He
who is ignorant of history wasn’t
watching while it was
happening!
The
Trump Inquisition – Epilogue
IF
I HAD
A
VOTE – WHY
& HOW
Having
watched
just
about
all of mercifully now ended
Impeachment Trial,
thought it’d
be grossly
inappropriate
to
offer a
summation of why and how I would have voted in the matter.
Therefore,
here it is. Read at own risk.
First,
I most assuredly am not a lawyer, don’t even play one on
Social Media (whatever that is). In the interest of full
disclosure, did cheat a bit on this. During a squandered youth at
one time I held a Real Estate Broker license, Series 7 Security
Exchange Commission license, and was an ‘Enrolled Agent’
qualified to represent clients before the Internal Revenue Service.
In the end, though, all I really know about law is what I learned
from my father, and just a whole lot of 1950’s TV. Also, if it
counts, we have very smart daughter who is a real lawyer, and a
favorite son-in-law who ought to be in Congress (whom I’m trying to
impress with the above self-promotion).
Second,
as with maybe half the sitting Senators, it is no secret I do not
think much of Donald Trump the person. What he was as President can
only be left to history for judgment. But, among the principles of
law my father taught me is that a good lawyer can defend either side,
and every juror must be objective. If we really want fairness and
justice, we must first give it. This means we must listen to both
sides; if you don’t, you’ll never know the
whole story.
Third,
I honestly believe the trial, if that what it is, was ill-advised at
best. The victims were on the indicting grand jury, witnesses sit on
the jury, and whole thing comes down to politics and not guilt or
innocence. In the final Senator’s vote there were a mere seven
candidates for ‘profiles in courage’.
My
Overview As Of Now
the
Case of House “Managers” (Prosecution)
Their
presentation was about 10
hours extended over two days. In
this observation, that
was about
twice the time it might have taken to present the case against Trump.
A
lot more information was presented than was germane
to
question of whether Trump ‘incited’ an
insurrection.
Much time was given to events of that day, damage done,
and personal trauma inflicted. Presumably
this was so the ‘jury’ could not
argue there
was
no
evidence to
considered
a riot even
occurred.
Perhaps
superfluous, but telling, the prosecution also pointed out
irreparable damage done to our Democracy, how Trump has made
worthless internationally the word of the President; and that he
willingly destroyed US reputation in world in his attempt to
overthrow certified legal results of the 2020 election.
Solely
in this opinion, all of the above is moot.
There
was, however, a complete, step-by-step,
compelling,
factual and
well documented
presentation by
managers
as
to
how event was instigated,
enabled,
and encouraged by
Trump and his subordinates:
For
two months preceding the event Trump was clearly and knowingly
involved and encouraging of supporter efforts
He
used Twitter and public statements to encourage gathering on
specific date
Fifty-million
campaign dollars were used to implement and finance the event as a
Trump “call” to his supporters to action
Insider
planning included stand-down orders to law enforcement authorities
He
could have reasonably expected his words would incite reaction of
some kind
During
the event he failed and/or refused to give Presidential orders or
personal instructions which could have saved lives
the
The Case
of
the Defense
After
inauspicious
start, I thought the
presentation was
a clear and compelling exposition of their legal theories.
Especially
so given
it was obviously
their
first time in the big leagues
and
had
less
than
a week to be prepared.
Basically
they made no
visible effort to disprove any
of submitted
evidence, only disputed
the
manager’s
interpretation.
These
are
central
arguments as
I heard them:
Due
Process was not provided in the Impeachment process. They
made
cohesive argument “indictment” (i.e. Article of Impeachment) was
flawed. It was rushed through without testimony or witnesses by
emotionally involved, politically motivated
House
of Representatives.
The
Trial itself was unconstitutional as it began after Trump had left
office.
SIDEBAR:
Delay in conveying Articles of Impeachment to Senate, and delay of
trial until after January 20, 2021 were entirely decisions of and
under control of then majority leader Republican
Senator Mitch
McConnell.
First
Amendment allowed Trump to speak freely, even unrestricted; and
opposition had taken text out of context to make their case.
As
there was no insurrection as
legally described.
The
only
charge
could be
“incitement to violence”. There
was no conspiracy participation
on
part of Trump to organize or
incite
violence.
