Month: January 2020
Trump’s legal team closed out his ‘defense’ by showing that it had no defense
On Tuesday, Donald Trump’s legal team stood before the Senate to give its closing argument … and discovered it didn’t have one. Instead, Pat Philbin spent half an hour adding some footnotes to Alan Dershowitz’s Monday night muddle. Pat Cipollone devoted 10 minutes to running some 20-year-old video of Democratic representatives complaining about Bill Clinton’s impeachment. And Jay Sekulow provided America with an hour of television too incoherent even for Alex Jones.
Sekulow’s final speech wasn’t so much an argument as it was the world’s angriest tone poem, a dissociative spew that drew from more conspiracy theories than four seasons of X-Files. And if it sometimes seemed that Sekulow was channeling the robot from Lost in Space, he was most definitely lost. But Sekulow did have a theme: Why won’t everyone stop picking on Donald Trump?
James Comey, Nellie Ohr, FISA warrant, Senate floor Foreign agent, Robert Mueller, Crossfire Hurricane Peter Strzok, phone text, CrowdStrike, what’s next? Whistleblower, Lisa Page, they don’t know in Ukraine Adam Schiff, Hamilton, “Danger” is back again, John Bolton, Manuscript, Inadmissible Trump’s shoes, FBI, investigate the sad guy Dossier, filed away, what else is there left to say?Well … quite a lot, actually. Sekulow’s speech wasn’t rambling or inarticulate so much as simply pointless. He touched on more conspiracy theories than can be composed by a whole alphabet of secret Twitter sources, but even when accepting such ideas as Joe Biden being corrupt, or Donald Trump being the downtrodden underdog, Sekulow failed to knit the threads together into something that looked more organized than dryer lint. If Adam Schiff gave a moving speech for the ages, and he did, Sekulow’s coda didn’t merit a moment.
Mostly, what Sekulow achieved in an hour was the same thing his compatriots managed in a much shorter period—a statement that he had nothing. That there was no defense of Trump’s actions. That there was no answer to the challenges posed by new evidence. And he demonstrated that Donald Trump selects lawyers by loyalty, not competence.
Not one of Trump’s attorneys could produce anything that looked like a closing argument. Because that first requires an argument.
Dershowitz: Trump laywer says Elizabeth Warren ‘doesn’t understand the law’ after she criticizes his presentation
Trump Offers Mideast Plan That Palestinians Say Is Non-Starter
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump announced what he called a detailed plan for Middle East peace that provides a “win-win” solution to make Israel and the region safer, but the hurdles to the proposal quickly emerged as Palestinians and some Arab nations signaled their opposition.At a White House event Tuesday alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said his plan offered a “contiguous” territory for a Palestinian state once key conditions are met, including the “rejection of terrorism.” The proposal opens a transition to a two-state solution that leaves Jerusalem as Israel’s “undivided capital,” Trump said to applause from an audience with casino magnate and Republican donor Sheldon Adelson in the front row.“Today Israel takes a big step towards peace,” Trump said. “My vision presents a win-win opportunity for both sides. There’s nothing tougher than this one, but we have to get it done.”But the pomp of the ceremony belied the widespread view outside the White House that the plan is probably dead on arrival. Palestinian officials weren’t consulted on the proposal, and many of the details divulged on Tuesday -- including Israel getting a green light to annex existing West Bank settlements -- ensure it will struggle to gain traction.Speaking after Trump’s presentation, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said “we say ‘no,’ and a thousand times ‘no”’ to the Trump vision. In a televised address from his headquarters in Ramallah, Abbas vowed to begin dissolving the Palestinian Authority, leaving a void in the region.Netanyahu said at the White House that it may take the Palestinians “a very long time” to get an independent state, but “if they agree to abide by all the conditions you’ve laid our in your plan, Israel will be there.”For the first time since peacemaking began almost three decades ago, the plan jettisons what had been articles of faith in previous rounds of U.S.-led negotiations, including some version of joint sovereignty over Jerusalem and viewing Israel’s borders before the 1967 Middle East war as the foundation for a peace agreement.A map Trump tweeted out after the presentation showed a patchwork of Palestinian territory, portions of which were linked only by a road or tunnel, featuring vague developments such as a “high tech manufacturing industrial zone” along the border with Egypt that currently don’t exist.Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and chief architect of the plan, said the map was a bold sign of the president’s initiative.“This is the first time in the history of the peace process that there’s been an official map that was drawn,” Kushner said in a Bloomberg Television interview.Trump said his proposal would require the Palestinian Authority to adopt “basic laws” on protecting human rights, fighting corruption, stopping malign activities of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, ending financial compensation to terrorists and stopping incitement against Israel. He said territory destined for Palestinian control would stay undeveloped for four years to give space for talks with Israel to progress.A fact sheet distributed by the White House indicated that Israel won’t have to surrender settlements built across much of the territory that’s claimed by Palestinians. The plan also rejects a key Palestinian demand -- the “right of return” by Palestinian refugees. Instead, refugees and their descendants who have long sought to return to Israeli-controlled territory will have to choose between remaining in Palestinian lands, moving to a third country or integrating into the country they currently live in.‘Illegal Colonization’The Palestine Liberation Organization’s negotiations affairs department said in a tweet that “the U.S. plan recognizes Israel’s illegal colonization and annexation of occupied lands belonging to the State of Palestine.”Jordan, a key U.S. ally, rejected the U.S. proposal and said in a statement that a Palestinian state must be negotiated based on Israel’s 1967 borders. Jordan warned Israel against annexing Palestinian lands.But Netanyahu signaled he’s moving fast to implement portions of the proposal beneficial to Israel -- and possibly to his political future ahead of March elections. His government will vote Sunday on a proposal to annex West Bank territory where settlements stand. Palestinians consider those settlements illegal.Trump Peace Bid Sets Aside Palestinian Goals: Mideast TakeawaysWhile Trump and Netanyahu were speaking in Washington, hundreds of Palestinians demonstrated in the Gaza Strip, mainly in Gaza city center. They burned Israeli and U.S. flags as well as a puppet of Trump.Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Hamas leader said Trump’s plan “is nonsense. It is a hostile deal, and the Palestinians will exert all possible efforts using all means to confront it, until it is toppled.”Trump has long said his administration’s unorthodox approach to Mideast peace was justified because so many previous efforts had failed. His effort has been embraced by Netanyahu, who stood next to the president at the White House as it was released.“I was not elected to do small things or shy away from big problems,” Trump said.Arab LeagueTrump previously broke with international convention on the Mideast by moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, recognizing Israel sovereignty over a portion of the Golan Heights and proclaiming that Israeli settlements in the West Bank aren’t necessarily illegal, measures all supported by Netanyahu. The administration has also cut off most U.S. aid to the Palestinians and closed the Palestine Liberation Organization’s diplomatic mission in Washington.Paul Scham, executive director of the Gildenhorn Institute for Israel Studies at the University of Maryland, said moving forward with a plan that isn’t backed by the Palestinians is “strange, to put it mildly.”“The consensus among people who follow this is that this is really solely a political stunt because it will help Netanyahu in his ongoing election, March 2, and will presumably help Trump as well with his base,” Scham said. The proposal may shore up Trump’s backing from evangelical Christians, who are stalwart defenders of Israel, as well as conservative Jewish contributors, for his November re-election bid.At Abbas’s request, the Arab League will meet in an emergency session in Cairo on Saturday.Trump addressed Abbas directly in his speech, saying he sent the Palestinian leader a letter and vowing that the U.S. proposal would foster economic prosperity for his people.“President Abbas, I want you to know that if you choose the path to peace, America and many other countries -- we will be there,” Trump said. “We will be there to help you in so many different ways.”Impeachment LawyerThe unveiling of the proposal comes as Netanyahu is facing political peril at home, confronting three separate corruption trials. That’s occurring as Israel heads to a third election in less than a year in early March, after two previous attempts failed to leave any leader in position to form a governing coalition.Tuesday’s announcement is among a number of events Trump is holding this week that may distract public attention from the second week of the president’s Senate impeachment trial. Trump also is set to sign the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement and hold campaign rallies in New Jersey and Iowa.But there was one reminder of Trump’s impeachment at the White House event. A member of the president’s defense team, Alan Dershowitz, was seen mingling in the crowd after the speech as the song “What a Wonderful World” played in the background.\--With assistance from Amy Teibel, Fadwa Hodali, Saud Abu Ramadan, Ivan Levingston and Kevin Cirilli.To contact the reporters on this story: Josh Wingrove in Washington at jwingrove4@bloomberg.net;Yaacov Benmeleh in Washington at ybenmeleh@bloomberg.net;Jordan Fabian in Washington at jfabian6@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Bill Faries at wfaries@bloomberg.net, ;Lin Noueihed at lnoueihed@bloomberg.net, Joshua GalluFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Mitt Romney violated Senate rules by drinking chocolate milk out of a bottle during the impeachment trial
Here Are the Next Steps in Trump’s Senate Impeachment Trial
(Bloomberg) -- The conclusion of Donald Trump’s defense brings the president’s impeachment trial closer to the only unknown variables -- senator questions and possible witness testimony -- moving past a process that has been tightly scripted thus far.The House impeachment managers presented their case that the Trump abused his power and obstructed Congress, and the White House on Tuesday argued that the two articles fall short of the constitutional standard for impeachment.Here are the next steps for the Senate trial:Senators submit questions for prosecution and defenseThe trial will continue Wednesday and Thursday with 16 hours of written questions from senators for the defense and prosecution. The trial’s presiding officer, U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, will read the written queries out loud for lawyers of each side to respond on the Senate floor.Leaders of both parties have requested suggestions for questions from their members so they can eliminate duplicates and ensure their party’s key issues are raised.