President Trump Official Response to Senate Trial Notification…

A response to the formal summons from the Senate, notifying the Executive Office of the President of impeachment proceedings, was due at 6:00pm ET today.   The White House has responded [WH pdf link – and embed below] with a seven-page position answer.

[Via White House] THE HONORABLE DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, HEREBY RESPONDS:

The Articles of Impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their President. This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election—now just months away. The highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the President began the day he was inaugurated and continues to this day.

.

Previously adopted by unanimous consent:

  • A Summons to the White House notifying them of the impeachment trial will be issued by the Senate.  A deadline for WH response: Saturday January 18th, 2020, 6:00pm,
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of 5:00pm Saturday, January 18th, 2020, for the filing of their impeachment brief to the Senate.
  • The White House (defense lawyers) have a response deadline of 5:00pm Monday, January 20th, for their response to the House impeachment brief.
  • The House of Representatives (impeachment managers) have a deadline of Noon Tuesday, January 21st, for their rebuttal brief to the White House defense brief.
  • The Senate Trial begins at 1:00pm Eastern, Tuesday January 21st, 2020.

Senators will not be allowed to bring their cell phones or any electronic device into the Senate chamber while the trial is underway.

This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, propaganda. Bookmark the permalink.

309 Responses to President Trump Official Response to Senate Trial Notification…

  1. MaryfromMarin says:

    Amen to what our @POTUS said.

    Liked by 29 people

    • first 3 lines of the last page are repeated from former page.

      Like

    • G. Alistar says:

      Perhaps my biggest frustration is the dems are stealing my 2016 vote for the POTUS. Chief Justice Roberts in the past, has had a strong record of siding with whomever the voters of the nation have chosen — our duly elected President. We will certainly see what he is made of next week. IF he agrees and the Senate dismisses this without witnesses, it will let a bunch of snakes off the hook.

      Like

  2. Hahahaha Sekulow’s first and middle names are mine as well, just reversed.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. FofBW says:

    The truth is like a sharp sword.

    It will cut through all the lies, narratives and scams.

    Liked by 29 people

  4. WSB says:

    I might have sent a letter consisting of two choice words….but this will do.

    Liked by 42 people

  5. donnyvee says:

    I like it. My dream version of it is a bit shorter. “Hey congress. F**k you”

    Liked by 14 people

  6. hoghead says:

    Logic, good sense, careful judgment and the rule of Law will prevail; this response to the communists’ raging shouts it.

    Oh wait, it IS 2020. The looners are not on the path.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Bob says:

    Hopefully the Speaker from the Great State Kentucky calls for a vote one minute after the Senate opens. Tally the votes in five minutes and let congress go on with more important business of the People, such as term limits.

    Liked by 18 people

    • vikingmom says:

      Sadly, that will NEVER happen! The day anyone in Congress votes to limit their own power will be the day we get back our country…so, yeah, don’t hold your breath!!

      Liked by 9 people

    • mikeyboo says:

      I would love for that to happen. But if Pres Trump puts on a defense that takes a little longer and leaves these mother-fluckers totally defeated and gasping for breath I will be over-joyed.
      God bless Pres Trump and his family. THEY have been a blessing to all American patriots.

      Liked by 13 people

  8. A2 says:

    The response, now that the President may do so, is absolutely correct.

    Liked by 16 people

  9. joshashland says:

    Can’t begin to imagine how many pages will be in the Monday night briefing from WH lawyers to Nadler and Schiff.
    Hope it’s gloriously long and arduous reading for them to respond to the next day by noon.

    Liked by 17 people

  10. jrapdx says:

    The excitement begins. And it will be exciting because the President and legal team aren’t going to take the Democrat Schiffshow lightly. Today’s response lays out in no uncertain terms the unconstitutional basis for the articles delivered to the Senate.

    Not that there’s anything unexpected in the President’s response, it’s been talked about plenty. But it was expressed directly and forcefully which gives us a sample of what’s to come. It’s going to only get more intense, with the “brief” to be filed by Monday and the answer to it.

