Tag: Trials

The Trial Of The Century

The House has impeached the president and now the drama moves to the Senate for the trial…….

The drama has been set into motion….the jurors have been sworn in and signed the oath….

The Senate got the formalities of President Trump’s impeachment trial started Thursday, though the real work of the trial is not expected to start until next week. At noon, House impeachment managers read the two articles of impeachment against Trump, formally beginning the third such trial in US history. Afterward, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn in to preside over the trial, and he in turn swore in the senators as jurors. (Only 99, however: Republican James Inhofe was absent because of a family medical issue.) All this as related developments—including a government watchdog assessment critical of Trump’s withholding of Ukraine aid and allegations by a Rudy Giuliani associate—continue to emerge. Coverage:

  • The trial: Expect the Senate be in session six days a week once things get rolling. There’s no timetable on how long it will last, notes Rolling Stone, though White House adviser Kellyanne Conway predicted two weeks during an appearance on Fox News Thursday. “These two articles are very weak,” she said, per the Washington Post. “We don’t see the need to have a lengthy, protracted trial.”
  • McSally’s slam: GOP Sen. Martha McSally tweeted a video of herself shutting down CNN reporter Manu Raju when he asked her before the trial began whether the Senate should consider new evidence. “You’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you,” McSally said. “You’re not going to comment?” Raju asked. “You’re a liberal hack,” McSally responded. The senator is taking flak from those defending a journalist’s right to ask what seemed to be a straightforward question, notes Mediaite, which has examples.
  • That GOA report: Will the watchdog’s assessment that it was illegal to withhold Ukraine aid be consequential? Apparently not. “I think they misunderstand the law,” said Rand Paul, in comments similar to other skeptical GOP senators. “I think presidents withhold money all the time, move money around,” he said, per Politico. “I think there’s a great deal of latitude to what presidents do. So I think they’ve misinterpreted the law.”
  • The judge: The AP predicts that Roberts will play a modest role in the proceedings. He is expected to follow the model of William Rehnquist, who drew little attention when he presided over the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton. One legal distinction: Roberts has little experience running a trial, compared to the appellate proceedings at the Supreme Court.
  • The wildcard: Will there be witnesses? The Hill sees this as perhaps the biggest question yet to be answered, and it won’t be answered until after opening arguments by both sides. Democrats who want to hear from top White House officials need four Republicans to force the issue, though Republicans such as Rand Paul are pushing back. For the record, the Hill’s preview also notes that it’s all but guaranteed the trial will end in Trump’s acquittal.
  • Those pens: In remarks on the Senate floor Thursday, Mitch McConnell faulted Nancy Pelosi for handing out commemorative pens after signing off on the impeachment articles Wednesday. “The speaker of the House apparently saw nothing strange about celebrating the third presidential impeachment in American history with souvenirs and posted photographs,” he said, calling it evidence of a partisanship. “That pretty well sums it up. That’s what the process has been thus far. But it’s not what this process will be going forward.”

Not to worry the GOP Senators have already decided the outcome so this should be a fairly short operation.

I will continue to update my readers during the impeachment process.

My personal observation is that this will be a political circus, a theater of the absurd, this outcome has been preordained by GOP Senators…so this will most likely be a waste of time and energy.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

That Senate Impeachment Trial

Paper #3

And The Saga Persists!

I have tried to keep my reader informed…it matters not whether you believe Trump is guilty or not….the important thing is the adherence to the Constitution.

I realize that it has been 2+  weeks since my two papers on the subject of impeachment and since there has been so much time under the bridge I feel I need to refresh my readers knowledge of those 2 papers…….never let it be said that I would leave you hanging…..

https://lobotero.com/2019/12/19/the-house-on-impeachment/

https://lobotero.com/2019/12/20/impeached-now-what/

To begin in case you spend your time under a rock or on FOX News……

The president of the United States has been impeached by the US House of Representatives and now it moves to the Senate for the trial…..

Keep in mind there will be a trial and like all trials there is an oath that the Senators must take before the “Trial” begins…..

