Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Trump’s legal team says impeachment trial unconstitutional, calls for acquittal
One America News ^ | February 2, 2021

Posted on 02/02/2021 12:25:54 PM PST by McGruff

President Trump’s legal team has called on the Senate for an acquittal, while arguing the impeachment trial is unconstitutional.

In a brief filed with the House Tuesday, defense attorneys noted Trump cannot be tried for impeachment because he is no longer the sitting president. They also argued his January 6 speech was protected by the First Amendment and he did not engage in insurrection or rebellion.

Trump’s legal team said the Senate has no jurisdiction over whether he can hold office again and the House Articles of Impeachment were improperly drafted.

The response came after the House Democrats filed their brief early Tuesday. The trial is set to start next Tuesday.

(Excerpt) Read more at oann.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: again; impeachmentfarce; impeachmentfarce2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 02/02/2021 12:25:54 PM PST by McGruff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Dismissal would be appropriate.


2 posted on 02/02/2021 12:28:21 PM PST by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Dismissal, yes. Acquittal, no.


3 posted on 02/02/2021 12:35:19 PM PST by faux_hog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: faux_hog

If Trump is smart, he’ll refuse and take it to trial.


4 posted on 02/02/2021 12:40:54 PM PST by knarf (The Constitution protects the right to peaceably assemble, not to protest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

The lawyers are correct but are tilting at windmills. The Democrats in the House don’t care about any of that.

If the Senate actually holds a trial, with witnesses, they should be lambasted for this distraction. There are major issues that need to be dealt with by Congress and trying to remove a person from an office he does not hold is the height of absurdity.


5 posted on 02/02/2021 12:41:11 PM PST by monkeyshine (live and let live is dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

The other argument for this impeachment being unconstitutional is that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has refused to preside over the senate trial.


6 posted on 02/02/2021 12:42:08 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Still drawing a blank re how they can “try” someone who allegedly is no longer in office.

Unless, of course, there really is something to the scuttlebutt we’re seeing on various sites.


7 posted on 02/02/2021 12:43:45 PM PST by AFB-XYZ (Stand up, or bend over)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

If true I’m glad. Let’s let Trump keep his eligibility for future presidency and there’s plenty of time and opportunity to wage the good war.


8 posted on 02/02/2021 12:50:08 PM PST by cymbeline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine

Actually, preventing the Democrat House and Senate from “working,” is a very good thing.


9 posted on 02/02/2021 12:51:37 PM PST by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: faux_hog

Dismissal.


10 posted on 02/02/2021 12:55:06 PM PST by yldstrk (Bingo! We have a winner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pfflier

That’s what I’ve heard too. The fact that John Roberts isn’t there means it is not an impeachment trial. It’s a Senate hearing, a Senate session, it’s a Senate proceeding, but it’s not an impeachment trial of the president.

The constitution says that in a presidential impeachment, that the Chief Justice shall preside. It’s not optional; the Chief Justice must be there for this to be an actual official legally binding impeachment trial of a president.


11 posted on 02/02/2021 1:01:11 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Fair point. LOL.

But these days it’s all about optics, image, etc. If the Senate Dems take this seriously they should be attacked for wasting the country’s time. You cannot remove someone from an office they do not hold! It’s stupid. In reality if the House delivers the articles the Senate should either refuse them, or put them on the shelf and ignore it. If not that, then just hold a vote and be done with it. It will fail. The Dems made their point and threw a bone to their far left and TDS constituents. That’s enough.


12 posted on 02/02/2021 1:05:21 PM PST by monkeyshine (live and let live is dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: knarf

“If Trump is smart, he’ll refuse and take it to trial.:

With Leahy (sp?) presiding?


13 posted on 02/02/2021 1:07:30 PM PST by ProudVet97 (E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

No, he called for dismissal first and aquital as a remedy.


14 posted on 02/02/2021 1:09:48 PM PST by Mathews (It's all gravy, baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet97
I remembered that just after I hit post

I thought about posting an oops, but there was always the hope that the trial would be so public, Leahy couldn't get away with quashing evidence etc.

15 posted on 02/02/2021 1:12:46 PM PST by knarf (The Constitution protects the right to peaceably assemble, not to protest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Trump’s team needs to take a different tack. The Democrats don’t care if they have the votes or not or if its constitutional or not. They are going to beat him over the head with videos and a narrative to destroy him and his reputation in the public’s eyes.

That is their goal.

His legal team needs to get on the ball and attack that angle instead of arguing technicalities. This is a straight up political attack.


16 posted on 02/02/2021 1:13:34 PM PST by headstamp 2 (Socialism- Institutionalized Deprivation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faux_hog

Right. An acquittal request is legitimate only if the trial itself were legitimate, which this stunt by the Democrats is not.


17 posted on 02/02/2021 1:13:48 PM PST by Ebenezer ("Be strong and of good courage.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
If the Senate actually holds a trial, with witnesses

They will hold a trial and any witnesses for Trump will be prevented from revealing evidence. This trial will be tightly controlled.

The only question is, how many Republicans will vote to convict?

18 posted on 02/02/2021 1:13:59 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (Pathetic Pierre Delecto, the Pestiferous Potentate of the Enchanted Chones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

But id it smart to given it an air of legitmancy by participating?


19 posted on 02/02/2021 1:16:06 PM PST by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

They would have to be complete idiots to vote against the man who got more GOP votes than anyone in history. So the answer to your question is 1. Mitt Romney.


20 posted on 02/02/2021 1:16:06 PM PST by monkeyshine (live and let live is dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson