Mr. Castor, the first to speak, delivered a rambling, almost somnambulant defense of the former president for nearly an hour. Mr. Trump, who often leaves the television on in the background even when he is holding meetings, was furious, people familiar with his reaction said. On a scale of one to 10, with 10 being the angriest, Mr. Trump “was an eight,” one person familiar with his reaction said....
None of the lawyers from the first impeachment trial who defended Mr. Trump returned for the second round. And most of the team he initially hired abruptly parted ways with him days before the trial began....
Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, castigated Mr. Trump’s defense lawyers in explaining why he voted “yes” on the question of whether the Senate has jurisdiction in the case even though Mr. Trump is out of office. Asked why he believed they did poorly, Mr. Cassidy replied to reporters, “Did you listen to it?” “It was disorganized, random — they talked about many things, but they didn’t talk about the issue at hand,” he said.
It is painful to watch a legal proceeding where one side has far, far better legal representation than the other. Castor is a former prosecutor, so perhaps he's used to being on the side that is much better represented and has skills honed through encounters with overworked, underprepared criminal defense lawyers. I don't know if I want to feel sorry for Trump for his lack of representation, when there are so many people struggling with insufficient legal assistance. It's easy to ignore such people. They're not in the spotlight.
ADDED: Trump is a conspicuous victim of poor representation. But I do feel bad about it. I want to see a fair fight. Yet perhaps it is his fault for trying to dictate what his lawyers must argue and leaving them in the position where their only alternative was to walk away, leaving Trump to scramble for someone, anyone who will represent him, and those are the characters who are struggling to hold up Trump's end of the fight. It's a grisly spectacle, but Trump has responsibility for it.
पोस्ट्स
११६ टिप्पण्या:
How does anyone have that capacity to "feel sorry" for Trump. How about personal responsibility? He definitely made his bed on this one.
That's what happens when everybody knows their career is over if they help Trump in any way. Look at what's happening around the country to Trump supporters. The left is cancelling you. First they came for Trump, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Trump Supporter.
Then they came for the Conservatives, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Conservative........Time to wake up.
It seems that the adage of the client determining the desired outcome and the lawyers determining the strategy is a much finer line in this case than others.
None of this feels legitimate. I wouldn't want to be a part of it either...
...but wendybar is correct. Soon we'll all get some.
At this point what difference does it make?
This isn't about cancelling Trump it's about cancelling anyone who challenges the establishment. If you support Trump and his America first policies they are coming for you next.
It's a grisly spectacle, but Trump has responsibility for it.
I figure they'll come for Ann before me. I can watch aghast at the grisly spectacle, but she'll have responsibility for it...
Why wouldn't the Senate's impeachment rules provide that a motion to dismiss be granted if at least 34 Senators vote for it?
What is happening around the country to Trump supporters, Wendy?
Are you talking about people whose employers decide they don't want to employ lawbreakers who outed themselves on social media?
I have as much sympathy for them as I do someone who posts themselves doing drugs or saying the n word .... zero.
It's a "high-tech lynching". We all know that. It's the height of vindictiveness, malice, and raw arrogance. No one gets out of this clean. Do the Democrats, who have bee slathering themselves in the muck of their lies and disingenuousness for four plus years, think that millions in this country will simply forget what we've seen and kneel to them going forward? Do they actually think that running Trump out of the ability to run for office removes the list of what he actually accomplished in his short term and somehow proves that he was wrong and they are correct- even as they open the borders, raise taxes, shut down entire industries, make us pay for energy again, and cozy back up to China?
There will be a bloodbath in 2022. Bank on it. Pelosi's legacy will be the shattering of the Democratic Party. It is about to be blown apart. All figuratively, of course.
It is a wonder that Trump can't seem to get decent representation, and you're right that it's hard not to hold Trump himself responsible. Giuliani was a talented prosecutor and a great mayor, but he's now an old man not up to the task Trump gave him after the election.
And now, Trump's inability to get good representation, partly his fault (probably), but also the fault of the legal profession, the Democrats, and the media, will be used by that same group of people to argue before the public that he can't get good representation because no good lawyer wants to be associated with him.
Trump is a conspicuous victim of poor representation.
Maybe, maybe not.
Maybe Castor is laying the groundwork for his surprise witness, there at the very end.
"I call to the stand, Mr. William Henry Cosby Jr.!!!"
What @Temujin said.
History will not be kind to the Democrats.
There will be a bloodbath in 2022
2022 is when the holdouts will discover the election was stolen in 2020.
History will not be kind to the Democrats.
They control the narrative. They're gonna rewrite it.
"How does anyone have that capacity to "feel sorry" for Trump."
Some of us are pity-oriented. I'm always feeling sorry for everyone. It doesn't keep me from seeing that some have done better than others and that wrongs have been committed, but I pity even the evil-doers.
Required Bob Dylan lyric. Substitute "Trump" for "immigrant":
I pity the poor immigrant
Who wishes he would’ve stayed home [at Mar-a-Lago]
Who uses all his power to do evil
But in the end is always left so alone
That man whom with his [tiny] fingers cheats
And who lies with ev’ry breath
Who passionately hates his life
And likewise, fears his death...
D.D. Driver said...How does anyone have that capacity to "feel sorry" for Trump. How about personal responsibility? He definitely made his bed on this one.
By taking on the entrenched powers, to try to clean up Washington and return good governance to the people? You're right, he did make that bed. Which is why we are rooting for him.
People like you, who style yourself "liberal" even as you reject every liberal value, need to ask yourself how it happened that you have thrown in your lot with the military-industrial-Wall Street complex that you pretend to so hate.
With 44 votes affirming a lack of jurisdiction acquittal is a forgone conclusion. The rest of the proceedings are partisan political propaganda. And I agree, Democrats will not benefit from this, nor will those Republicans that vote to convict.
Mark said...What is happening around the country to Trump supporters, Wendy?
Are you talking about people whose employers decide they don't want to employ lawbreakers who outed themselves on social media?
Yes, we are talking about people who are demonized and rendered untouchable for their politics. By people like you who think it's ok to punish disagreement by defining disagreement as "lawbreaking." You might want to think a bit on where that leads.
tim, you might want to ask where constantly crying wolf leads.
After months of bullshit claims about the election, you fail to realize you are claiming morality after completely discrediting your position.
Own the shit you shoveled all November.
By taking on the entrenched powers, to try to clean up Washington and return good governance to the people?
Ugh. No. He hired his crappy legal team. That's how he made his bed. He chased away good lawyers by being an epic prick and this is what he is left with. Boo hoo.
There will be a bloodbath in 2022. Bank on it.
People keep saying this or some variant of it, but what makes them think that mail in voting and its attendant manipulation won’t become SOP in all future elections? There may be a bloodbath but it’s likely to be Republican blood.
How is it -- why is it -- that anybody around Trump is still talking to the Times?
I don't read the NYT but CNN and MSNBC are so biased and one-sided that they're hard to watch. I don't know what was up with Castor, but everyone interested in this is so much in their own self-contained bubble of media that tell they what they already want to hear that communication from one bubble to another is getting to be impossible.
People like you, who style yourself "liberal" even as you reject every liberal value, need to ask yourself how it happened that you have thrown in your lot with the military-industrial-Wall Street complex that you pretend to so hate.
LOL. I think you might be getting me confused with someone else.
And also, sir, this is a Wendy's.
Mr. Trump “was an eight,” one person familiar with his reaction said.
I bet that Orange Man was at least an 8.3 since he's so Bad.
So much losing.
Mark said...tim, you might want to ask where constantly crying wolf leads.
After months of bullshit claims about the election, you fail to realize you are claiming morality after completely discrediting your position.
This is a style of argument known as "not even wrong."
Before we can advance this discussion, you need to define your terms--what are the "bullshit claims" and what is the "morality" claim? How do they relate to each other? Right now, you're just doing that liberal thing of throwing out extreme but meaningless terms so you can continue to dance and weave no matter what response you get. Smoke and mirrors. It's all you have. It's all you ever have.
D.D. Driver said...LOL. I think you might be getting me confused with someone else.
And also, sir, this is a Wendy's.
If I were, you would have actually said something so the discussion could advance.
