Democrats

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Damned by his own words: Democrats follow Trump's wide-open multimedia trail | David Smith's sketch

      by

      As US president, Donald Trump seemed be talking and tweeting 24 hours a day. That has thrown his near total absence from public life over the past three weeks into sharp relief. The Silence of the Tweets.It also means that when clips of Trump’s rally speeches filled the Senate chamber on day two of his impeachment trial on Wednesday, his voice was jarring and jangling in the ear, like a blowhard from a cruder, coarser time.His speeches, tweets and phone calls were replayed incessantly as the House impeachment managers put their case against him. Seldom has an accused been so damned by their own words. In his fiery claims of a stolen election, his exhortations to “fight like hell” and his failure to denounce hate groups such as the Proud Boys, Trump proved the star witness in his own prosecution.The spectacular irony was that a man who thrived on grabbing attention on TV and social media had left a trail of digital clues that ought to lead all the way to conviction. It was the 21st-century equivalent of a Victorian diary in which the master criminal brags about how he did it.“Trump’s worst problem?” tweeted David Axelrod, former chief campaign strategist for Barack Obama. “Videotape.”It helped Jamie Raskin and his fellow House impeachment managers build a case that this incitement did not begin on 6 January, the day of the insurrection at the US Capitol, but over months of spinning election lies and cheering on political violence.Wearing grey suit, white shirt, deep blue tie, and wielding a blue pen in his right hand, Raskin told the Senate: “He revelled in it and he did nothing to help us as commander-in-chief. Instead he served as the inciter-in-chief, sending tweets that only further incited the rampaging mob. He made statements lauding and sympathising with the insurrectionists.”Congressman Joe Neguse displayed clips of Trump addressing rallies in October where he said he could only lose the election if it was stolen. “Remember he had that no-lose scenario,” Neguse said. “He told his base that the election was stolen.” Such beliefs fueled the so-called “stop the steal” campaign.Another impeachment manager, Eric Swalwell, pored over Trump’s tweets, a goldmine for the prosecution. Among the many examples: the then president retweeted Kylie Jane Kremer, founder of a “Stop the Steal” Facebook group, who promised that “the cavalry” was coming.Swalwell told the senators, who sit at 100 wooden desks on a tiered semicircular platform, that there is “overwhelming” evidence: “President Trump’s conduct leading up to January 6 was deliberate, planned and premeditated. This was not one speech, not one tweet. It was dozens in rapid succession with the specific details. He was acting as part of the host committee.”Swalwell added: “This was never about one speech. He built this mob over many months with repeated messaging until they believed they had been robbed of their vote and they would do anything to stop the certification. He made them believe that their victory was stolen and incited them so he could use them to steal the election for himself.”The trial heard Trump pressuring Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia secretary of state, to overturn his election defeat in the state. Congresswoman Madeleine Dean said: “We must not become numb to this. Trump did this across state after state so often, so loudly, so publicly. All because Trump wanted to remain in power.”Her colleague Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands noted an incident last October when dozens of trucks covered in Trump campaign regalia “confronted and surrounded” a Biden-Harris campaign bus traveling from San Antonio to Austin in Texas.“What that video that you just saw does not show is that the bus they tried to run off of the road was filled with young campaign staff, volunteers, supporters, surrogates, people,” she said.And as the saying goes, there’s always a tweet. Plaskett highlighted that a day later, Trump tweeted a video of the episode with the caption, “I LOVE TEXAS.”Plaskett also played a clip of Trump at a presidential debate, telling the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” when asked to condemn white supremacists. They heard him “loud and clear”, she said, and even used the slogan on their merchandise. Several members of the Proud Boys have been charged in connection with the riots.Later, Plaskett presented chilling audio and video evidence, some of it never made public before, that she said displayed the consequences of Trump’s incendiary words. Capitol police and law enforcement could be heard pleading for backup as the mob closed in. An officer could be seen running past Senator Mitt Romney and warning him to turn around, then Romney was seen breaking into a run to safety.Trump’s political career was always like a child playing with matches. On 6 January, he started a fire. And as Wednesday’s hearing demonstrated, if he ever builds a presidential library and museum, there will be no shortage of multimedia material. More

    • 200 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Impeachment trial: Trump accused of inflaming insurrection while defense insists it was free speech – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.10pm EST16:10
      Trump lawyer appears to warn of more violence if impeachment trial continues

      3.36pm EST15:36
      Trump’s defense team warns against punishing political speech

      3.07pm EST15:07
      Trump’s legal team argues impeachment trial is unconstitutional

      2.46pm EST14:46
      Raskin provides emotional account of January 6 insurrection

      1.25pm EST13:25
      Impeachment managers play videos from Capitol insurrection

      1.03pm EST13:03
      Second impeachment trial of Donald Trump begins

      12.51pm EST12:51
      Community health centers to receive one million vaccine doses, White House says

      Live feed

      Show

      4.44pm EST16:44

      Some viewers of the impeachment trial wondered why David Schoen, one of Donald Trump’s defense lawyers, kept resting his hand on his head as he took a sip of water while making his opening argument.
      Daniel Goldman, the lead counsel of the House inquiry during Trump’s first impeachment, explained it was because Schoen is an observant Jew and must cover his head and say a blessing when he drinks a sip of water.

      Daniel Goldman
      (@danielsgoldman)
      Mr. Schoen is an observant Jew who must cover his head when he takes a sip of water and quietly says a blessing. Since he is not wearing a kippah, he therefore covers his head with his hand.

      February 9, 2021

      4.35pm EST16:35

      David Schoen, one of Donald Trump’s lawyers, argued that House Democrats inappropriately delayed the impeachment trial by holding back the article of impeachment.
      But it was then-Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell who said he would not bring the chamber back early from recess to start the trial, despite Democratic leader Chuck Schumer’s requests for an emergency session to immediately begin the proceedings.
      So it is not accurate to blame Democrats for the delayed start date of the impeachment trial.

      4.26pm EST16:26

      Congresswoman Ilhan Omar pushed back against the arguments presented by Donald Trump’s defense team in the impeachment trial.
      Omar sent a tweet about the proceedings shortly after the defense team played a video showing Democrats, including Omar, calling for the impeachment of Trump as early as 2017.
      “Let’s be clear, we might have all done and said things we regret, but only Trump and the #seditioncaucus words and actions have let to an insurrection of our nation’s Capital, death and bodily harm,” the Democratic congresswoman said. “Don’t let them confuse you.”

      Ilhan Omar
      (@IlhanMN)
      Let’s be clear, we might have all done and said things we regret, but only Trump and the #seditioncaucus words and actions have let to an insurrection of our nation’s Capital, death and bodily harm. Don’t let them confuse you.

      February 9, 2021

      4.21pm EST16:21

      Lauren Aratani

      Bruce Castor’s bizarre opening argument in defense of Donald Trump could be part of the team’s “deliberative strategy,” a Trump ally is telling reporters, including the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman and NBC’s Peter Alexander.

      Peter Alexander
      (@PeterAlexander)
      A Trump source, just now, describes Castor’s argument as a “very clear, deliberative strategy.”Says defense is “lowering the temperature… before dropping the hammer on the unconstitutional nature of this impeachment witch hunt.”

      February 9, 2021

      It seems that the defense team was trying to tamper emotions after the House’s impeachment managers appeared in front of the Senate. Castor was “lowering the temperature” before the team went on to “dropping the hammer on the unconstitutional nature of this impeachment witch hunt,” according to an anonymous Trump ally who spoke to Alexander.
      It is unclear what part of Castor’s statement was part of this strategy given that he acknowledged moments ago on the Senate floor that the team “changed what we were going to do on account that we thought the House managers presentation was well done.” Perhaps the admission was part of the “deliberative strategy”?

      4.13pm EST16:13

      David Schoen criticized the House impeachment managers for playing “movies” to make their case for Donald Trump’s conviction.
      The impeachment managers opened their arguments today by playing a video showing the violence and destruction at the Capitol on January 6.

      Shortly after Schoen issued his criticism, he played his own video, showing Democrats calling for the impeachment of Trump as early as 2017.
      Schoen’s video opened with a clip of Jamie Raskin, the lead impeachment manager, as menacing music played in the background.

      4.10pm EST16:10

      Trump lawyer appears to warn of more violence if impeachment trial continues

      David Schoen, a member of Donald Trump’s legal team, accused Democrats of abusing the impeachment power to gain a political advantage.
      The former president’s lawyer argued Democrats are pursuing impeachment because they are still mad about the results of the 2016 election. (The impeachment managers’ opening argument focused exclusively on the violent insurrection at the Capitol last month, which Trump incited.)
      “I promise you that if these proceedings go forward, everyone will look bad,” Schoen said, warning that the trial would “open up new and bigger wounds across the nation”.
      Schoen then appeared to suggest that the impeachment trial could spark another civil war, saying, “This trial will tear this country apart, perhaps like we have only seen once before in American history.”

      Updated
      at 4.10pm EST

      4.01pm EST16:01

      As he concluded his opening comments, Bruce Castor also bizarrely seemed to suggest Donald Trump should be arrested if the allegations at the heart of the impeachment trial are true.
      “A high crime is a felony, and a misdemeanor is a misdemeanor,” Castor said. “After he’s out of office, you go and arrest him. … The department of justice does know what to do with such people. And so far, I haven’t seen any activity in that direction.”