    My hunch is the President would really like to have witnesses testify and be cross-examined. For one thing the Democrats have NO credible witnesses. Secondly the House “managers” are legal lightweights compared to the President’s team. The latter will rip the House witnesses to shreds.

    OTOH when high-powered witnesses like Giuliani testify for the President, the Schiffless House managers will be unable to counter devastating testimony that blows away impeachment charges and implicates Democrats in tremendous fraud and corruption.

    However the Senate trial proceeds, I fully expect the President comes out a winner and the Democrats sorry they ever started down the impeachment path. Should be a wild and fun ride!

    Liked by 21 people

    • Zorro says:

      Democommunists will never be sorry until incarcerated or hung. They will love POTUS being tied up for weeks and breathless headlines, however false, from their co-conspirator propagandists. There is no other story line for their candidates except if they create a VA bloodbath.

      Liked by 23 people

      • I’m afraid you’re a prophet.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Somebody's Gramma says:

        I think Jordan Peterson said it best, “ideological psychopaths”, although not in reference to this particular discussion, his point was, don’t be one. The democommies are definitely that.

        Liked by 5 people

      • mikeyboo says:

        Of course the Democrats will continue nattering-its what they do. But I believe the country is ready to move on. McConnell and Republicans should make this short and sweet. I think most of the country will be appreciative of a quick end to this crap and delighted to move on. As for the others, fluck ’em if they can’t take a joke!

        Liked by 3 people

      • jrapdx says:

        Can’t disagree that the Demo-leftists are relentlessly selfish and mean-spirited, care only about their dominance and not a whit about the American people.

        Frankly it matters not a bit if they say they’re sorry. The only important thing is that they’re defeated and removed far from any positions where they can continue to do harm.

        The more they bungle their impeachment farce the more likely they’ll lose out in the elections. I have great faith that President Trump is determined to pummel the Democrats as much as possible, pound them into the earth as the Senate trial unwinds and will emphatically succeed.

        I think it’s highly likely the result of President Trump’s glorious efforts will leave the Democrats feeling sorry they invoked the very nightmare that will soon envelope them.

        Liked by 2 people

    • jeans2nd says:

      You are forgetting who sits behind and feeds the Socialist democrat’s legal lightweights – Lawfare. Lawfare are no lightweights, and they will feed and rehearse the Socialist democrat’s legal lightweights, including being the scriptwriters.

      After all, Adam Schitt, being from Hollywood, considers everything to be just another rehearsal for his next starring role in The Travails of A Power Seeker On His Way To The Presidency-Dictatorship.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Ellis says:

        Lawfare is a group of third rate lawyers. They are total lightweights in way over their heads.

        Like

      • jrapdx says:

        “Lawfare” is just a bunch more lawyers and at that outmatched by the President’s team. Besides “Lawfare” hasn’t had such great success lately, won’t be a bit surprising to see this impeachment process blow up in their faces.

        Schiff himself suffers from grandiosity without anywhere near the talent to back it up. He thinks he’s good at lying, but really he’s as transparent as the finest clear glass.

        His impending collision with reality is going to be rudely abrupt. He better have his seatbelt tightly fastened, but even if he does it still might not be enough to save him.

        Like

  11. Mike says:

    Short and sweet.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. 6x47 says:

    Once again history presents Chief Justice John Roberts with the opportunity to become a great jurist by issuing a summary judgement dismissing with prejudice the unconstitutional articles of impeachment.

    But doing so requires honor, integrity, and courage: None of which John Roberts possesses. So the mediocrity who sits as Chief Justice will weasel out, as he always does, and hope better men than he will stand up for what is right.

    Tragic, really, that a man so manifestly unfit for his post is in this position at a time when the Constitutional order is falling apart.

    Liked by 20 people

    • NJMAGA says:

      This sham should not be allowed to proceed to a trial. But it will. Justice Roberts will have done more damage to the Constitution than anyone else in my lifetime. Count on it.

