US Senate

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Key moments as Senate votes in favour of Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial – video

      by

      After nearly four hours of debate, a divided US Senate voted 56 to 44 to proceed with the historic second impeachment trial of Donald Trump. House Democrats opened the trial with a chilling and dramatic video of the Capitol siege. The House impeachment managers warned that allowing Trump to escape punishment would establish a ‘January exception’ for presidents to betray their oaths of office. In their rebuttal, Trump’s defence team argued that the trial was not only unconstitutional but would ‘open up new and bigger wounds across the nation’ and was based on the Democrats not wanting ‘to face Donald Trump as a political rival in the future’
      Trump impeachment: Senate votes to proceed with trial
      ‘He just rambled’: Republicans unimpressed by Trump’s impeachment lawyers More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      'He just rambled': Republicans unimpressed by Trump's impeachment lawyers

      by

      The performance of Donald Trump’s legal team on the first day of his second impeachment trial has drawn sharp criticism from Republican senators and other onlookers, many of whom appeared unimpressed by the at times rambling and incoherent opening statements.Two members of the former president’s legal team, Bruce Castor and David Schoen, sought on Tuesday to persuade the Senate to dismiss the trial on constitutional grounds. Castor’s performance in particular drew criticism as waffling and lacking in focus.Several Republican senators said they didn’t understand the lawyers’ arguments. The Louisiana senator Bill Cassidy, who voted with Democrats to move forward with the trial, said Trump’s team did a “terrible job” and was “disorganized”, “random” and “did everything they could but to talk about the question at hand”.Cassidy was not the only Republican who was displeased with Trump’s defense team.Susan Collins, a Republican senator of Maine, said she was “perplexed” by Castor, who is Trump’s lead lawyer, saying he “did not seem to make any arguments at all, which was an unusual approach to take”.“The president’s lawyer just rambled on and on,” said Senator John Cornyn, a Republican of Texas. “I’ve seen a lot of lawyers and a lot of arguments, and that was not one of the finest I’ve seen.”The Texas senator Ted Cruz, one of Trump’s staunchest allies, said he didn’t think the lawyers did “the most effective job”, while praising the Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, who is acting as the Democrats’ lead prosecutor, as “impressive”.Cornyn and Cruz both still voted to dismiss the trial, along with 42 other Republican senators. Six Republicans, including Cassidy and Collins, voted with Democrats to advance the trial.Trump himself was also reportedly unhappy with his lawyers’ showing. Politico reported that sources close to the former president say he grew “increasingly frustrated” as he watched the day unfold. Other outlets, including CBS and CNN, also reported the president was disappointed, according to sources.Per @MajorCBS, “Two sources familiar with the former president’s reaction to today’s Senate proceedings described Trump as angry about his lawyers’ lackluster performances. One source said the President “didn’t sound pleased” on phone calls with close associates.— Doug Sovern (@SovernNation) February 9, 2021
      Multiple people tell me Trump was basically screaming as Castor made a meandering opening argument that struggled to get at the heart of the defense team’s argument.— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) February 9, 2021
      The trial’s opening day saw Raskin deliver an emotional speech that recounted his personal experience of the Capitol attack, describing how his daughter and son-in-law were in an office in the Capitol and hid under a desk, where they sent what they thought were their final texts. Through tears, Raskin said: “This cannot be the future of America.”[embedded content]Castor opened his meandering presentation by praising senators as “patriots” and mentioning that he still gets lost in the Capitol. The speech included such cryptic lines as “Nebraska, you’re going to hear, is quite a judicial thinking place”. He spoke for 20 minutes before addressing the 6 January insurrection and failed to directly address the president’s actions that day or argue against the constitutionality of the impeachment trial.Castor concluded his opening comments by bizarrely daring the justice department to arrest Trump if the allegations at the heart of the impeachment trial were 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.”The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman said a Trump adviser had defended the performance as a “deliberative strategy” meant to distract from Raskin’s emotional presentation – though critics pointed out that a master strategist wouldn’t need to put out a background statement explaining their strategy.It was a performance that left many observers befuddled, with some reporters comparing the 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.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.— Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) February 9, 2021
      If Trump still had his Twitter account, he may Tweet-fire this lawyer on the spot.— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) February 9, 2021
      Alan Dershowitz, who served as a member of Donald Trump’s defense team during his first impeachment trial, seemed less than impressed with Castor’s rambling 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.”The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump impeachment: Senate votes to proceed with trial

