top of page

Reflections on the Election 2020 Part 22

Continuing the Impeachment of Mr. Trump


The lead attorney Mr. Jamie Raskin was outstanding and for people of African Ancestry it was especially a proud moment as we watched Stacey Plaskett and Joseph Neguse not only present a compelling case with great eloquence and persuasiveness but their decorum was equally impressive. And that they came from different parts of the world, they made people of African Ancestry elated throughout the Diaspora:


Jamie Raskin D-MD, Diana DeGette, D-CO David Cicilline D-RI, Jaoquin Castro D-TX, Eric Swalwell D-CA, Ted Lieu D-CA, Stacey Plaskett D-Virgin Islands, Madeleine Dean R-PA, Joseph Neguse D-CO


Since I have presented the case against Mr. Trump it is only fair that I present the argument of Mr. Trump attorneys:


During the past four years, Democrat members of the United States House of Representatives have filed at least nine (9) resolutions to impeach Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, 1 each containing charges more outlandish than the next.2 One might have been excused for thinking that the Democrats’ fevered hatred for Citizen Trump and their “Trump Derangement Syndrome” would have broken by now, seeing as he is no longer the President, and yet for the second time in just over a year the United States Senate is preparing to sit as a Court of Impeachment, but this time over a private citizen who is a former President. 3 In this Country, the Constitution – not a political party and not politicians – reigns supreme. But through this latest Article of Impeachment now before the Senate, Democrat politicians seek to carve out a mechanism by which they can silence a political opponent and a minority party. The Senate must summarily reject this brazen political act.


This rushed, single article of impeachment ignores the very Constitution from which its power comes and is itself defectively drafted. In bringing this impeachment at all, the Members of the House leadership have debased the grave power of impeachment and disdained the solemn responsibility that this awesome power entails. In bringing this impeachment in the manner in which they did, namely via a process that violated every precedent and every principle of fairness followed in impeachment inquiries for more than 150 years, they offered the public a master’s class in the art of political opportunism. The intellectual dishonesty and factual vacuity put forth by the House Managers in their trial memorandum only serve to further punctuate the point that this impeachment proceeding was never about seeking justice. 4 Instead, this was only ever a selfish attempt by Democratic leadership in the House to prey upon the feelings of horror and confusion that fell upon all Americans across the entire political spectrum upon seeing the destruction at the Capitol on January 6 by a few hundred people. Instead of acting to heal the nation, or at the very least focusing on prosecuting the lawbreakers who stormed the Capitol, the Speaker of the House and her allies have tried to callously harness the chaos of the moment for their own political gain.


II. STATEMENT OF FACTS RELEVANT TO THE ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT

On January 6, 2021, rioters entered the Capitol building and wrought unprecedented havoc, mayhem, and death. In a brazen attempt to further glorify violence, the House Managers took several pages of their Memorandum to restate over 50 sensationalized media reports detailing the horrific incidents and shocking violence of those hours. Counsel for the 45th President hereby stipulate that what happened at the Capitol by those criminals was horrible and horrific in every sense of those words. Their actions were utterly inexcusable and deserve robust and swift investigation and prosecution. As President Trump said in a video statement of condemnation, “I want to be very clear, I unequivocally condemn the violence that we saw last week. Violence and vandalism have absolutely no place in our country and no place in our movement.”5 Mr. Trump’s comments echoed his sentiments expressed the day of the rally, as he repeatedly urged protesters to stay peaceful,6 and told rioters to go home.7


8 The House Managers’ compulsion to obfuscate the truth is borne out of an absence of evidence relied upon in their “Statement of Facts.” As the body vested with the sole power to impeach, the House serves as the investigator and prosecutor. There was no investigation. The House abdicated that responsibility to the media. Of the 170 footnotes in the House Manager’s Trial Memorandum, there were only three citations to affidavits of four law enforcement officers and they were merely referenced to support descriptions of what rioters were wearing and weapons that were found. The rest of the purported “facts” relied upon by these Constitutionally-charged prosecutors came from hearsay through the media.


The intellectual dishonesty and factual vacuity put forth by the House Managers in their On January 6,2021, rioters entered the Capitol building and wrought unprecedented havoc, 2 vandalism have absolutely no place in our country and no place in our movement.”5Mr.Trump’s comments echoed his sentiments expressed the day of the rally, as he repeatedly urged protesters to stay peaceful,6 and told rioters to go home.7 8 evidence relied upon in their “Statement of Facts.” As the body vested with the sole power to impeach, the House serves as the investigator and prosecutor. There was no investigation. The House abdicated that responsibility to the media. Of the 170 footnotes in the House Manager’s Trial Memorandum, there were only three citations to affidavits of four law enforcement officers and they were merely referenced to support descriptions of what rioters were wearing and weapons that were found. The rest of the purported “facts” relied upon by these Constitutionally-charged prosecutors came from hearsay through the media.


To repeat it was crystal clear to everyone that the presentation by the House management team had presented overwhelming evidence that Trump was guilty. But the team was up against almost the impossible obstacles. They had to win not only the argument of Mr. Trump’s guilt, also they had to win enough Senators who would vote for their country’s interest and not their own.


It reminded me of my basketball playing days in the park or gym. There was a player, I'll call his name John, he vigorously, disruptively argued practically that every play was against him. He generally won his arguments as players grew weary of arguing and would let him have his way. Early on I became aware that you had to not only beat him on the court, but also win the arguments if you were going to win the game and remain on the court. You stay on the court or continue to play as long as you want. I decided that I'd rather have him on my team then to play against him. After all, most of us had come to the gym or to the park just to have fun. If we won it was okay, and if we lost it was no big thing as long as we had a good run or exercise. But to John it seemed that he had a psychological need to win every game and to win every argument.


Similarly, the House prosecution team had to win not only the legal arguments to convict Mr. Trump but also, they had to win against political interest and corruption. As I stated, it was a near impossible task. So, I don’t think anyone was surprised when Mr. Trump was found not guilty. But the prosecution team and all fair-minded observers were unanimous in their agreement that Mr. Trump was guilty as charged.


Related Posts

See All

Reflections on the Election 2020 Part 1

Unless God Intervenes Leaving my television on while watching one of my old sitcoms, as they used to call them, I was awakened around 5:30 a.m. Sunday, November 1st, to the Jeffersons “Movin’ on up”,

Reflections on Election 2020 Part 2

God Intervenes Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020 the day of the election had arrived. At 5 a.m. I headed to Brooklyn to cast my ballot. It was a towering challenge for me to return to Brooklyn to vote. I di

Reflections on Election 2020 Part 3

Remembering Jesse Jackson and Arthur Eve Campaigns My mind raced back to the Reverend Jesse Jackson campaign in 1983 and 1984. In September 1983 Rev. Jackson asked Assemblyman Al Vann and me to organi

Comentários


bottom of page