Democratic chief impeachment representative and former constitutional law professor Jamie Raskin (D-Md.
Next week, the Senate will begin impeachment hearings against former President 0). On Thursday (Feb. 4), House impeachment representatives in Congress formally requested Trump to testify under oath. Senior Republican Senator Lindsey Graham responded by saying the Democrats were “putting on a show”.
Jamie Raskin, the chief Democratic impeachment representative and former constitutional law professor, sent a letter to Trump and his defense attorneys on Thursday, refuting the Trump team’s defense that Trump’s role in the Jan. 6 violence at the Capitol was irrefutable.
Raskin said there is clear and overwhelming evidence that Trump is guilty of violating the Constitution, but “given that you (Trump) dispute these factual allegations, I am writing to invite you to provide sworn testimony about your actions on Jan. 6, 2021, before or during the Senate impeachment hearings.”
Raskin asked Trump to respond by 5 p.m. on Friday (5).
The second impeachment trial against Trump will begin next Monday (8) with Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) presiding in place of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (D-Vt.).
Intent behind House impeachment delegates’ request for Trump to appear in court
The Associated Press reports that the House impeachment delegates’ request does not require Trump to appear in court, but it is a warning to Trump that any refusal to testify could be used at trial to support arguments for conviction. Even if Trump does not end up testifying, this request by the impeachment representatives is certainly still making clear the determination of Democrats to make aggressive charges against Trump even if he has left the White House.
The House Democrats’ elected impeachment representatives said on the 2nd that Trump “bears a single responsibility” for the violence in Congress and must be held accountable for his actions, even after he leaves office. A conviction for Trump would prevent Trump from holding public office again and would also prevent Trump from challenging the presidency again in the future.
Trump’s impeachment defense attorney, on the other hand, argued that the impeachment was unconstitutional and should be dropped immediately; he also argued that Trump’s statements at the Time were protected by the First Amendment and did not incite violence.
Trump’s lawyer wrote, “If the First Amendment only protects what the government believes is customary in current American Culture, then there is no protection at all.”
House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, responded, “If we don’t follow through on this (impeachment conviction) thing, we might as well remove any punishment for impeachment from the Constitution.”
The aggressive accusations by Democrats sparked fierce opposition from Republicans. The official Twitter account for House Judiciary Committee Republicans responded, “Democrats: ‘If you don’t testify, you’re presumed guilty.’ That’s not how America works!”
Graham: Democrats are putting on a show
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, tweeted that the Democrats are “putting on a show” by trying to push the normal impeachment process, which should be done in the House, onto the Senate floor.
Graham served as the House’s impeachment representative in the Senate’s 1999 impeachment of Democratic President Bill Clinton.
Impeachment Representative Raskin used as his argument that President Clinton had testified under oath about impeachment when he was in office. He said that although former President Clinton did not testify at the impeachment trial in 1999, the trial included the playing of Clinton’s grand jury testimony from a year earlier, but the trial ultimately resulted in an acquittal.
U.S. legal and intelligence experts say there is growing evidence that the rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 were pre-planned and coordinated, saying the rioters were incited by former President Trump, who was speaking to supporters 1.5 miles away at the time – a connection that has been increasingly undermined.
Expert Witnesses: Two Impeachments of Trump House Fail to Conduct Adequate Investigations
Jonathan Turley, an expert witness who participated in the House’s first impeachment hearings against President Trump, had a comparison of the Clinton and Trump impeachment cases, noting that the key problem was that the Democratic-held House lacked the evidence it should have on President Trump’s impeachment charges.
Turley said the House’s trial of Clinton’s impeachment was based on the lengthy findings of two independent prosecutors who presented evidence to the House Judiciary Committee that was then sent to the House in two trucks full of evidence.
But in the case of Trump’s impeachment, both the first, and second impeachment, the House rushed to vote on Trump’s impeachment without conducting a full investigation, inviting witnesses to appear, and debating.
Tulley said the House Democrats’ fast track approach to impeachment, unwilling to spend more time or take more testimony through court orders, also doomed the articles of impeachment they sent to the Senate to be “a thin, incomplete record.
Under the Constitution, a two-thirds vote of the Senate is required to decide whether an impeachment charge is valid.
Although there are no clear figures on how many Republican senators would agree with Trump’s impeachment charges, the likelihood of getting a certain number of affirmative votes from Senate Republicans and ultimately convicting President Trump remains extremely low based on the unanimous vote in the House and the new 50-50 pattern in the Senate.
Forty-five Republican senators voted for a resolution last month saying the Senate’s impeachment trial violated constitutional procedures because Trump is no longer president. Democrats need 17 Republican endorsements to ensure a final conviction for Trump, and currently, they have up to five votes.
Recent Comments