I found it fairly trying to watch, didn’t you?
Well, except for the parts that made me chortle with glee, like when “Sawblade” Schiff repeatedly pantsed the hapless crew on the defense side.
9 Likes
Mikey Cohen and Ghoulie now have some stuff competition for worst lawyers ever.
8 Likes
OR…UFOs
2 Likes
Fox broadcast most of the trial yesterday from what I understand. I don’t think that went well for their audience. They didn’t see a GOP team that was ‘winning’.
30 Likes
Now, how much of that audience actually learned something yesterday and are prepared to deal with the consequence? It’s gonna be real tough to write this off or spin it. Real tough.
I suspect Fox thought #ditchMoscowMitch and the GOP were going to run rough-shod over the House Managers. The exact opposite took place. No spinning that.
5 Likes
That’s because you’re not a dumb as Donald is Chris.
The House managers pounded home the point that Trump is a cheater.
2 Likes
What does winning look like when you’ve rigged the game?
6 Likes
“If I were the President watching this, I would not be especially pleased.”
Someone clearly doesn’t know Trump. Sekulow’s mindless tangential screed listing every fake grievance Faux News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda machine has spun about everything from Russian interference to the “deep state” was specifically meant to massage Trump’s grundle. He couldn’t have been happier about it, and he no doubt watched it with a tumescent toadstool.
14 Likes
This is the defense Trump wants -that he did absolutely nothing wrong. Everything was “perfect”. In Davos today, apparently he admitted they were holding on to all the evidence. So, he just confessed again to the Obstruction of Congress charge.
32 Likes
“I don’t know why you wouldn’t take the time and every second you have to make an argument on behalf of the President,” he said.
Chris, you occasionally speak reason but today you’re being a disingenuous yutz. Scroll up and see the plain truth @txlawyer spoke at the top of the thread: There’s no case to make. This is a bank robber who drove away, the dye pack exploded, he ran into a tree and was dragged half-conscious from the car by the cops with the money, the gun, and the note on the seat beside him. There are 37 witnesses. There’s a confession. There’s NO CASE. Idiot.
15 Likes
Wallace: “I don’t know why you wouldn’t take the time and every second you have to make an argument on behalf of the President."
They would if they could, but they can’t, so they don’t.
8 Likes
@pshaw re Justin Hendrix: THIS X 1,000,000!
3 Likes
Val Demings saw it as well. I expect we will see this during the trial.
23 Likes
I don’t know how to respond to Mr. Wallace. At some points he seems a reasonable person seeking the facts…albeit with a conservative spin. At others, he just doesn’t measure up at all and is impossible for me to even listen to though that’s not hard for me since I have never tuned into Fox News.
2 Likes
I have a different take on this. Trump’s defense team is not speaking to the American people or even to the Senate. They are speaking to an audience of one person, Donald Trump.
They (and everyone else) knows the fix is in. They know they do not have to worry about “winning” their case, so they are free to build their personal brand with the only person that matters.
Trump demands personal loyalty, and he proves that by forcing his acolytes to compromise themselves. When Cipollone uttered a bald faced lie in front of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States he sent a clear and direct message that his personal loyalty to Trump comes before all else. In TrumpWorld, he is a made man.
My guess is that he really wants Ginsberg’s seat, and this is how he hopes to get it.
10 Likes
Wallace made the comments while briefly putting down two pails of water one marked Putin and one marked Trump.
1 Like
And yet… There was Roberts, posing for history in his robes, equating the impeachment managers with Trump’s lawyers. What a win for the both sides are the same crowd.
9 Likes
Well when one’s legal team’s defense is “Trump is King” what can you expect? To argue for the unitary executive as limitless power would mean explaining why those unlimited powers aren’t written down somewhere. That all legal challenges in the past didn’t confer these unlimited power to the Executive branch.
So that leaves BS, and more BS, and I have to imagine that the lawyers among the Republican Senators, especially those that have been Constitutional Law professors such as Josh Hawley R-MO, might need to leave to use the nearest vomitorium.
3 Likes
Wallace’s days at Fox are numbered. He was supposed to praise Sekulow and Cipollone as awesome legal eagles who had knocked it out of the park and did a slam dunk and other mascbro metaphors.
2 Likes