Info They May Have Had on Capitol Breach


====

Wonder if this be over today as planned? Don't think so.

===

.

marsh said:

it is simply folly to suspect the forces behind the impeachment won’t brazenly jump the shark once again. The fact that there have been absolutely no consequences in response to their heinous attack on our election can only serve to embolden and provoke such repeat offenses.

Click to expand...

And this is our "political" future in a nutshell.

Unless something stern is done about it....

The longer it lasts, the less work the marxists can do to further their agenda. I hope it lasts a year.

Now they're going to closing arguments?

===
.

House Managers Fold: Will Not Call Impeachment Witnesses After Pelosi Subpoena Threat

by Tyler Durden
Saturday, Feb 13, 2021 - 10:48

Update (1300ET): After a couple of hours of 'negotiations' during which Sen. Cruz threatened to subpoena Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Trump's lawyers said they would call "100s of witnesses", a deal has been reached that means no witnesses will be called.
House impeachment managers dropped their request to obtain testimony from Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler after senators agreed instead to enter into the record an account of her secondhand account of a phone call between Trump and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy.
This agreement has averted the prospect of an avalanche of requests for testimony from both sides that would have extended the impeachment trial beyond its expected conclusion later today (and perhaps delayed any attempts at reaching a stimulus agreement).
As a reminder, Senator Lindsey Graham, who has been advising Trump's legal team, said that if the Senate agrees to the request by House impeachment managers to depose Herrera Beutler, he’ll insist on “multiple witnesses”...starting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
He said she should be required “to answer the question as to whether or not there was credible evidence of pre-planned violence before President Trump spoke? Whether Speaker Pelosi, due to optics, refused requests by the Capitol Hill Police for additional resources like the National Guard?”
* * *
Just when you thought Donald Trump's second impeachment trials was over, five Republicans have joined their Democratic colleagues in a Saturday morning vote (55-45) to call witnesses - an unexpected development in this snap impeachment over Trump's alleged role inciting the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

GOP Sens. Collins, Graham, Murkowski, Romney and Sasse were the five.
The move - which was originally opposed by several Democrats, will allow them to strengthen their case. It is unclear what kind of delay this may cause, after impeachment managers and Trump's defense team estimated it would be over on Saturday.
In response to the vote, Trump attorney Michael van der Veen answered that if witnesses are going to be called, "I’m going to need more than 100 witnesses, not just one," adding "we should close this case out today," but if that doesn't happen, "Do not handcuff me by limiting the number of witnesses I can have."

Trump adviser Jason Miller is holding up this piece of paper for reporters, per pool: pic.twitter.com/LwBxYPl9sp
— Josh Wingrove (@josh_wingrove) February 13, 2021

Click to expand...

Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren suggested that a debate on the number of witnesses should not take place, saying "I don’t think there’s any limit right now, and that’s part of what will be debated."
As Axios notes, Trump himself is Democrats' most desired witness, however the former president has already quashed that - saying he would not comply willingly. The Senate could subpoena him, however it's unclear whether they would have enough support.
Instead, Democrats plan to call GOP Rep. Jamie Herrera Butler of Washington, who the NY Times reported on Friday said Trump 'sided with the mob' during a phone call as the attack was unfolding. Herrera Butler, who voted to impeach Trump in the House, was requested to testify by House impeachment manager Jamie Raskin.
Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler, Republican of Washington, at the Capitol last week.Credit...

In a statement on Friday night, Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler, Republican of Washington, recounted a phone call relayed to her by Mr. McCarthy of California, the minority leader, in which Mr. Trump was said to have sided with the rioters, telling the top House Republican that members of the mob who had stormed the Capitol were “more upset about the election than you are.”
She pleaded with witnesses to step forward and share what they knew about Mr. Trump’s actions and statements as the attack was underway. -NY Times

Click to expand...

"To the patriots who were standing next to the former president as these conversations were happening, or even to the former vice president: if you have something to add here, now would be the time," said Herrera Beutler in a statement.

pic.twitter.com/6N8vg5PRJz
— Jaime Herrera Beutler (@HerreraBeutler) February 13, 2021

Click to expand...

According to her account, McCarthy 'frantically' called Trump on Jan. 6 and asked him to "publicly and forcefully call off the riot," and that Trump replied that it was Antifa, not his supporters, who were responsible. When McCarthy pushed back saying that wasn't true, Trump allegedly said "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."
Senate Democrats who initially opposed witnesses include Kristen Gillibrand of NY, who said on Thursday: "We've heard from many witnesses based on their interviews and their video presentations, so, I feel like we've heard from enough witnesses." Sen. Angus King of Maine said "I think the case has been made. I don’t know what witnesses would add."

Once witnesses have testified, impeachment managers and Trump's defense team will present closing arguments - with each side allotted two hours. A full vote on whether to convict or acquit will follow.
To that end, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has told his fellow Senate GOP in an email that he will vote to acquit the former president - writing "As I have said for some time, today's vote is a vote of conscience and I know we will all treat it as such," according to Politico's Burgess Everett.

McConnell says it was a “close call” but says impeachment is “primarily a tool of removal” and the Senate lacks jurisdiction . He says criminal conduct by a president in office can be prosecuted when the president is out of office pic.twitter.com/JGMTjCp2OL
— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) February 13, 2021

Click to expand...

Watch:

40,439751

Please see source for videos
Posted for fair use

God, they're so insane.

Cowards and traitors! Kabuki run amok.....

Botox n Booze Broads :: shakes head :: Guess it's good that they've let their insanity come out into the open eh

Can't result in questioning Dems on their relationship to the Antifa/BLM False Flag at the Capitol, ultimately blamed on MAGA.

This is about keeping Trump from running in 2024, and to vent their insane hatred for him. Nothing more.

jward said:

Mr. Trump was ... telling the top House Republican that members of the mob who had stormed the Capitol were “more upset about the election than you are.”

Click to expand...

That's pretty much a slam dunk. Voters vs Rinos?

jward said:

it was Antifa, not his supporters, who were responsible

Click to expand...

And that is the KEY element here, which is as usual with pettifoggery, being totally ignored. No way will I believe the FBI et al. do not have facial recognition photos of every one of the rioters who damaged or destroyed property in the Capitol, no way do they not have photos of Antifa/BLM as well plus the computer software to match them quickly.

I thought we were better than that. Obviously not.

Dozdoats said:

And that is the KEY element here, which is as usual with pettifoggery, being totally ignored. No way will I believe the FBI et al. do not have facial recognition photos of every one of the rioters who damaged or destroyed property in the Capitol, no way do they not have photos of Antifa/BLM as well plus the computer software to match them quickly.

I thought we were better than that. Obviously not.

Click to expand...

WE are. THEY have an agenda.

The eff bee eye was co-opted as an investigatory arm of the communists during the 0bunghole administration.

pettifoggery? Gawd I love new to me words

THEY have an anti-US (us and USA) agenda.