Home » Trump’s defenders

Comments

Trump’s defenders — 11 Comments

  1. I did pay attention to Dershowitz’s calm, powerful presentation on why the impeachment articles do not pass the Constitutional sniff test.

  2. I wasn’t bored one bit.

    I recorded everything from Saturday through today (Tuesday) and have re-watched some of the better arguments.

    Prof. Dershowitz was brilliant and electrifying to watch. Let’s hope he’s not the last of a dying generation of erudite and genius legal minds.

    The only negative: I thought Eric Herschmann, while he made excellent arguments, was a poor public speaker insofar as he read, too fast and with little intonation, his entire presentation.

  3. Dershowitz has gone to great pains to explain that he’s not defending Trump, he’s defending the Constitution.

    He’s perfectly fine with impeaching and convicting Trump as long as it’s constitutionally viable. That distinction is obviously lost on democrats, who lust for Trump’s demise.

  4. I watched all of Ray and Dershowitz’s presentations. Both well argued, but a bit short on passion. I watched all of today’s presentations. Philbin was good, but dull. Jay Sekulow had an excellent presentation – well argued with lots of dramatic pauses and energy. Pat Cipollone was short, but effective. He showed video clips of all the House managers arguing against impeaching Bill Clinton, which were the exact opposite of their arguments against this POTUS.

    I enjoy hearing good arguments and was not bored, but I am probably in a minority. As Matt Gaetz said, the White House defense lawyers needed a little less lawyer and a bit more politician in their approaches to their arguments. Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, Louis Gohmert, or Gaetz would have been much more fiery and aggressive in their presentations of the defense arguments.

    Well, the whole thing was not watched by many. The House managers repetitiveness managed to drive most viewers away. The polls seem to be all over the place. I don’t trust any of them. My guess is that this spectacle is not changing many minds. That’s too bad. In a sane world more people would recognize and turn against the prevarications of the Democrats.

  5. None of these folks are Perry Mason, but a little less droning and a little more verve would be appreciated.

  6. Just because it’s worth remembering.

    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1222157837322932225.html

    Doc Zero

    Trump’s America First approach is similar to how airplane passengers are told to attend to their own oxygen mask before they help others. We have to secure our interests first and strengthen our practical commitment to our own ideology. We must become more American than ever.

  7. public Service Announcement

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/01/28/mitch-mcconnell-prepares-for-next-steps-in-senate-trial-questions-then-possible-witnesses/

    …according to several media reports, McConnell took a ‘whip of the Senate’ regarding witness testimony and does not currently have enough republican votes to block the pre-planned House Managers’ unconstitutional scheme to call witnesses.

    The appropriate constitutional position for the Senate to take would be that the House investigates; the House calls witnesses within their investigation; the House assembles articles of impeachment; and the Senate is the trier of fact from those articles.

    Ergo if a witness was not included in the article assembly, that would be a defect of the House articles; incurable in the Senate. However, it appears there are enough republicans willing to establish a new extra-constitutional process whereby the House can assemble speculative supposition; avoid the executive branch using their lawful process to appeal to the judicial branch for opinion; and put the burden of witness testimony on the Senate.

    How and why any senator would agree to establish this precedent is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps it would be a worthwhile endeavor to call, email or write our senators and ask them why they would even contemplate such an undertaking.

    In the current quasi-constitutional House process, the Democrats refused to allow Republicans to call witnesses during their investigative phase. As a result the articles as assembled are completely one-sided and partisan. There are no republican witnesses in the evidence underpinning the article assembly. This was obviously done by design.

    As a result a one-sided, Democrat only, witness group is structured in the articles. Now the same Democrats are demanding additional witnesses beyond those they called in the House. The witnesses they are demanding are from the executive branch; and blocking the executive from access to the judiciary explains why the Democrat plan has presented this end-run around the constitution. This was not a flaw in the article assembly, it was a feature.

    I refuse to accept that Republican senators are stupid. Obviously they, like us, can see how and why the House used this process; yet they are willing to allow it. It makes no sense unless we accept there are GOP senators in alignment with the usurpation plans of the Democrats.


    If I can make this argument understandable to you as readers, surely Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could emphasize the gravity of this issue to his fellow colleagues in the Senate. Yet apparently he has not.

    The inability of Senators, regardless of party, to articulate this simple and dangerous constitutional issue is the most alarming development in this entire impeachment process.

    In the most general of terms, DC politicians do not understand the level of intelligent understanding held by most voters. Perhaps, as a final firewall against losing our constitutional republic, it would be helpful if we contacted with our senators and advised them we are aware of the issue.

    Find Your Senator Phone Number HERE
    (202) 224 – 3121 [Extensions Here]
    .

  8. “I refuse to accept that Republican senators are stupid.”

    Well, there’s your problem…they aren’t called the Stupid Party for nuthin’

  9. No, I wouldn’t call them “stupid” either. Not at all.

    It’s something else. Lack of awareness, perhaps. A general naivete that one might attribute to a less than wholesome(?) optimism about human (or at least American) nature and behavior.

    The basic problem is…they’re…just…for the most part…unwilling (unable?) to acknowledge just how diabolical the Democrat Party is. (One might understand…)

    But this is precisely where a street fighter like DJT comes in (Protector of the Diffident! Shield of the Republic!)…and although the GOP was generally hesitant about the “optics” of such an ungentlemanly outsider, he has proven himself.

    (To be sure, three years later a certain segment of the GOP is STILL finding the strength to be righteously outraged…. Ah, the luxury of principles!…)

    Nonetheless, I think the GOP—it’s collective eyes having been pried open (think “Clockwork Orange”?) by “events”—has been “getting better”. Those who’ve been able to learn have looked on in awe as the Donald is somehow still standing; and they’ve benefited from the fact that he’s been a lot better (perhaps even saner)—more successful, durable, robust—than many if not most of them expected.

    For their part?…well, the Democrats have insisted on donating a generous amount of time and effort tutoring the Deplorables(TM) among them. Up front and personal, ubiquitous and sustained. Nasty and deranged.

    And all for free!
    (They always did claim to be in favor of education for the masses….)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>