On Tuesday, Trump's lawyers filed his first formal response to the article of impeachment that was approved by the House of Representatives on January 13. Trump was impeached, for the second time, on a single charge: incitement of insurrection.
It's no surprise that trumps original legal team walked out on him. These arguments try to use big fancy words and lawyer speak but as you point out in layman's terms, these arguments are pathetic and look like a child made them. So trump literally says. "You need to fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore." and "We're going to march down Pennsylvania to the Capital" but his lawyers are trying to say he was advocating for election security?!? The mind boggles at these pathetic arguments. For too long trump has been able to skate around being held legally responsible for anything. He begged Russia to interfere in our elections on live TV and faced zero consequences. He then accepted that help and faced zero consequences. If he faces no consequences for flat out lying about the election and inciting a riot, the United States is no more. We cannot continue to exist as a country if this man is free and clear with no consequences. Free speech does not equate to purposefully lying about the election and inciting a riot. These lawyers are a joke and I hope they are laughed out of court.
I can't remember where I saw it (Emptywheel? Lawfare?), but I've read that in every one of the court cases, Giuliani and the Kraken legal team didn't contest the accuracy of the vote count and almost invariably stipulated that the count was accurate because they knew that making the claim in court would constitute perjury, which could get them disbarred.
I'm sure that was on purpose but they can't possibly blame these voting machines publicly and then change the wording in their court filings. They said what they said and repeated those claims on live television. They can try and revise their statements now but the damage is already done. Dominion and the other one (I can't recall the name) definitely have a case in my opinion. I hope they sue them into oblivion.
But blaming the machines publicly and changing the wording in the court filings is exactly what they did. Then they continued the public statements, even after receiving Cease & Desist letters from both Dominion and Smartmatic, which is why both companies are suing various and sundry defendants for defamation, seeking almost $5.5 billion combined in damages.
Trump has added new members to the Clown Car. It’s mind-boggling that this is the quality of legal representation he’s getting. I guess when everyone either quits on you or refuses to sign on, you take whatever warm legal body you can get.
He won't be convicted, which is mind boggling. I'm wondering if there is a legal means to hold him accountable outside of the federal government? The thought of him running again is too much to think about. I feel like I got my sanity back and would seriously like to keep it.
I’m afraid that even if he’s found guilty and kept from running again there would be someone either like him or worse to take up his slack. He was the pattern. Next comes the many layers of fabric from which his many duplicates will be cut. We, as whatever opposition party we wish to see next, have got to be recruiting our next generation of stalwart candidates to meet them and make themselves worthy of being voted for.
Given that former presidents are provided money and staff and access to classified briefings from the US Government, one could argue that they occupy an "office of honor" and that Trump could also be removed from that office, as well as disqualified from holding any other.
I want to remind the Managers that Trump specifically said "I'll be there with you" when he urged the rioters to go to the Capitol at his rally. You can only imagine how some of his "followers" reacted because they felt they were marching right behind him. Emboldened.
There is precedent in that last bit (re: free speech), and I wish I could remember the article that cited the court cases. It clearly states that a speaker cannot be held accountable for the actions of those in the crowd even if they discuss such armed rebellions in the abstract, but there was a clear separation between that and being physically at a place where you instruct the crowd toward immediate violence. The latter free speech does not cover.
"In the Brandenburg case, the Supreme Court said speech loses First Amendment protection if it calls for and is likely to lead to “imminent lawless action.”
The operative word is “imminent.” Following Brandenburg, the high court clarified that vague threats of violence were protected by the First Amendment".
IMO, Trump knew his actions would imminently lead to violence and the delay or prevention of Congress's solemn duty to certify the electoral vote count, which was his plan B dating back to 2015. He literally was shouting fire in a crowded theatre filled with thousands of people committed to unlawfully invade our Capitol, to engage in violence against anyone standing in their way.
This expectation was planned for, acknowledged loudly by the rioting participants who also prepared for the violence beforehand. Once the violence commenced, Trump did nothing to curtail it, as he watched it manifest on TV for hours. Before the eyes of the Nation and the World, Trump watched the U.S. Capitol being rampaged, lives being lost and injured, and our governmental representatives being hunted while the vote was delayed, as an arsonist would watch a fire he set to destroy an entire town.
I want to remind the Managers that Trump specifically said "I'll be there with you" when he urged the rioters to go to the Capitol at his rally. You can only imagine how some of his "followers" reacted because they felt they were marching right behind him. Emboldened.
I want to see the timeline that the prosecution surely has of Trump's words and the mob's actions. Every thing he said is timestamped and every reaction is the same, thanks to the mob's endless need for approval by their social media circles. When Trump said "go" they said "where;" when he said "jump" they said, "how high;" when he said Pence was a disappointment they said "hang Pence."
Is there any way you can argue the case against Trump in the Senate? It would be over in 15 minutes. Save a lot of taxpayer bucks too.
And. The Republican Senate will buy it, spellings, repetitive remarks, nonsense and all. "Case dismissed. Treason we create is ok."