“they talked about many things, but they didn’t talk about the issue at hand” - Bill Cassidy
I didn’t listen to most of it, perhaps only the last 20 min of Trump’s lawyer, and I heard him talk about the un-Constitutional issue all through that time. Not sure what was discussed earlier or what Cassidy heard, or didn’t hear.
Mrs. X said...
what makes them think that mail in voting.. won’t become SOP in all future elections?
Why Shouldn't it? Don't We WANT, to Make ALL VOTES COUNT?
Why Should a mail in ballot need a signature, Don't We WANT, to Make ALL VOTES COUNT?
Why Should a mail in ballot need an address, Don't We WANT, to Make ALL VOTES COUNT?
Why Should a mail in ballot come from a citizen, Don't We WANT, to Make ALL VOTES COUNT?
Why Should a mail in ballot come from an actual person, Don't We WANT, to Make ALL VOTES COUNT?
Lets MAKE ALL VOTES COUNT!!!
Ultimately, the quality of Trump's defense DOES NOT MATTER. This is not a legal trial, this is an onanistic political circle jerk by the Democrats. The result is a foregone conclusion: There is no way in hell that the Democrats get the 67 votes in the Senate to convict. I hope the Democrats have lots of lube so they don't chafe themselves.
Also I never trust the validity of a Haberman article. She’s always talking about Trumps state of mind but it comes across as projection or how she would feel if in that position. She is a veritable “mean girl”, imho.
“they talked about many things, but they didn’t talk about the issue at hand” - Bill Cassidy
So it is unconstitutional only if the lawyer makes a compelling argument? How did he vote the other way the first time, since he does not say that the House speakers convinced him that he was wrong before and the trial is, in fact, constitutional?
Mark said...
tim, you might want to ask where constantly crying wolf leads.
After months of bullshit claims about the election, you fail to realize you are claiming morality after completely discrediting your position.
Own the shit you shoveled all November.
2/10/21, 6:53 AM
We will, when YOU own the shit that has been going on since Obama was President. All the deaths of the Police at the hands of BLM and Antifa, because of the rhetoric that STARTED with him and his administration.
I agree that Trump would make a terrible client.
The "judge" in the current case has already declared he would vote for his guilt. Does being a terrible client mean that you don't get an impartial "judge"?
One of the first appeals to the election results was filed by two lawyers. Within hours, their pictures and life stories were all over the internet. Within another day their law firm had withdrawn. Does being a terrible client mean its Ok the lawyers who will take your case deserve to be threatened for taking your case?
Trumps does deserve some of the responsibility for not getting the representation he wants. But he is not alone in being responsible.
Sydney Powell had a previously scheduled engagement?
Not to mention Obama's spying and the fake Russian Collusion that was spewed from ALL the Media and we now know were a bunch of lies perpetrated by the Obama administration and his corrupt Intel Agencies.
Whoever Trump uses to advise him on hiring practices, he's still using. Still losing.
Trump kisses up to Andrew McCarthy, McCarthy turns around and solidifies a Trump hater in the GOP leadership while a Trump supporter is stripped of her committees.
Not sure if it was Lindsey Graham (reported) or Jared Kushner that picked this defense team, but it's clear they are working for the Senate GOP, not Trump.
That's on Trump.
Nixon made his bed and I still felt a little sorry seeing him go. If we get all this talk about the august halls of Congress being defiled, etc. etc. consider that the flip side of the coin is the Shakespearean drama of high and mighty leaders being laid low. One can be as emotional as the other.
But I don't really buy the "Trump definitely made his bed on this one" line. He certainly didn't intend the half-assed "insurrection" that he's accused of inciting. He was in a situation - losing an election in very questionable circumstances - where he had limited or few or no options or opportunities for redressment and limited or few or no skills for dealing with the situation.
"You made your bed and you can lie in it" implies a much simpler and more straightforward situation than what we've seen in the last few months: simple cause and effect, a clear-cut line from individual acts to their results, without all the other complicated moving parts that make things turn out as they do. The phrase doesn't apply to Trump as clearly as it did to Nixon (or Clinton for that matter).
I'd doubt Trump is enraged. Just noticing that you can't count on anybody who might be intimidated by political correctness.