“I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that in all things pertaining to the trial of the impeachment of __________________, now pending, that I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.”

Will this oath mean anything these days in the hyper-partisanship?  I think it will mean NOTHING!

The media has done little to clarify what a “trial” is all about…instead they throw a wealth of opinion from a wealth of lawyers on what all this means.

That leads the Old Professor to try and help where he can.

If the “Trial” is to be fair then it needs to adhere to some principles…..first the process……

Article I of the Constitution grants the House the sole power of impeachment, and if the House does impeach, the Senate the “sole power to try all impeachments.” It also provides that the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court will preside if the trial involves a president. The Constitution authorizes the Senate to “determine the rules of its proceedings,” including additional rules governing an impeachment trial by the Senate. The Senate has established and may modify its own rules supplementing these constitutional requirements.

Now we go to the Senate and there are some principles that must be observed…….

Four principles for conducting a full, transparent, and fair impeachment trial:

  1. Trial procedures should be established before the trial commences. A trial can only be fair if the rules are agreed to in advance. For that reason, any supplemental rules or modifications to the existing rules should be agreed to before the trial commences.
  2. The Senate should hear the full case before voting on the President’s removal. The Senate must allow members of the House to present the case for the President’s removal and the President should be afforded an opportunity to respond. Both should occur before a vote to dispose of or approve an article of impeachment.
  3. The trial should be open to the public. An impeachment trial of a president is a matter of exceptional importance to the American people. They should be able to understand the case for the President’s removal and the President’s defense. The doors to the Senate chamber should be open and the American people permitted to witness the proceedings to the extent possible. Transparency should only be sacrificed to advance compelling interests such as the sanctity of Senate deliberations, the need to protect legitimately classified information, or the recognition of a whistleblower’s right to anonymity.
  4. Each Senator should take seriously his or her oath to “do impartial justice” and to “support and defend the Constitution.” The question is not whether to support the President. The question is whether the President has committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors within the meaning of the Constitution.

(Public Citizen)

The problem with this Trial is that I already see where two of the principles have been violated…..and that would mean that this will NOT be a FAIR trial.

There is a process for a fair and transparent trial…and so far Mitch has done neither….but do not take my word for it…..

How a Fair, Transparent Impeachment Trial Should Proceed

My problem is that too many Americans are allowing partisan stupidity to take hold and are turning this process into a circus of lies and moronic babble.

This country is better than this sideshow…at least I still believe we are….but that belief is getting weaker by the day.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Impeached–Now What?

Paper #2

Yes Irene the president has been impeached by the House of Representatives….instead of whining about the outcome of the House vote why not look forward to the trial in the US Senate, where the president will most likely be acquitted (acquittal does not mean not guilty).

The Impeachment process in the House is done….the Senate now awaits the articles so they can set up a date for them trial to begin.

So what now has been asked…..

– The Democratic-controlled House voted almost entirely along party lines Wednesday night to make Donald Trump the first Republican president in US history to be impeached—and analysts don’t expect things to get any less partisan in the weeks to come. Trump will go on trial in the Senate next year, but the timing is now unclear: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said after Wednesday’s vote that Democrats are considering holding off on sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate because they are concerned that the trial will not be a fair one. More:

