This is a good read: https://www.thepostemail.com/2019/12/22/scotus-no-articles-of-impeachment-or-a-trial-are-required-for-the-senate-to-acquit-president-trump/
This article discusses a possible role for the Supreme Court: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/12/an-impeachment-role-for-the-supreme-court/
If I trusted Senators, I would say that a trial might be fun. Trump could bring in Biden, Schiff and all the deep state actors to redpill the country, then bring the pain. But I don’t trust that, once started, the Senate would go along with Trump’s witness list, and would instead look for ways to damage him and gain leverage over him. A quick dismissal might be the safer option. What I know is that he has thought it through, and has a plan. He already got Graham to adjust his thinking. Now to work on Romney and the sisters, not to mention a derp who is in it deep, Richard Burr.
Good stuff. I particularly found interesting the dissection of lefty, lying, lawyer-witness Feldman’s “Deceptive legal analysis” ... which appears to have sucked in some of Trump’s supporters to the effect that Nanzi maintains control of the impeachment process.
HERE IS A QUESTION THAT I DID NOT SEE ADDRESSED: I just watched the Mark Levin interview with Kenneth Starr wherein Judge Starr opined that President Trump might be able to sue Congress for all its harassment, claiming this has been an utterly unlawful, anti-Constitutional Bill of Attainder.
I don’t what penalties could theoretically be assessed for Congress issuing Bills of Attainder, but it certainly seems to be a blatant violation of Donald Trump’s rights as a citizen as specifically protected by Article I, Section 9.
Starr says this issue is clearly litigable.
Richard Burr !
spit!
and his little friend, lumpy-face Warner, too!