You can lie in your bed and eat it too.
I do think the expense of legal representation is one of the unspoken inequities in this world. I don't know what I'd do if someone threatened to sue me over something, or if I were charged with a crime.
I have only watched a little bit of the impeachment. I think what it was is that, honestly, the Democrat's attack is... not that strong. But, after watching what I saw, I felt like, "yeah, it doesn't matter what anyone else says, does it?"
Maybe the lawyer felt the same way? All I know is that the whole thing seems like a waste of time. I read the House Managers brief; it was unconvincing and flawed. I doubt their argument live was any better (and it wasn't from what I saw.)
And also, sir, this is a Wendy's
More proof that the left can't meme.
Also: It isn't like the Democrats in Congress follows rules -- see Pelosi not having to pay the fine she demanded others paid for. It was pointless to be there for this show trial.
"You can lie in your bed and eat it too."
Just don't remove and eat the tag. "Under Penalty of Law"
tim, keep ignoring the topic Ann posted and try to make this about me.
There is a long list of lawyers who already have a Trump association, where your claims that lawyers will be harassed are moot.
Are you saying this is the best he could get from them? If so, he must have a long history of choosing terrible lawyers.
The Senate decided what they were doing was “constitutional”. I thought interpreting that was up to the Supreme Court. But let’s not address the obvious legal bullshit on a law blog.
Not a lawyer but my defense would be that this is the latest step in a coup that started with Hillary’s made up Russian collusion, continued through the first impeachment followed by an election rigged by a secret cabal.
On a scale of one to 10
Trump goes up to 11.
Why have a best defense in a show trail. Why not contribute to the farce. Trump wins by losing. Jiu Jitsu.
"Are you saying this is the best he could get from them? If so, he must have a long history of choosing terrible lawyers."
-- Honestly, I'm kind of surprised. Giuliani, Powell, and Wood all, before dealing with the election, had major wins where they embarrassed and completely destroyed the opposition. I've never seen so many extremely competent, capable people suddenly fall apart at once.
And yet, at the same time, of the cases that actually got decided on the merits, Trump... is doing rather well. So, it's up in the air as to what the heck happened.
It has been amazing to read the Althouse blog since the election fraud began. Stared in Wisconsin really with the crap COVID scare on last April’s Supreme Court race that lead to the massive increase in mail in voting. It allowed election commissions to ignore and break laws.
Then we got the ballot harvesting in the Madison parks.
And then for blog protection, refusal to entertain any of the Legislature testimony on the election fraud.
But now we get back to the “legal” analysis of this impeachment bullshit.
My best analysis of Trumps original legal team walking out on him, is most lawyers are unethical pussies. Just look at our Congress.
It's a grisly spectacle, but Trump has responsibility for it.
To a point. He is responsible for the representation he has in the kangaroo court. He should not NEED any representation as he is a citizen being impeached as though he were a holder of public office. How is this legitimate?
So is the new normal "Congress can impeach a ham sandwich"?
Any lawyer or law firm willing to represent Trump was threatened with destruction- by the lawyers and law firm egging this shit on and by the political left now seemingly permanently in charge. There is no bar as a check on integrity or to respect the representation of the politcally toxic. It is the swamp exterminating a threat.
All those women they hung at the Salem Witch Trials really had shitty legal representation.
It was their own fault. They just didn’t know how to hire good people.
Just don't remove and eat the tag. "Under Penalty of Law"
I figured that's how they'll get the rest of us...
Trump wants incompetent representation because it makes his mouth breathing followers feel sorry for him for being the biggest victim the world has ever seen. The report that he is at an 8/10 on the anger scale is part of the act. Reality TV always has a script to trigger deep emotional bonding.
Mission accomplished.
"Trump wants incompetent representation because it makes his mouth breathing followers feel sorry for him for being the biggest victim the world has ever seen."
-- Except the biggest three disappointments: Powell, Giuliani, and Wood all scored major victories in nearly every case they tried before Trump. And even then, when it comes to cases tried on the merits, his legal team is ahead on points when it comes to the election (just too late to matter.) So... unfortunately, your read of the situation doesn't mesh with the facts.
