Impeachment
Chuck Schumer Really Pissed That Most Senate Republicans Are Traitors
But, yet, they are.
February 14, 2021 11:30 AM
The one-term loser's second annual impeachment trial ended as we expected, if we've paid attention, or feared if our heads are stuck in West Wing episode. The Senate failed to convict the insurrectionist in chief, although Democrats gained nine more votes than last time. At this rate, we might finally hold him accountable at the third annual impeachment.
I'm not so cynical that I don't find it dispiriting. After too many trips on the karma-less merry-go-round with Lex Luthor, an alternate universe Superman finally cracked. President Luthor mocked his faith in the system: "You're as much responsible for this as I am. So go ahead, fix it somehow, put me on trial, lock me up, but I'll beat it. And then we'll start the whole thing all over again."
And we will.
Chuck Schumer has received a lot of criticism because he wasn't personally able to awaken consciences in 43 Republican senators. He's the Majority Leader not the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future. People are also frustrated that he didn't go to the mattresses against the GOP, but he's also not Michael Corleone finally settling all family business.
<p>
Republicans and byzantine Senate rules are solely to blame for the latest and likely not the last travesty of justice related to President Klan Robe. Schumer made that very clear in his post-travesty floor speech. It was remarkably similar to one Mitch McConnell gave where
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/us/mcconnell-trump-impeachment-acquittal.html" target="_blank">he also read the defendant for filth.</a>The minority leader was like the attorney on <em>Law & Order</em> who represented an obviously guilty and repulsive client. They'd admit the guy is slime but explain to the jury why it was their duty to acquit: “You don't have to like my client. I certainly don't. He makes my skin crawl. I can't even look him in the face, but the CONSTITUTION!"
</p><p>
Those were strawman defense attorneys, of course, designed to have copaganda TV audiences rooting against "search warrants" or any other namby-pamby legal rights that protected rapists. Schumer wasn't having McConnell's crocodile tear appeals to constitutional duty. Republicans aren't usually big on letting off on a technicality the ring leaders of gang violence and terrorist attacks. They are usually foaming at the mouth to tell a bad guy that his
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiXNUaSjXRY" target="_blank">diplomatic immunity's just been revoked</a>. Now they're suddenly the ACLU but just for powerful white people ... so basically the GOP as it's always existed.
</p><div id="82959" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2cb23728b756ea84aa4815c267172c31"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360698480122036224" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said: "This trial wasn't about choosing country over party, even not that. Thi… https://t.co/K2A6FqltRz</div> — USA TODAY (@USA TODAY)<a href="https://twitter.com/USATODAY/statuses/1360698480122036224">1613250772.0</a></blockquote></div><blockquote><strong>SCHUMER: </strong>None of the facts were up for debate. We saw it. We heard it. We lived it. This was the first presidential impeachment trial in history in which all Senators were not only judges and jurors, but witnesses to the constitutional crime that was committed.<br>
<br>
The former president inspired, directed, and propelled a mob to violently prevent the peaceful transfer of power, subvert the will of the people, and illegally keep that president in power.
<br>
<br>
There is nothing—nothing—more un-American than that.
<br>
<br>
There is nothing—nothing—more antithetical to our democracy.
<br>
<br>
There is nothing—nothing—more insulting to the generations of American patriots who gave their lives to defend our form of government.
<br>
<br>
This was the most egregious violation of the presidential oath of office and a textbook example—a classic example—of an impeachable offense, worthy of the Constitution's most severe remedy.
<br>
<br>
In response to the incontrovertible fact of Donald Trump's guilt, the Senate was subject to a feeble -- and sometimes incomprehensible -- defense of the former president. Unable to dispute the case on the merits, the former president's counsel treated us to partisan vitriol, false equivalence, and outright falsehoods.
</blockquote><p>McConnell claimed that the twice-impeached thug's actions on January 6 didn't meet the narrow legal definition of “incitement." Schumer called bullshit:</p><blockquote>Here's what the Republican leader of the Senate said: the mob that perpetrated the "failed insurrection" was on January 6th "was provoked by President Trump."You want another word for "provoke?" How about: "incite."</blockquote><div id="18f28" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e8abe7faa27573c16c8359e06cc45dc5"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360696533239406597" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said: "The vast majority of the Senate Republican caucus, including t… https://t.co/W1Y41dfqjA</div> — USA TODAY (@USA TODAY)<a href="https://twitter.com/USATODAY/statuses/1360696533239406597">1613250308.0</a></blockquote></div><blockquote>Still—still!—the vast majority of the Senate Republican caucus, including the Republican leader, voted to acquit former President Trump, signing their names in the columns of History alongside his name—forever.<br><br>January 6th will live as a day of infamy in the history of the United States of America. The failure to convict Donald Trump will live as a vote of infamy in the history of the United States Senate.<br><br>Five years ago, Republican Senators lamented what might become of their party if Donald Trump became their presidential nominee and standard-bearer. Just look at what has happened. Look at what Republicans have been forced to defend. Look at what Republicans have chosen to forgive.<br> <br>The former president tried to overturn the results of a legitimate election—and provoked an assault on our own government—and well over half of the Senate Republican conference decided to condone it.<br><br>The most despicable act that any president has ever committed and the majority of Republicans cannot summon the courage or the morality to condemn it.<br><br>This trial wasn't even about choosing country over party, even not that. This was about choosing country over Donald Trump. And 43 Republican members chose Trump. They chose Trump. It should be a weight on their conscience today. And it shall be a weight upon their conscience in the future.</blockquote><p>Schumer is rightly pissed, but he shouldn't imagine that the gaping holes where most Republicans souls are will trouble them. All they understand is power. Don't wait for history to judge them, as you drive down Confederate Slave Owner Avenue (see how that turned out?). We must extract a price from Republicans today and every day afterward. Don't give up, blame Democrats, and stay home in 2022. That's what Republicans want. That's how Republicans win. It's time to break the pattern.</p><p>[<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/13/politics/schumer-speech-trump-acquittal/index.html" target="_blank">CNN</a>]<br></p><p>
<em><em>Follow Stephen Robinson on </em><em><a href="https://twitter.com/SER1897" target="_blank">Twitter.</a></em></em><br>
</p><p>
<a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.
</p><p>
<strong>Yr Wonkette is 100 percent ad free and supported entirely by reader donations. Please click the clickie, if you are able!</strong>
</p><p>
</p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form>
<p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Crime
Your Impeachment Saturday ... Something Or Other, NOBODY KNOWS!
It's a liveblog!
February 13, 2021 09:45 AM
Nobody has any idea what is happening today, your Impeachment the Second Saturday Something. We had thought perhaps closing arguments and a vote on disqualifying that rat bastard from ever holding office again, but, well, maybe a tiny bit of news broke last night, and maybe the (EXQUISITE) House Managers of the Senate's impeachment trial miiiiight just decide they have to call some witnesses. Wouldn't that be terrible! Because Trump's (SAD AND MAD) personal injury attorneys (no really) said some things we might just need to get to the bottom of, about how Donald Trump didn't know no how that his vice president was being hunted by a mob when he tweeted mildly about the coward Mike Pence helping Democrats steal the election, and maybe Tommy Tuberville, who happened to be chatting Trump up at the time, or oh say Kevin McCarthy, who told Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler that as he screamed at Trump to call off his dogs, Trump replied, "well Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," could shed some light on that?
Anyway, let's start some blog!