      Aaron Rupar
      (@atrupar)
      Castor winds down his very bizarre speech by daring the DOJ to arrest Trump pic.twitter.com/jmoxdIU6Pm

      February 9, 2021

      3.55pm EST15:55

      Bruce Castor closed his opening comments by acknowledging that Donald Trump’s defense team was caught off guard by the strength of the House impeachment managers’ presentation.
      The former president’s lawyer said the defense team reshuffled because they thought the managers’ presentation would focus only on the question of Senate jurisdiction rather than recounting the violence and destruction of the January 6 insurrection.
      “We have counter-arguments to literally everything they have raised, and you will hear them later in the case,” Castor said.
      And with that, he handed things over to another member of Trump’s defense team, David Schoen.

      3.47pm EST15:47

      Alan Dershowitz, who served as a member of Donald Trump’s defense team during his first impeachment trial, criticized Bruce Castor’s rambling opening presentation.
      “There is no argument. I have no idea what he is doing,” Dershowitz told the conservative outlet Newsmax. “I have no idea why he’s saying what he’s saying.”

      Newsmax
      (@newsmax)
      ‘There is no argument – I have no idea what he is doing,’ @AlanDersh on Trump’s defense lawyer Bruce Castor ‘talking nice’ to U.S. Senators – via Newsmax TV’s ‘American Agenda.’ https://t.co/VlT7z8drtO pic.twitter.com/7P7uVk5X19

      February 9, 2021

      Dershowitz said Castor was too focused on “talking nice” to senators rather than making a “constitutional argument” for why the impeachment trial should be dismissed.
      “I have no idea what he’s doing. Maybe he’ll bring it home, but right now it doesn’t appear to be effective advocacy,” Dershowitz said. “Boy, it’s not the kind of argument I would have made. I’ll tell you that.”

      3.36pm EST15:36

      Trump’s defense team warns against punishing political speech

      About 20 minutes into his speech, Bruce Castor addressed the January 6 insurrection, pointing to a First Amendment defense for Donald Trump inciting the violence.
      “We can’t possibly be suggesting that we punish people for political speech in this country,” the former president’s lawyer told senators.
      The impeachment managers preemptively addressed this argument in their final pre-trial brief, which they filed earlier today.
      “The First Amendment does not immunize President Trump from impeachment or limit the Senate’s power to protect the Nation from an unfit leader,” the managers wrote in their brief.
      They added, “And even assuming the First Amendment applied, it would certainly not protect President Trump’s speech on January 6, which incited lawless action.”

      Updated
      at 3.36pm EST

      3.28pm EST15:28

      Bruce Castor, who is leading Donald Trump’s defense team, opened his presentation by praising senator as “patriots” and mentioning that he still gets lost in the Capitol sometimes.
      Castor did not directly address the president’s actions on January 6 or argue against the constitutionality of the impeachment trial.
      Reporters compared the former president’s lawyer to a college student who did not do the reading before class, joking that Castor would be fired by tweet if Trump still had access to his Twitter account.

      Abby D. Phillip
      (@abbydphillip)
      I have been in this government class before, where someone hasn’t done the reading, napped through the first half of class, gets called on and just riffs for 15 minutes.

      February 9, 2021

      James Hohmann
      (@jameshohmann)
      Bruce Castor’s opening speech feels a little like this. pic.twitter.com/D2j5soQ6s8

      February 9, 2021

      Seung Min Kim
      (@seungminkim)
      If Trump still had his Twitter account, he may Tweet-fire this lawyer on the spot.

      February 9, 2021

      3.17pm EST15:17

      The beginning of Bruce Castor’s presentation seemed to be mostly him rambling, which did not escape the attention of those watching the impeachment trial.

      Susan Glasser
      (@sbg1)
      Yes. https://t.co/tOAiYJFRCH

      February 9, 2021

      Castor, who is leading Donald Trump’s defense team, spent several minutes explaining how senators are different than other Americans. It was very unclear how that issue relates to whether the impeachment trial is constitutional.
      The contrast to House impeachment managers’ presentation, which started with a video showing the violence and destruction of the January 6 insurrection, was quite stark.

      Dave Weigel
      (@daveweigel)
      This is a “My Cousin Vinny”-level mismatch of opening statements so far

      February 9, 2021

      3.07pm EST15:07

      Trump’s legal team argues impeachment trial is unconstitutional

      The impeachment trial has now resumed, and Donald Trump’s legal team has started delivering its argument that the trial is unconstitutional.
      Lawyer Bruce Castor opened his remarks by acknowledging the “outstanding presentation” offered by the impeachment managers.
      Castor also emphasized that he and Trump’s other lawyers denounced the violence at the Capitol on January 6, saying they believed all the insurrectionists involved in the attack should be prosecuted. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Analysis: Democrats use Trump impeachment to show sometimes symbolism is the point

      by

      Sign up for the Guardian’s First Thing newsletterThe Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin stood at the lectern, faced 100 senators and removed his black face mask to begin the historic second impeachment trial of former president Donald John Trump.Don’t worry, Raskin assured them with a disarming note of humour on Tuesday. He might have been a constitutional law professor for three decades but he would not be lecturing them on the Federalist Papers. “A professor is someone who talks in someone else’s sleep,” he quoted from the poet W H Auden.Instead Raskin promised “cold, hard facts” and he was as good as his word. He let the murderous mob do the talking. The congressman stood aside to a play a brutal, raw, shocking video of the insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January.For the senators riveted to their seats, forced to relive the nightmarish quality of that day, there was something especially spooky about watching the mob rampaging through the very building where they were sitting, smashing windows, crushing police officers in doors, waving far-right regalia and chanting “Fight for Trump!”For Republicans, it must have been uniquely stomach-churning to see what their champion had unleashed – knowing that most of them will continue to defend them during this trial for fear of angering his “base”. Never can they have been so relieved to have been wearing masks that concealed their expressions from the press gallery.The video ended with a tweet from Trump from that day insisting this is what happens when an election is stolen (it wasn’t stolen). He told his fans: “Go home with love & peace! Remember this day forever!”The montage was an early indication that, whereas Trump’s first impeachment trial a year ago – which turned on a phone call seeking political favours from Ukraine – was like a white-collar criminal case, this time is more akin to a mob trial with Trump cast as the instigator of violent thugs.It was a dramatic, roaring start to the trial that promises to plant a giant exclamation mark at the end of the Trump presidency. Raskin and his eight fellow House impeachment managers want to make sure that 6 January will become the operatic climax of America’s four years of living dangerously.They also want to send a message. They are aware that the world’s faith in America has been badly shaken by the election and presidency of a reality TV star who thrives on petty insults and breaking rules. And they are aware that the 6 January riot may have been breaking point for some.Peggy Noonan, a former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan, told the MSNBC network on Tuesday: “I have spoken to many people in foreign affairs, including ambassadors and others representing other countries, and since the events following the November election and the president’s attempt to overturn it, they have been not been disappointed, they have been anguished by this, by the sense that America is dropping the ball and can no longer function as the thing you are aiming at.”But Joe Biden likes to say that betting against America is always a bad bet. His election and orderly inauguration last month sent a signal to the world that it should not write off the young republic yet.Democrats are aware that the trial outcome is a foregone conclusion – another Trump acquittal, barring sensational new evidence – and that the stakes are lower because he has already left office. But sometimes symbolism is the point. The impeachment trial is a test of accountability, stability and rule of law before a global audience.So in a Capitol building where some windows remain cracked, they observed the solemn rituals and traditions, filing into the Senate chamber beneath the busts of 20 former vice-presidents gazing down from marble plinths in alcoves. This time there were no members of the public in the gallery because of coronavirus precautions.Just before 1pm, Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate minority leader, walked in a little unsteadily and stood at his desk. He was approached by Susan Collins, who is expected to vote against Trump and spoke to him animatedly. Then came Tom Cotton, who is expected to vote for Trump’s acquittal, for another deep conversation.McConnell remains the pivotal figure at the trial and in the coming years. For a few days after the attack on the Capitol he seemed to be ready to cut Trump loose, and persuade many colleagues to do likewise, yet he then voted to support the notion that this trial is unconstitutional. His future actions will offer clues as to whether the Republican party can shake off Trumpism without having to learn the hard way at the ballot box.Marco Rubio sat at his desk writing with a quill pen. Bernie Sanders had an iPad resting on a folder. Some seats were empty for the opening pledge of allegiance and prayer.The Senate president pro tempore, Patrick Leahy, presiding over the proceedings, led the chamber in reciting the pledge and gaveled in the Senate as a court of impeachment.The prayer, from Chaplain Barry Black, included a pointed quotation from the poet James Russell Lowell: “Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide, / In the strife of Truth with Falsehood, for the good or evil side.”Then, after a procedural vote, Raskin began his argument that the trial is indeed constitutional – a former president can be tried even after leaving office. To deny this, he said, would create a “brand new January exception”, meaning that an outgoing president could act with impunity during his final weeks in the White House.Once such technical arguments are out of the way, Democrats were expected on Wednesday to prosecute the case like a criminal trial with more compelling videos and graphic descriptions of that day.But they didn’t want to overdo it. Trump is gone and Biden is facing the most daunting presidential inheritance since Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s. While this trial plays out, the new president is trying to win support for a $1.9tn rescue package and tackle the coronavirus, economic, racial justice and climate crises.As Biden tries spinning these plates, the last thing he needs is a rancorous impeachment trial to bring it all crashing down. But Democrats insist they can get it done. If you had a dollar or pound for every time a member of Congress insists they can “walk and chew gum at the same time”, you would be very wealthy indeed.Like a criminal lawyer, Democrats are seeking to appeal to not only the head but also the heart. They are not only prosecutors but also survivors of the rampage, a point brought home with visceral force by Raskin in a closing argument that had the chamber silent and spellbound on Wednesday.“And then there was a sound I will never forget,” he recalled. “The sound of pounding on the door like a battering ram. The most haunting sound I ever heard and I will never forget it.”Raskin’s 25-year-old son, Tommy, a Harvard law student who struggled with depression, took his own life on New Year’s Eve. A day after Tommy was buried on 5 January, the congressman had brought his daughter and a son-in-law to the Capitol for the ratification of Biden’s victory.He had assured them it would be safe but, after the mob stormed the building, they were hiding under a desk in a barricaded congressional office sending what they thought were final text messages to loved ones. More than an hour later, they were rescued by Capitol police.Raskin, fighting back tears, said of his 24-year-old daughter: “I told her how sorry I was and I promised her that it would not be like this again the next time she came back to the Capitol with me. And you know what she said? She said, ‘Dad, I don’t want to come back to the Capitol.’”At that Raskin broke down for a moment, putting fingers to his eyes before regaining his composure. “Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw and I heard on that day and since then, that one hit me the hardest. That and watching someone use an American flag pole, the flag still on it, to spear and pummel one of our police officers – ruthlessly, mercilessly tortured by a pole with a flag on it that he was defending with his very life.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump prosecutors pitch to the public in made-for-TV impeachment trial