The Senate decided what they were doing was “constitutional”. I thought interpreting that was up to the Supreme Court.
*Everybody* is supposed to decide based on that. For instance, Presidents have vetoed bills they thought were unconstitutional. If someone kicks it into the court system, so be it, but the other two branches are supposed to think and avoid doing unconstitutional things beforehand.
Mark said...What is happening around the country to Trump supporters, Wendy?
Are you talking about people whose employers decide they don't want to employ lawbreakers who outed themselves on social media?
Linda Kerns, who was representing the Trump team in the Pennsylvania lawsuit, ceased representing Trump after (she said in a court filing) that an attorney with Kirkland & Ellis in Washington left her a one-minute voice mail regarding her representation that “falls afoul of standards of professional conduct.” (Kirkland Ellis has admitted in a court filing that this did occur, but claims the lawyer who made the harassing call was acting unilaterally.) Kerns also said that she “has been subjected to continuous harassment in the form of abusive e-mails, phone calls, physical and economic threats and even accusations of treason -- all for representing the President of the United States’ campaign in this litigation.”
Another firm on the case, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP, gave notice last week that it’s withdrawing from the matter. A Trump spokesman blamed that decision on harassment by “leftist mobs,” after the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump group led by conservatives, targeted lawyers working for the campaign. All of the above according to Bloomberg.
"Some Trump critics including Republicans affiliated with the Lincoln Project have indicated they planned to pressure the commercial clients of law firms representing the campaign to drop the firms if they continued with the court fight on behalf of the president." (Politico, Nov. 13, 2020)
On Tuesday, The Lincoln Project, a group of anti-Trump Republicans, said it will spend $500,000 on ads targeting Jones Day and a smaller law firm working for Trump, following a Monday New York Times report citing dissent among Jones Day’s senior attorneys over its election work for Republicans. In tweets online, the group, co-founded by conservative lawyer George Conway, who is the husband of former Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway, has encouraged lawyers and clients to abandon Jones Day. Online critics of Jones Day also tweeted at its clients, including Verizon VZ.N and General Motors GM.N, urging them to drop the law firm. One law firm recruiter, who asked not to be named for fear of exposing the identities of clients, said three Jones Day attorneys were, as of Wednesday, looking to leave because their clients do not want to be associated with the firm. (Reuters, Nov. 12, 2020).
Representative Bill Pascrell, a Democrat, on Friday called for Giuliani and other members of the legal team to be stripped of their law licenses for bringing “frivolous” lawsuits and allegedly attempting to help Republican Trump steal the Nov. 3 vote from President-elect Joe Biden. (Reuters, Nov. 25, 2020).
One of President Trump’s campaign lawyers in Pennsylvania was placed under official protection following threats against her, according to court papers filed Wednesday evening.
Philadelphia lawyer Linda Kerns “has been the subject of threats of harm, to the point at which the involvement of police and US Marshals has been necessary to provide for her safety,” the filing says. Kerns also said in court papers Monday that she’d “been subjected to continuous harassment in the form of abusive emails, phone calls, physical and economic threats, and even accusations of treason — all for representing the President of the United States’ campaign in this litigation.” Later Monday, Kerns sought permission to quit the case, in which Trump’s campaign is challenging his projected loss to Joe Biden in the crucial Keystone State. (NY Post, Nov. 18, 2020).
Matt: "major victories"??? You owe me a keyboard.
"(Kirkland Ellis has admitted in a court filing that this did occur, but claims the lawyer who made the harassing call was acting unilaterally.)"
-- Henry II claimed the same about some knights.
"Matt: "major victories"??? You owe me a keyboard."
-- Wood defeated several major media companies legal teams for Sandman; Powell exposed the corruption involved in trying Flynn. Giuliani *destroyed the mob.* If you want to pretend those were not major victories, go ahead. But all three defeated legal teams that were better bankrolled, more powerful, and either actually dangerous or simply politically dangerous to go after.
Why they all fell apart after signing on against Trump, we'll probably never know.
Against, alongside. At this point, what difference does it make?
