The trial is a fraud. A majority of the jurors declared, before the trial started, before any evidence was presented, that they would acquit. The result is preordained, it is rigged. How can any self-respecting lawyer willingly participate in a rigged trial?
And then there's John Bolton's allegations that Trump personally instructed him to withhold aid money from Ukraine until that country announced an investigation into the Bidens. Did Trump's lawyers know about this? If they did, then they lied to the Senate when they stated categorically that he did no such thing. Isn't knowingly making false statements perjury?
And we mustn't forget John Roberts, who presides over the process. How, I wonder, does a Chief Justice feel about presiding over a trial in which jurors have boasted about not being impartial?
Apparently some prominent lawyers and law firms declined offers to join Trump's legal team, but other high-profile litigators jumped on board, including former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, he of the O.J. Simpson and Jeffrey Epstein affairs.
Defending a degenerate is one thing—somebody has to do it—but defending a degenerate in a trial rigged in his favour is something else. On the other hand, with a win guaranteed, it's easy money and easy fame.
It seems that anyone who becomes associated with Donald Trump is either corrupted by the experience, of corrupt to begin with. Even a Supreme Court Chief Justice can't escape the taint.
3 comments:
Did you ever read the Roberts court's decision in 'Citizens United'? The US Supreme Court has been ideologically groomed to favour one ideology over all others.
It's common to find a statue of the goddess Themis in court houses. She is invariably depicted holding the sword of justice in one hand and the scales of justice high in the other. She also is blindfolded. The blindfold signifies unbiased justice, justice for all.
A court that is ideologically groomed is, by its alignment, corrupt. It cannot dispense justice free of favouritism. It serves one interest, not all. Justice corrupted is no justice at all. That it should carry its stain onto the floor of the US Senate should not surprise anyone.
.. At some point.. many points.. many many books will be written with a fkcus on The Impeachment Trial Of Donald Trump.. Thus the three current aspects of US governance, law, The House, the Senate and the Judiciary will be examined in complete excruciating detail. The Constitution itself will be considered & judged.. even ridiculed or defended. Every single word, phrase, sniff, smile, evasion, truth, insult, logic will be parsed, dissected.. or be twisted.
Can we count on a hysterical perversion or interpretation from, say, Donald Trump junior ? Or Alan Dershowitz.. oh yes. Nancy Pelosi's detailed perspective ? Yes, Ted Cruz drifing about his pages in some epic wandering in the bewilderness logic..? Yes. The Trial transcripts will be a multi volume tome, a best seller.. State of the Grift outstanding.
They've stumbled on to and past the stage where John Kennedy (what a name !) lobs a softball diversion ie 'How much money did Burisma pay Hunter Biden to do whatever he did for them?' Pam Bondi of Florida.. bumbled out a pedantic lecture on the state of Hunter's band account.. and so it rolled, drolled, recounted, discounted.. Essentially all the ravings of the GOP Senate team resembled kabuki theatre.. 6:30 AM kids thriwback cartoons, Roadrunner.. Smokey the Bear.. Daffy Duck.. But the Presiding Judge Roberts took it all stoically. Personally, I am currently in disbelief at how hands off, no comment, uninvolved he appears. The Constitution makes clear his role.. as all powerful & PRESIDING.. over all aspects &,procedure of such an Impeachment. Perhsps he has a big surprise for Mitch McConnell.. yet all I see currently is precedent setting silence and letting the GOP Senate walk all over this farcical trial.. stunning failure
There's a piece in the NYT today on how the USSC is incrementally lowering the constitutional barrier between church and state.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/opinion/supreme-court-religion.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
Post a Comment