      by

      The lethal Capitol invasion by Donald Trump supporters that is at the heart of the former president’s second impeachment trial happened more than a month ago. But Democrats leading the prosecution of Trump are counting on an element of surprise.Surprise, the impeachment prosecutors are calculating, because while most Americans understand the broad outlines of what happened during the 6 January attack on the Capitol, relatively few have come to grips with the shocking audio and video footage from that day – portraying a cauldron of violence, vandalism, bloodlust and fear.And in what is shaping up as history’s first made-for-TV impeachment trial, Democrats are planning to make some of these surreal scenes the centerpiece of their case against the only president ever to be impeached twice.A police officer crushed in a doorway. A woman wearing a Trump flag shot in the neck. Mobs in Trump gear breaking doors and smashing glass, and hunting the halls of legislature for members to tear “into little pieces”. Staffers for the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, huddled under a conference table, sending texts for help, as rioters pound on the doors. A woman trampled to death as her friend begs for space.And the chants: “The steal is real!”, “Hang Mike Pence!” and “USA! USA! USA!”A Senate split 50-50 will act as jury at the trial, and Trump is expected to retain enough Republican support to avoid conviction and a ban on his holding future office.But the prosecutors’ case as previewed this week is not principally directed at lawmakers. Instead, it is unmistakably pitched to the public.Impeachment managers led by Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland are expected to draw on hours of previously unseen footage from body cameras worn by police, from the media and from live streams captured by the insurrectionists themselves to produce what is shaping up as a shocking inside account of the Capitol attack.With unique access to evidence gathered by law enforcement officers in nearly 140 cases related to the invasion so far, the prosecutors will try to break through calcifying versions on both sides of the political aisle of what happened, and to provoke a new reckoning with how close the country came to an act of mass violence inside the halls of government.That realization, they think, could jolt a reconsideration of Trump’s guilt for the article of impeachment with which he has been charged: incitement of insurrection.The Huffington Post politics reporter Igor Bobic was inside the Capitol that day – but outside either legislative chamber – and captured some of the most notable footage of the invasion.“One month since the attack and I’m still learning harrowing details about the day,” he tweeted at the weekend. “Staffers I haven’t seen since recalling how they barricaded themselves in offices in terror. Members telling me how they followed my feed on their phone while in the chamber in disbelief. Reporters still trying to make sense of it all. All of us still coping.”Last month Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who was forced into hiding during the invasion, described hearing threats from insurrectionists and told thousands of followers on Instagram Live: “I thought I was going to die.”Trump’s defense team seemed to sense the danger to their case that the video scenes represented, and in a brief submitted on Monday they floated multiple pre-emptive responses.Heatedly condemning the attack on the Capitol and denying Trump’s complicity, the defense accused Democrats of “a brazen attempt to further glorify violence” by presenting the facts of the case. In a footnote, the lawyers went so far as to suggest that the crowd was a mix of pro-Trump and anti-Trump elements.Trump’s quotes were expected to be juxtaposed with scenes of violence at the CapitolBut the footage may make plain what no legal argument might deny. The crowd proceeded from a rally at which Trump spoke and arrived at the Capitol wearing red hats and Trump 2020 flags, mixed in with militia patches, white supremacy group insignia, Confederate flags and illegal firearms and knives.In an initial brief submitted last week, the impeachment managers described Trump’s “singular responsibility for the assault”, mustering dozens of quotations in which the former president spread the falsehood of a stolen election, demanded intervention, then “summoned a mob to Washington, exhorted them into a frenzy, and aimed them like a loaded cannon down Pennsylvania Avenue”.Trump’s quotes were expected to be juxtaposed with scenes of violence at the Capitol, as prosecutors hope to make a case that will drive home their charges against the former president.“We cannot, for a moment, treat the attack of 1/6 as something normal that happened,” tweeted Andy Kim, a Democratic representative from New Jersey. “It was a truly dark day in our nation’s history and it deserves a response of that magnitude.”It may be history’s first made-for-TV impeachment. But as for President Joe Biden, his press secretary, Jen Psaki, said his attention would be elsewhere: “He will not spend too much time watching the proceedings.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats to open Trump impeachment trial by recounting Capitol attack

      by

      House impeachment managers will open their prosecution of Donald Trump for “incitement of insurrection” by recounting the deadly assault on the US Capitol in harrowing and cinematic detail, rekindling for senators the chaos and trauma they experienced on 6 January.The historic second impeachment trial will open on Tuesday, on the Senate floor that was invaded by rioters, with a debate over the constitutionality of the proceedings. In a brief filed on Monday, Trump’s lawyers assailed the case as “political theater” and argued that the Senate “lacks the constitutional jurisdiction” to try a former president after he has left office – an argument Democrats promptly rejected.Exactly one week after the Capitol assault, Trump became the first president to be impeached twice by the House of Representatives. This week, he will become the first former president to stand trial. It would take 17 Republicans joining all Democrats in the Senate to find Trump guilty, making conviction highly unlikely.Nevertheless, when opening arguments begin later this week, House Democrats will try to force senators to see the assault on the Capitol as the culmination of Trump’s long campaign to overturn the result of the election he lost to Joe Biden. Relying on video and audio recordings, impeachment managers, led by the Maryland congressman Jamie Raskin, will try to marshal the anger and outrage many members of Congress expressed in the aftermath of the riot, which sought to prevent them from counting electoral college votes and thereby to disrupt the transition of power.In a 78-page brief submitted to the Senate on Monday, Trump’s lawyers laid out a two-pronged rebuttal, also arguing that his rhetoric was in no way responsible for the Capitol attack.The senators will grapple with the constitutional question on Tuesday, when they are expected to debate and vote on the matter. Though scholars and a majority of senators say they believe the trial is constitutional, many Republicans have seized on the technical argument that a former president cannot be tried for “high crimes and misdemeanors” as a way to justify support for acquitting Trump without appearing to condone his behavior.In their own pre-trial filing on Monday, the House managers dismissed the arguments laid out by Trump’s lawyers and vowed to hold Trump accountable for the “most grievous constitutional crime ever committed by a president”.“Presidents swear a sacred oath that binds them from their first day in office through their very last,” they wrote. “There is no ‘January Exception’ to the constitution that allows presidents to abuse power in their final days without accountability.”In a vote last month, all but five Republican senators voted to dismiss the trial as unconstitutional. Yet Charles Cooper, a leading conservative lawyer, rejected that view in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published on Sunday.Because the constitution also allows the Senate to disqualify former federal officials from ever again holding public office, Cooper wrote, “it defies logic to suggest that the Senate is prohibited from trying and convicting former officeholders”.The trial begins just more than a year after Trump was first impeached, for pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden’s family. He was acquitted by the Senate.Americans are now more supportive of convicting Trump, according to an ABC News/Ipsos poll released on Sunday. It found that 56% of Americans believe the Senate should convict Trump and bar him from future office.Though the exact framework of the trial remains uncertain, subject to negotiations between the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, and the chamber’s Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, it is expected to move much faster than Trump’s first trial.Under a draft agreement between the leaders, obtained by the New York Times, opening arguments would begin on Wednesday, with up to 16 hours for each side. At the request of Trump’s attorneys, the proceedings will break on Friday evening for the Jewish Sabbath and resume on Sunday.The House managers are expected to forgo calling witnesses, a major point of contention during Trump’s first trial. The former president declined their request to testify, a decision Raskin said “speaks volumes and plainly establishes an adverse inference supporting his guilt”.The managers have indicated that they intend to lay out a comprehensive case, tracing Trump’s extraordinary efforts to reverse his defeat, including a call in which he pressured the Georgia secretary of state to “find” enough votes to overturn Biden’s victory there. When it became clear that all other paths were closed, they will argue, Trump turned his attention to the certification vote on Capitol Hill, encouraging supporters to attend a rally held to protest against the result.At that event, Trump implored them to “fight like hell” and march to the Capitol to register their discontent – words his defense team will argue are protected under the first amendment.The House managers contend that “it is impossible to imagine the events of 6 January occurring without President Trump creating a powder keg, striking a match, and then seeking personal advantage from the ensuing havoc”. More

    • 175 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Congress is 'better poised than ever' to pass paid family leave bill, lawmakers say

      by

      Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has said US Congress is in a “unique moment” and “better poised than ever” to pass a paid family and medical leave bill that would make the benefit permanently accessible to all American workers for the first time, as she and congresswoman Rosa DeLauro reintroduced the legislation on Friday.Currently, the US is the only industrialised nation in the world not to have a national paid family and medical leave policy.The two Democrats first introduced the Family Act in 2013 and in every Congress since then, but it has so far failed to gain sufficient support to become law. Now, however, following the pandemic and the change of administration, they believe the momentum is finally with them and paid leave could soon become a permanent reality for American workers.“I see this as a unique moment in time … Not only is paid leave understood, it’s something supported by the majority of Americans – Democrats and Republicans,” Gillibrand said in a video press conference.So far the legislation, which they reintroduced on Friday, has the support of more than 230 members of Congress. It would entitle every worker, regardless of company size and including those who are self-employed or work part-time, to up to 12 weeks of partial income – including for their own health conditions, pregnancy, birth or adoption, or to care for a child, parent or spouse.Nearly 80% of US workers – a disproportionate share of whom are women and people of colour – do not have access to paid leave through their employer, according to the National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF).“This first introduction has more co-sponsors in the Senate and the House than we’ve ever had, so we are better poised than ever before to actually pass this bill,” Gillibrand said. “It’s something that Joe Biden believes in, Kamala Harris believes in, I have the support of the entire Senate leadership.”Following the pandemic, an emergency paid leave scheme was introduced last year as part of the Cares Act. Biden has since pledged to expand and extend it as part of the $1.9tn Covid-19 relief package that is making its way through Congress.Gillibrand said it was a good “first step”, but next they want to see paid leave become permanent. When asked about a timeline for getting it passed, the senator said: “We want to get the pandemic paid leave in this next Covid bill and then we want to get the permanent paid leave in whatever the next budget funding spending bill that exists.”She said they are “open to every legislative avenue”, adding: “We are ready and waiting to work collaboratively with all our colleagues.”DeLauro said they met with Biden, Harris and White House staff on Friday morning and talked about how they would get the bill passed.“We’re going to work it out so that it happens and we’ve got the support of the administration on making sure we can get it across that finishing line,” she added.Gillibrand said being able to address Biden and Harris directly is “exactly what is making this moment ripe for success”.They said the pandemic – and the emergency leave – has helped the issue gain traction as more members of Congress, across the political spectrum, realise how critically it is needed.Gillibrand said: “Getting it in the Covid relief bill, even in a pandemic form, is extremely valuable because it lays the groundwork for a permanent paid leave.”DeLauro added: “If there’s anything that this pandemic has done is to shine a light on the inequities that are out there, making paid family leave more important than ever …“Several years ago this was at the fringe, it was not discussed. Today, paid family and medical leave is at the centre of the discourse with every opportunity to see it become a reality.”Joycelyn Tate, senior policy adviser at Black Women’s Roundtable, said paid leave is a critical issue for many Black women.“Many Black women are working in these frontline jobs like home healthcare aids, grocery store workers, janitorial service workers and delivery drivers and they do not earn a single day of paid leave,” she said. “Now this forces Black women to make the agonising choice between our health and the health of our families, or our economic security if we or our family members get sick.”Debra Ness, president of the NPWF, said “the time is now” to take action.“The time is now to pass an inclusive paid family and medical leave policy so workers no longer have to make the impossible choice between caring for themselves or a loved one and their financial security.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump will refuse to testify at Senate impeachment trial, lawyers say

      by

      Donald Trump’s legal team has said the former president will not voluntarily testify under oath at his impeachment trial in the Senate next week, where he faces the charge from House Democrats that he incited the deadly insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January.
      The lead House impeachment manager, Jamie Raskin, a Democrat, wrote to Trump asking him to testify under oath before or during the trial, challenging the former president to explain why he and his lawyers have disputed key factual allegations at the center of their charge that he incited a violent mob to storm the Capitol.
      “You denied many factual allegations set forth in the article of impeachment. You have thus attempted to put critical facts at issue,” Raskin wrote in a letter made public on Thursday.
      He went on to say that if Trump refused to do so, an adverse inference would be made from his reluctance.
      Hours after the letter was released, the Trump adviser Jason Miller said that the former president “will not testify” in what he described as an “unconstitutional proceeding”. Trump’s lawyers dismissed the request as a “public relations stunt”.
      The request from House impeachment managers does not require Trump to appear – though the Senate could later force a subpoena – but it does warn that any refusal to testify could be used at trial to support arguments for a conviction. Even if Trump does not testify, the request nonetheless makes clear Democrats’ determination to present an aggressive case against him even though he has left the White House.
      The Senate impeachment trial starts on 9 February. Trump is charged with inciting an insurrection on 6 January, when a mob of his supporters broke into the Capitol to interrupt the electoral vote count. Democrats have said a trial is necessary to provide a final measure of accountability for the attack. If he is convicted, the Senate could hold a second vote to disqualify him from seeking office again.
      In the letter, Raskin asked that Trump provide testimony about his conduct “either before or during the Senate impeachment trial”, and under cross-examination, as early as Monday, 8 February, and not later than Thursday, 11 February.
      The request from Raskin cites the words of Trump’s own attorneys, who in a legal brief earlier this week not only denied that Trump had incited the riot, but also asserted that he had “performed admirably in his role as president, at all times doing what he thought was in the best interests of the American people”.
      With that argument, Raskin said, Trump had questioned critical facts in the case “notwithstanding the clear and overwhelming evidence of your constitutional offense”. He said Trump should be able to testify now that he is no longer president.
      Raskin said if Trump refuses to appear, the managers will use his refusal against him in the trial – a similar argument put forth by House Democrats in last year’s impeachment trial, when many Trump officials ignored subpoenas. Trump was eventually acquitted of the Democratic charges that he abused his presidential powers by pressuring the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden, now the president.
      The impeachment managers do not have the authority to subpoena witnesses now since the House has already voted to impeach him. The Senate could vote to subpoena Trump, or any other witnesses, on a simple majority vote during the trial. But it is unclear if the Senate would be willing to do so.
      Shortly after Raskin’s letter was made public, Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said he would listen to the House managers’ arguments if they felt a subpoena was necessary. But he said that “the more I see what’s already in the public record, the more powerful the case” against Trump, based on his own words and actions.
      Trump’s statements before and after the attack on the Capitol “are the most powerful evidence”, Blumenthal said. “His own words incriminate him. They show his guilty intent.”
      The South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, one of Trump’s closest GOP allies, said he thought the letter was a “political ploy” and noted that Democrats did not invite or subpoena him to testify before the House, which voted to impeach Trump on 13 January.
      Asked if he thought Trump would testify, Graham said it would be a “bad idea”.
      “I don’t think that would be in anybody’s interest,” he said.
      Associated Press contributed to this report More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats press ahead with move to discipline extremist congresswoman

      by

      Democrats in the US House of Representatives moved forward on Thursday with ousting the extremist congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia from the committees she was assigned to, over incendiary statements she made before entering Congress.
      The move is the latest development in Congress members’ attempts to deal with Greene, who has been a stated supporter of the QAnon myth, for years pushing such unfounded conspiracy theories and lies that included racist and antisemitic tropes.
      A vote on Greene’s committee seats was due to take place on Thursday. Democrats, who have the majority in the House, could strip her of her positions without Republican votes.
      A day earlier, the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, the top congressional Republican, declined to take action against Greene, despite wider pressure from members of Congress to push some kind of punitive measure for uncovered past statements and social media posts.
      These included supporting the assassination of Democratic members of Congress, denying that the September 11 terrorist attacks on the US ever happened, and perpetuating the myth that the Parkland, Florida, school shooting in 2018 was faked.
      In a private meeting with her colleagues on Wednesday night, Greene received a standing ovation for apologizing for her association with QAnon.
      Democrats nevertheless took steps to remove the Georgia congresswoman from her positions on the House budget and education and labor committees, respectively.
      Greene addressed her past statements under the threat of losing a significant proportion of her legislative power. She stressed that she now believed “school shootings are absolutely real”, that they should be taken seriously, and that “9/11 absolutely happened”.
      She portrayed her descent into conspiracy theories as a misguided period in her life that was over when she realized the falseness of the movement.
      “I never once during my entire campaign said QAnon. I never once said any of the things that I am being accused of today during my campaign,” Greene said. Up until her Thursday speech, Greene did not deny any of her past statements and avoided having to publicly address them directly.
      In December, after she was elected, Greene praised a tweet promoting the QAnon movement.
      Democrats have been pushing for Greene to either be expelled from Congress or severely punished if she should stay. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican minority leader, has called Greene’s past comments “looney lies”.
      In arguing that Greene should lose her assignments, Democrats pointed to the now former congressman Steve King of Iowa, a Republican, who lost his committee assignments after associating with neo-Nazis and making racist statements for years.
      On Thursday, the House rules committee chairman, Jim McGovern, a Democrat, argued that Greene was not entitled to her committee postings.
      “Serving on a committee is not a right, it is a privilege and when someone encourages violence against a member they should lose that privilege,” McGovern said.
      After Greene’s speech, McGovern signaled that it was insufficient.
      “I stand here today still deeply, deeply troubled and offended by the things that she has posted and said and still not apologized for,” McGovern said.
      Republicans largely refrained from defending Greene’s previous comments directly and instead argued that taking away her committee appointments would establish a slippery slope.
      Congressman Austin Scott of Georgia, a Republican, skeptically asked during a floor speech whether Democrats would stop with Greene if successful.
      “We know better. We know better,” Scott said of his Republican colleagues.
      Tom Cole of Oklahoma, McGovern’s Republican counterpart on the rules committee, argued that taking away Greene’s committees “opens up troubling questions about how we judge future members of Congress”. More