Poor pitiful Trump and his poor pitiful loyalists. All the tears and threats and projections of blood baths, why should anyone feel sorry for you people? No accountability= no pity. Do you people really have no internal monitors, or intuition that you’ve been poorly used? Where is discernment? Where is that spark of reality? Indeed...wake up. You’ve been victims alright, victims of a cult.
Trump's team should have reserved their opening statement.
I'm ignoring the whole thing, it's a political show trial for propaganda purposes with a forgone conclusion. What I find more interesting is the continuing presence of the NG in DC, the winnowing of the armed forces, the corrupt and loony picks for Biden's cabinet, and the ongoing censorship of the social media. There are also indications that communications, vpn in particular, are being surveilled. These things are not being tracked by the press but I think they are all more significant than the "impeachment". There is a turn to tyranny; my hopes are vested in federalism.
“Except the biggest three disappointments: Powell, Giuliani, and Wood all scored major victories in nearly every case they tried before Trump.”
This is delusional.
I know a lawyer is always going to lawyer. But.
This has nothing to do with the law or the constitution.
This is a turf war, power negotiation. Trump is the worse politician is history. (thats narrative setting) except he has the power to motivate 80 million voters. What will be his next political goal? Regardless of what it is, the worst politician ever, terrifies Democrats and Republicans alike. Why? Because he is exposing the uni party.
McConnell is happier not being the Senate Minority leader. Wrangling votes is his power. It is easier and generates lots more income selling the votes of 2-3 senators to pass Dem majority legislation, than having to buy a dozen votes to pass Republican legislation.
The name of the rally was "Stop the Steal".
Don't tell me Trump's lawyers testifying the election was legit and the voters chose Biden over Trump wasn't sabotage, and Trump wasn't enraged by it.
His team swallowed every lie presented by the democrats, focusing instead on the process calling it "beneath the Senate". Defending the Senate, not Trump.
Maybe today they will apologize to Pelosi and Schumer for having to take up their time.
Thank You tommyesq @ 7:51am!! And there are more, but Mark is too lazy to look them up himself, relying on CNN instead to tell him how to think.
It's anticlimatic.
Really Inga? You don't think Powell, Wood, and Giuliani were well known for getting major victories before signing on with Trump? You think defeating the entrenched state and exposing corruption, defeating the army of lawyers available to media companies, and defeating the *mob* count as major victories?
Are you sure you're not the one delusional?
Matt: none of those examples were defending Trump. We live in a what have you done today world. Testing on laurels is for losers.
Trump STILL cannot get loyal retainers. The man has no sense of people.
Release the Quacken!
---Also I never trust the validity of a Haberman article. She’s always talking about Trumps state of mind but it comes across as projection or how she would feel if in that position. She is a veritable “mean girl”, imho. [Breezy]
"Haberman was born on October 30, 1973, in New York City, the daughter of Clyde Haberman, who became a longtime journalist for The New York Times, and Nancy Haberman (née Spies), a media communications executive at Rubenstein Associates."
By a veteran NYTer out of a PR dam. Talk about inbreeding. There are many institutions and organizations in our society in dire need of new blood and fresh thinking.
"Trump STILL cannot get loyal retainers. The man has no sense of people."
-- It's a problem in a lot of Republican administrations and campaigns it seems. Honestly, the next Republican president probably will follow Biden's lead and purge the government of possible dissenters like Biden has been doing. Firing apolitical appointees before their terms up? Precedent is set, baby. When you can do that, you can do almost anything.
Of course, I don't REALLY think a Republican president will do that (nor, realistically, should they.) But if they did, I couldn't really complain either.
Ann Althouse said...
Required Bob Dylan lyric. Substitute "Trump" for "immigrant":
Keep going (only this time substitute "elitist" for "immigrant")
I pity the poor elitist
With credentials spent in vain
Whose heaven is utopia
Who fears the acid rain
Who votes but remains terrified
Whose lawyers slickly plead
Who falls in love with wealth and power
And turns his back on me [freedom, self-reliance, God, family, country...]
@Matt Sablan. Giuliani has been washed up for a long long time. He served Trump poorly. Powell is a loon, she served Trump poorly. Wood is an extremist who called for martial law, he served Trump poorly.
" people familiar with his reaction said. "
The leak is real. The news is fake.
