I only watched a small portion of the Night of the Living Dead-on-Arrival Senate trial of Donald Trump.
The only issue argued today was whether the trial was constitutional and could proceed. The arguments, at least the small portions I saw, were nothing new. The points have been argued before and briefed extensively.
You can read Trump’s Trial Memorandum here, the part addressing unconstitutionality starts on page 13. Jay Sekukows ACLJ also issued a Memorandum on why the trial is unconstitutional, and Byron York lists 5 Reasons the trial is unconstitutional in non-legal terms.
You can read my posts here:
On a prior vote, 45 Republicans voted that the trial was unconstitutional. I thought a couple more might join the “No” vote. But I was wrong.
Bill Cassidy from Louisiana voted “yes” because, in his own words:
“The House managers were focused, they were organized. They relied upon both precedent, the Constitution, and legal scholars. They made a compelling argument. President Trump’s team were disorganized.”
He’s in impartial juror? How nice. Is there a single impartial juror on the Democrat side? Not one.
The constitutional question is not dependent on the performance of the lawyers.
Cassidy doesn’t need to worry about local backlash, he just won reelection, so he’s there for six more years.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY