Posted on 02/02/2020 6:04:27 PM PST by OddLane
There have been suggestions that the White House defense team could be brought up on bar charges for their arguments in the Senate. I have previously written that such statements by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others are vindictive and ill-informed. The White House team were effective advocates for their clients and we do not disbar lawyers for making arguments or defending individuals that we do not like. I was surprised and disappointed therefore that my fellow witness from the Trump impeachment hearing, North Carolina Law Professor and CNN Legal Analyst Michael Gerhardt joined this dubious argument on CNN yesterday. The call for ethics charges seems dangerously close to the view of Lawrence O’Donnell that Trump defenders are barred from his MSNBC program because they are all “liars.”
Obviously, Gerhardt and I have substantial disagreements. Gerhardt supported the articles of impeachment based on bribery and other crimes. I opposed those four articles, which were ultimately rejected by the Committee. The Committee went forward with the two articles that I said would be legitimate but remained unproven. We later disagreed when Gerhardt declared that this impeachment was the first time that the White House closely coordinated with his own party on the handling of the impeachment trial. Those however were academic differences over the history and interpretation of prior presidential impeachment cases.
This however is different. Proponents of the impeachment seem to be lashing out at counsel and suggesting that they were acting unethically in zealously advancing the President’s defenses. After disagreeing with me that the impeachment was not “rushed” prematurely, Gerhardt asked to make a different point about the defense team. He declared...
(Excerpt) Read more at jonathanturley.org ...
I am looking forward to criminal charges being brought against Schiff and other Democrats after the election.
Does anyone here think things are going to end peacefully?
L
“I think the Demoncrats really want a shooting war sometimes”
They DO like do-overs when they lose.
Behold the new American Soviet Justice system:
We accuse you of a crime. Someone who knows somebody who knows something said you did it.
But I am not guilty and have done nothing of the sort of thing I am being charged with.
Well, that only makes you seem guiltier. Besides, even though we don’t have any evidence at this time, the charge is so serious, we must investigate.
I’m hiring a lawyer.
Fine, but we are taking witness testimony, in secret and your lawyer ain’t welcome. Moreover, neither are any witnesses who could exonerate you.
I demand to be able to face my accuser!!
Sorry, your accuser is anonymous and protected. We can’t ha e them face injustice!! Besides, we have other witnesses who heard from someone that you did if. Also. It’s is the opinion of some very learned people that you did it.
That is hearsay and opinion.
That is much better evidence than any of that direct stiff, Really, you have a problem with the facts of your obvious guilt. And even worse, by hiring a lawyer and defending yourself you have obstructed your guilt.
I demand the opportunity to defend myself.
Sure, we’ll give you a trial. But first we are going to leak the facts of your guilt. But you really can’t offer any defense. Where are your witnesses that we didn’t let you call? Where?
But I can poke holes in your case. And what happened to the original crime I was charged with? I am being charged isn’t what?
Obstructing your guilt and whatever else we can throw against the wall. In the meantime, we just heard from this guy who is selling a book and said I the past you didn’t do it but now he says you did.
No, no more witnesses unless I can call mine.
Fine, but if you manage to beat this wrap it will be illegitimate. Unless we get more witnesses to establish your obvious guilt, it doesn’t count, This whole thing was entirely unfair to us as you were obviously guilty.
Well, my lawyers proved your case was defective.
Speaking of your lawyers, they are now going to be charged with helping to obstruct your obvious guilt which is established,
It’s like wanting to disbar attorneys who defend killers in New York City.
Hmmm...
...never mind, the DA’s there now let them free anyway. Let me work on another example.
If he’s not careful, they’ll pull his invitation to Dem shindigs. He may even have to become a - gasp - Republican!
Very Soviet. Very, very Soviet.
BTTT.
Is AOC behind the bar tracking the tab?
Well phrased.
kind of similar to the 26 lawsuits democrats filed against Sarah Palin after she returned to Alaska
you cannot forget who you’re dealing with.
the left is pure scum
They are facing the demolition of their entire view of the Universe.
Otherwise sane adults will go to great lengths, invent fabulous conspiracy tales, destroy lives, to avoid admitting their world view was wrong.
In their world view, Trump should not have won. They should have a leftist Supreme Court. Men and Women are Women and Men, whenever they decide they are.
In their world view, the United States is the greatest threat to World Peace, not the guarantor of Pax Americana.
In their world view, cars, trucks and planes can run on solar power as easily as gasoline, jet fuel, and diesel.
In their world view, everything can, and should be free!
They are and were wrong, they are being confronted with it, and it is driving them crazy.
This reads like BabylonBee...but so much from the Dems reads like that these days.
“We” may not disbar lawyers for defending clients but the vindictive people on the Left might.
Rule 308.
I can’t find any evidence that Nadler was ever admitted to the bar in any state.
I agree. The CNN legal analyst is likely to be the driver in a clown car sequence in most of their events.
The sh*t never ends.
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.