Yesterday was the second day of the house impeachment managers persecution Trump impeachment trial day three sees Dems conclude arguments (Fox)., more sound and fury, signifying nothing. You can see the whole thing at CTH if you want. They have an emotional argument, not a factual one. Twitchy, House impeachment manager brings up the Charlottesville ‘fine people’ hoax during trial. AllahPundit whines Lead Dem Lawyer To Senate: Would You Bet The Lives Of More Police Officers That Trump Won’t Do This Again? and Tuberville: I Told Trump That Pence Was Under Threat While The Attack Was Happening. At Da Hill, Hillary Clinton moans Trump acquittal 'will be because the jury includes his co-conspirators'. Boy, did we ever dodge a bullet when she lost. Ace, Impeachment managers claiming that "disinformation" is an impeachable offense continue resorting to disinformation in making their case And if you think that's bad -- one of the impeachment managers once applied for a visa to enter a Communist Chinese vagina!
Presidents Trumps lawyer, on the other hand, have decided on a 3-4 hour defense (they were allotted the same two days as the persecution), saying the Democrats presented no facts to dispute. Capt. Ed at Hot Air VIP, Trump’s Team To Wrap Up Defense Case By Tomorrow.
The attorneys for Donald Trump have sixteen hours to rebut House impeachment managers and present the former president’s defense. According to CNN, they might not even use half of that allocation. Their new plan involves wrapping up their presentations tomorrow night, the same day on which they begin, and handing the case off to the Senate jury to decide.
I assume Sundance will link the live feed, if you care to watch. It's not up yet, and since it snowed in DC last night, things might be running a little late. Breitbart, Cruz: Impeachment ‘a Lot of Moralizing, Venting ‘Hatred for Donald Trump’ and Lindsey Graham: The ‘Not Guilty’ Vote Is Growing After Today — ‘This Is a Liberal Democratic Novel Being Presented as Evidence’. From Hugh Hewitt, Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) On The Impeachment Trial. Acquittal. PM, Rep. Jim Jordan SLAMS Democrats for manipulated video of Trump omitting his call for peaceful protest on Jan 6. Becker News, 15 GOP Senators Give Dems Parting Insult at Trump Impeachment Trial, CNN’s Reaction is Priceless. Didn't bother to show up.
Matthew Walter at Da Week notes The most important person in the impeachment trial is missing. It isn't Trump. Justice Roberts; instead the "Judge", Patrick Leahy, is also a prosecutor and jury member.
Why then did Roberts refuse to participate, creating a highly improbable but logically possible scenario in which Trump would be able to void a Senate conviction? It seems to me unlikely that the Chief Justice had some nefarious motive here. Rather than a sly attempt to preclude the possibility of Trump's conviction and disqualification from office, Robert's decision not to participate strikes me as a tacit rebuke of the process itself, an extra-legal ruling of sorts.
Speaking of Donald Trump, it's the question I think should be at the core of the impeachment trial but is not: Did Trump intend that the crowd break into the Capitol and terrorize the members of Congress?
It’s an elementary aspect of parenting, friendship, courtship and marriage. A hallmark of injustice is indifference to intention.Yeah, why are the House Managers indifferent to this distinction?
In the comments, David Begley said, "Ann is correct in focusing on Trump’s intent. Did the House Managers even talk about intent?"
I was not willing to sit through the hours and hours of presentation of other things that I already knew. I wanted them to focus on the decisive question: Trump's responsibility. Some people have a low standard and think that if Trump stirred up the crowd and made them feel energized to do what they independently decided to do, he's responsible enough. But they're choosing, I think, to offer nothing to those of us who think Trump needs to have specifically intended the breaking into the Capitol. Can anyone point me to the part of the trial where my concern is addressed? I'm not willing to stare at a smokescreen.The post title is a play on an old Obama quote that I've always found highly amusing, but I'm quite serious in asking my question. Whether or not I am part of that You're-responsible-enough-Donald crowd, I want to be pointed to the part of the trial that addresses the question: Did Trump intend that the crowd break into the Capitol and terrorize the members of Congress?
Karen Townsend at Hot Air, Senator Cassidy’s Hometown GOP Party Censures Him Over Impeachment Vote. As they say, votes have consequences. Reuters, Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump third party. I suppose we can manage without them.
'Bonchie' at Red State, Tucker Carlson Lays out Some Uncomfortable Questions About the Capitol Riot Tweet warning:
Tucker Carlson's Monologue On The Unanswered Questions Concerning January 6th Including The Tragic Deaths Of Ashli Babbitt & Officer Brian Sicknick— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) February 11, 2021
Tucker Discusses The Recent Revolver News Piece Analyzing Some Of These Questions pic.twitter.com/KhYJeaswqf
Even AllahPundit wonders How Did Officer Sicknick Die? It looks like da feds are getting ready to blame "bear spray" and not a fire extinguisher attack. John Sexton at Hot Air wonders Does Biden Owe The Capitol Police An Apology for calling them racist? Being a Democrat means you never have to apologize. Assuming facts not in evidence, John Podhoretz at Commentary asserts Trump’s Mob Would Have Killed Them If It Had the Chance. Kurt Schlichter tells us (the MSM) to Stop Calling It an 'Insurrection', while Don Surber writes Democrats improve upon Reichstag fire. Godwin's Law violation? Maybe, but the comparison is apt.
Flashback: @RepRaskin defends violent domestic insurrectionists … in Portland— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 11, 2021
Raskin claims the protests were “non-violent” and the activists adhered to social distancing, masking pic.twitter.com/Uxf2sHI94L
If you really were a person who reads and understands literature, you would know that — in the world of novels — a character who corrects other people curtly in that pedantic "No, that’s Faulkner" manner is an icky prig. I've read a lot of novels, and characters who talk like that are up to no good. That snootiness, even when there's no mistake, marks a character toward whom you know instinctively you are not supposed to feel sympathetic. And let me just add that when the novelist makes a character utter words like "it says volumes about his lack of soul," the competent reader knows immediately that it is the speaker of those words who lacks soul.
Weirdness in Georgia, Georgia Senator Warnock under investigation for voter registration misconduct. The weird part is it's actually being investigated. And from Da Mail, GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene 'cheated on husband with men at gym'. At least they weren't Chinese spies, as far as we can tell. And Da Beast, Even for the Trumpist Conspiracy-Peddler Sidney Powell, This Was ‘Weird as Shit’ Dodging the Dominion voting subpoena (It was North Carolina, but close enough).
Mashable, Twitter confirms Trump's ban is permanent, even if he runs again in 2024 Twitter delenda est.