I think it was Scalia that observed 'the supreme court is not the last court because it is always right, it is always right because it is the last court.
On the constitutionality of holding a trial for a person that is not President, The Senate is right, because there is no higher authority to hear an appeal. No person has standing, and the court is not going to step in the middle of a political battle (that their party is winning)
The question of President Trump running for office again is interesting. The states would have to be prohibited from allowing a person on the ballot. The Senate lacks power to dictate to States how to approve candidates. And the State Constitutions have no provisions about qualifications to appear on the ballot concerning convictions of impeachment.
Should have hired me.
We have has a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico over the last year. We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed. While we should have a larger conversation in the near future about a broader strategy for reengaging the beat press that covers HRC, for this we think we can achieve our objective and do the most shaping by going to Maggie.
I always get my legal analysis for Inga
"washed up", "served poorly", "is a loon", "extremist, calling for martial law"
This is some great legal scholarship. I especially note, the 'martial law' smear, considering Democrats have 10,000 armed soldiers walking the Street of DC, for no particular reason. As always the Dems are always accusing other of threatening actions the Dems are already doing.
“This is some great legal scholarship.”
My comments regarding Trumps legal teams are not based on any assertion of legal scholarship. It’s based on common sense and rationality which seems to be lacking in Trump and his loyal followers.
Gusty Winds said...
The Senate decided what they were doing was “constitutional”. I thought interpreting that was up to the Supreme Court. But let’s not address the obvious legal bullshit on a law blog.
This is obviously not a trial in any sense of the word. So let's stop using that word.
It fits in nicely with the Kavanaugh Inquisition as a fake scripted "reality show". The purpose is to entertain the leftists and the idiots and to demoralize those who have a quaint notion of fairness and justice.
Her commments in hillarys emails is why i dubbed the whole peanut gallery rizzotto press.
It's a grisly spectacle, but Trump has responsibility for it.
She was asking for it! Wearing that dress and walking that way.......
Notice that the media are showing clips of the Capitol riot over and over again, but aren't showing anything of Trump's allegedly inciteful* speech. They know what builds an emotional case against Trump and what tears down a rational, legal case against him.
Trump has got to be hard to work for, but at this point doxing cancel culture limits his ability to get quality people to work for him. In general, though, the idea of the complete outsider cleaning out "the swamp" may be attractive to many people, but a president needs to have a trusted, competent team, and that means drawing on people who are part of that swamp. A head of government also needs to understand the little workings of politics and they way Washington works. Trump was able to get some major things done without such a trusted team and without real insider knowledge of Washington's ways, but he wasn't able to save himself because he didn't understand all the angles.
Caution, though: having a team of experienced insiders doesn't mean that "the adults are back." It may just mean that the children who are running are a little older - or not even a little older, just deeper in the swamp and more comfortable there.
____
*Yes, it's a word, but one best not spoken.
“Notice that the media are showing clips of the Capitol riot over and over again, but aren't showing anything of Trump's allegedly inciteful* speech. They know what builds an emotional case against Trump and what tears down a rational, legal case against him.”
Then why aren’t Trump’s lawyers showing Trumps Jan. 6th speech? Prove that his words didn’t incite violence.
Even the House Managers Brief acknowledges Trump told people to go home and be peaceful. They just say it wasn't enough, and they think he should have said it sooner. It is the weakest case I have seen put forward in a long time.
DJT thought bubble: "I'm really annoyed about something, but I don't want to make a public announcement, because that's not really my thing. I need to leak it to a friendly journalist. How about Maggie Haberman of the NYT? That seems like the perfect choice."
Clyde @7:07am spot on.
And I pity the fool... I PITY HIM!
---We have has a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico over the last year. We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed.
Yet our hostess continues to cite the work of such discredited practitioners. Why continue to feature their prejudice?
"I don't know if I want to feel sorry for Trump for his lack of representation, when there are so many people struggling with insufficient legal assistance."
I don't often have this reaction to an Althouse post, but --WTF?
---"I need to leak it to a friendly journalist. How about Maggie Haberman of the NYT? That seems like the perfect choice."
