Congress Democrats and early lawyers President Trump
Donald TrumpGraham rejects Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing request on Feb. 8. Trump’s attorney presents the case of the first amendment in the indictment trial. he published competitive writings Tuesday describing his legal strategies for next week’s Senate impeachment trial on Trump’s role in inciting a violent mob to storm the Capitol on Jan. 6.
The 80-page House Democrats blame the deadly siege directly at Trump’s feet, saying he intentionally “whipped [the crowd] in a frenzy. ”The former president’s new legal team, which was formed Sunday night, filed a 14-page response arguing that the trial is unconstitutional and that Trump’s rhetoric did not inspire the riot.
Here are five takeaway meals from rival writings.
The writings emphasize different political worlds
Reading the legal writs filed by both parties is like entering two completely different universes.
Democrats are still enraged by the Jan. 6 deadly riot and set a hotline for Trump’s months-long campaign to delegitimize presidential election results in his Washington speech, which urged supporters to “fight” for him. and the violent mafia that then besieged as far as the Capitol.
All House Democrats and 10 Republicans voted last month to accuse Trump of inciting violence, and there is no doubt in the minds of Democrats that the Constitution grants the Senate the right to condemn Trump and ban him. re-run for office, even now that he is a private citizen.
In fact, Democrats say it is imperative that Trump be punished to ensure that American democracy is never again threatened in this way.
“President Trump’s conduct must be declared unacceptable in the clearest and most unequivocal terms. This is not a partisan issue. Their actions directly threatened the foundations on which all other political debates and disagreements unfold, “the Democratic writ states.” They also threatened the constitutional system that protects the fundamental freedoms we love. “
On the Republican side, shock and anger have subsided a few weeks after the uprising. Forty-five of the Senate’s 50 Republicans have already voted to withdraw the trial considering it unconstitutional.
In their legal brief, Trump’s lawyers argued that the trial procedure is void because a former president cannot be charged.
They argued that there was no correlation between Trump’s rhetoric and the crowd that later stormed the Capitol. The president’s speech that his election was stolen, despite being unpopular in Washington, is protected by the First Amendment, and any effort to punish him would violate his civil liberties, Trump’s lawyers argued.
Many Republicans believe Trump is responsible for the deadly riot, though many more view the dismissal process as a political effort designed to get Trump out once and for all.
Try to focus on the first amendment, the accusations of incitement
The House last month accused Trump of a single charge of “incitement to insurrection,” based in large part on his Jan. 6 speech right in front of the White House, which encouraged supporters to march on the Capitol and prevent Congress from certifying the electoral victory of its opponent, President Biden. .
The Democrats ’legal document promises to deconstruct this one-time office and dissect it into a series of even more specific allegations, which support anyone who should disqualify the president from holding office in the future.
This list includes charges that Trump abused his powers for personal political gain, endangered the lives of lawmakers and his own vice president, and threatened national security by fomenting the Capitol violation, where riot police stole items from the lawmakers’ offices, including a Speaker laptop Nancy Pelosi
GOP senators Nancy PelosiBiden accept more COVID-19 talks after the “excellent” first meeting. McConnell claims Taylor Greene’s scope of conspiracy theories as “cancer” in GOP country On The Money: Schumer promises Senate Senate to pass “bold” law on coronavirus, rejecting GOP offer | Republican Senators Biden sends positive vibes after the long WH MORE meeting (D-California).
“If provoking an insurrectionary riot against a joint session of Congress after losing an election is not a contested crime, it is difficult to imagine what it would be,” the Democrats wrote in their letter, calling the former president “singularly responsible.” of the deadly attack.
Trump’s allies have a decidedly different view, arguing that he had every right both to expose electoral irregularities and to encourage his supporters to protest a process he considered intrinsically corrupt, as long as it was done peacefully.
The defense document of his lawyers focuses fully on these First Amendment liberties, stating that Trump assumes no responsibility for the actions of supporters who turned violent in the midst of protest. These riots, his lawyers suggest, had simply misinterpreted Trump’s message.
“If the First Amendment protected only the discourse that the government considered popular in current American culture, it would be no protection,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.
His lawyers also rely on a procedural defense, namely that Democrats have violated their powers of dismissal by packing several charges into a single article. This, according to Trump’s lawyers, makes it “impossible to know whether two-thirds of the [senators] agreement on the full article, or only in parts, as a basis for [a] vote to condemn “.
The debate over constitutionality is being debated
Does the Constitution allow Congress to dismiss a government official once out of office?
This issue is critical to the writs filed by both parties, and the matter is likely to chew a large amount of time at trial after it begins Feb. 9.
Democrats turned 23 pages in their brief detailing the constitutional case for accusing a former president and preventing him from seeking re-election.
Trump was indicted by the House while he was still in office, so the process was already underway.
Democrats cited Article 1 of the Constitution, which gives the House “the sole power to remove” and the Senate “the only power to try all removal proceedings” without indicating whether the individual continues in office.
Democrats went back in history to argue that former England officials were subject to removal and disqualification after leaving office, that there was nothing in the Constitutional Convention to suggest that those who left office should be protected from the dismissal and that the Framers intended the powers of dismissal of Congress to be broad and ample, especially with regard to the president. They cited examples dating back to 1876, when former Senator William Blount was indicted after leaving office to plot to give the British control of parts of Florida and Louisiana.
Democrats say there are no loopholes that allow a public official to resign quickly or be fired to avoid the consequences of the crimes committed in office.
“If the Senate does not judge President Trump (and condemn him), there is a risk of declaring to all future presidents that there will be no consequences, no accountability, no response from Congress if they violate their oath of‘ preserve, protect and defend the Constitution ‘in its final weeks – and instead provoke lethal violence in a lawless effort to retain power, “the Democrats wrote.” This precedent would horrify the Framers, who wrote the incumbent presidential oath. to the Constitution and did not add any January exceptions. “
Trump’s team noted Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution, which states that the president “shall be removed from office in the event of dismissal and conviction for treason, bribery or other serious crimes and misdemeanors.”
They say that since Trump cannot be removed from office, the rest of the debate is void.
Trump’s lawyers open the door to the debate over election fraud
Trump’s legal team has noted that it does not want to turn its unsupported claims about election fraud into the centerpiece of the indictment trial. However, the former president’s lawyers may have made him vulnerable on this front by addressing his defense brief.
The document only slightly addressed the issue, arguing that Democrats are wrong in claiming that the former president produced lies about election theft because reasonable people cannot agree on whether changes were made based on the election. state in electoral laws during the coronavirus pandemic. designed to suppress the Republican Party vote.
“There is insufficient evidence on which a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th president’s statements were accurate or not, and therefore denies that they were false,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.
Democrats are eager to litigate what they have called the “big lie” they say laid the groundwork for angry conspiracy theorists to fire the Capitol.
“Contrary to Trump’s lawyers’ public statement that they will not ‘present a theory of election fraud,’ Trump’s lawyers continue to defend Trump’s Big Lie that the election was stolen,” said a senior aide to the government. ‘Democratic Dismissal Team.
Democrats hope to take advantage of emotional aspects of the Jan. 6 attack
Unlike Trump’s first ouster, which was based on a private phone call with a relatively obscure foreign leader, Congress has a personal involvement this time around. Riot police who broke into the Capitol building did so while both chambers were in session, forcing lawmakers terrified to dodge as Capitol police rushed to take them to safe rooms.
Some of the crowd chanted violent threats against anyone who considered themselves disloyal to Trump, including Pelosi and the former vice president. Mike Pence
Michael (Mike) ‘s attorney Richard Pence Trump to file first-instance case in prosecution trial Trump’s legal change hints at bigger problems The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Republicans squeeze Biden to 0.000 millions of COVID-19 MORE relief alternatives. Some offices were looted, their personal belongings stolen as trophies, while employees were placed under desks behind doors that could only pray to be locked up.
A Capitol Police officer died and was commemorated this week for lying in honor of the Capitol. Two other police officers committed suicide a few days after the attack.
This combination of fear and personal tragedy will in itself be a form of testimony in the Senate trial, as Democrats seek to revisit these chaotic moments in an effort to maximize the emotional impact on viewers watching the trial televised throughout the country.
The idea is simple: hit while the anger is hot and emotions are high, one of the main reasons Pelosi handed the article to the Senate instead of keeping it longer, as some of his group had argued .
But the strategy is unlikely to bear fruit. Senate Republicans are almost certain to clear Trump of any wrongdoing related to the Capitol attack. Democrats, however, are struggling to ensure that absolution votes are as uncomfortable as they can be.