Wednesday PM
Trump's bungling legal team shouldn't detract from powerhouse effort of House prosectors
Kia ora and G’day
Long day at The Haps and only one accidental nap!
Donald Trump’s legal team managed to underperform what were subterranean expectations on the first day of the disgraced President’s second impeachment trial today.
Man, they were bad. Like bad-stand-up-comedy-bad.
At one level, it’s a shame much of the coverage will focus on the bumbling, disingenuous, utterly incoherent performance of Trump’s two lawyers. Late-night comics and SNL won’t be able to resist. And expect a flurry of breathless reports of “well-placed sources” at Mar-a-Lago conveying the client’s inevitable rage and frustration. If I were lawyers Bruce Castor (photo above) and David Schoen, I wouldn’t hold my breath on the invoice.
It’s a shame because it will deflect attention from a powerhouse prosecution from House Impeachment managers.
Thinking back to the first impeachment, Adam Schiff et al did valiantly, but the subject matter lacked emotional resonance. Trump’s Ukraine grift was textbook corruption, alarming to DC insiders but fairly abstract and far removed from the concerns of most Americans. In any event, the conduct in question was consistent with what most observant people had assumed Trump was up to, anyway. He just got caught for once.
January 6th is another matter entirely. The insurrection, shocking enough at the time, has only grown in infamy since. Comparisons to 9/11, bandied about in January, seemed overblown. But, as the dust settles, it’s becoming clearer how the events will appear through history’s lens -- and it’s grim. It brought to the fore long-simmering terroristic violence that remains very much an active threat to US democracy.
Below I’ve embedded the brilliantly-executed video montage produced by House managers that creates an irrefutable timeline of Trump’s guilt, along with Rep. Jamie Raskin’s opening presentation. Taken together, they lay out the case for the prosecution in powerful terms — well worth a look.
Raskin lost his son to suicide on New Year’s Eve, burying him only 24-hours before the siege. He mentions it in his speech, but I strongly suggest you read this extraordinary tribute by Raskin and his wife. For all the tragedy, it is also a celebration of a remarkable young man — and an ode of parental love.
What happens now?
For the rest of the week, and over the weekend and into next week, the trial proper will get underway after the Senate settled the constitutionality question in a 56-44 vote today.
Both sides get 16 hours to make their cases — no more than two eight hour days each. At the conclusion, Senators will vote whether to convict, which requires a two-thirds majority (67 votes). Most unlikely since only 56 appear to believe the proceedings themselves are valid. Notably, though, Bill Cassidy, an old-school Republican from Lousiana, changed his vote today on the constitutionality question today, siding with House managers. He told reporters:
“House managers were focused, they were organized [and] made a compelling argument. President Trump's team were disorganized. They did everything they could but to talk about the question at hand and when they talked about it, they kind of glided over, almost as if they were embarrassed of their arguments."
In breaking with GOP, colleagues, Cassidy joins just five others:
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah
Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska
Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.
In the unlikely event, however, enough other Republicans find their conscience, the Senate has the option of banning Trump from pursuing office again; this time only needing a simple majority of 51 votes. Neither is likely to happen, which dials back the dramatic tension a bit — but that shouldn’t detract from the importance to posterity and precedent of getting the facts into the record.
Editors Note: The Haps Thursday edition will come out as a PM edition tomorrow so I can follow the full second day of the trial.