Leaks to unfriendly journalists often work better. But who knows who said anything to Haberman, or why? Imagine running a formerly major-league "newspaper of record" and keeping her on one of the biggest beats even after it is revealed that she's a gofer for the DNC.
Her byline should have a disclaimer with it every time it appears.
Inga said...Prove that his words didn’t incite violence.
The new legal standard from the Resident Idiot.
I would ask you to prove that you are not a fucking fascist idiot, but your posts show that you are.
This is the Democrat party base, folks. They will make you prove that you are a loyal and obedient citizen or else.
Be afraid of stupid self righteous people. Be very afraid.
Well Trump's lawyers did say one factual thing: "The people are smart enough ..to pick a new administration if they don't like the old one. And they just did." Imagine how Jan.6th would have been if enough honest people around Trump said this and encouraged him to stop lying?
My comments regarding Trumps legal teams are not based on any assertion of legal scholarship.
Yes that is exactly what I said. You are judging the performance of lawyers with zero analysis of there performance in there profession. Actually, you used no performance standard of any sort. In short, no judgement at all, just ad hominem attack...name calling, school yard taunts.
Castor misses.
Pollux scores on the rebound.
(Wikipedia tells me that the famous pair were the product of "heteropaternal superfecundation." Sounds painful.)
Well Trump's lawyers did say one factual thing: "The people are smart enough ..to pick a new administration if they don't like the old one
And the only reason the Dems are pushing an unconstitutional impeachment is some fever dream notion they are going to deprive the people of voting for Trump in 2024
Good to know even trolls understand.
Yet our hostess continues to cite the work of such discredited practitioners. Why continue to feature their prejudice?
Right, like Trump was actually delighted with his lawyer’s train-wreck performance and Haberman is flat-out lying about that in her report.
Admit it: At this point you’re just phoning it in.
Of course, if you have a shitty lawyer and still win it strengthens your argument that it was a very weak case.
---Right, like Trump was actually delighted with his lawyer’s train-wreck performance and Haberman is flat-out lying about that in her report.
Looks like 7.5 watts.
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
"Well Trump's lawyers did say one factual thing: "The people are smart enough ..to pick a new administration if they don't like the old one. And they just did." Imagine how Jan.6th would have been if enough honest people around Trump said this and encouraged him to stop lying? "
I would encourage you to stop lying.
None of this matters. None of it.
I cannot be made to care.
Are you talking about people whose employers decide they don't want to employ lawbreakers who outed themselves on social media?
I hope you get what's coming to you good and hard, Lefty Mark.
Because they will come after you eventually. And you'll deserve every bit of it.
The former Overstock CEO tried to lend a hand to the hapless Trump team and discovered that Rudy Giuliani was amazingly drunk all the time, the group had been infiltrated by spies, those who were not were incompetent or cut off from power. It was, in short, a shit show. Trump is to blame.
https://www.deepcapture.com/2021/01/november-3-december-23-all-the-presidents-teams/
In the end, T-Rump alienates everyone. Including his would-be attorneys. Not only is he responsible for the "grisly spectacle" of being one of the dumbest clients in the world, but the grisly spectacle of what he unleashed upon the Congress January 6th. The trial footage today shows just how grisly that spectacle was. It was nasty and so is he.
---Not only is he responsible for the "grisly spectacle" of being one of the dumbest clients in the world, but the grisly spectacle of what he unleashed upon the Congress January 6th.
You had me almost enthralled there, hasty pudding. But where is the rest of the sentence? What happened to that second grisly spectacle? Inquiring minds want to know. No secrets, now, it's clear you've got the goods!
---The former Overstock CEO tried to lend a hand to the hapless Trump team
... but found that there was nobody competent but him. Um hmm. Thanks for the link.
Take the hit, Donald J. Go for a conviction. Collapse the Republican Party. The Democrat Party has already collapsed. They have nothing left other than deception and Vote Fraud. Republicans have nothing left than betrayal.
Both Dems and Reps have sold America out to China.
The majority of Americans hate these parties.
Donald J. You've carried the cross this far. Can you finish it?
Haberman’s NYT piece on Officer Sicknick has been retracted. Leopard doesn’t change its spots.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा