Trump's "lawyers" have said they only need one day (tomorrow) to defend Trump.
My guesses for what they'll do:
Distract, lie, distort, and deflect.
1/11
First, they will spend lots of time arguing that the trial is unconstitutional since Trump is no longer in office--even though the Senate has already voted on that and settled that question. Trump's lawyers will ignore that vote, and make the argument anyway.
2/11
Second, they will insist nothing Trump said on 1/6 was any worse than various random statement by random Democrats (elected, unelected, or retired) and civil rights activists over the years. They'll also concentrate on Trump's one reference to "peaceful" protest.
3/11
Third, they'll say the rioters were mere rioters, claim lots of them were BLMers and "antifa" (while offering no evidence of that), and did what they did either just on their own, or just to make Trump look bad (false flag operation).
4/11
Fourth, they'll insist nothing any of the rioters did was any worse than the terrible, aweful, very bad, no good stuff BLM and "antifa" did throughout last summer (ignoring that all the violence over the summer was done by rightists and Trump supporters).
5/11
Fifth, they'll insist Dems are picking on Trump because they hate him, and the trial is nothing but a partisan stunt, and they'll threaten us with Republicans committing their own partisan stunts as soon as they get the chance (thus admitting GQPers are mindless partisans).
6/11
They might try Gym Jordan's idiot argument that Trump couldn't have caused the riot on 1/6, because law enforcement already knew there was going to be violence. Maybe they'll blame Speaker Pelosi for it, claiming it was her responsibility to ensure security.
7/11
Trump's lawyers are likely to insist Trump did everything he could to stop the violence, and will distort or invent claims in an effort to make that seem plausible.
They are unlikely to engage with any of the evidence or arguments the House managers presented.
8/11
They are, in fact, likely to ignore anything the House managers said, except possibly to use it to prove Democrats hate Trump.
That's my prediction for what will happen to tomorrow. A barrage of bullshit.
9/11
Republicans will hope we'll argue about the bullshit, and forget the compelling and terrifying evidence the House managers presented.
Republican Senators, Representatives, and talking heads, Fox "News" and OAN will be 24/7 with the lies and distractions.
10/11
It will only take 3 to 5 hours to present that firehose of falsehoods, that landslide of lies. No reason for them to risk boring listeners. It will be a red-faced shout-a-rama lacking all substance.
That's my prediction.
11/11
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Trump's lawyers missed a really big opportunity. I think there's a reason they did.
Pundits are making a REALLY BIG DEAL over Trump's tweet on 1/6 regarding Pence, and the timing of it, and what it says about Trump.
I think they missed the boat entirely. I could be wrong.
1/16
Background (please read): The Capitol was assaulted. Anti-American invaders rampaged the halls searching for Senators and Congresspeople and the Vice President, at Trump's direction. At about 2:15 pm, Trump tried to call Senator Tuberville. (WHY HIM? No one has asked that.)
2/16
But Trump accidentally called Sen. Mike Lee instead. Lee handed the phone to Tuberville. At that moment, the Secret Service had hustled Pence out of the Senate chamber, wafting him off to a secure location, because the room was about to be overrun.
Schoen is pretending courtroom "due process" must be followed--after meeting with some of the jurors to plan strategy last night.
Schoen accuses Democrats of editing videos and taking comments out of contexts, after showing edited videos of Democrats and taking their comments out of context. I guess he wanted us to know he knows what he's talking about.
Schoen is showing longer clips of Trump speeches. The additional footage doesn't help Trump's case, unless you're a racist insurrectionist.
I was right. "Lawyer" starts out with name-calling and an insistence that trial is "unconstitutional". He's saying Trump's 1/6 speech was rather bland, and pretending that was the only thing the House managers talked about, and the managers were "slanderous."
"Lawyer" is arguing that since there were objections raised by Democrats to some of the vote counts in 2016, that means Trump didn't engage in sedition.
You're pretending @POTUS will make money from this. You're demanding President Biden "donate every cent to charity" for a book he didn't write, one that was contracted two years before his inauguration.
That's ridiculous, @waltshaub. Do better! Apologize and sit the fuck down.
And your question--"Would anyone be publishing this book if he wasn't the president's son?"--obviously yes. The contract was signed in 2019, long before Joe Biden became president. So shove your insane innuendo up whatever orifice of yours your head is in.
And what the fuck do you mean to imply by saying Joe "supports" the publication of this book? Are you hinting at some kind of dark influence? Spell out your insane conspiracy theory, you cowardly muckweasel.
I think it is significant to consider how Speaker Pelosi reacted after the 1/6 Insurrection.
We know the insurrectionists targeted her specifically. Had they found her, we know they would have assassinated her. That's not even a question.
1/5
But after the event, Speaker Pelosi didn't make a point of the the danger to herself. She repeatedly told the story of her staff, cowering in terror under a table in a conference room as the insurrectionists battered on the locked door.
2/5
Speaker Pelosi didn't make this about herself. She made it about everyone else who was threatened. She made it about the threat to America. She made it about the assault on the Capitol, the Cathedral of Democracy.
3/5
I suspect what Trump and his lawyers will try to argue is that he won the election, but had it stolen from him, and Biden was inaugurated illegally--thus making Trump no longer president now, so he can't be tried (even though he was impeached before the inauguration). However....
.... arguing this way perpetuates the Big Lie that Trump told on Jan 6 (actually, that he insisted upon every day starting Nov 3). This argument is a continuation of the incitement to insurrection for which Trump was impeached in the first place.