<p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0NTQzNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1Mjc5NzU2OX0.TGaAnbO7fy54KWxP-xsXJ5W2-MjvCUQQE6t7cmD3uh4/img.jpg?width=980" id="43aea" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a5cda16e571be1e6394ccc504998b09a" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="4032" data-height="3024">
</p><p>Oh you wanted a livestream? Okay, let's find you one. </p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="576f4ed70177ff10fb18b7d134ff1893"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YSnHwMIfaaE?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p><br></p><p><strong>10 am: </strong>Whew, that PBS stream wasn't starting so I went to MSNBC which said the trial was starting at NOON, but now here is Judy Woodruff on the ol' PBS, did I say whew? WHEW! Chaplain is chaplaining. </p><p><strong>10:05: </strong>Yup, Jamie Raskin brings up some HEARSAY HEARSAY from Herrera Beutler and wants to subpoena her, her contemporaneous notes, and ... not McCarthy? Probably because he lies so much. (And good for Herrera Beutler for putting her name where her mouth is; that CNN link above has an awful lot of "GOP congressmen" and "Pence people" with blank Twilight Zone faces.)</p><p>Trump's One Angry Man Michael van der Veen says there is only one article of impeachment, "incitement," so letting McCarthy and Congress just die is unimpeachable! Also, why didn't the House investigate? But if we're doing witnesses, van der Veen says VERY MAD, he needs a 9/11 Commission instead of just ... asking his client what had happened. IMPROPER! CLOSE THE CASE! DON'T HANDCUFF ME BRO! Van der Veen says again he had only eight days to prepare, well, next time maybe Trump won't lose 97 teams of lawyers before breakfast. He says he has to DISCOVER DISCOVER DISCOVER the truth, is he having a stroke? Oh well. </p><p><strong>Raskin: </strong>This was always the time we were going to talk about having witnesses, don't let MAD BALLS fool ya! Also, you know, the news broke last night. (Actually, Herrera Beutler's been telling town halls and local Washington state media about this for several weeks. That's really on all of us.) Why did Trump not act to defend the country is very relevant, and "desertion of duty" is "built into" the impeachment charge, obviously, like if a police officer mugs you he is guilty of theft but he's also not doing his job as a police officer. </p><p><strong>Van der Veen:</strong> It's my understanding that Minority Leader McCarthy will lie and say it never happened. They also lied about Mike Lee saying he heard Tommy Tuberville telling the president he had to go because they were taking the VP out, even though they literally never said that and <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/mike-lee-tantrum-reminds-tommy-tuberville-of-this-hilarious-time-trump-tried-to-get-pence-killed" target="_blank">Lee just jumped in </a>to NUH HUH NEVER SAID THE THING YOU NEVER SAID I SAID I SAID. (At the time Lee claimed he could be "the only witness" to the Tuberville call and he hadn't heard that ... except of course other witnesses included Tuberville and whichever lucky White House staffer was staffing Trump.)</p><p>Anyway, van der Veen is now yelling that there will be no subpoenas via Zoom; he wants Nancy Pelosi (she's the real rioter) to come to HIS OFFICE, IN PHILLYDELPHIA, and the Senate cracks the fuck up, they can't believe this shyster my god. </p><p>This is hysterical, Trump's personal injury attorney (no really) tells the UNITED STATES SENATE that the way the rules of civil procedure works (this is not civil court) is you go to PHILLYDELPHIA. Senate President Pat Leahy tells the Senate to stop laughing at the mean man. </p><p><br></p><div id="6240d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="15946fe706abd8b06434b6a3928d8b05"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360611122294972417" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"That's the way it works, folks ... I don't know why you're laughing ... there's nothing laughable here" -- the Sen… https://t.co/0X6qcLZ1L7</div> — Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar)<a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/statuses/1360611122294972417">1613229945.0</a></blockquote></div><p><br></p><p><strong>10:15: </strong><em>I didn't laugh at any of you</em> (direct quote), van der Veen whines, before explaining again that the Senate has to come to his office, and they are TRAMPLING on the Constitution of the United States. This is ... hooboy! </p><p><strong>Raskin</strong>: Yeah, we didn't "stipulate" anything, love you all, I am nice and not laughing at this poor man, peace out. </p><p>Leahy tells "all parties" not to use language unconducive to civil discourse. NO POOP THROWING ANYBODY! </p><p>Now they vote on having witnesses! </p><p><strong>10:30:</strong> With Murk, Suzie Q, and Sir Mittens of Romneyham voting with the Dems for witnesses, looks like we're all going to PHILLYDELPHIA! (And good for you Ben Sasse.)</p><p>And Lindsey Graham changes his vote to aye on witnesses. WHAT UP LINDS, WHATCHA DOING? OH SHIT!</p><p>Alaska senator asked (after he'd voted) what the vote was for. LEAHY HULK MAD NO DEBATE.</p><p><strong>10:37: </strong>Guess they all just walked out, because Chuck "suggested the absence of a quorum," and a minute ago there were a hundred senators there! </p><p>ANGER issues you say? I have seen nothing of the kind! </p><p><br></p><p>Marco Rubio would like to take <a href="https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1360614939216478211" target="_blank">some time to lie: </a></p><p>"Last night left wing Twitter starting beating up the managers for not calling witnesses & this morning they caved By a majority vote the Democrats can now force a trial where the House Managers get their witnesses & former President Trump gets none. A complete farce," he tweeted. IS THAT what happened, Marco Rubio? IS IT? Or did a Republican congresswoman scream and shout that Trump told McCarthy to get fucked when he asked for help during the congress-hunt? Hmmm, guess we will never know! </p><p>PBS says Graham changed his vote on witnesses to "yes," so that as a person who supported the motion he can later call to fuck the motion. Remember the night of the riot, when a HAMMERED Lindsey Graham said it's been a wild ride with the president but ENOUGH, he wanted OFF THAT TRAIN? Guess he sobered up! </p><p>Daily Kos's <a href="https://twitter.com/Scout_Finch/status/1360613203135315976" target="_blank">Jennifer Hayden says</a> Graham et al. are threatening to subpoena DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, and ... <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/heres-hillary-clinton-owning-the-benghazi-committee-like-the-badass-she-is" target="_blank">Hillary Clinton?</a> Fuck it, call em all! </p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<a href="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTI0OTY2Ni9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjQwNzMyMn0.P5ZzC2x00x2vo8Ua-cfyvQgpnWMDzLEz7lgKpEhLFuY/img.gif?width=980" target="_blank"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTI0OTY2Ni9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjQwNzMyMn0.P5ZzC2x00x2vo8Ua-cfyvQgpnWMDzLEz7lgKpEhLFuY/img.gif?width=980" id="ec74a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="33a0c54b2e20e059b0cd17ffde89dc9c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"></a>
</p><p><br></p><p>Sir Mittens of Romneyham <a href="https://twitter.com/AndrewDesiderio/status/1360618435386957833" target="_blank">will not have </a>your insouciance, sirrah! </p><p>Per the pooler: "Ron Johnson turned to Mitt Romney and was upset with him, even pointing at him once. Johnson was visibly upset. They were going back and forth with [Dan] Sullivan in the middle of them. I heard Johnson tell Romney 'Blame you.' Voices were definitely raised." I DEMAND FISTICUFFS!</p><p>ABC News's <a href="https://twitter.com/Santucci/status/1360619527525052419" target="_blank">John Santucci says</a> PANIC IN THE STREETS OF LONDON PANIC ON THE STREETS OF MAR A LAGO! "Sources close to president Trump are floored by what just happened. 'Stunned'. 'Stupefied'." "Remember this legal team was already fighting amongst themselves but they pulled it together for what they thought was one last day - now what happens is completely unclear."</p><p>But I mean really: Weren't they "stunned" and "stupefied" the whole time? (Yes.)</p><p>Wait what, did you guys know this???</p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a595d173feb4cd16c13744b2e45504ca"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MQaZKquLa5M?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p><br></p><p>No offense to personal injury attorneys, it is important to help people who have been injured! But wanna hear one of Michael van der Veen's radio ads? <a href="https://twitter.com/patkiernan/status/1360616097326616576?s=21" target="_blank">Oh yes you do! </a></p><p><br></p><p><strong>11:45: </strong>Okay, we're in recess. See you back here at 12:30!</p><p><strong>12:25:</strong> They've been <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1360635183100276737" target="_blank">trying this</a> all week. Lindsey Graham did it, even one of the trumpenlawyers (probably van der Peen) had some hilarious sneer yesterday about ... oh who knows, I don't have time to dig it up. Anyway, it's very much of the school "Why did Hillary Clinton collude with Russia to steal the election from herself, HENGHHH?"</p><p><br></p><p>LOL Ted Cruz on the PBS stream saying the "political" Democrats were ready to convict on Day One, because they have eyeballs, and also were there. Does Ted Cruz have eyeballs? Was Ted Cruz there? A question for the ages really. </p><p><strong>12:45:</strong> PBS reporter Lisa Desjardins says counsel are coming to an agreement that instead of witnesses, they would just stipulate Herrera Beutler's statement into the record. Otherwise they'll block all Biden's nominees. Hi, I have a crazy idea, <em>what if </em>we abolished the filibuster???</p><p><strong>12:52:</strong> Leahy recognizes Bruce Castor (dumb cop of dumb cop mean cop), who says we'll allow Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler's statement into the record. Jamie Raskin agrees and reads her statement. </p><p>Sigh. </p><p><strong>12:58: </strong>Well, that was deflating! But here is Jamie Raskin for his closing statement. "After he knew violence was happening at the Capitol, he took measures inflaming the crowd against Mike Pence." He refused requests to call off the rioters. He taunted Kevin McCarthy, per this evidence that has just been stipulated to be part of the record. It is OBVIOUSLY part and parcel of the offense, inciting violence. It is decisive evidence of his intent to incite an insurrection. When van der Peen says IGNORE IT, that is PLAINLY WRONG. They have no defense. If you start a fire and are charged with arson, you can't say everything I did after is irrelevant. If you try to get water and put out the flames, the court might infer it was accidental. But if you go and pour more fuel, or watch it gleefully, any reasonable people would infer <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/01/24/dont-look-back-ryan-lizza" target="_blank">you are Darrell Issa!</a> </p><p>(Just kidding, that last part was not Jamie Raskin, it was your Wonkette. But such a good one, us!)</p><p>Raskin thanks them for their attention, says their accusations were irrefutable and unrefuted. Notes that the former president refused to come and testify, OBJECTION OBJECTION PHILLYDELPHIA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE!</p><p>Raskin notes that if you want to talk about the president being cancel cultured just for starting a riot, how about Rep. Liz Cheney, who stood up to bullies and told the truth and they tried to strip her leadership position from her. </p><p>Ain't that America, Raskin asks, for you and me? Are you a Ben Franklin PHILLYDELPHIAN or a THIS GUY?</p><p><strong>1:15: </strong>Raskin is still laying out the evidence they've shown this week, and that's all fine, but, whoo boy, it is not feeling like enough to overcome the anger of people watching that they won the vote for witnesses and then lay down for Lindsey Graham's threats. Just woof.</p><p><strong>1:20:</strong> Here is Rep. David Cicilline. People were wearing body armor and holding weapons and he literally pointed at the Capitol and sent them at us. He may not have intended every single thing that happened (he did) but he foresaw it. But what happened after? There's a lot of discussion about what he knew and when he knew it. He's refused to come and tell us (OR HIS LAWYERS APPARENTLY, WHO WANTED THE HOUSE TO GIVE THEM THEIR ANSWER OF "WHAT DID HE DO TO STOP IT"). </p><p>They claimed we manufactured evidence. We got his statements from a public archive. Everything's undisputed. Yesterday their lawyer claimed "at no point was the president informed the VP was in danger." How about nah? As the violence intensified, he tweeted more. By 2:12, the mob was attacking the Capitol, on live television. By 2:12, he would have seen the VP being hustled off the Senate floor. Defense counsel suggests SOMEHOW the president didn't know the VP had been removed for his safety as rioters broke in and police were overwhelmed. Cicilline SUGGESTS perhaps defense counsel is entirely full of shit. </p><p>Then while President Shitmouth is doubtless watching this unfold on TV, as he was "obsessed" with the certification, he tweeted more shit about Mike Pence. Rioters read his tweet about Mike Pence through a bullhorn and began chanting HANG MIKE PENCE. Court-martial this duty-derelicting son of a bitch! </p><p>Did Trump call to check on Pence's safety? Nah, he called Mike Lee because he thought he was Tommy Tuberville. Then AT SOME POINT, he spoke to Kevin McCarthy, who was pleading with Trump to call off the attack by "your supporters, Mr. President." "Well Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are." He essentially said, as he essentially tweeted at 6:01, "you got what you deserved."</p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0NTY1NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MjU2MjI4OX0.oU4ZUX52tb0h2Dz4GDT-lYkha_xYSeZ2HRRAFmyu3DU/img.jpg?width=980" id="4aef8" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4e58500526b0f99f4520b78f73d6567d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="1200" data-height="709">
</p><p><br></p><p>The call ended with rioters breaking through the windows of McCarthy's office. Three weeks later, McCarthy went to Mar A Lago for a spot of tea and further humiliation. </p><p><strong>1:35: </strong>Objection that part of this — maybe the broken window? — was not stipulated into evidence. Leahy will consider later. </p><p><strong>1:44:</strong> Leahy rules "debate out of order" as Sen. Mike Lee yells "this is not debate, he said something that was not true!" So we're back to Lee's bullshit claim that he was lied about, when NOBODY SAID he was the witness to Tuberville's call. </p><p>So we're back "out of quorum" (not out of quorum) again. </p><p>Norm Ornstein is on PBS saying he doesn't know what Lee's damage is, since all Cicilline attributed to him was "a phone call at 2:26 existed." Which he showed them yesterday when he finally gave up his phone logs (he had earlier said his phone logs "didn't go back that far"). </p><p>Norm Ornstein notes that Twitter is INFLAMED ("FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!"), but hears that they could not get anyone else to agree to testify on the record because have you noticed what fucking thugs those POSes are?</p><p>Judy Woodruff phumphers about a Joni Ernst quote that was "colorful" about how they'll obstruct work on the many MANY crises Trump left for Joe Biden if they don't get a pass for their fascist shithead. Thanks for putting the country first, Joni Ernst! </p><p><strong>1:55:</strong> Mike Lee withdraws his lie. Here comes House Manager Madeleine Dean. She would like to know: Does the fact that some people preplanned the attack mean that he didn't incite the attack? Let her answer her own question: Nah. The evidence overwhelmingly confirms he was inciting his people for months. That conduct took time, and he sent his "save the date" telling his thugs when, where, and whom to fight. He spent $50 million from his "legal defense fund" to get people to his rally. (But then how much was left for the Trump kids? :( )</p><p>AV CLUB TIME! (Trump running his mouth about the "fraudulent election" starting in MAY and culminating in him speaking before the mob on Jan. 6 promising to STOP. THE. STEAL. This election was stolen, and we fight, and if you don't fight like hell, you don't have a country anymore.)</p><p>Second, Dean says: We don't have to prove he knew every detail that would come, but he totally did. He knew they were Proud Boys, he saw their violence, he'd been encouraging and praising violence his whole term.</p><p>More AV club as Dean plays Trump's tweets of young brownshirts spitting DESTROY THE GOP (if they don't flip the election for Trump) and people he loves trying to run Biden's campaign bus off the road in Texas. That's upsetting!</p><p><strong>2:10:</strong> Someone shouts from the Senate floor, "THIS IS CROOKED." I am unsure what the "new evidence" being stricken refers to. (You can't introduce evidence in closing statements.) But there was some video of Katrina Pierson talking about patriots fighting, and it really did sound like the Democrats' use of "fight" which van der Veen played for 14 hours straight yesterday. Dean says the video was already in evidence and she will keep it in the record, but people are grumbling "I never saw it!" "She doesn't even know what she put in!" They are discussing. </p><p><strong>2:15:</strong> Van der Veen, the former president's One Angry Man, appears to be yelling at the Senate Parliamentarian, so, that's on-brand. </p><p><strong>2:17: </strong>Dean is back and gets a chuckle. "Thank you Mr. President, I have to say that of all the trials I have ever been a part of, this is certainly one of them!"</p><p>Since Dean didn't come back and apologize, I ASSUME van der Veen was full of shit, COULD THAT BE????</p><p>Anyway, until she started working on the trial Dean didn't know, even though she was there, how much Trump had pre-planned, and the bravery of the police and the people who cleaned up after the mob. Perhaps none of the people here will be remembered in 200 years. But what they do here will be. </p><p><strong>2:21:</strong> Joe Neguse time! He is grateful for the Senate's small courtesies, but he made "small" sound nice. He notes that defense counsel has ignored the facts and dealt only in distractions, like the former president being a private citizen, and lots of people say "fight." </p><p>Why would the Constitution include impeachment at all if we can just put people in jail? It wouldn't! (But also we should put him in jail.)</p><p>Neguse, clearly a nice young man, appeals to the Senate's better angels. I mean, bless you, but have you met them?</p><p>He talks about a good thing the Senate did once, overriding a Reagan veto of sanctions on South Africa. Two current senators, a Republican and a Democrat, voted for it that day. Grassley and Leahy I guess? I don't know, you guys got Google. </p><p>Now Neguse talks about the officers struggling to recover, or who may never, like this <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/police-officer-suicides-capitol-riot/2021/02/11/94804ee2-665c-11eb-886d-5264d4ceb46d_story.html" target="_blank">really sad WaPo article</a> about an officer who took his life. If Cruz, Graham, McConnell et al. had human souls, they would be moved right now. </p><p><strong>2:41: </strong>Jamie Raskin is back, talking about the children. His children, our children, children of the insurrectionists, all American children and how we must care for them. Goddammit. He says we have a second chance with the truth, talks some true shit about Trump trying to run over both the Separation of Powers and the will of the people. Will the Senate defend the people? Will the world look up to us? Will the Senate fuckin' CONDONE THIS SHIT????</p><p>It is beyond my understanding how the Republicans in the Senate (or most of them) are about to vote to acquit.</p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<a href="https://media0.giphy.com/media/rwJzx3xGdIAes/giphy.gif?cid=2fb0ca762mh0aay4cnkfbdjik7hfchz08bul4rxwxwcpm55i&rid=giphy.gif" target="_blank"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0NTcwMy9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyODE5MzQ0OX0.9p9dhMOHlO0UVijmI1Q3d8cvBYp5w5U6Xo4CYTFLuys/img.gif?width=980" id="00348" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2d1c22d7b55e5722dcefd325d26ff19f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="500" data-height="213"></a>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/90s-fargo-francis-mcdormand-rwJzx3xGdIAes" target="_blank">Giphy</a>
</small>
</p><p><br></p><p><strong>2:49: </strong>Van der Veen starts with "I'M TALKING" like he is <a href="https://wonkettebazaar.com/collections/kamala-2020" target="_blank">Madam Vice President Harris</a> and he can get the fuck out. </p><p>Van der Veen says the issue with the Herrera Beutler stipulation is that they stipulated it EXISTS, not that it's TRUTHFUL. Oh fuck you. Now he's on the Mike Lee complaint, which Lee withdrew at 1:55, I typed it right there! And then he goes to the Dean video which apparently had been in the record already because they spoke to the parliamentarian and she kept going! </p><p>At least his gorilla testosterone shot has worn off. </p><p>And now that he has already begun, Mr. van der Veen will begin! </p><p>All of us "starting with my client" are deeply disturbed by the attack. ASSUMES FACTS NOT INTRODUCED INTO THE RECORD VAN DER PEEN. </p><p><strong>3:00:</strong> Peen says Trump's crumpets and hairbraiding party of Jan. 6 was hijacked by groups on right AND left, so that's the kind of honesty we're working with here today. </p><p>DID YOU KNOW Joe Biden gave moral comfort to mobs attacking police officers? DID YOU KNOW a mob killed Rand Paul and his wife, <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/rand-paul-shouted-to-death-on-streets-of-dc-recovers-in-time-to-describe-martyrdom-to-fox-friends" target="_blank">but he got better? </a>DID YOU KNOW that Saint President Trump sending in the National Guard against VERY MANY BLACK PEOPLE was wonderful and pure and Democrats attacked him <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/park-police-didnt-use-tear-gars-on-protesters-they-used-tear-gas-with-protesters" target="_blank">just for gassing A CHURCH so he could hold up a Bible?</a> DID YOU KNOW that Madam Vice President Harris personally bailed out BLACK CHARLES MANSON? </p><p>He's still talking, but I will pause from being bored only to note that he has just interrupted himself to pick up a thread <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/impeachment-liveblog-day-4-trumps-razzle-dazzle-legal-team-gonna-law-so-hard" target="_blank">from yesterday</a> and Bondsplain <em>Bond v. Floyd</em> to Jamie Raskin, law professor and Bond colleague and friend, to sneer "by the way, he never burned his draft card, he still had it, that was part of his defense," except Raskin never said Bond burned his draft card, he said he was a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which was against the Vietnam War. </p><p>So ... I don't know, just another data point for "attention to detail" for the Peen.</p><p>Peen says the House could have tried the president while he was still in office if they "really believed he was such a threat." *Mmhmm, nods wisely, puts head in fireplace.*</p><p>Peen says Trump was not given a chance to defend himself; says the House did not call witnesses he ferociously whined this morning to exclude and then came to the horrid "stipulation" that has so many libs fucking ON FIRE right now; says they "fabricated twitter accounts" they did not fabricate. Says it's patently false and a hoax that Trump said there were fine people on both sides in Charlottesville. Says they are scurrilous scalawags with such a weak case they must lie and lie and lie and lie, like for instance he pressured Brad Raffensperger, whose released phone call with Trump, where Trump demanded he "find 11,780 votes" must also have been fabricated I guess. </p><p>Anyway, it's a circus and a showtrial and unconstitutional and "possessed" blah blah blah. </p><p><strong>3:28:</strong> Okay he's done finally. Jamie Raskin takes five minutes of his reserved 27 minutes, "in an unprecedented act of self-restraint on my part," he will not rebut every slur and accusation. </p><p>Raskin read my bloog and would love to hear the president denounce the "violent insurrection" since Peen said he was appalled by it BY INTRODUCING EVIDENCE (not evidence) IN HIS CLOSING REMARKS. Raskin embraces the new "Raskin Doctrine" that a president may not incite violent insurrection. Says Trump's liberty is not at issue, starts a digression into Bond (that must have gotten under his skin too): "I GOTTA RESPOND TO THIS," direct quote. NO JAMIE! NO! </p><p>For the first time all week, Raskin seems to be rambling, letting Peen dictate his argument; while we would all love Storytime about Julian Bond and John Lewis, it seems like there are better times to school that syph dick about a court case he got wrong. Stay on course! Okay, here's his point, and he does have one: The First Amendment is on OUR side. We're defending the Bill of Rights and Separation of Powers and US Senate and US House and the right of the people to choose their president through an election, not have it overturned by violence! </p><p>But it took a while to get there. </p><p><strong>3:42:</strong> And they vote. Senators, how say you? Is Donald John Trump guilty or not guilty? </p><p>Baldwin Guilty. Barasso Not Guilty. Bennet Guilty. Blackburn Not Guilty. Blumenthal Guilty. Blunt Not Guilty. Booker Guilty. Boosman Not Guilty. Brown Guilty. Burr Guilty. Cantwell Guilty. Capito Not Guilty. Cardin Guilty. Carper Guilty. Casey Guilty. Cassidy Guilty. Collins Guilty. Coons Guilty. Cornyn Not Guilty. Cortez-Masto Guilty. Cotton Not Guilty. Cramer Not Guilty. Crapo Not Guilty. Cruz Not Guilty. Daines Not Guilty. Duckworth Guilty. Durbin Guilty. Ernst Not Guilty. Feinstein Guilty. Fischer Not Guilty. Gillibrand Guilty. Graham Not Guilty. Grassley Not Guilty. Haggerty Not Guilty. Hasson Guilty. Hawley Not Guilty. Heinrich Guilty. Hickenlooper Guilty. Hirono Guilty. Hooven Not Guilty. Hyde Smith Not Guilty. Inhofe Not Guilty. Johnson Not Guilty. Kaine Guilty. Kelly Guilty. Kennedy Not Guilty. King Guilty. Klobuchar Guilty. Lankford Not Guilty. Leahy Guilty. Lee Not Guilty. Luhan Guilty. Lummis Not Guilty. Manchin Guilty. Markey Guilty. Marshall Not Guilty. McConnell Not Guilty. Menendez Guilty. Merkley Guilty. Moran Not Guilty. Murkowski Guilty. Murphy Guilty. Murray Guilty. Ossoff Guilty. Padilla Guilty. Paul Not Guilty. Peters Guilty. Portman Not Guilty. Reed Guilty. Risch Not Guilty. Romney Guilty. Rosen Guilty. Rounds Not Guilty. Rubio Not Guilty. Sanders Guilty. Sasse Guilty. Schatz Guilty. Schumer Guilty. Scott FL Not Guilty. Scott SC Not Guilty. Shaheen Guilty. Shelby Not Guilty. Sinema Guilty. Smith Guilty. Stabenow Guilty. Sullivan Not Guilty. Tester Guilty. Thune Not Guilty. Tillis Not Guilty. Toomey Guilty. Tuberville Not Guilty. Van Hollen Guilty. Warner Guilty. Warnock Guilty. Warren Guilty. Whitehouse Guilty. Wicker Not Guilty. Weiden Guilty. Young Not Guilty. </p><p><strong>3:58:</strong> Congratulations to Richard Burr, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Pat Toomey for having eyeballs in their faces and enough spine not to lie down and say PLEASE SIRE MAY I HAVE ANOTHER when somebody tries to assassinate them. I mean it, we are pretty mean to Susan Collins in particular, for sucking all the time, but she did well this time. She may escape history's gimlet eye, FOR NOW. </p><p>Here's Chuck to call Peen "feeble," which is correct, and I think I'll have a drink, yeah nah? Yeah. Here's to us. </p><p><br></p><p>Don't forget to tip your bloggers, your bloggers is me! </p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p><p></p><p><a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.</p><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Trump impeachment hearings
Impeachment Liveblog Day 4: Trump's Razzle Dazzle Legal Team Gonna LAW SO HARD
Oh, it's a shitshow and a half.
February 12, 2021 11:44 AM
Last night, Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, and Mike Lee, three of the "jurors" in the ongoing second impeachment trial of Donald Trump, met with Trump's impeachment lawyers behind closed doors.
"We were discussing their legal strategy and sharing our thoughts," Cruz told CNN's Manu Raju.
"I think that's the practice of impeachment. There's nothing about this thing that has any semblance of due process whatsoever," Trump's lawyer David Schoen told the reporter. This from an attorney who stepped out of the hearing yesterday to hop on Fox and whine about the lack of due process and Democrats treating this solemn event as an "entertainment package."
Trump's lawyer, David Schoen, SLAMS the Left for caring more about emotion than facts and due process. https://t.co/UbG20Qbnfi— MRCTV (@MRCTV)1613071800.0
Schoen, an Orthodox Jew, is out for tomorrow during the Sabbath. And after Trump
lost his shit over Bruce Castor's disastrous performance Tuesday, he's being sidelined. Which may mean that, lacking an attorney to present tomorrow, Trump's team rests its case today.
Hosanna! Alleluia! And Lord help us. It's time for your Day 4 Impeachment LIVEBLOG!
<p>
Here's your livestream!
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e29174092c0ca0700ae26ce28b9dd34d"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ilm5w6mSHY4?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p>
<br>
</p><p>
Don't forget Wonkette relies on YOUR donations to keep us watching this shit, please and thank you!
</p><p>
<strong>12:00</strong> Still waiting for kickoff, but CNN's Manu Raju says that senators are being asked to submit questions now. Might could get questioning tonight, if Trump's lawyers decide to say FUCKIT and finish today.
</p><div id="4d643" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="969b11acf47720e689aa6f923929e78a"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360247050860974082" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Even though Dems aren’t saying if they’ll ask for witnesses, it’s widely expected they won’t. Meantime, GOP and Dem… https://t.co/MFLwdXHBE1</div> — Manu Raju (@Manu Raju)<a href="https://twitter.com/mkraju/statuses/1360247050860974082">1613143143.0</a></blockquote></div><p>
<strong>12:02</strong> Senate Chaplain Barry Black praying that the Lord will unite the senators to "make choices that will be for your greater glory." Well ...<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:05</strong> Oh, here we go. Attorney Michael van der Veen is up to denounce this appalling act of "political vengeance." WITCH HUNT! THE LEFT! SLANDER! RUSSIA! Donald Trump is a man of peace. How was he to know that the crowd of enraged lunatics he sent to march on congress would ... march on congress and act like lunatics?<br>
</p><p>
LOL, he's making a bizarre argument that Trump was just exhorting them to pass voter ID laws "in the next election."</p><p>
On the plus side, this atorney seems to have written his remarks out this time, so we're spared freefrom blarping about Rome or whatever.
</p><p>
<strong>12:10</strong> Now we have video of Democrats objecting in 2017. Thought the GOP didn't like slickly produced videos?<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:15</strong> And now we're getting supercut of Trump reading paeans to "Law and Order" with Democrats expressing support for BLM. Also Chris Cuomo. Good we're getting this campaign ad for a guy who already lost.<br>
</p><p>
Anyway, van der Veen says a small group "of various different stripes and political persuasions ... hijacked" the event. He blames antifa, of course.
</p><p>
<strong>12:18</strong> See, it's Democrats' fault that rioters stormed the Capitol because they objected to Trump teargassing racial justice protestors. Lock up Mayor Muriel Bowser!<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:20</strong> Nancy Pelosi is the real inciter. Also the national news media, for reporting on Russian political interference. Democrats supported "riots that destroyed vast swathes of American cities."<br>
</p><p>
As the resident of an American city that is often invoked in these situations, let me offer a hearty FUCK YOU, Mr. van der Veen.
</p><p>
<strong>12:22</strong> The theme of the day is CULTURE WAR.
</p><p>
"Constitutional cancel culture!" Because if we impeach Trump, we're really impeaching the "75 million" (not really) Trump voters.
</p><p>
"Unlike the left, President Trump has been consistent in his opposition to mob violence." You know, like the time he
<a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html" target="_blank">offered to pay the bills</a> of his fans who beat up protesters at his rallies.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:28</strong> David Schoen is up to tell us more about how Trump couldn't possibly have incited a riot because he loves police so much.<br>
</p><p>
But first he's going to holler some more about that due process he cares about so much.
</p><p>
<strong>12:30</strong> While Schoen is yelling about something or other — he's mad right now about the videos Democrats showed in their prosecution, says they were withheld from the Defense which is UNFAIR — can we just point out that Trump was offered the chance to testify, and he declined. He had a chance to defend himself; he chose not to.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:32</strong> Now we're yelling about due process in court. This is not a court, it's congress. <br>
</p><p>
Also, Schoen is real mad about reliance on news reports which are uncorroborated. Then he goes on to accuse House managers of doctoring tweets and videos. Without proof, natch.
</p><p>
LOL, he's accusing Raskin of manufacturing graphics because they recreated tweets. You know why Democrats have to recreate Trump's tweets? BECAUSE THE FUCKER INCITED A RIOT AND GOT BOOTED OFF TWITTER, SO HIS DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE.
</p><p>
<strong>12:40</strong> OMG OMG OMG! They're actually arguing with a straight face that this nitwit Trump retweeted, the one who organized the march, was bringing JESUS, aka "calvary", not just botching the spelling of "cavalry."
</p><p>
<strong>12:40</strong> Missed this "incitement to resurrection"
</p><p>
<strong>12:45</strong> Well, we were just treated to five straight minutes of video of Trump yelling at reporters about Charlottesville. Not sure how they think this helps. Supposedly "context?"<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:47</strong> Here's a supercut of Democrats calling for Trump's impeachment. You know, as a chaser for that long lecture on the evils of manipulated videos taken out of context.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:50</strong> More video of Maxine Waters. And Nancy Pelosi. Also Johnny Depp and Madonna???<br>
</p><p>
<strong>12:52</strong> Oh, noes! Not big, scary Elizabeth Warren talking about "fighting back!" Remember all the times she riled up hordes of ladies in their hand-crocheted pink hats to beat a cop to death with a flag? <br>
</p><p>
No?
</p><p>
HUH.
</p><p>
<strong>12:52</strong> Apparently the entire defense is going to just be unending videos of Democrats using the word "fight." Not, like, to a bunch of people who actually went on to lay siege to the Capitol. But, you know, because Democrats are the real inciters.<br>
</p><p>
What even is this shit?
</p><p>
<strong>12:55</strong> ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<a href="https://media3.giphy.com/media/xT8qBbYBBB1uvWbN7y/giphy.gif?cid=2fb0ca763troji65xnv9hwijtx5afjshtronenbdqgx647vm&rid=giphy.gif" target="_blank"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0MzM4Ni9vcmlnaW4uZ2lmIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNTc4Mzg2OX0.Y-rGvGRXCYkB4lfcOxDFNBKvvHvW93c_Sqmf8UtyYRM/img.gif?width=980" id="674bf" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="583d0fe3a3a288e2fe9119702524c7dd" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="480" data-height="344"></a>
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">sleepy clarissa explains it all GIF</small>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">
<a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/xT8qBbYBBB1uvWbN7y" target="_blank">Giphy</a>
</small>
</p><p>
<strong>12:57</strong> What the hell is even happening?
</p><p>
<strong>12:59</strong> Oh, great. Now we're going to watch video of riots interspliced with totally out of context videos of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:02</strong> What does Jamie Raskin objecting to Florida's electors in 2017 have to do with Trump sending the rioters to the Capitol? Fuck if I know.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:05</strong> This is all soooooo bad. I believe Schoen's argument is that an hour of Democrats objecting to the count in 2017 is <em>exactly the same</em> as the sustained, monthslong campaign of outright lies about nonexistent voter fraud and attempts to get legitimate electors thrown out Republicans have waged this year.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:10</strong> What is the point of this horseshit? Like why are we watching videos of Jerry Nadler during the Clinton impeachment? The Republicans already have the votes to acquit, why go out looking like idiots?<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:12</strong> Oh, TG, Schoen's AV Club is done. We've got van der Veen back to talk about First Amendment. But first, a disquisition on "political hatred," from the people who just showed us a supercut of Maxine Waters and Hillary Clinton.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:15</strong> Okay, before we get too far into this bullshit about "there is no First Amendment right not to be impeached" business: There's no "hearsay" in congressional proceedings, and there's no due process. If Trump gets arrested, he can assert all these constitutional protections he likes. This isn't a court of law, this is a political body which can do whatever it likes.<br>
</p><p>
And for van der Veen to criticize the quality of the legal work in the House brief is
<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/09/965590112/i-said-the-opposite-criticism-of-trumps-impeachment-defense-intensifies" target="_blank">fucking rich</a>.
</p><p>
<strong>1:18</strong> "This is not whataboutism" van der Veen said, introducing the same ten clips of Democrats, but this time with ominous back music. <br>
</p><p>
Did Madonna try to assassinate Trump and we missed it?
</p><p>
<strong>1:19</strong> LOLOLOL, VDV just sighed the heaviest, most community theater sigh directly into the microphone. He is deeply disturbed by this terrible rhetoric destroying our democracy. That's why he's here defending <checks notes> Donald Trump.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:22</strong> And now we will dry hump the First Amendment and pretend that impeaching the president for his speech violates the prohibition to "make no law respecting speech." <br>
</p><p>
In this bizarroworld interpretation, swearing allegiance to a foreign government in a KKK robe would be totes cool because FIRST AMENDMENT.
</p><p>
And now we're inventing a standard for "high crimes and misdemeanors" that pretends the definition is not entirely at congress's discretion.
</p><p>
<strong>1:28</strong> Van der Veen is now indignantly exclaiming that he's being threatened by a bunch of law professors who <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2019/12/09/more-than-five-hundred-law-professors-write-a-letter-favoring-impeachment-what-effects-will-it-have/" target="_blank">wrote a letter</a> saying his argument is frivolous shit and that he should be disbarred for advocating it.<br>
</p><p>
"How dare you!" he howls.
</p><p>
Because Republicans are always, always, always the victim.
</p><p>
<strong>1:30</strong> When y'all figure out what these words have to do with the issues at hand, please let me know.<br>
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0MzU0Mi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTA0MDgxMX0.WrhRi-xaVglS0nTWhm6NK0xRJGu7pwkbazQYvTxFZBg/img.png?width=980" id="4ab6e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="51783a9103c3f2813bbf1c39b9428c20" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="696" data-height="387">
</p><p>
<strong>1:30</strong> But while we're on the subject of WHO IS DISGRACE, this implication that there is an extensive body of law saying that presidents have First Amendment rights in impeachment hearings is nonsense. The cases he's citing have ZERO to do with impeachment — they're First Amendment case in regular court.<br>
</p><p>
This is not a regular court! Because this is congress, not the judiciary.
</p><p>
Congress is constituted under Article I, the (federal) judiciary is constituted under Article III. It's just shocking hackery to pretend otherwise.
</p><p>
<strong>1:35</strong> The cases are <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/385/116/" target="_blank">Bond v. Floyd</a> and <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/450/261/" target="_blank">Wood v. Georgia</a> — look at them yourself and see if you think they're on point.<br>
</p><p>
"The House managers do not mention Wood or Bond in the trial brief or anywhere else. Why?" wonders van der Veen.
</p><p>
<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:40</strong> What's that sound you hear? It's every lawyer on Twitter throwing their phones across the room in disgust at once.
</p><div id="d2d57" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ac8647351d9853b6f6a45a29ec1bca62"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360298386449121280" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">1. explicitly OR IMPLICITLY calls for lawless action.
"Implicitly" is EXACTLY what he did.
But again, this is su… https://t.co/JYd0CCBeUK</div> — Elie Mystal (@Elie Mystal)<a href="https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/statuses/1360298386449121280">1613155383.0</a></blockquote></div><p>
<strong>1:42</strong> And if Counselor van den Veen wishes to bring up the <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/492" target="_blank">Brandenburg test</a> for incitement, he is entirely free to address it in a court of law. Which this is not.<br>
</p><p>
<strong>1:45</strong> Who's here for a lecture on hypocrisy from a guy who wept about evil democrats airing quotes out of context — "manipulatively, selectively edited parts of Trump's speech" — with half an hour of supercuts of Democrats using the word fight?<br>
</p><p>
Nobody?
</p><p>
<strong>1:50</strong> Does the Trump brain trust think video of Donald Trump helps their case? Because he's been off the TV for six weeks now, and our ability to tune him out has eroded. He's crazy as a loon, but thanks for the reminder.<br>
</p><p>
Also, this video is edited, which is UNLEGAL.
</p><p>
<strong>1:51</strong> "Spare us the hypocrisy and false indignation!"<br>
</p><p>
DRINK.
</p><p>
Oh, it's fight video o'clock again. Thank God, it's been like ten minutes since we saw these clips.
</p><p>
<strong>1:55</strong> Hahaha, here we go again. Van der Veen is pretending that Trump was instructing the insurrectionists to "fight" for "electoral reform" and to "hold big tech responsible" — not to overturn the electoral college.
</p><p>
And now it is break time. FIGHT!
</p><p>
<strong></strong><strong>2:02</strong> You guys! I regret to inform you that Trump's lawyers may have told a wee fib when they said that they didn't get the House managers' evidentiary videos before the trial.
</p><p>
Try not to pass out.
</p><p>
<strong>2:20</strong> And the senators are filing back in. Hang tight. In the meantime, whores gonna whore.
</p><div id="0c401" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d0d1aca9ba36db6fd915462a63df069e"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360304989390835713" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">President’s lawyers blew the House Manager’s case out of the water. Legally eviscerated them.</div> — Senator Ron Johnson (@Senator Ron Johnson)<a href="https://twitter.com/SenRonJohnson/statuses/1360304989390835713">1613156957.0</a></blockquote></div><p>
<strong>2:25</strong> Here, while you wait,<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/impeachment-dumb-args-redux" target="_blank"> let Jamie splain you</a> how pig ignorant and deliberately deceptive Trump's legal arguments are. Spoiler Alert: VERY.
</p><p>
<strong>2:35</strong> WE'RE BAAAAAACK!<br>
</p><p>
Steve Castor is up, and he's launching into an exegesis into his feelings about representing Trump. Cool, cool, Trump must be delighted.
</p><p>
<strong>2:40</strong> Castor just totally made up a legal definition of "insurrection" having something to do with taking over TV stations or something.<br>
</p><p>
Here's the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383" target="_blank">real statutory definition</a>:
</p><blockquote>
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
</blockquote><p>
If the foo shits ...
