This should be interesting: Collins and Murkowski ask when Trump learned of the riot and what actions Trump took to stop the riot.
And Trump's lawyers just straight up don't know. And they're blaming a lack of an "investigation" for why they don't know.
That was, without a doubt, the weakest shit from Trump's people this entire week.
Think about a murder case:
Collins: When did you client know that the victim wounded, and what actions did you client take to save him.
Lawyers: Who can know? And THAT is the problem.
Jury: wut?
There doesn't need to be an investigation. The Trump lawyers could have just ASKED TRUMP WHEN HE KNEW!!!
(which of course, they did. It's just that his answer doesn't help them. So... they pretended not to know. It's the Sarah Sanders method of dealing with Trump)
Loooooollll
Dems just asked Collins and Murkowski question *again,* but this time of the House Managers instead of the useless Trump team.
Castor says that the President didn't know that Pence had been taken to safety.
That's simply a lie, considering the world knew, because it was literally broadcast on television.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The point of the witnesses was not to change Republican minds. Christ. The point of impeachment was not to change Republican minds. REPUBLICAN MINDS CANNOT BE CHANGED.
The point of witnesses was to make it as UGLY AS POSSIBLE for Republicans to vote to acquit, which we all knew they were going to do anyway.
Impeachment itself was a waste of time, if you thought the point was to convince REPUBLICANS.
The impeachment managers are saying "we proved our case."
THAT WAS NEVER IN DOUBT. The case was "proven" on Jan 6.
I really hate this game of "let's cite a @FedSoc guy for authority because he's not being a complete intellectually dishonest dick this time."
I get why they're doing it. But, like, I don't cite Satan when making my argument that sex is good and fun. There are other sources.
And now we're elevating Turley. This is annoying.
This argument also proceeds from a false pretense: that Republicans are reasonable and can be convinced through logic or shamed by their own hypocrisy.
None of that is true. Republicans will say one thing today and another thing tomorrow. It's their way.
I wouldn't *completely* dunk on a lawsuit against GorillaGlue. Label says "skin" not "hair" which is different. And there are things such as hair glue.
It's not the easiest case to make, but it's not as dumb as, like, 90% of the Trump election lawsuits the media took seriously.
And, that's absolutely a point worth making. People feel chesty to dunk on a Black woman who admittedly did something stupid.
But the actual POTUS and the @GOP made far more legally dubious arguments for 77 days and mainstream press treated them like they had a shot.
So, I dunno, maybe think about who you're dragging and why. Is it that you've really thought through personal injury law? At the very least, consider if you've brought the same energy for this person as you've brought to Rand Paul, who is actually dumber.
I usually share *positive* stories about my kids and my relations to them. But, you know, those are the best bits. Overall, the struggle is real. Here's half an hour from my life today:
The 5yo was supposed to draw a picture of winter stuff yesterday, which of course he didn't do, even though I specifically told him to do it, yesterday, I didn't check that it was done.
So, today, right before his lunch break, the teacher says he needs to bring the picture with him for his class in half an hour. I run around finding him paper and say "DRAW A SNOWMAN" then go to make his lunch.
And the reason for that is that this is edit not interested in presenting a well thought out opinion of PRINCIPLE, nor is it actually trying to PERSUADE anybody to do anything, or even rile up "the choir."...
It's just trying to play cowardly both side bullcrap.
The point of this piece, the ONLY point, is to appease the white supremacists and other Republican aligned forces, who complain about the "liberal media."
It's so some fucking guy can go on TV and say "no no no, we've been critical of the Biden administration as well."
I don't know how to make this point sexy, but when you read Biden's EOs vs Trump's EOs the thing that strikes you most is the COMPETENCE.
Biden's EOs are written in the language of LAW, and STRUCTURE, and like BUREACRACY.
I just cannot emphasize how SHODDY Trump's legal work was. Like the straight legal writing CHOPS of his entire administration was SO BAD.
You'd get a Trump EO and the first 3 hours was just looking at thinking: "what, the hell, is this even SUPPOSED TO DO?"
Biden's EOs are like: "a thing to do this [law]" "which affects the following laws [law law law]" "and revokes the following provisions [law law law]" "in concert with the following [law law law]"
Like, THEY ARE WRITTEN BY PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.