      Liked by 8 people

    • peace says:

      I suspect that President Trump now knows what the dems blackmailed Roberts with in order to pass Obamacare. Thus, the blackmail is a non-issue now.

      Liked by 2 people

      • dammit_janet says:

        My guess is it had to do with using the birth parents of his adopted child as leverage. That leverage would only work until the child is old enough to decide for themselves is if challenges came up. The ACA decision was a decade ago, so the leverage may no longer apply. Just my guess.

        Like

        • CountryDoc says:

          I keep hearing this. I can’t imagine worse case scenario, even if Roberts illegally adopted his kids, that would cause a true patriot to violate the constitution, justice, or control his Supreme Court writings. Is there ANY evidence in the history of Justice Roberts of that kind of duplicity?

          Liked by 1 person

          • dammit_janet says:

            As I think more about Roberts’ Hail Mary pass to save the ACA by calling it a tax, giving him the benefit of doubt he could have been more influenced by the voters that put Obama in office with the promise of affordable healthcare.

            Like

      • CountryDoc says:

        I would like to know that is true. I suspect it is. Our trust of POTUS is high. Our understanding of what he knows and where the score card is on what he has control/knowledge of is limited. Others may know. There are many spies, traitors, swamp creatures pretending to be good. My best reassurance has been that POTUS has been so unbelievably successful in what he has done and consistent with what he says his goals are, despite so much resistance.

        Like

    • lieutenantm says:

      I agree but Roberts is not sitting as a judge here…….The Senate as a whole is both JUDGE and JURY. Roberts sits as…basically…a facilitator..and process clarifyer?

      Liked by 12 people

      • X XYZ says:

        That’s right.
        The senate proceeding is not a “trial” as we know it, nor is it intended to be .
        Robert’s role in presiding over it is that of window dressing – to sit back, smile and look officious in his official robes..

        Liked by 2 people

    • I totally agree. Roberts is not qualified for the position. He is a very small man.

      Liked by 1 person

      • CountryDoc says:

        What power does he have if the senate democrats and traitor rinos behave as the house did, or even worse, if there are very subtle and illegal strategies by the lawfare schemers to subvert a true process?

        Like

  13. Tom22ndState says:

    So, the traitor’s brief is out now as well, yes? I’m gonna go seek it out.

    Like

  14. gearhound99 says:

    Impeachment without a crime and subsequently re-elected after being acquitted.

    Liked by 4 people

  15. nigelf says:

    Three words I would have liked to have seen added to this:
    Bill of Attainder.

    Liked by 4 people

  16. The garbage charges deserve dismissal. The President, however, deserves an acquittal.

    And Democrats deserve the ass-whipping they’re gonna get. Scum.

    Liked by 14 people

  17. hawkins6 says:

    Here are two of the most reputable, unbiased Senatorial Jurists discussing President Trump’s Official Response to his Senate Trial Notification. Like all the other Democrat Senators, they are engaged in a serious apolitical deliberation in order to ensure a fair and impartial trial vote for their beloved President.

    President Trump can relax, knowing that the impartial Senate jury has been vetted on the Dem side to emulate Weissmann’s Dream Team, Crossfire Hurricane and the Kavanagh hearing impartiality and lack of bias. However, the GOP side has a few surly members that can not be reliably vetted for their fairness or their wisdom.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. TwoLaine says:

    I wish someone really smart on the President’s team would draw the stark parallels between what has been done to him in this impeachment SCAM, and before, and what is done in the the FISA court and process.

    All secret. No representation. No due process. Selective editing and facts. Total railroad job. Just a bunch of snake operatives and black robes riding roughshod over Lady Justice.

    FISA MUST BE ABOLISHED!

    Liked by 21 people

  19. C says:

    I only wish the document had discussed the methods that were used to generate this fraud…like the fake whistle-blower, the actions of the lawfare group, etc. I know that isn’t in reference to the two articles, but that background would have been helpful.

