why aren’t republicans voting to convict donald trump
https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1355906882096009216
it’s only getting disowned from your entire family
(I haven’t confirmed this, a republican did say this after all)
1 Like
10 Likes
I deleted because it’s apparently not true.
So if Trump doesn’t have lawyers advising him, will he testify? You know he’s dumb enough and narcissistic enough to do it. Plus being banned on social media has to really irritate the fuck out of him. He might see it as a way to vent.
1 Like
I doubt it. As others have mentioned, why mount a defense at all if you already know your cronies will clear you?
2 Likes
Lol Mitch
In the Senate, he got early room to maneuver from the majority leader, Mitch McConnell. As he sought the president’s help in Georgia runoffs that could cost him his own grip on power, Mr. McConnell heeded misplaced assurances from White House aides like Jared Kushner that Mr. Trump would eventually accede to reality, people close to the senator told The Times.
Lol Eric
Flying home on Air Force One from the final campaign event in Grand Rapids, Mich., in the early hours of Nov. 3., Mr. Trump’s son Eric proposed an Electoral College betting pool.
He wagered that the president would win at least 320 electoral votes, according to a person present for the exchange. “We’re just trying to get to 270,” an adviser more grounded in polling and analytics replied.
Mitch, scumbag
Perhaps most important in Mr. McConnell’s evolving calculus, internal polls were showing that the Republicans’ strongest argument in the Georgia runoffs was that a Republican-led Senate would be a necessary check on a new — and inevitable — Democratic administration.
Lock him up
Mr. Stockton said he was surprised to learn on the day of the rally that it would now include a march from the Ellipse to the Capitol. Before the White House became involved, he said, the plan had been to stay at the Ellipse until the counting of state electoral slates was completed.
1 Like
He won’t testify to mount a defense. He might testify so that he can have a televised pseudo-rally. Kind of like those COVID briefings.
But I’m not sure he will even do that. He is lazy AF.
1 Like
I’d love to see him testify. He doesn’t have a reputation of doing well in those kinds of situations.
I realize this is complete fan fic, but can they call him to testify?
Kind of. I think this is a mistake a lot of us make.
“Doing well” means different things to us than it does to MAGA types.
It’s entirely possible that we watch it and think it’s terrible and they watch it and realize that Q’s plan really is coming together or some other nonsense.
I admit that I am not that great a gauging this. For example, I thought his first debate was a classic example where left would think he looked like an unhinged lunatic and right would think he was a strong leader. Polls afterward seemed to show that it really didn’t play well with anyone. That was one of the few pleasant surprises I can remember from this multi-year nightmare.
1 Like
I’m sure they can call.
Does he have to come? Well, that would require someone willing to enforce the subpoena. Maybe Biden’s DOJ would, but I doubt it. That’s a shame, because he should be a lock to enforce it and he isn’t.
Meh. Good chance WAAF anyway. This would have great entertainment value.
1 Like
Can we have a “ChrisV tells us what to freak out about and what to not freak out about?” repository thread.
Dead serious.
3 Likes
i doubt DOJ can enforce a senate subpoena. it would probably go to scotus, and it will be the freeest-money 6-3 decision or worse.
senate trial president (Leahy) could probably hold him in contempt, but precedent is only around presidents appearing voluntarily, and there are no other mechanisms available. this is a pandora’s box. you push too far, and 45 senators/6 justices will make it impossible to hold president accountable.
Trump lawyer opening statement, one time.
2 Likes
There is an actual mechanism for this. Lawbros can chime in, but either house or senate can issue a criminal contempt citation for not appearing. This gives the executive branch (i.e. DOJ) the ability to prosecute for contempt. The problem was that DOJ would never act because Trump/Barr controlled it. That is no longer the case.
ianal, my understanding of this starts and ends with what the federalist society ghouls have said out loud so far.
the issue is DOJ can’t just arrest and bring the witness. the contempt of congress mechanism via DOJ is for US Attorney to bring a different suit for failure to appear, win, and then make it thought appeals and scotus. it would be like holding a trial just so you can continue the senate trial, and the senate also can’t wait forever. they vote 55-45, and the case is moot, minority wins.
but the biggest hurdle would be the fact it’s a former president. it is not yet to be tested that a president must comply, much less a former one. it’s totally possible some circuit panel says, nope, can’t compel a former president to tell on himself without the executive branch behind him, and if managers are not prepared to fight it all the way, it becomes precedent.
it’s sort of the asymmetrical advantage conservatives have, they are not afraid of losing cases, they throw hundreds of them to chip away, and at some point every check and balance breaks.
1 Like
Yeah, my understanding is the same as yours. The idea is that Trump is then faced with two options: he can appear or he can not appear and go through the whole DOJ/court process. Trial still goes on with out him. But I would assume that DOJ can make that process painful for him (they won’t but they probably could). That threat could be enough to make him show up.
So they can never really force him to testify. The best they can do is give him a choice between testifying and fighting the DOJ. He could choose the latter. Most wouldn’t. Even he may not considering it’s very difficult for him to get anyone to represent him.
But you’re right. Most likely he tells the senate to pound sand and they probably don’t even issue the contempt citation. But if they do, DOJ pursues it half-heartedly and loses in court. That’s the most likely outcome. The play is to convince him that there is a decent chance it could play out differently. But that’s gonna to be a tough sell. He knows how feckless his opponents are.
i think the play isn’t to call trmp, but to bring hard evidence of a planned insurrection (memo’s, executive actions, tweets, rally speeches). make it a public lashing, go after his legacy, expose the corruption, use it to purge everyone who helped and was involved. basically, goad trmp into wanting to take the stand. he (correctly) knows he’s got 45 votes, he will be watching the trial on tv and want to talk back to so-so bad.
obv a good defense lawyer would never allow it, but his “team” is probably less than stellar anyway. plus the client is likely un-cooperative. even without twitter, he is bound to make mistakes left and right.
1 Like