I agree with everything you just said.
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.
freepersup: Looks like Matt Gaetz can keep his day job.
>>> Trump Impeachment Lawyer: ‘Stolen’ Election Claims Won’t Be Brought Up During Trial <<<
BY JACK PHILLIPS February 3, 2021 Updated: February 3, 2021
Trumps EO is based on “proven”
foreign interference in the
presidential election. Since
no evidence has been allowed
to be heard in a court of law,
the EO remains dormant. It’s
not a bluff. And Trump has not
been called on it. Trump’s
team has that evidence, hence
the rush to try and put him
out of any position to pursue.
The Rats are very afraid of
evidence seeing the light of
day.
Oops. I guess one has to have an account online to read the article.
I had read the same article in it’s entirety via my cell phone as a subscriber to The Epoch Times daily emails that I receive, and went online to post a link to the same ET article, here at FR. Seems it’s protected content.
The headline tells the story.
The defense:
1- unconstitutional procedure
2- allegations denied
You could not be more wrong.
SCOTUS agrees with rollo tomasi. The Supreme Court held in Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224 (1993), that Art. I, § 3, cl. 6's grant of the "sole Power to try all Impeachments" to the Senate means "the Senate alone shall have authority to determine whether an individual should be acquitted or convicted." The "[a]uthority in the Senate to determine procedures for trying an impeached official" is "unreviewable by the courts." The Constitution provides for no "[j]udicial involvement in impeachment proceedings, even . . . for the purposes of judicial review."
“ The fraud will come to light”
So what?
Does “the fraud coming to light” increase or decrease the chance of conviction?
Conviction by the Senate is the issue and the only issue for next week.
I am maintaining that there should not even be a trial, that it is unconstitutional. By filing their statement, one of the senators needs to call for a vote on whether there should be a trial or not. Roberts will not even show - it is not his place to preside over a trial of a citizen. And he knows it. Those senators have taken an oath to defend the constitution. If they vote yes every one of them violates their oath.
No problem. Matt would win in a heartbeat.
I suspect that Goetz is looking more towards primarying Rubio in 2022.
That’s really awesome.
By doing a full circle like that would show the Democrats we’re sick of their games and we can play games too.
That would be excellent.
Here is a good link to the video:
https://rumble.com/vdj9bp-matt-gaetz-i-would-resign-my-seat-to-defend-president-trump.html
Absurd notion, we have 45 not guilty votes and a country full of lawyers and to hell with the House ethics committee anyway.
He had conviction on the Cheney vote and was dead wrong.
I agree with everything you just said.
He is nuts.
We need him more that Trump needs him;
He certainly can be a witness
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.