It's no surprise that trumps original legal team walked out on him. These arguments try to use big fancy words and lawyer speak but as you point out in layman's terms, these arguments are pathetic and look like a child made them. So trump literally says. "You need to fight like hell or you won't have a country anymore." and "We're going to march down Pennsylvania to the Capital" but his lawyers are trying to say he was advocating for election security?!? The mind boggles at these pathetic arguments. For too long trump has been able to skate around being held legally responsible for anything. He begged Russia to interfere in our elections on live TV and faced zero consequences. He then accepted that help and faced zero consequences. If he faces no consequences for flat out lying about the election and inciting a riot, the United States is no more. We cannot continue to exist as a country if this man is free and clear with no consequences. Free speech does not equate to purposefully lying about the election and inciting a riot. These lawyers are a joke and I hope they are laughed out of court.
I can't remember where I saw it (Emptywheel? Lawfare?), but I've read that in every one of the court cases, Giuliani and the Kraken legal team didn't contest the accuracy of the vote count and almost invariably stipulated that the count was accurate because they knew that making the claim in court would constitute perjury, which could get them disbarred.
I'm sure that was on purpose but they can't possibly blame these voting machines publicly and then change the wording in their court filings. They said what they said and repeated those claims on live television. They can try and revise their statements now but the damage is already done. Dominion and the other one (I can't recall the name) definitely have a case in my opinion. I hope they sue them into oblivion.
But blaming the machines publicly and changing the wording in the court filings is exactly what they did. Then they continued the public statements, even after receiving Cease & Desist letters from both Dominion and Smartmatic, which is why both companies are suing various and sundry defendants for defamation, seeking almost $5.5 billion combined in damages.
Trump has added new members to the Clown Car. It’s mind-boggling that this is the quality of legal representation he’s getting. I guess when everyone either quits on you or refuses to sign on, you take whatever warm legal body you can get.
His legal team doesn’t know it yet, but they’re working pro bono
Lol
He won't be convicted, which is mind boggling. I'm wondering if there is a legal means to hold him accountable outside of the federal government? The thought of him running again is too much to think about. I feel like I got my sanity back and would seriously like to keep it.
I’m afraid that even if he’s found guilty and kept from running again there would be someone either like him or worse to take up his slack. He was the pattern. Next comes the many layers of fabric from which his many duplicates will be cut. We, as whatever opposition party we wish to see next, have got to be recruiting our next generation of stalwart candidates to meet them and make themselves worthy of being voted for.
Free speech? You can't yell "Fire!" in a movie theater and you can't tell a mob to "fight like hell" at a rally.
Given that former presidents are provided money and staff and access to classified briefings from the US Government, one could argue that they occupy an "office of honor" and that Trump could also be removed from that office, as well as disqualified from holding any other.
I want to remind the Managers that Trump specifically said "I'll be there with you" when he urged the rioters to go to the Capitol at his rally. You can only imagine how some of his "followers" reacted because they felt they were marching right behind him. Emboldened.
There is precedent in that last bit (re: free speech), and I wish I could remember the article that cited the court cases. It clearly states that a speaker cannot be held accountable for the actions of those in the crowd even if they discuss such armed rebellions in the abstract, but there was a clear separation between that and being physically at a place where you instruct the crowd toward immediate violence. The latter free speech does not cover.
"In the Brandenburg case, the Supreme Court said speech loses First Amendment protection if it calls for and is likely to lead to “imminent lawless action.”
The operative word is “imminent.” Following Brandenburg, the high court clarified that vague threats of violence were protected by the First Amendment".
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-virginia-protests-speech-factbox/factbox-when-can-free-speech-be-restricted-in-the-united-states-idUSKCN1AU2E0
IMO, Trump knew his actions would imminently lead to violence and the delay or prevention of Congress's solemn duty to certify the electoral vote count, which was his plan B dating back to 2015. He literally was shouting fire in a crowded theatre filled with thousands of people committed to unlawfully invade our Capitol, to engage in violence against anyone standing in their way.
This expectation was planned for, acknowledged loudly by the rioting participants who also prepared for the violence beforehand. Once the violence commenced, Trump did nothing to curtail it, as he watched it manifest on TV for hours. Before the eyes of the Nation and the World, Trump watched the U.S. Capitol being rampaged, lives being lost and injured, and our governmental representatives being hunted while the vote was delayed, as an arsonist would watch a fire he set to destroy an entire town.
Marshajust now
I want to remind the Managers that Trump specifically said "I'll be there with you" when he urged the rioters to go to the Capitol at his rally. You can only imagine how some of his "followers" reacted because they felt they were marching right behind him. Emboldened.
Thanks for finding its!
I want to see the timeline that the prosecution surely has of Trump's words and the mob's actions. Every thing he said is timestamped and every reaction is the same, thanks to the mob's endless need for approval by their social media circles. When Trump said "go" they said "where;" when he said "jump" they said, "how high;" when he said Pence was a disappointment they said "hang Pence."