Posted on 02/03/2021 7:35:17 AM PST by Travis McGee
Matt Gaetz was on with Bannon for the past half hour. The gist is they both think that "the best defense is a good offense" and that the centerpiece must be exposing the truth about the stolen election.
The GOPe Senate HATES this idea, and says Gaetz cannot do it while he is a sitting Congressman.
Matt Gaetz says that he will resign from Congress immediately in order to defend Trump in the Senate.
if he does this who will be doing the apointing of a replacement. if it is a trump suportring govenor go for it if not then it is a stupid move.
What's interesting about this line of argument is that the issue of election fraud is in the article of impeachment. A first response would be to say that it is improper to include a charge in the article of impeachment and then deny the President the right to put up a defense against the charge.
From the article of impeachment:
2 ...In the months preceding the Joint Ses
3 sion, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements
4 asserting that the Presidential election results were the
5 product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted
6 by the American people or certified by State or Federal
7 officials. Shortly before the Joint Session commenced,
8 President Trump, addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in
9 Washington, DC. There, he reiterated false claims that
10 ‘‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide’’.
The predicate for Trump's alleged crime is that he repeatedly made "false statements" that said that the election was fraudulently won and that's how he "incited" the crowd at the rally.
A natural defense would be that the crowd didn't need "incitement" on this issue because there was plenty of public information already out there that the people were well aware of. He could then submit as evidence the information that the people had access to.
I would say that he doesn't necessarily want to spend the time trying to prove that the election was fraudulently won, but only that reporting of the evidence of election fraud presented at hearings held by several state legislatures was widely available to people who attended the rally, and therefore the President did not incite the crowd "with false statements."
These were statements made under oath at several state legislature hearings, the President should argue.
-PJ
Texas is also.
No question about it.
It comes down to how red his district is, what the competition looks like, and how liked he is.
That said, he won his district 64.6 to 34.0, so he's not likely to lose that support in a rerun.
-PJ
I’ve been looking for confirmation of this happening and so far, silence. Seem like it would be big news.
Better dead than red
He’s one of the few actual conservatives in the House. Call me selfish.
You could not be more wrong.
There were interlocutory cases during the 1st Impeachment and the 1st Impeachment Trial that simply did not reach SCOTUS because the Democrats feared that very thing -- trying interlocutory cases or In Re: Impeachment in SCOTUS -- and after their attempts to depose Trump admin officials beforehand, simply mooted the same Trump admin officials subpoenas to appear at Impeachment to prevent any appeals.
This nearly got away from Nancy when Charles Kupperman refused to stop fighting his Federal case despite her mooting his subpoena! Then Mulvaney tried to plead into Kupperman's case precisely to send it to SCOTUS! United States District Court Leon (Shrub appointee, of course) rejected Mick's suit but had to grovel to Kupperman's lawyer and basically commit fraud upon the Court and assure Kupperman the case would eventually be dismissed.
Then in the 1st Impeachment Trial, the Senate barely voted against witnesses for the exact. same. reason. That is why only a couple of RINOs were allowed to vote for witnesses. You could not have had witnesses because they would have immediately hit SCOTUS.
Why do you think Rand -- who consistently communicates with the Majority Leader -- was even allowed to present his procedural vote! Schumer could have prevented that with simple Senate parliamentary out-of-order.
This trial, I state again, the first defense order-of-business should be to ticklist every Constitutional question and tell Leahy the Complaints are being filed as. we. speak.
Pull Queeg directly into this Constitutional crisis which he cannot and must not avoid.
That is the SHOT OVER The BOW! Yes, he can have evidence from here to ETERNITY on the Fraud of Voting.
And they are impeaching him again to try and prohibit him from ever running for office again
Yet one of the Democrats who votes to impeach was himself impeached as a judge.
It’s just stupifying
No one can be appointed to the House of Representatives.
You cannot enter the House as a Member unless you are elected. Vacancies are sometimes filled by special election, and sometimes they are left open until the next biennial election.
I appreciate the point, but when the bias of the “arbiter” is so blatant, it goes against every concept of fairness in any adjudication. I’d like to know if the past cases of the President Pro Tempore was of the opposing party or had a long history of hatred toward the impeachee (made that word up).
And a sitting senator gets to be the “judge”?
Resigning your seat and running in the special election to fill the vacancy used to be a thing done when House members changed parties. I do not recall anyone doing since Phil Gramm in the early 80s.
It is divided & this is a farce.
Leahy is president pro tempore of the Senate which is why he is presiding as the judge. Pro tempore have served as judges in the past during impeachment trials.
Just a minor quibble. Leahy will serve as the Presiding Officer of the Senate. When the Chief Justice crosses over to the legislature, he assumes the role of Presiding Officer of the Senate, not judge.
there is always a first time!
Well, what cases has he tried? I've searched, and I can't find much of anything about his career as a lawyer other than he was an associate at a now-defunct firm in Fort Walton, FL. No high-profile verdicts or appellate cases that I can find. He had only been out of law school for 3 years when he joined the Florida House, and less than 10 before joining Congress.
Trump already has real lawyers defending him. He has no need of Gaetz. Of course, if Gaetz is silly enough to resign his seat for no reason, maybe his safe Republican district could use a representative with better judgment.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.