      by

      A divided US Senate voted to proceed with the historic second impeachment trial of Donald Trump after an emotional opening day in which the prosecution argued that the former president was singularly responsible for inciting the deadly assault on the US Capitol while the defense warned that the proceedings would further cleave a divided nation.After nearly four hours of debate in the same chamber that was invaded by pro-Trump rioters on 6 January, the senators, now seated as jurors and sworn to deliver “impartial justice”, voted 56 to 44 on the question of whether there was a constitutional basis for putting an impeached former president on trial. Six Republicans joined all Democrats in an early victory for the prosecution that undermined one of the central pillars of Trump’s defense.Trump is the first president to face an impeachment trial after leaving office, and the only president in American history to be impeached twice. But the assault on the Capitol, an event that one House impeachment manager called the “the framers’ worst nightmare come to life”, shook the nation and the world as loyalists to the former president stormed the seat of the American government in an effort to prevent Congress from formalizing Joe Biden’s victory. Though they ultimately failed, the domestic attack left five people dead and America’s commitment to a peaceful transfer of power tarnished.Republicans’ near-uniform opposition to holding a trial strongly suggested that there were not enough votes in the chamber to convict the de-platformed, one-term president even after he brazenly sought to overturn his election defeat with baseless claims of a stolen election. At least 17 Republicans would have to join all Democrats to find Trump guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. A conviction would allow the Senate to disqualify him from ever again holding office.Last month, only five Republicans joined Democrats to defeat an attempt to dismiss the impeachment charge as unconstitutional. Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican of Louisiana, was the only member to switch his vote, leaving open the possibility that some lawmakers could yet change their minds.Republicans have largely coalesced around the argument that the Senate did not have the authority to hold the trial because impeachment was intended to lead to a president’s removal from office, a position that has allowed them to avoid weighing in on whether Trump’s conduct amounted to an impeachable offense. But that view has been challenged by constitutional scholars, including the leading conservative lawyer Charles Cooper, who argued that the claims were unfounded.Citing these scholars, writings by the nation’s framers and historical precedents, the House impeachment managers warned that allowing Trump to escape punishment would establish a “January exception” for presidents to betray their oaths of office.House Democrats opened the trial with a chilling and dramatic video of the Capitol siege that threatened the lives of the former vice-president, Mike Pence, members of Congress, and everyone working in the building that day. The video pulled from the extensive visual recordings from rioters, reporters and witnesses to create a reel juxtaposing the president’s incendiary speech to supporters at a rally near the White House with scenes of mayhem and violence on Capitol Hill. There, Trump encouraged his supporters to “fight like hell” and march to the Capitol to make their voices heard before lawmakers certified Biden’s victory.[embedded content]The cries and chants from the video echoed through the chamber, where just over a month ago rioters sat in the dais and swung from the balcony. It concluded with a tweet from Trump, sent only moments after the building was secured on 6 January: “These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”“You ask what a high crime and misdemeanor is under our constitution? That’s a high crime and misdemeanor,” the congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the leader of the House Democrats prosecuting the case, told the silent chamber, after playing the video. “If that’s not an impeachable offense, then there is no such thing.”In their rebuttal, Trump’s defense team argued that the impeachment trial was not only unconstitutional but would “open up new and bigger wounds across the nation”.Accusing Democrats of abuse of power, Trump’s lawyer David Schoen said the party was fueled by their “hatred” of Trump and their determination to see him impeached. He played a video compilation of Democratic politicians calling for Trump’s impeachment as early as 2017.“This trial will tear this country apart, perhaps like we have only seen once before in American history,” he said, warning: “If these proceedings go forward, everyone will look bad.”In a meandering defense that reportedly left Trump enraged, his lead lawyer Bruce Castor denounced the Capitol assault as “repugnant”, praised the senators as “patriots” and concluded by suggesting that if the former president had committed a crime, the punishment should be criminal prosecution, not impeachment.“There is no opportunity where the president of the United States can run rampant in January at the end of his term and just go away scot free,” Castor said. “The Department of Justice does know what to do with such people.”The trial will resume on Wednesday with the substantive arguments over the sole charge of “incitement of insurrection”. Each side has 16 hours to present its case, and the trial is expected to stretch into the holiday weekend. Prosecutors have promised to present new evidence to prove that Trump was “singularly and directly responsible” for the Capitol attack.Trump’s lawyers have argued that the president’s claims of voter fraud and his fiery rhetoric to the crowd on 6 January were not only protected under the first amendment, but similar to language used by Democrats to rally their own supporters. In pre-trial briefings, they emphasized his instruction that the crowd march “peacefully” to the Capitol.Trump, who left Washington for his Mar-a-Lago resort on the day of Biden’s inauguration, has refused a request by Democrats to testify voluntarily at his trial. It appears unlikely that the House managers will call witnesses, appealing instead to the collective memories of the senators who lived through harrowing afternoon.[embedded content]Concluding the Democrats’ argument for the day, Raskin offered an emotional and deeply personal account of his experience that day. Still grieving the loss of his son, who had died by suicide just days before, the former constitutional law professor brought his family to work with him, eager for them to witness “this historic event – the peaceful transfer of power in America”.When the riot erupted, they were separated. His daughter and son-in-law hid in an office, fearing for their lives, Raskin recalled, his voice quivering. When it was all over and they were reunited, his daughter said she never wanted to return to the Capitol, a place known as the People’s House.“Senators, this cannot be our future,” he said through tears. “This cannot be the future of America.” 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

