Posted on 01/19/2020 2:20:39 AM PST by Kaslin
The president's legal counsel formally responded to the two articles of impeachment leveled against the president, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The deadline for House Democrats to file their trial brief was 5 p.m EST on Saturday. The president's answer to the two articles was due just an hour later. The president's lead attorneys, Jay Sekulow and Pat Cipollone, prepared Trump's six-page formal response to the articles.
"The articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president," the formal answer reads. "This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away. This highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the president began even before his election and continues to this day."
Trump's counsel argued the impeachment articles are "constitutionally invalid on their face" and are the result of a "lawless" House inquiry that violated basic principles of fairness and due process.
"The Articles of Impeachment now before the Senate are an affront to the Constitution of the United States, our democratic institutions, and the American people. The Articles themselves -- and the rigged process that brought them here -- are a transparent political act by House Democrats. They debase the grave power of impeachment and the solemn responsibility that power entails. They must be rejected."
In his answer, the president "categorically and unequivocally" denies "each and every" accusation leveled against him in both impeachment articles. Trump's attorneys then lay out a series of arguments as to why both articles of impeachment against the president must be rejected.
"In order to preserve our constitutional structure of government, to reject the poisonous partisanship that the Framers warned against, to ensure one-party political impeachment vendettas do not become the 'new normal,' and to vindicate the will of the American people, the Senate must reject both Articles of Impeachment. In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote."
Earlier this week, the White House announced a few additions to Trump's legal team as they prepare to defend the president before the Senate. Former impeachment counsel and Whitewater investigator Kenneth Starr and Harvard University Law Professor Alan Dershowitz will defend the president in his upcoming trial. Former Florida attorney general and adviser to the president Pam Bondi, as well as Jane Raskin and Robert Ray will also take part in the president's defense
Was this the actual "strategy" behind Nanzi's "urgent" impeachment delay? File at the last hour and hope the president was unable to defend himself?
L8r
L8r? later
San Fran Nan sat on the AoI because someone tipped her about the GAO report, it’s release date, and what it was going to say. So she waits until it is almost release day, then she sends the AoI to the Senate, and voila a day or so later the report saying he broke the law is all over the news.
(1) It does not meet the criteria for impeachment cited specifically in the Constitution: treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors; no crime was committed.This precedent could not be more dangerous.(2) For the Supreme Court to fail to declare this "impeachment" unconstitutional will make it legal de facto and de jure, and this will give the Legislative Branch of the Government carte blanche in the future to nullify the election to the Presidency of anyone the Legislative Branch wishes to impeach and for no constitutional reason, in fact for no reason whatsoever.
(3) Furthermore, this precedent establishes the authority of the Legislative Branch to impeach not only the President but also the Vice President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Secretary of State, and so on down the line of succession until the Legislators find a President suitable to them.
(4) Thus this places the Legislative Branch in authority over the Executive Branch, inasmuch as the President et al. will serve at the pleasure of the Legislative Branch.
(5) It also gives the Legislative Branch de facto control of US elections inasmuch as legislators can impeach elected officials in sequence until they reach one they approve and establish him/her as President of the USA. The President will then serve only at the pleasure of the legislators, knowing that he/she can be impeached at any time and a President more favorable to them selected.
(6) It therefore nullifies the separation of powers between the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Government, making the Executive Branch subservient to the Legislative.
The Supreme Court MUST act immediately to establish the constitutionality of the impeachment process and the unconstitutionality of "impeachment" that does not meet the requirements cited in the Constitution.
Giuliani agrees. He must have been lurking here on Free Republic.
Rudy Giuliani: Supreme Court Should Dismiss The Impeachment Trial Against President Trump”Rudy Giuliani argued that the Supreme Court should dismiss the impeachment trial against President Trump. "There's nothing in the Constitution that would allow the Supreme Court" to do that, Giuliani allowed, but "there’s also nothing in the Constitution that allows the Supreme Court to declare a law of Congress unconstitutional. Marshall made it up."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/01/12/rudy_giuliani_supreme_court_should_dismiss_the_impeachment_trial_against_president_trump.html
The scotus won’t.. they have ruled in the past that they are not interested is getting involved.
I'd like to know who set this deadline. Did Pelosi send the articles with a deadline of one hour to respond? If that's how it went down, that underscores the illegitimacy of this process that she is trying to invent. It is an attempt to remove the president using a process in which he has no opportunity to defend himself and no recourse. Electing Democrats has become downright dangerous to the American way of life. Now more than ever.
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.