    Like

  20. Coast says:

    I only wish the document had discussed the methods that were used to generate this fraud…like the fake whistle-blower, the actions of the lawfare group, etc. I know that isn’t in reference to the two articles, but that background would have been helpful.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Pew-Anon says:

    This reads more like an American Thinker article than a high quality legal statement. I’m not inclined to think that’s a good thing. Hopefully this does not portend problems.

    Like

    • Dee says:

      I thought it was fine, concise, to the point on each point. Pointing out the unconstitutional nature of the articles, lays it right out there, just the facts.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Diana Allocco says:

      This is basically the executive summary, NOT the legal brief.

      It’s perfect.

      Liked by 6 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      You mean like a political document rather than a legal document don’t you? Nothing legal about this impeachment hoax rather everything is political. Two worries: this dems in the house has their chance, I think the senators up for election in Nov will be doing some soul searching. The witnesses is a wild card, they will potentially implicate a number of both Democrat and Republican politicians. Great for the POTUS and a worry in that deep state actors might be exposed. It’s politically dangerous and perhaps legally dangerous if established they took kick backs like Hunter Biden.

      Like

      • Pew-Anon says:

        I suppose the political angle is one way if looking at it. But if you have tons of legal ammo, and they do, why not fire it?. I don’t see any legal shots fired here, at least no quality shots.

        Like

        • G. Alistar says:

          Perhaps the trap is still catching corrupt politicians, appointees and SES’s or perhaps the timing associated with November 2020 plays a role. Or perhaps it’s ongoing with grand juries we are not privy to. Maybe it just takes a while to get the legal issues nailed down (you can’t even get a no contest divorce in Less than a year.). Other?

          Like

    • peace says:

      It’s an easy read so the average American voter can read and understand it – it’s written in plain English

      Liked by 3 people

  22. thatgreatnorthernguy says:

    I find this consice and understandable, even for some one as myself with only a high school education. I haven’t seen the Democrat filing yet, but will excessively wordy and legally thin. Read “in the light of intelligence, as guided by experience'” the only conclusion is for AQUITTAL.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Maria says:

    My respect for Mr. Sekulow, lawyer to the President and author of that response, just went up a notch.

    Liked by 8 people

  24. Normally Quiet Observer says:

    The Senators are prohibited from having electronics devices in the chamber … does that ALSO include their staffers? Silly, and stupid, if it doesn’t. IMHO.

    Liked by 6 people

  25. Chimpy says:

    The President’s legal team should subpoena ALL the testimony transcripts that occurred during the House proceedings.

    Liked by 11 people

  26. Steve in MT says:

    This answer was a throwing down of the gauntlet to the Schiff Circus. While the House keeps saying that it has been abundantly clear that crimes were committed, they are whistling by the graveyard with nothing to show. I could easily see this case dismissed by Wednesday, but I think the squishes will drag it out for a week and then dismiss.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. Our tax dollars will not buy enough vodka to dull the pain and angst of queen nancy
    And the hangovers will be brutal
    Enjoy your final days you hag. I’ll be watching.
    Waiting.

    Liked by 4 people

  28. amwick says:

    I am pretty sure that SD explained, more than once, that the subpoenas were not valid,,, the response calls them constitutionally defective. I am glad this was addressed clearly…

    Liked by 16 people

  29. MaineCoon says:

    First him.

    Then us.

    “In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote.”

    Truth will prevail.

    Liked by 16 people

  30. Joebkonobi says:

    POTUS makes a compelling argument that the House Impeachment process, as well as the articles of impeachment are unconstitutional. Every Senator has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. Would seem to me that if they vote for anything other than dismissal of the articles they are not upholding the Constitution.

    There should not be a single vote other than to dismiss both articles and the trial. Any Senator voting for dem witnesses are breaking their oath of office. Simple.

    Liked by 13 people

    • WSB says:

      Great point, Joe!

      Liked by 2 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      Great point Joe, I fear that like me, you are a dreamer. More honor in the Vito Corleone family than in most of our democrat legislators.

      Liked by 1 person

    • X XYZ says:

      “Every Senator has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution.”

      Yeah, and they ALL just now took an oath to be “impartial”. Yeah, right. (sarcasm explicit)

      HAHAHHAH! AN OATH!!! WOW! They took an OATH! OOOOHHHH! How impressive!

      What’s an oath worth? That’s the fly in the ointment. It’s the big loophole. As any good lawyer will always tell you: “get it in writing”.

      Like

    • CountryDoc says:

      Do not the house representatives also take an oath to uphold the constitution? If I were supreme court chief, and the violations of the constitution really are a clear cut and obvious as they seem to be, I would be riduculing everyone in the house who inititated, facillitated, or did not speak up against this — AND be threatening to report every one of them who is a lawyer to the BAR as not worthy of their license. I’m dreaming, but it really is that bad.

      Liked by 2 people

    • amwick says:

      I agree Joe, but every Congress Critter takes an oath…That really upsets me… They swear this and that,,, it is totally bogus to most of them. THat is how we got here, in this mess. They have no ethics, no honor (so many of them)…

      Like

  31. wlbeattie says:

    I’ll quote what I wrote on twitter!

    ” As a layman, I could read and understand that document.
    It’s well written and easily understood!

    I don’t think I’ll be alone in that area! 😇👍”

    Liked by 8 people

    • theoldgoat says:

      This document is meant for the people to be able to read and understand, it isn’t smothered with legalese to hide the meaning of the words. It is how most of the documents were made in our founding, so it was concise, clear and the average person would be able to hear it or read it and understand it.
      This is the whole sum of the truth against what the House National Socialists did.
      The next document, I suspect, will contain a lot more legal references and be meant to confront the Lawfare group as well as the corrupt House managers of this sham impeachment.

      Liked by 6 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      Yes, yes, yes! It is precise and accurately targeted to the “people” of these United States. The citizens who will be holding all of them politically accountable in November 2020.

      Liked by 2 people

  32. Jorizabeth says:

    BTW, Off topic maybe, but…. Where’s Rush been this week?

    Liked by 1 person

  33. JohnCasper says:

    This bogus impeachment is a fraud wrapped in a hundred fabrications inside a thousand lies.

    Liked by 12 people

  34. What’s really happening is…..is what Lawyer can BS the best……until people realize the Law profession is corrupt beyond repair nothing will change…

    Liked by 2 people

  35. litlbit2 says:

    If McConnell was not so hog tied through the Secretary of Transportation to the Swamp and CoC, he would take charge of his Senate Chamber and remove Silly Nancy’s grasp on his manly parts. Come Monday, man up or grab ankles! Waiting.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. JohnCasper says:

    This letter should go down in history along with J’accuse.

    “I accuse” (J’accuse) was the letter written by Émile Zola to the president of the French Republic in defense of Alfred Dreyfus who had been wrongly accused of treason by the French Army. It was published in the newspaper L’Aurore on Jan. 13, 1898.

    Liked by 2 people

  37. JohnCasper says:

    Sekulow may well be today’s Emile Zola.

    Liked by 4 people

  38. surakvulcan says:

    For God’s sake go to SCOTUS immediately and demand they vacate this unconstitutional impeachment. The articles have not alleged ANY crimes! Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress aren’t violations of US Code! This is a mere no-confidence motion dressed up as an impeachment. Even if POTUS is acquitted, all future presidents will be permanently in a state of war with houses that don’t like them. Stop this farce now!

    Liked by 5 people

    • mopar2016 says:

      I agree, but we seem to be living in the Twilight Zone these days.
      Things are really stupid now and the country has been systematically dumbed down.


      https://images.dailykos.com/images/707029/large/Barr_Epstein-Suicide-Note_Redacted-Summary.png?1565744594

      Liked by 5 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      No, while I realize there is danger here but I really want witnesses. It will be a crushing blow to Adam Schiff, Nadler and Democrats in general even IF it does catchup a few corrupt republicans.

      Like

    • MelH says:

      A Bill of Attainder is a legislative act that imposes punishment without a trial. It nullifies the targeted person’s civil rights. Just in case you wondered.
      On another matter, immediate acquittal leaves truth in question . However, it is a fact that Democrats can’t accept the truth , so why offer it?
      I just want John Bolton buried, though I have NO idea what he would say. Democrats wanting him to testify tells me he has a bone to pick. He was fired by the President, wasn’t he?

      Like

    • Andy Krause says:

      SCOTUS has no authority over political decisions. The Constitution states that the Senate decides. If the evidence is lacking for impeachment so be it. The Senate will vote. There is nothing for SCOTUS to rule on. If the House wishes to be at war with the Executive they will be.

      Like

    • ILOT says:

      I’m convinced it’s what they want. With discussions of pushing for elimination of the EC circulating it won’t belong before the progressive left is convinced that POTUS serves at the pleasure of Congress. At that point why have elections…?

      Like

  39. milktrader says:

    I can’t decide if I want this to end or want it to start!

    Liked by 2 people

  40. Unfortunately, Jay Sekulow operates from the position that the system is honorable…..

    Liked by 1 person

  41. freespeechfanatic says:

    We are being absolutely subverted and betrayed by the Republican Senate. Don’t let McConnell (or Cruz, or any of them) fool you. That they aren’t dismissing these specious articles forthwith is more than enough evidence. They’re cowards and Quslings and want Trump gone, but they realize they’re walking on eggshells and need to be extraordinarily careful and coy. The next few months will be revealing and perilous, both.

    Liked by 4 people

    • G. Alistar says:

      Rather it is a trap….to catch corrupt politicians. Both Dems and GOP.

      Like

      • CountryDoc says:

        What are your supporting points and logic for that conclusion, Alistar? I pray this can happen.

        Like

        • G. Alistar says:

          First, hasn’t President Trump alluded to “we caught them” several times? Durham has been tight lipped but working for months. Bill Barr also said Obama’s Administration was spying on the Trump campaign and later his administration. Didn’t Admiral Rogers inform Trump about the illegal spying even before inauguration? Importantly, I think it a trap for swamp creatures because POTUS ran on draining the swamp. Rosenstein, may have been in one the plan from the start or he may have flipped when confronted with damning evidence. He is like fickle Senators who support a Trump only when it is convenient). Rosenstein, more than anyone could have access to emails, texts, documents which make a case against corrupt actors. IF I’m wrong, something else big has been going on….I wrote here on CTH months ago that someone very powerful and with very good access has been selectively informing DoJ good guys about the corruption (I.e., Strozk/Page, Comey, McCabe, etc.). Trump is not just a businessman, hotel owner, TV personality…he is a billionaire because he is smart and cut his teeth in the dangerous and brutal NYC real estate market. Importantly, his sense of serving Americans economically, securing the border, military are not done for political or financial reasons, rather he loves our country. We have cold anger for all this corruption….I cannot imagine his cold anger with all the constant personal attacks, lies, and the Mueller coup. Pray he traps all the S.O.B.s and makes em pay.

          Liked by 4 people

    • Andy Krause says:

      Pelosi can marshal the House Democrats to vote in block. None of them leave the reservation. McConnell always has two or three flakes that cause problems. Why are the “flakes” never punished?

      Liked by 1 person

  42. trialbytruth says:

    Well done short and sweet.

    It could be shortened to “bite me” or “nuts” but this was more appropriate for the powdered bum set.

    Liked by 3 people

  43. PCS says:

    I wonder if Trump’s legal team gets that the Democrats want to subvert anything that they can. Or everything they can.
    Run up massive spending that would cause an economic collapse? Check.
    Subvert the rule of law and especially the Constitution? Check.
    Lie, lie, and lie some more until lying is totally normal and socially normal? Check.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. J says:

    The tyrants response to the Presidents defense brief will be interesting reading. How do you refute black and white fact that the Constitution as written has been violated in numerous ways by the House Dems?