</p><p>
<strong>2:43</strong> Castor says he hopes this catchy phrase he just made up will be a "mantra" in the days to come: "Political hatred has no place in the American justice system, and most certainly no place in the congress of the united states."<br>
</p><p>
And now it's video time again. Surprise, it's the exact same dozen clips, interspersed with Trump saying "Law and Order" over and over again.
</p><p><strong>2:45</strong> "Manipulated video." DRINK!<br></p><p><strong>2:46</strong> Their entire argument appears to be that Trump can't have incited a riot because he loves cops. <br></p><p>Oh, wait, we're back to pretending this is a court of law where Trump could get locked up and is thus entitled to due process.</p><p> Also lying about Supreme Court holdings.</p><p><strong>2:50 </strong>Castor just totally lied about Trump not being invited to testify to the House in his own defense.</p><p>He said NFW.</p><div id="d8f9f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="267a37afb60141b3fd9373e5c0540345"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1357428710849343488" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">🚨Response to Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin🚨 https://t.co/I13JBvbkmD</div> — Jason Miller (@Jason Miller)<a href="https://twitter.com/JasonMillerinDC/statuses/1357428710849343488">1612471199.0</a></blockquote></div><p><br></p><p><strong>2:55</strong> Trump didn't incite the riot, because the riot was always going to happen. Everyone in government knew that beforehand. That's why he went down to those people who were raring to riot and told them to fight. <em>Ipso facto</em> totally innocent.</p><p><strong>2:57</strong> LOL, fresh off his lie about Trump being asked to testify, Castor is clutching his pearls about evil House managers deceiving the Senate with manipulated video. Steve Castor wouldn't do that, because he knows God is watching!<br></p><p><strong>3:00</strong> You guys, I don't know how to break it to you. But ... this is some extremely shite lawyering.</p><div id="4e9ba" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5470e9e84a4e1d59a154af464a4a4ae9"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360316945602666499" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Bruce Castor: "I don't know if we're under oath here, but I sure felt like it."... is just an amazing statement from an attorney.</div> — Elie Mystal (@Elie Mystal)<a href="https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/statuses/1360316945602666499">1613159807.0</a></blockquote></div><p><strong>3:02</strong> Castor is now referring to "open source reports" to corroborate his timeline. Wait 'til David Schoen finds out his own side is relying on "unverified" news reports?<br></p><p><strong>3:03</strong> Oh, great, it's movie night again. Bunch of manipulated video of newscasters saying the insurrection was preplanned over screaming Fox music. But, please, sir, go on about evidence which would not be admissible in a court of law.<br></p><p><strong>3:08</strong> Castor is now refuting the House managers' contention that the "surreptitiously recorded" call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger is proof that Trump tried to incite a riot (a contention they never made). See, Trump isn't the one who released the call, so how can he have been using the call to incite a riot.</p><p>This is gobbledygook. The call itself is impeachable conduct, and it goes to show that Trump's intent was to overturn the election result, not encourage his voters to get out and vote in 2022, as these legal eagles have claimed.<br></p><p>And now we're on to the Big Lie trying to "prove" election fraud.Trump will be happy again.</p><p>Castor is accusing Democrats of taking Trump's request to "find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have" out of context. Because there's, we guess, a <em>good context</em> for pressuring an elected official to commit vote fraud.</p><p><strong>3:10</strong> WHY IS CASTOR READING THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE GEORGIA CALL? It makes Trump sound so fucking guilty!<br></p><p><strong>3:13</strong> Castor just accused "the media and their Democratic allies" of distorting the call to make Trump look bad. The call which was immediately released unedited in its entirety, and without a screaming soundtrack to let listeners know how to feel about it.<br></p><p><strong>3:15</strong> JFC, this hearing has more videos than Netflix. <br></p><p>"In a world ..."</p><p><strong>3:16</strong> LOL, Castor just told Congress to quit impeaching Trump and pass some damn covid relief. No doubt Mitch McConnell appreciates the nudge.<br></p><p>Also, cancel culture is bad. THE END.</p><p>Seriously, they're done. Just couldn't do any better than that limpdick performance.</p><h2>Question Time! </h2><p>Rebecca here, Liz is gone for the day and MAN we miss her already!</p><p><strong>Question 1 from Chook and DiFi: </strong>Isn't it true that the violence would not have happened BUT FOR President Trump?</p><p><strong>Joaquin Castro:</strong> He invited the mob, incited the mob, sent the mob, and then sat on his fat ass, so: YUP. The mob "didn't come out of thin air."</p><p>Don't feel like Castro really needed to take the full five minutes there, but at least it gave me time to yell at Shy that I need a drink. He looks really handsome though, and I believe Liz fell down on the "handsome screenshots" part of the job. Oh probably because it was those other guys all day, YOWCH, NO SCREENSHOTS. </p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0NDEzMy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjUzNjIyMX0.OpodfeSLahJto38APZKMip-PvJ3Z4CgpNI5eMmZEHtY/img.png?width=980" id="eed44" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ab3ceff93908bb0b2cc5cb3d06ed3027" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="1686" data-height="916">
</p><p><strong>4:06 Question from Graham, Cruz, Marshall (???) (oh, Kansas):</strong> Did AOC doing bail for protesters mean Democrats are Black?</p><p>Trump lawyer: BLACK!</p><p><strong>4:09 Question from Senator Rev. Warnock of Georgia (yay!): </strong>Did dozens of courts tell Trump's kraken lawyers to GTFO?</p><p><strong>House managers: </strong>For sure! And we sure are not impeaching him for going to court! MAN did he get so much due process for his "big lie." Good for him and his frivolous lawsuits! We're impeaching him for <em>all the rest of it. </em>Like Rep. Cheney said: <em>Summoning a mob, assembling a mob, and lighting a match. </em>The president's lawyers should have addressed it, but they were too busy playing hours of clips of "Fight Song" like five times each because it was the "we have 16 hours of argument to fill" equivalent of three inch margins and 26-point font. </p><p><strong>4:14 Susie Q and the Murk:</strong> When Trump learned of the breach, what did he do SPECIFICALLY to stop it, Trump lawyers? </p><p>Oh this is RICH: Trump's lawyer says it's the House Managers' fault they don't know what their client did (nothing), because THEY did not INVESTIGATE. I cannot even unpack right now how bad-faith it is that they're blaming the Democrats for not their own ignorance of their client's actions, but it is CHOOTSPAH. (The answer is he did literally nothing; sorry the Dems didn't investigate you up an alibi.)</p><p><strong>4:20 </strong>I didn't listen to the last question, but here is House Manager Stacey Plaskett talking about "yeah, his incitement was not just a Rocky training montage and the word fight" it was HAVE YOU NOT BEEN LISTENING? He is "not on trial for those prior statements, no matter how vile, but those statements make clear his</p><p>1) pattern of encouraging violence, never condemning it</p><p>2) his behavior is different; not just an official calling to fight for a cause, but calling upon people whose prior conduct was already violent, assembling them and inflaming them and deliberately encouraging them to engage in violence at a specific day, time, and purpose to stop the certification <em>physically</em> with every reason to know they were armed and violent</p><p>Plaskett says that is why he must be convicted and acquitted ... er disqualified. </p><p><strong>4:25 Tim Scott and Haggerty (?):</strong> Isn't this just a show trial to attack Trump's voters?</p><p><strong>Trump lawyers:</strong> <dribbling shitmouth></p><p><strong>4:30 Markey and Duckworth:</strong> No seriously, did he do anything to stop it?</p><p><strong>Stacey Plaskett:</strong> It was on TV. Everybody saw it. He didn't even tweet them to stop. How come? We don't know! At 4:29 a police officer was still battling, after two three hours. Why didn't he even condemn it? HE DID NOTHING. </p><p><strong>4:33 Mitt Romney:</strong> When he did poops on Mike Pence, did he know people were trying to kill Pence?</p><p><strong>Joaquin Castro: </strong>Sure seems like it, everybody else knew. He took NO measures to send help to the overwhelmed police, didn't even acknowledge the attack, and Tommy Tuberville was like no YOU hang up, oh wait <em>I</em> gotta hang up, they're evacuating the VP. </p><p><strong>Trump lawyers:</strong> Nope, he did not know the VP was in danger, and the House rushed through the impeachment and didn't do its due diligence to give the president an alibi, impeach the House! Also he repeatedly tweeted the crowd to be peaceful and go home (MANY HOURS LATER BECAUSE WHAT IS EVEN CHRONOLOGICAL TIME). </p><p><strong>4:38 Amy Klobs for herself, Casey, and Brown:</strong> Blah blah "precedent," what message does acquitting him send? </p><p><strong>Plaskett:</strong> Dude. Just the worst message! FBI watch listees took photos of memos, desecrated John Lewis's statue, the WORLD WATCHED US. So what are we gonna do about it? They'll know what we did this day one hundred years from now. You wanna embolden the bad guys? Do it. Embolden them? They're "standing by" and "standing ready," waiting and watching, to see if it was, like Donald Trump said, "totally appropriate."</p><p>And by the way, continues Plaskett, the defense sure had a lot of videos of Black women talking about fighting for a cause. Some things happened that WERE violent. And some things happened that gave us comfort: Amish people standing up for us Black women and our children. It's a monumental decision like you have made before: you've voted on wars, you've freed slaves. Our decisions can be controversial but they define us as a people. History will await our decision.</p><p>Goddamn she is SO GOOD. </p><p><strong>4:45 Lee, Hawley, Blackburn, Portman, and the whole crew:</strong></p><p>Why Constitution not state constitutions? They specifically allow impeachment of former officials? Do these underwears go under or over my pants?</p><p><strong>Trump lawyer: </strong>BURP. Framers smart! Many drafts! No typos! </p><p><strong>4:50 Padilla our new California senator:</strong> This is more of a comment than a question, but "Big lie," yeah, I fought that? On the "front lines"?</p><p><strong>Castro: </strong>Cool, buddy, thank you for your service, anyway, people sure died. The defense says everything Trump did was okay, and he could do it again and that'd be great. We really wanna let that happen? He said <em>six months ahead of time</em> it was a rigged election. There's a cost to doing that. And by the way, the defense intimated I misspoke before when I said Trump implied people should fight to the death (reads tweet about Trump saying "if election was stolen from Democrats, they would fight to the death but Mitch won't do anything"), I will MISSPEAK my SHOE up your ASS. </p><p><br></p><p><br></p><p><strong>4:55 Josh Hawley for himself and Kevin Cramer:</strong> How many angels can dance on the head of this pin? Or more precisely, could the Senate disqualify a president without removing him?</p><p><strong>Trump lawyer: </strong>No. Also Castro was lying. Trump guy LITERALLY does unfrozen caveman lawyer: "I'm not from here. I was being polite. They made shit up, and I only had TWO DAYS! Trump said Democrats would be bad, and all hell would break loose, but Republicans are SMARTER!" That's Trump, always complimenting Mitch McConnell!</p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTY0NDM0Mi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxOTc0MzYxNH0.Cj7thdd-FMiSAbl-LcSsWKlYdyuRo61fXp6_n1WfOrQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="d807a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ed8099156fa33bdc102563c41db82387" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="800" data-height="559">
</p><p><br></p><p><strong>Jamie Raskin:</strong> I rule you PROFOUNDLY inaccurate and irrelevant, anyway, I'm a law professor, here's the answer to your question. Eight people have been convicted and removed, and three disqualified. You need two-thirds for conviction and THEN a simple majority for disqualification. You're welcome.</p><p><strong>5:00 Question from Minnesota, so either Klobs or Smith? </strong>Hey, those times you objected to the certification, was that with a mob?</p><p><strong>Jamie Raskin:</strong> No ma'ams. No mob insurrections! No injured and dead cops! If we want to reform the Electoral College, let's do it without violence. </p><p><strong>5:05 Kevin Cramer: </strong>Does anyone love Israel more than Donald Trump?</p><p><strong>Trump lawyer:</strong> Nope, he is basically Hebrew Jesus!</p><p><strong>5:10 Bernie Sanders and oh how I wish we could hear it in his voice:</strong> So, did Trump win the election? </p><p><br></p><div id="eb5e4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a59fbc62bf5403ef2a811782492637e9"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360354803189239809" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">WATCH: Sen. Sanders and Trump lawyer exchange words over question on claim that then-Pres. Trump perpetuated a lie… https://t.co/uuKQto08eP</div> — MSNBC (@MSNBC)<a href="https://twitter.com/MSNBC/statuses/1360354803189239809">1613168833.0</a></blockquote></div><p><br></p><p><strong>Plaskett: </strong>Nope. He lost by millions of votes AND the Electoral College. He went to 61 courts and he lost. He lost the election, he lost the court cases, McConnell recognized it EVENTUALLY. When I lost my first election, I stayed in bed for three days. I didn't lead a riot. He had no support for his rigged claims, but he didn't care, he was just trying to anger up their blood.</p><p><strong>Trump lawyer: </strong>My judgment's irrelevant! (And he has such a SNEER!) The Senate starts throwing poo at him. Leahy says NO POOP THERE, YOU. The question is, Michael van der Veen continues, were his words inciteful to violence or riot. Why won't they answer THAT question! The question they want my client to be punished by! The House managers have showed ZERO evidence of him inciting them (it did, Evan blooged the whole thing). He is v mad!<br></p><p><strong>5:23</strong> Missed some, PBS was talking and my puter was froze! Anyway, how short was the Capitol Police's skirt? </p><p><strong>Trump lawyer: </strong>Jiminy Crickets, v v short! (Your Wonkette agrees, the Capitol Police fucked off its prep! So therefore Trump is innocent.) Who ignored it, van der Veer asks, AND WHYYYY????</p><p><strong>Plaskett</strong>: They got any exculpatory evidence? They are welcome to exculpate all over the place. The House wasn't required to get their alibi for them, particularly when there is no alibi. Why wasn't the National Guard deployed for more than two hours? Mayor Bowser does not have the authority to deploy them. Why didn't the president? Why didn't he say he would send help? He did not defend the Capitol. </p><p>Anyway, it's probably Nancy Pelosi's fault. </p><p><strong>5:28 Jeff Merkley:</strong> If the president stokes Americans, sends a mob to the Capitol, and then expresses "pleasure and delight" (as GOP Sen. Ben Sasse described it!), is that wrong? </p><p><strong>Castro:</strong> Yeah. Once the mob stormed the Capitol, the VP, the Congress, the cafeteria workers, EVERYBODY was in danger, and then he said a few times "stay peaceful" when they'd already gotten violent, already hurt people. What he never said was STOP THE ATTACK. LEAVE IMMEDIATELY. In his 11,000 word incendiary speech, he said "peaceful" once. He said <em>fight</em> almost as much as a Democrat does, BUT TO ARMED PEOPLE. </p><p><strong>5:35 Ted Cruz: </strong>Isn't Kamala Harris the real violence inciter? Blah blah blah "House Managers made up a new standard."</p><p><strong>Jamie Raskin:</strong> Yeah, there's never been a case like this before, where a president attacked the government with a mob, so ... new shit yo!</p><p><strong>Trump lawyer van der Veen:</strong> Trump's incitement fails <em>Brandenburg</em> (it really really doesn't) and when Kamala called on people to burn down cities, that too was protected speech. </p><p><strong>5:40 Patty Murray: </strong>After the riot was finally contained, Trump tweeted, "this is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps," what was that about? </p><p><strong>Castro: </strong>Right? He saw it, we all saw it, why was he like "this is what you get when you're bad to me"? Unless you agree it's something to praise, not condemn. No consolation, no reassurance, no condemnation of the violent attack on Congress? That guy's the WORST! </p><p><strong>5:45 Alaska Senator somebody:</strong> Why do Democrats hate due process for a private citizen?</p><p><strong>Van der Veen: </strong>Prosecutorial misconduct! They say it's our burden to prove their case! (That is ... exactly the opposite of what has actually been happening; the defense lawyers have been mad that the House didn't come up with the answer to "what did Trump do to help" because the answer was nothing.) Without due process, Trump is not entitled to a lawyer or a notice of the charges against him, neither of which is a thing that has happened here! REGIMES! </p><p><strong>5:50 from somebody:</strong> <em>Brandenburg</em> more please!</p><p><strong>Raskin:</strong> Yeah, so many bipartisan law professors say he actually Brandenburged. How do we know he was "likely" to incite violence? BECAUSE HE DID! Brandenburg was about a bunch of racists in a field; the Court said they were unlikely to imminently incite violence because they were in a field! Trump was not in a field! </p><p>ERGO AND SUCH AS! USE YOUR COMMON SENSE. They're treating their client like he's a criminal defendant. The president is not going to spend one minute in jail (BOOOOO), this is about the standard for what kind of country has a shithead like that as president. </p><p><strong>5:55 Marshall of Kansas:</strong> But they went to the Capitol before he was done talking and knocked over the stuff, so ... right? </p><p><strong>Van der Veen:</strong> Yes. And <em>Brandenburg</em> is about crimes, not elected officials, so Jamie Raskin is wrong. </p><p>The fuck he think this gotcha is? "Standards for public officials are higher." Um ... yeah? Now he's talking about tweets and fire chiefs and he's so full of shit his name is Michael van der Veen. </p><p><strong>6:00 Chris Van Hollen:</strong> Hey Jamie Raskin, what the fuck did van der Veen just say? </p><p><strong>Raskin: </strong>Don't even know, man. But he talked about <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/385/116/" target="_blank">Bond v. Floyd.</a> I knew Julian Bond. Julian Bond was a friend of mine. And you, sir ... well you know the rest. <em>Bond</em> was about how they wouldn't swear in Julian Bond to the Georgia state lege because he was against the Vietnam War. SCOTUS said that was a violation of his First Amendment rights. That's ... not what happened here. Trump was sworn in and violated his oath of office. KEEP JULIAN BOND'S NAME OUT YOUR MOUTH. </p><p><strong>6:08 Fucking Rubio: </strong>Doesn't this new precedent of impeaching a former official (not new) let us LOCK HER UP Hillary Clinton?</p><p><strong>Raskin: </strong>Don't know how many times I can say this, "the jurisdictional issue is OVER. It's GONE." The Senate voted for it and also [PRECEDENTS, YOU IDIOTS]. Well, it's not like any of them were listening <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/wonkettes-second-annual-trump-impeachment-trial-liveblog-starts-now" target="_blank">on Tuesday when we went over this. </a></p><p><strong>Van der Veen: </strong>Oh my yes. It could happen to Hillary or anyone, and that would be so awful and bad. And Mr. Raskin doesn't get to tell YOU what you can do, he's not the king of jurisdiction! NULLIFY IT! </p><p><br></p><div id="c7203" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6b518319d5b616def37b58cfb8a1195a"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1360366659190464516" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">“Members of the jury, if you convict my client of inciting a violent mob, you will also be logically required to co… https://t.co/dKOV4HjGAb</div> — Scott Lemieux (@Scott Lemieux)<a href="https://twitter.com/LemieuxLGM/statuses/1360366659190464516">1613171660.0</a></blockquote></div><p><strong>6:17 Bennet of Colorado: </strong>What if Georgia officials had said, "okay Mr. Trump and Mr. Trump's mob surrounding the state capitol"?</p><p><strong>Castro</strong>: Man, the pressure and intimidation — by Trump! — of all the state officials! Michigan, PA, he was blowing up their phones. Georgia was way worse! Siccing death threats on Raffensperger, a Republican, and his family. Did he ever say sorry? Of course not. Another Republican official warned him, "if this continues, someone's going to get killed." (Someone did.) He didn't stop. He said they'd face criminal penalties if they didn't do what he wanted! Just find him those 11,780 votes! THAT IS FUCKING NUTS! You all cool with that? Overturning the election by any means necessary? It wasn't just one speech, one thing, he was trying ERRETHANG. Did a rabbit come out of a hat an a mob show up here all by themselves? COME ON. </p><p><strong>6:27 Either Cruz or Cornyn: </strong>So they're whining about the "January Exception," but we can just put him in jail if it's such a big deal right? </p><p><strong>Van der Veen:</strong> Boring thing. </p><p><strong>Raskin: </strong>Yes, he could be prosecuted; the reason the Framers gave "impeachment powers" to Congress was to protect the Republic. It's not about vengeance. We're not here in anger, but protecting the country. Their January exception would invite officeholders to run rampant in the last few weeks in office because we wouldn't have time to investigate. The transfer of power is always the most dangerous time, coups and seditious plots. You don't have to look at history: IT JUST HAPPENED <em>TO US. </em>Listen to the tapes, unless they're going to claim we fabricated those too!</p><p><strong>6:30: </strong>QUESTION TIME OVER! Chuck would like to vote on a Congressional Gold Medal for Officer Eugene Goodman, who is now getting BIG CLAPS. Bet Rand Paul votes against it. </p><p><strong>6:34 Mitch McConnell: </strong>What Chuck said, not even gonna be a dick about it. </p><p>ADJOURNED! </p><p>You are welcome for this half of the liveblog, which was very great and perfect I'm sure except for the parts I couldn't hear or understand or skipped. Join me at 10 Eastern tomorrow (Saturday) for MORE BLOOG! </p><p>Goodbye!</p><p><strong>Follow Liz Dye on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/5DollarFeminist" target="_blank">RIGHT HERE!</a></strong></p><p>
<strong>Please click here to support your Wonkette. And if you're ordering your quarantine goods on Amazon, <a href="https://amzn.to/2wbH77j" target="_blank">this is the link to do it.</a></strong>
</p><p>
<strong><a href="https://amzn.to/2wbH77j" target="_blank"></a></strong></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form>
<p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Impeachment
Mike Lee Tantrum Reminds Tommy Tuberville Of Hilarious Time Trump Tried To Get Pence Killed
Well, that worked out well.
February 11, 2021 03:33 PM
WTF is Mike Lee whining about now? Here's what Evan wrote in yesterday's liveblog, in case you haven't seen the Utah senator's massive hissy fit at the end of Wednesday's impeachment hearing.
7:29: Oh, surprise, they are quitting for the night! Jamie Raskin says we can come back tomorrow!
First Senator Mike Lee needs to bitch that he does not like how impeachment managers relayed some comments from him, God even fucking knows, Mike Lee needs to go somewhere and shut his fucking face. He says they should be stricken from the record because we're supposed to believe him or something, my God.
Know what you need to do? If you love Wonkette and you love our liveblogs, you need to remember that Wonkette is only funded by you, and click below to give us MONEYS.
7:40: And now Jamie Raskin is making life easier for everybody, withdrawing the Mike Lee thing for now, saying Mike Lee's shit is inconsequential to their case and go eat boners on a Mormon planet in hell (not his words), SEE YOU ALL TOMORROW.
So, what was that about?
<p>Apparently Lee objected to Rep. David Cicilline's characterization of a phone call from then-President Donald Trump during the riot. Trump mistakenly thought he was dialing Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama but reached his Utah buddy instead. (Where's that Sharpie to draw a wiener on the map bonering 'Bama into the Mountain West Conference?)</p><p>Here's how Lee himself characterized the interaction to <em>Salt Lake Tribune</em> reporter Bryan Schott, who originally <a href="https://mailchi.mp/sltrib/the-rundown-an-upsetting-day-in-america" target="_blank">reported it</a>.
</p><blockquote>
<em>A</em><em>nxious to hand the phone to someone else (and not have to argue with the president about matters at hand), I asked if he'd like me to find Senator Tuberville.</em><br>
<em><br>
He said, "Yeah sure, that'd be great." </em><em><br>
<br>
I went and found Senator Tuberville, handed him my phone, and explained that the president would like to speak to him. I stood nearby for the next five or ten minutes as they spoke, not wanting to lose my phone in the middle of a crisis.</em><br>
<em><br>
Then the Capitol Police became very nervous and ordered us to evacuate the chamber immediately. As they were forcing everyone out of the chamber, I awkwardly found myself interrupting the same telephone conversation I had just facilitated. </em><br>
<em><br>
"Excuse me, Tommy, we have to evacuate. Can I have my phone?"</em><br>
<em><br>
Senator Tuberville promptly ended the call and returned my phone to its rightful owner.</em></blockquote><p>
In Cicilline's characterization, "Donald Trump reportedly asked Senator Tuberville to make additional objections to the certification process. That is why he called. Le's be clear: At roughly 2 p.m, when Donald Trump was walking around the White House watching the TV delighted and spent five to ten minutes talking to Senator Tuberville urging him to delay the election results, this is what was happening in the Capitol." And then he cut to video of the horrendous violence going on outside.
</p><p>
Lee said he wasn't the source for the second part of Cicilline's story, as he had no knowledge of the conversation between Tuberville and Trump. Which is fair enough, we suppose, although it's not clear that Cicilline was characterizing Lee as a witness to that part of the story. In the event, Raskin withdrew the statement, saying "This is much ado about nothing because it's not critical in any way to our case."
</p><p>
Then the GOP tried to salvage a disastrous day by shouting HEARSAY over and over and pretending that the Democrats' evidence was all shit.
</p><div id="87aa8" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0da2074ef3f63523a001b74f17f44d9b"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1359703826773770243" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"They would be thrown out of a courtroom for showing this video...They have hearsay on hearsay on hearsay." - David… https://t.co/Q4Qx89O9x5</div> — Trump War Room (@Trump War Room)<a href="https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/statuses/1359703826773770243">1613013629.0</a></blockquote></div><p>
Fun fact: there is no "hearsay" in INPEACH because CONGRESS IS NOT A COURT OF LAW. If Trump's attorney David Schoen is confused on this point, he can Google "Article I" + "Article III" + "What is the difference."</p><p>
But while we're on the subject of Mike Lee and which news reports he <em>is or is not a source on</em>, we'd just like to point out that Trump wasn't the only one who mistakenly dialed Lee's number looking for Tuberville. The president's lawyer Rudy Giuliani did the same thing, leaving a message for "Senator Tuberville, or I should say Coach Tuberville" on Lee's voicemail during the melee. </p><p>"I'm calling you because I want to discuss with you how they're trying to rush this hearing and how we need you, our Republican friends, to try to just slow it down so we can get these legislatures to get more information to you," Giuliani said. "And I know they're reconvening at 8 tonight, but it, the only strategy we can follow is to object to numerous states and raise issues so that we get ourselves into tomorrow—ideally until the end of tomorrow."</p><p>We know exactly what that drooling idiot said, because Cicilline played this voicemail at yesterday's hearing. And you know how he got a recording of Mike Lee's personal voicemail?</p><p>BECAUSE MIKE LEE HIMSELF IMMEDIATELY GAVE IT TO REPORTERS ON JANUARY 6.</p><p>"The problem for Giuliani? He left his message on the voicemail of another senator, who shared it with <em>The Dispatch,</em>" reporter Steve Hayes <a href="https://thedispatch.com/p/giuliani-to-senator-try-to-just-slow" target="_blank">wrote</a> that day. So maybe Sen. Lee should STFU with the performative outrage about what he did or did not say to the media, mmmkay?</p><p>But while we're <em>still</em> on that topic, we'll note that the other witness to this conversation was also in the chamber yesterday. And you didn't see Tommy Tuberville hopping up to object that Cicilline got it wrong about the president leaning on him to slow the count down. </p><p>According to Tuberville, "He didn't get a chance to say a whole lot because I said, 'Mr. President, they just took the vice president out. I've got to go.'" Which prompted <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-pence-tweet-capitol-riot-impeachment-trial_n_6024b281c5b6b295bc045640" target="_blank">every reporter in DC</a> to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/11/tuberville-pences-evacuation-trump-impeachment-468572" target="_blank">look at the clock and note</a> that Pence was removed from the chamber at 2:14 p.m. So if Trump found out about it then, he must have already known that the Vice President was in danger when he attacked him in a tweet at 2:24, saying, "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution."</p><p>Which is ... not a great look. </p><p>So, congratulations to Mike Lee, who just reminded everyone that he hotfooted it to reporters with Giuliani's voicemail while the violence was ongoing, and then managed to jog Tubby's memory about the time Trump found out Pence was in danger and sicced the mob on him. </p><p>You really showed 'em, fella!</p><p>[<a href="https://mailchi.mp/sltrib/the-rundown-an-upsetting-day-in-america" target="_blank">SLTrib</a> / <a href="https://thedispatch.com/p/giuliani-to-senator-try-to-just-slow" target="_blank">Dispatch</a> / <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/11/tuberville-pences-evacuation-trump-impeachment-468572" target="_blank">Politico</a>]<br></p><p><strong>Follow Liz Dye on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/5DollarFeminist" target="_blank">RIGHT HERE!</a></strong></p><p><strong>Please click here to support your Wonkette. And if you're ordering your quarantine goods on Amazon, <a href="https://amzn.to/2wbH77j" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">this is the link to do it.</a></strong></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Newsletter
©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc
