(Thread) Trump's Trick Won't Work Again
Dare I say it: The House Democrats know what they're doing.
See @tedlieu's response to the OMB's refusal to comply with the impeachment inquiry ⤵️
Trump is trying the "No Collusion" trick again.
Dare I say it: The House Democrats know what they're doing.
See @tedlieu's response to the OMB's refusal to comply with the impeachment inquiry ⤵️
Trump is trying the "No Collusion" trick again.
@tedlieu 1/ The 5-part No Collusion Trick
💠 Shout “No collusion!” repeatedly.
💠 People respond with “Yes, collusion!” and point out the dozens of contacts and coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian campaign.
People also note that the crime is "conspiracy."
💠 Shout “No collusion!” repeatedly.
💠 People respond with “Yes, collusion!” and point out the dozens of contacts and coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian campaign.
People also note that the crime is "conspiracy."
@tedlieu 2/
💠Meanwhile, Trump did all he could to prevent Mueller from getting relevant evidence.
💠When Mueller was unable to secure evidence to prove each element of criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, Trump declared himself “completely exonerated.”
💠Meanwhile, Trump did all he could to prevent Mueller from getting relevant evidence.
💠When Mueller was unable to secure evidence to prove each element of criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, Trump declared himself “completely exonerated.”
@tedlieu 3/
💠 Trump then justified his obstruction of justice by saying “It was a witch hunt! Why should I comply with a witch hunt?”
For why the criminal code doesn't apply in impeachment proceedings, see
and
💠 Trump then justified his obstruction of justice by saying “It was a witch hunt! Why should I comply with a witch hunt?”
For why the criminal code doesn't apply in impeachment proceedings, see
and
@tedlieu 4/ This morning, Russell Vought, Deputy Director of the OMB, announced that it was “fake news” that his office would comply with the Congressional impeachment inquiry.
The OMB is the office that, on Trump's orders, withheld aid to Ukraine.
The OMB is the office that, on Trump's orders, withheld aid to Ukraine.
@tedlieu 5/ Trump is trying the same trick: Obstruct the proceedings while claiming he's entitled to the same protections as a criminal defendant.
He doesn't.
Life, liberty and property are at stake in criminal proceedings.
Being president isn't a constitutionally protected right.
He doesn't.
Life, liberty and property are at stake in criminal proceedings.
Being president isn't a constitutionally protected right.
@tedlieu 6/ But now it won’t work because:
💠The House already has enough evidence that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden (proving bribery beyond a reasonable doubt isn’t necessary.)
💠House investigators simply point out that innocent people don’t withhold evidence.
💠The House already has enough evidence that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden (proving bribery beyond a reasonable doubt isn’t necessary.)
💠House investigators simply point out that innocent people don’t withhold evidence.
@tedlieu 7/ People get that. I venture to maintain that even Fox viewers get that.
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
Why, then, is the House issuing subpoenas and demanding depositions?
Because if they don’t, Trumpsters will say, “They didn’t even give us a chance to tell our side of the story!”
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
Why, then, is the House issuing subpoenas and demanding depositions?
Because if they don’t, Trumpsters will say, “They didn’t even give us a chance to tell our side of the story!”
@tedlieu 8/ The OMB has a chance to tell its side of the story.
Their refusal will further strengthen the Articles of Impeachment.
Senate Republicans will have to answer the question: Should the US President be able to completely insulate himself from Congressional inquiries?
Their refusal will further strengthen the Articles of Impeachment.
Senate Republicans will have to answer the question: Should the US President be able to completely insulate himself from Congressional inquiries?
@tedlieu 9/ No doubt, about 35% will say that the president SHOULD be able to insulate himself—if the president is Donald Trump.
35% and the support of enough red-state Republicans may be enough for Trump to stay in power.
But not enough for the Republican Party to remain viable.
35% and the support of enough red-state Republicans may be enough for Trump to stay in power.
But not enough for the Republican Party to remain viable.
@tedlieu 10/ Pelosi and Schiff, in their Oct. 2 press conference, made clear their goal: To write Articles of Impeachment so compelling that Republican leadership will find it extraordinarily difficult (and for many, impossible) to defend the president.
@tedlieu 11/ I predict the Articles of Impeachment will divide, split, and forever damage the Republican Party.
This sentence⤴️ may be the start of my next thread.
This sentence⤴️ may be the start of my next thread.
@tedlieu
It's also a technical legal term. It doesn't have a common meaning.
Conversely, I think some people on TV feel cool saying such a cool legal term 😉
Mostly they use it wrong. Quid pro quo alone isn't a crime.
Quid pro quo is one element of a crime.
It's also a technical legal term. It doesn't have a common meaning.
Conversely, I think some people on TV feel cool saying such a cool legal term 😉
Mostly they use it wrong. Quid pro quo alone isn't a crime.
Quid pro quo is one element of a crime.
@tedlieu All my threads are also blog posts. You can view this one here: terikanefield-blog.com/trumps-trick-w…