How
I would
have
voted
In
the sure and certain knowledge this is a political and not strictly
legal thing, mine is a split decision.
YES
on Guilty of Incitement to
Violence
The
only issue on the table are the events and actions surrounding a
riot on January 6th.
Evidence
may be understood
differently by
opposing sides.
However,
the facts are clear, recorded, and publicly available. The
defense made no attempt at rebuttal to this.
The
attack on the Capital was premeditated.
Insurgents
planned
for
it, knew
what they were going to do before they got there. Day
was chosen to coordinate with date promoted by Trump to
‘stop’ the electoral vote.
Trump
failed
to
act in
a timely and forceful manner to impede
his followers, nor
did he authorize forceful response where
any
other President
of my lifetime
would
have
been
expected to act.
Any
President of the United States has an inherent ‘apparent
authority’ which imposes
a greater weight of responsibility. What the President says must be
reliable, this
country has gone to war at his word. Those who attacked the Capital
building would have never done so if the only speakers that day had
been Rudy and Donny Jr. The
actions of that day most definitely
were
done by people who
believed
it
was what “my president ordered”. On
this one specific occasion Trump
sowed the wind, and the nation will
reap
the whirlwind. For this any POTUS must be held to account. He
cannot turn his back and once again say, “I’m not responsible at
all.”
NO
on
Denial
of
Future
Office
[NOTE: Removal
from office is not a factor here, but my observations would be
similar.]
The
only vote would be on denying
ability to run again for office. Such
a vote
would not,
in
this opinion, be in the highest and best
interest
of
country.
Seventy-four
millions
Americans
can be wrong, but they
voted for
the guy.
Denying the
choice of
voters
has
always led to tragic
unintended
consequences.
All
that could come of
not
allowing him
to
run again would be
to make him a
“martyr”.
From such a platform
he could promote
any agenda, implement
any vendetta,
and
raise
more money for
any
purposes.
This
is not over. It
has just begun. He will
be
occupied
enough for some time
in multiple
civil
lawsuits and criminal investigations. Plus,
inquiry
into any
criminal
involvement
in the
insurrection
– such
as was
suggested
by both his defense counsel and McConnell.
What
I would
have
done different
Certainly
the House of Representatives felt they were operating under the
constraint of time, there being only two weeks between the riot and
end of Trump term. In the mind of Democrat majority, Impeachment was
the logical action to take.
If
I were asked, and I most certainly was not, I would have argued for a
‘Censure’ of Trump and public rebuke of those involved in the
speeches given that day.
Then,
if I’d been asked, I would have suggested a formal Criminal
Referral to the Justice Department for a complete investigation into
the background and causes of the events in question. As one of
defense lawyer pointed out: If there were crimes committed the
appropriate authorities have the time, know how to build a case, and
can make arrests.
Summary
Citizens
of the United States of America were ill-served by the manner and
methods of these events. As a result it
will be years before all the truths
are exposed
of Trump’s
intents
and actions.
Donald
Trump was not the first, and will not be the last habitual
criminal to escape
immediate consequences
due
to
a somewhat strained legal technicality.
History
demands those
not watching closely
will
not see it
for
what it is,
an ‘end of
the beginning’ of
what we once thought was America. Whatever we will be, it is not
what we were because
of Donald John Trump.
This
fight ought to have been fought in the court of public opinion. It
was not. The ‘fix’ was always ‘in’. This ‘trial’
was held in front of men and women who had largely made up their
minds before the first day. Republican Members of the
‘jury’ conspired with the defense attorneys; during
the proceedings some of the ‘jury’ ignored the testimony,
occupied their self with busy work, some
slept, others left the room rather than listen.
History will condemn those who voted to ignore the facts or
made too little of them. History
will record, also, for better or worse we
got the future their vote presents us.
One
Last
Thing
On
January 6, 2021 there was an attempted coup in the Capital of the
United States of America. That it was a failure resolves nothing.
As a consequence of this attempt it was deemed needful by a sitting
administration to muster 25,000 armed troops to insure a ‘peaceful
transition’ of government. Nothing good has ever come of all this.
The
attempted coup of January 2021 failed. But, as one life-long
terrorism expert admonished: “Do you know what to call a failed
coup? A rehearsal.”
He
who is ignorant of history wasn’t
watching while it was
happening!
