Trump impeachment lawyer says Capitol riot had ‘nothing’ to do with him
Jamie Raskin, lead Democratic impeachment manager in the Senate trial of Donald Trump, has derided the “absurd constitutional arguments” raised by the ex-president’s defence team in their response to the “incitement of insurrection” charge laid against him, as the war of words between the two camps heats up.
Mr Trump’s lawyers were also accused of producing “14 pages of circuitous logic and rambling paeans to America” by MSNBC pundit Hayes Brown, who summarised their misspelled filing as “cringeworthy at best”, but hit back by insisting the prosecution is “ill-advised” and “undemocratic”.
The US Justice Department has meanwhile unveiled further charges against the Capitol rioters, arresting Ethan Nordean, the Seattle “sergeant-at-arms” of the far-right Proud Boys collective, and charging two other men with conspiracy over the events of 6 January, when the US Capitol Building was stormed in protest at Mr Trump’s election defeat.
Ex-president’s lawyers hit back at ‘undemocratic’ process
Trump’s attorneys have been equally scathing in their criticism of the process, with David Schoen telling Fox News earlier this week that this impeachment is “the most ill-advised legislative action that I’ve seen in my lifetime”.
Democratic efforts to see the 45th president convicted for starting the Capitol riot and banned from running for elected office ever again is “about as undemocratic as you can get,” he added.
In a subsequent interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Schoen said he does not plan to argue that Trump lost the election because of fraud, as the man himself has repeatedly insisted, and will instead argue that the trial itself is unconstitutional since Trump has already left office and that his words were protected by the First Amendment and did not directly lead to the riot.
On his point about constitutionality, Democrats cite an 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who had already resigned and to opinions by legal scholars agreeing that they are within their rights in holding the former commander-in-chief to account.
Schoen’s co-counsel, Bruce Castor, was interviewed on KYW Newsradio Philadelphia on Wednesday and insisted the Senate had no jurisdiction over a private citizen because “it would be almost the equivalent of the president having died – they can’t remove him from office because he simply is unable to be removed because he’s not there.”
“There are plenty of questions about how the election was conducted throughout the country, but that’s for a different forum, and I don’t believe that’s important to litigate in the Senate trial because you don’t need it,” he continued. “President Trump has plenty to win with what he has.”
“I don’t know where people got that notion that was some sort of litmus test to get to defend the president, because as you saw from the document I filed, which had to be approved by the president personally, there isn’t anything in there about the election being stolen,” Castor said.
His last point, though, was particularly contentious: “Just because somebody gave a speech and people got excited, it doesn’t mean it’s the speechmaker’s fault – it’s the people who got excited and did what they know is wrong.”
Joe Sommerlad4 February 2021 09:55
Trump defence team arguments branded ‘absurd’ and ‘cringeworthy’
Jamie Raskin, lead Democratic impeachment manager in the Senate trial of Donald Trump, has derided the “absurd constitutional arguments” raised by the ex-president’s defence team in their response to the “incitement of insurrection” charge laid against him, as the war of words between the two camps heats up.
The Maryland Democrat made the comments on a caucus call on Wednesday, according to CNN, offering a preview of how they intend to their attack when the trial begins on Tuesday.
Trump’s lawyers were also accused of producing “14 pages of circuitous logic and rambling paeans to America” by MSNBC pundit Hayes Brown, who summarised their misspelled filing as “cringeworthy at best”.
“The defence the brief mounts can be generously described as spurious,” he writes.
Joe Sommerlad4 February 2021 09:30
Good morning and welcome to The Independent’s coverage of the second impeachment of former US president Donald Trump.
Joe Sommerlad4 February 2021 09:16