    Liked by 2 people

  45. Matt Transit says:

    Pray for President Trump.
    At least one of his “advocates” refuses to support him.
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/18/donald-trump-impeachment-news-today-alan-dershowitz

    Like

  46. History Teaches says:

    So far, the Lawfare braintrust has been orchestrating all this under their terms. Working together with the House elite, tweaking rules and laws to their advantage. And using the MSM to spin and spread disinformation and a perverted view of the constitution.

    Finally, they are confronting serious opposition. And in a forum where they couldn’t achieve all the conditions they wanted.

    The playing field has now changed. The opposition is serious, savvy, hardened, shrewd and motivated.

    This is not the minor leagues of the House basement, with Pelosi and company banging out signals on garbage cans.

    Winning will not only be acquittal. Winning will be the evisceration of the Lawfare forces. Ripping their constitutional arguments to pieces and once and for all establishing that clever wordcraft is a thin veneer for intentionally seditious behavior.

    Liked by 8 people

  47. clulessgrandpa says:

    Great letter, but what happens with it now? Who could rule on the constitutionality of the Articles? Shouldn’t the first item on the agenda for any impeachment be whether the Articles are constitutional?

    Liked by 1 person

    • theoldgoat says:

      It is a political process, not really a legal process. It is part of the interesting aspects of our Founders’ thinking on this. Any President could be impeached for any political purposes, but until now, most recognize that doing so jeopardizes the majority party that brings purely political charges.
      This move should be political suicide for the left. Should be.
      The assumption the Founders made was that charges like the garbage that this House brought forth would never have been attempted, as it harms the Republic and could negatively impact the offices of the House, Congress and the Executive Office.
      Roberts might be able to make a statement on their constitutionality, but only if asked specifically by the Senators. I don’t know if that is voted on, and if it is, how many would be required to have him give a legal answer about it.
      The Founders lived in a time when honor was an individual characteristic, not politically motivated. I don’t think, even with as brilliant as they were, they ever thought such corruption would exist in a majority of the House to allow such nonsense to move forward.

      Liked by 3 people

      • SHV says:

        Excellent comment, it is a political process and the “feed back” loop for this bad behavior of the Dem/Thugs is at the ballot box in 10 months. In reading the “brief”, I think the President’s team is making the correct argument that this impeachment is an affront to the American People. The good news is that the corrupt MSM will have to cover the “trial” and this position will have a positive influence on hopefully 10-15% of voters who can be persuaded to vote these corrupt pols out of office.

        Liked by 1 person

      • WSB says:

        If you read through any of our founders’ history and later, you will find worse instances of immoral corruption. They knew.

        Allow this to play out.

        The Constitution was written knowing human behavior for a couple thousand years at that point.

        Liked by 5 people

      • WSB says:

        PS…why do you think people made a pilgrimage to this continent in the first place?

        Liked by 2 people

      • CountryDoc says:

        I think the founders never expected this much corruption, or intellectual blindness. But they did foresee it. Jefferson in his wisdom, as well as Franklin, were concerned about the long term viability of the republic. Jefferson from the point intellectual capability of the general population, and Franklin from a general historical perspective.

        Liked by 2 people

  48. David Farrar says:

    If we must go through with this silly charade of a Senate impeachment trial, at least it should be for a good cause. Tightening up Article II, §4 to require (in the absence of an alleged crime) a one/third bipartisan vote in the House to approve an impeachment vote would be a good place to start.

    Accordingly, after the House mangers present their case in chief, a motion should be made to declare the House impeachment articles unconstitutional, with the addendum that said motion be sent to the judiciary for its decision on the motion. Should it be upheld, the Senate impeachment trial would come to an abrupt end. Should SCOTUS fail to uphold the motion, the impeachment trial would go forward.

    Liked by 1 person

    • amwick says:

      This is what I keep wondering about… sorry, broken record… I don’t think the House will clean itself up by Tightening Article II, so it is up to the Senate… Would it make sense for the Senate to address these two articles, and then say something like, if the House vote is not bipartisan in the future, we will accept the articles, but then dismiss them??

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s