Thursday, January 23, 2020

The Jury Washes Its Hands

A) I have yet to hear any defense of Joe Biden.

B) Biden is not "indefensible" because he needs no defense. This is beyond cavil, but the GOP is beyond the reach of reason.

C) Fighting for documents is more of that "damned if they do/damned if they don't" argument. It's just a way of avoiding responsibility for Trump's corruption and abuse of power. "You can't prove it so we aren't responsible!" That's a terrible abdication and the worst kind of reliance on the "technicalities" that Scott no doubt condemns in criminal defendants.

And is this why Biden is indefensible?
Again: a) these are only opening arguments, and b) you all voted 8 times (or was it 10?) to refuse to allow evidence. So...what were you complaining about again?

The bottom line here is this is the real argument of the GOP, and it is the one they will cower behind as they slink off into history in ignominy:

“The other guy. I’m sorry, Jay Sekulow, started off by saying, ‘he never did anything wrong’ and he didn’t say, ‘he didn’t do this.’ That’s an amazing thing to be missed. He didn’t say, ‘he didn’t do this. He didn’t cut this deal to screw [Volodymyr] Zelensky. He didn’t do this.'”

Wiley held up the White House brief noting that Trump’s team made exactly the point that the House Democrats are making to the Senate.

“Either you have to stipulate to the facts, which are that he did it,” said Wiley. “And this brief really is saying he did it. I mean, if you read it in plain language, ‘he did it. He just shouldn’t be impeached for it.’ I think the only argument to make in the absence of evidence to do what you’re saying, Chris, which is to say, ‘he is a good guy, he wouldn’t do what you’re accusing him of.'”
Which is entirely in keeping with the "technicality defense" Scott alludes to here:  you can't prove it, and besides, it was fine that he did it.  Fine not because Trump did a good thing, but "fine" because it's not grounds for impeachment because...well, the articles of impeachment don't say "quid pro quo."
And no, it doesn't work like that. This is not a matter in which "magic words" must be used in order to invoke the Spirit of Justice. But now we know why Jay Sekulow is the President's lawyer, instead of a real, and competent, defense lawyer. And we can put to rest the whole "sounds like Trump wrote that." It's not Trump; it is his lawyers themselves.

Or the GOP in general; it's impossible to slip a piece of paper between them these days.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)