  • The next steps. Before the process can move to the Senate, the House needs to appoint impeachment managers to present the case. Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff and Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler are seen as likely candidates. Rep. Justin Amash, an independent who left the Republican Party and voted for impeachment, may also be included to “confer some bipartisan credibility on the Democrats’ case,” the Guardian reports.
  • Acquittal expected. With Republicans holding 53 of the 100 seats in the Senate and a two-thirds supermajority required to remove Trump from office, an acquittal is widely expected—a conviction would require 20 Republican senators to switch sides. But the process is likely to “further aggravate the political and cultural fault lines in the country” that Trump’s presidency “has brought into dramatic relief,” the New York Times reports.
  • Support for a delay. Democratic Rep. Earl Blumenauer says he has taken the idea of a delay to every member of House leadership and there has been a lot of interest, including from Pelosi, Politico reports. “As long as we have the articles of impeachment under our control, we have an opportunity to prevent a travesty,” he says.
  • Trial negotiations. In a look at how a Senate trial would work, the Washington Post notes that a majority of senators will have to agree on rules for a trial, which are not set out in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants a speedy trial with no witnesses called, though he may reach a compromise with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to avoid a public battle. After rules are agreed upon and a trial begins, senators, including those currently on the campaign trail, will work six days a week.
  • Trump’s legacy. Trump has downplayed the importance of impeachment, arguing that his opponents are the ones who look bad, but historians say the stain on his legacy will be permanent, the AP reports. “It’ll be impossible to look back at this presidency and not discuss impeachment. It is permanently tied to his record,” says Princeton University presidential historian Julian Zelizer. “Ukraine will be his Watergate. Ukraine will be his Lewinsky.” Rice University presidential historian Douglas Brinkley agrees that impeachment is a “medallion of shame,” but notes that the impeachment will “look smaller” if Trump wins the election this year and becomes the first impeached president to be re-elected.

The talking point after the vote was that the House should withhold the articles from the Senate until the Spring of 2020…..considering the worthlessness of Mitch then I agree with this idea….even some conservs are feeling this would be a good idea as well and worth considering…..

It is beginning to dawn on Democrats that the moment they send articles of impeachment for Donald Trump to the Senate, they will have lost all of their leverage.

So they shouldn’t do it.

At least not yet, especially in light of the recent comments by Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham.

McConnell has said that he intends to work in “total coordination” with the White House and that “I’m going to take my cues from the president’s lawyers.” He adds: “There’s no chance the president will be removed from office.”

Graham is, if you can believe it, even less subtle. “I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind,” he said over the weekend at Doha Forum in Qatar. “I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here . . . I will do everything I can to make it die quickly.”

Impeach and Withhold

I think that the Dems will fair better if they delay and give them time to make the rounds and make their case for the trial…it will give them time to frame the conversation and not let the president and his sycophants do it for them.

Then there is the chance that a debate about censure will come out of the flames of the impeachment……

Censure?

And the Old Professor will explain that in the next in the series here on IST.

The next post in this series will be coming in January 2020….when the Congress returns to DC to go back to work(?)……so the trial will get lots of lip service…..just something the media demands that is why they ask the same questions over and over and expect a different answer……now that is sanity!

Two weeks of total bullsh*t

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Make Those Villains Pay

The US and its allies have made the villains of our wars pay for their treachery.  First it was the Nazis at Nuremberg and later it was Saddam  of Iraq.  The Allies thought that someone would have to pay for the atrocities that was committed by the Nazis and since Hitler had avoided trial by eating a bullet….someone had to be the example.

After the Allies got the Nazis to surrender they set about rounding up and arresting Nazis so they could be put on trial (except for the Nazis that got a free rode with Operation Paper Clip).

For the Germans it was the Nuremberg trials (1945-1949)…….

No trial provides a better basis for understanding the nature and causes of evil than do the Nuremberg trials from 1945 to 1949.  Those who come to the trials expecting to find sadistic monsters are generally disappointed.  What is shocking about Nuremberg is  the ordinariness of the defendants: men who may be good fathers, kind to animals, even unassuming–yet who committed unspeakable crimes.  Years later, reporting on the trial of Adolf Eichmann, Hannah Arendt wrote of “the banality of evil.”  Like Eichmann, most Nuremberg defendants never aspired to be villains.  Rather, they over-identified with an ideological cause and suffered from a lack of imagination or empathy: they couldn’t fully appreciate the human consequences of their career-motivated decisions.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/nurembergACCOUNT.html

If that is too much to read…then watch this……

These were show trials and to  pretend they were anything other than that is disingenuous….why do I say such a thing?

Easy the judges were from the Allied countries so to say that it was a “fair” trial is laughable.  (do not get me wrong….these d/bags deserve to be punished for their crimes against humanity)

All I am saying is if the Allies truly wanted this to have an air of legitimacy then the judges should have come from the neutral countries during WW2…Switzerland, Sweden, Ireland.