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Senator Raskin breaks down recounting Capitol breach – video

      by

      Democrat senator Jamie Raskin fought back tears as he recounted his experience of the Capitol breach which happened the day after the death of his son.
      Raskin’s 24-year-old daughter and his son-in-law were hiding in his office during the attack. ‘People died that day,’ the senator continued, ‘this cannot be our future’
      Trump second impeachment: live updates 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

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump's impeachment trial starts with graphic Capitol assault footage – video

      by

      Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial opened in the Senate with graphic video of the attack on the Capitol on 6 January and his comments that spurred a rally crowd to become a mob.
      The lead House prosecutor told senators the case would present ‘cold, hard facts’ against Trump, who is charged with inciting the siege of the Capitol to overturn the election he lost to Joe Biden
      Trump second impeachment: live updates More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      'Jim Crow relic': Senate filibuster stands in way of Democratic voting rights push

      by

      As states around the country advance a wave of measures that would make it harder to vote, Democrats in Washington are planning the most sweeping voting rights protections in decades. But to pass those protections, Democrats will have to overcome a huge barrier.Shortly after taking control of the US Senate last month, Democrats made it clear that they wanted to move quickly to advance a version of the massive voting rights bill that passed the US House last year. The measure would require every state to offer automatic, same-day and online voter registration. It would require states to let anyone vote by mail if they wish and implement new guidelines to prevent states from being overly aggressive in how they purge their vote rolls. It would also strip state lawmakers of their power to redraw congressional districts every 10 years, curbing their ability to draw lines that virtually guarantee re-election.Democrats are also considering separate legislation to restore a key provision in the 1965 Voting Rights Act that would require states with a history of discriminating against voters to get any voting changes approved by the federal government before they go into effect.Though they control both chambers of Congress and the White House, Democrats won’t be able to pass either measure unless they get rid of the filibuster, a procedural maneuver the minority party in the Senate can use to block legislation that doesn’t have the support of 60 senators.Democrats are divided on whether to get rid of the filibuster, and it’s unclear whether they will ultimately do so. Those who favor scrapping the procedure argue that it is impeding a once-in-a-generation opportunity to protect the right to vote. Not doing so, they say, would amount to giving Republicans a free pass to continue a brazen effort to restrict voting rights and entrench their power amid a shifting electorate that appears less likely to favor the GOP.The filibuster should not block Democrats from passing a major voting rights bill and a new voting rights act, Eric Holder, who served as US attorney general from 2009 to 2015, said in a statement to the Guardian. Both measures, he added, were “badly needed corrections and reforms that will strengthen our democracy”.“The reality is that too many in the Republican party have grown comfortable manipulating our political system for partisan advantage,” added Holder, who is leading the Democratic effort to combat excessive partisan gerrymandering. “The Senate should not allow the filibuster, which was once used to stop civil rights legislation, to now stop critical bills that would protect and strengthen our democratic system.”Stacey Abrams, the former former Georgia gubernatorial candidate who helped flip her state blue in 2020, also urged Democrats in Washington to go full throttle to protect voting rights.“Democrats in Congress must fully embrace their mandate to fast-track democracy reforms that give voters a fair fight, rather than allowing undemocratic systems to be used as tools and excuses to perpetuate that same system,” she wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in which she endorsed getting rid of the filibuster.“This is a moment of both historic imperative and, with unified Democratic control of the White House and Congress, historic opportunity.”The last few weeks have crystallized the need for those protections as states that saw record turnout have taken up bills that would make it harder to vote. In Georgia, where Democrats won for the first time in decades amid record turnout, Republicans are weighing measures to require voters to submit ID during the mail-in ballot process and to get rid of no-excuse absentee voting. Republicans in Arizona, another state Democrats flipped in 2020, are considering legislation to make it easier to remove voters from a permanent vote-by-mail list and to require mail-in ballots be notarized.Across the country, at least 165 bills in 33 states would make it harder to vote, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice.Danielle Lang, a voting rights attorney at the Campaign Legal Center, noted that lawmakers who campaigned on strengthening America’s voting laws now had an obligation to see it through.“Failure to act is not an option,” she wrote in an email. “While we averted democracy disaster in 2020 – due to the sheer willpower of election officials, organizers, and voters nationwide – it would be folly to ignore the warning sirens it set off.”The filibuster has a long history of impeding civil rights legislation in America and has been deployed to try to block civil rights protections, including the 1964 Civil Rights Act. When Barack Obama spoke at the funeral for John Lewis, the civil rights icon who died last year, he called the filibuster a “Jim Crow relic” that should be eliminated to pass sweeping voting rights legislation.The filibuster also essentially allows a small minority of senators to exercise outsize influence over legislation, thwarting the will of the majority. “It’s supremely ironic that something that gives rural, sparsely populated states so much power already would further kind of entrench minority rule and further make it difficult to access the ballot box,” said Stephen Spaulding, senior counsel for public policy and government affairs at Common Cause, a government watchdog group.Keeping the filibuster in place and not passing sweeping voting reforms would have “profound downstream effects”, Spaulding added.“The American people chose new leaders; they want a responsive government,” he said. “To have essentially a minority of senators exercising veto power over the entire legislative process is just not gonna be tenable.” More