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer agreed to alternate between questions from Republicans and Democrats. Roberts suggested that the House prosecution and Trump’s defense limit their answers to five minutes, following the precedent of Bill Clinton’s 1999 Senate trial.The central issue: whether to depose new witnessesSenator questions will be followed by the first chance for a vote on calling additional witnesses, probably on Friday. This is the moment that will determine whether the trial could wrap up this week or stretch into next month -- with possible surprises for both sides.The trial’s rules allow four hours of debate, divided equally between the prosecution and the defense, on seeking documents and witness testimony. There would then be separate votes on whether to subpoena specific witnesses and documents.Democrats need to persuade a simple majority of senators, which means at least four Republicans, to vote in favor of allowing the Senate to consider additional testimony.There would also be an opportunity for senators to offer other motions, according to the Senate rules adopted for the trial.That could include a motion from Trump’s defense team to dismiss the case, although GOP leaders have said Trump would be better served by a full trial ending in acquittal. If no witnesses are called, one of the motions could be to set a time and date for final deliberations and the vote on Trump’s guilt or innocence.If a simple majority supports deposing additional witnesses, senators would have to vote on individual witnesses or groups of witnesses. Schumer said he plans to call former National Security Advisor John Bolton and acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, among other administration officials. Some Republicans have said that calling Trump aides to testify would mean they should also depose former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, to testify about their work in Ukraine.Senate trial concludes with vote on two chargesOnce the Senate hears from all approved witnesses, or if the motion to hear additional testimony falls short of a simple majority, the trial would move toward its conclusion. Senators would deliberate for an unspecified amount of time, then take a vote on each article of impeachment.The House of Representatives impeached Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and it would take 67 senators to convict Trump on either charge and remove him from office. Since that would require at least 20 Republicans to vote against the president, Trump is likely to be acquitted.\--With assistance from Steven T. Dennis.To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net;Erik Wasson in Washington at ewasson@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Anna Edgerton, Laurie AsséoFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
'Why Not Trust the American People With This Decision?' Trump Defense Team Finishes Impeachment Arguments
GOP senator plans to ask about Bidens, whistleblower in impeachment trial
WATCH LIVE: Trump’s impeachment trial — Jan. 29
Rand Paul Slams Chuck Schumer, Says Trump Should Sue Him for Defamation
During an interview on Fox News Tuesday, Senator Rand Paul became incensed over Senator Chuck Schumer’s recent comments, advocating for President Donald Trump to sue the New York Democrat for defamation.
“You know, I’m offended and shocked that Schumer would be so scurrilous as to accuse the president and his children of making money illegally off of politics when the only people we know have made money off of this have been Hunter Biden and Joe Biden,” Paul said.
RELATED: Liberal Woman Goes Ballistic On Rand Paul in Restaurant
Rand Paul: We Know Hunter Biden Has Made Millions
“So Hunter Biden makes a million dollars a year, that’s documented, but Schumer simply creates and makes up and says, ‘Oh, maybe the president’s kids are making money,’” Paul went on. “John Bolton is making money as we speak. He has probably already gotten the several million dollar advance for this book. He’s making money by testifying against the president.”
We Know John Bolton is Making Money
“The only people we know who have actually made money? Hunter Biden and now John Bolton,” Paul continued. “And they’re not objective–John Bolton is not objective in any way now that he’s cashing million dollar checks. To have Schumer come up and say out of the blue, ‘Maybe the president’s kids are making money,’ with no evidence at all, that’s defamation and they ought to sue him.”
Paul is correct that Sen. Schumer has suggested–with zero evidence–that President Trump’s family may have been making money abroad.
BOOM:@RandPaul drops the hammer on Chuck Schumer for his reckless defamation of the Trump family
It is a FACT that Hunter Biden profited off his dad's name
To suggest any of the president's children have done that while in office is a flat-out lie
Chuck should be ashamed. pic.twitter.com/j6OKdexZYF
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 28, 2020
Trump SHOULD Sue Schumer!
“There is nothing in the record about the president’s kids,” Paul said. “So Schumer has just created this whole thing out of whole cloth and said, ‘Oh, why don’t we go after the president’s kids?’ We don’t know yet whether or not the president’s dealings with the Chinese president have something to do with the Trumps making money.’ He just made it up! Completely made it up! That’s defamation of character and he ought to go to court and be sued for it.”
Rand Paul has been a staunch defender of President Trump throughout the impeachment process, even going so far as to threaten forcing a vote to have Hunter Biden and the CIA whistleblower testify.
Who knows? That could happen.
Donald Trump could even eventually sue Chuck Schumer, too.
The post Rand Paul Slams Chuck Schumer, Says Trump Should Sue Him for Defamation appeared first on The Political Insider.