PJM: Ten Ways the Democrats’ Own Impeachment Witnesses Destroyed Their Case Against Trump

https://pjmedia.com/trending/ten-ways-the-democrats-own-impeachment-witnesses-destroyed-their-case-against-trump/

The link is a useful complement to the opening argument presented by the president’s defense team in the impeachment trial, and a bit easier to comment on than the video posted earlier, for anyone who feels they can refute the record in a competent way. But I actually want to comment on something else.

I heard Chuck Schumer on TV yesterday claim that the president’s defense team made a strong argument in favor or more witnesses and documents.

Schumer’s claim is ridiculous on its face.

The president is under no obligation to prove his innocence. Some people may want him to, but they really have no right to demand any such thing.

We saw the same problem in the Kavenaugh hearings. Those opposed to Kavenaugh’s confirmation leveled outrageous charges against him and demanded that he prove he his own innocence in response. It was ugly to the point of seeming almost demonic. It was certainly unamerican to so distort the rule of law, over the nomination of a justice, no less.

In our system the burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt. So far, the House Managers have presented a remarkably shoddy case that is full of holes and deficiencies. More witnesses and new documents might, conceivably, remedy all that, but it is also true that a failed prosecution doesn’t deserve to be made whole.

Some senators might argue that the American people have a right to know the truth about issues related to this impeachment. I certainly agree, but it’s not a good argument for adding witnesses and documents to the trial. The trial should dispose of the case before it. If there are other issues to be explored, other venues can be used to explore them.

16 thoughts on “PJM: Ten Ways the Democrats’ Own Impeachment Witnesses Destroyed Their Case Against Trump

  1. It is not up to the president as to whether or not witnesses are called. It is up to the Senate.

    The idea that witnesses should be called is that it would benefit the destruction of the case against the president in the assumption that he is innocent. Those that hold the case has been shredded are, with no exceptions, the supporters of the president. Not exactly a surprise, nor, necessarily, a statement of fact.

    Unlike you, most of the country wants to hear from witnesses. But, as I stated, it is up to the Senate and no one else. It matters little that McConnell strategized with the White House to ensure acquittal because they still need to hold on to 4 Senators. Or 3, because it sound like Romney is going to vote for witnesses.

    BTW it may have come across as a bit wrongheaded for Schiff to say that the Senators’ heads will be on pikes. But judging from the outraged reactions, he hit the nail square on the head. As some Senator said a while back, if they held a secret ballot in the Senate, Trump would be headed to Mar a lago permanently. But it is the fear of getting “primaried” that is driving conviction. Which is kind of interesting since Trump’s track record on getting supporters elected is a bit spotty.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. RE: “Unlike you, most of the country wants to hear from witnesses.”

      If the Senate wants witnesses, let the Senate vote to have them. I’m agnostic about it.

      What I want is for the Senate to do its job. Based on what we’ve heard so far, there’s no compelling reason for more witnesses or documentation, but maybe something will come up in the question and answer session.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “What I want is for the Senate to do its job.”

        And on that, we agree.

        We disagree on details, but you know what? Nobody asked either one of us for advice.

        Water pistols at 10 paces or pea shooters at 15?

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Against my better judgment I went ahead and read this piece on PJMedia. I did know better but did it anyway. Sad that anyone would think this is a piece is worth posting. About half of its points were essentially the same – Hunter Biden is a good example of crony capitalism. Big whoop there! There is not and never has been any evidence of wrong-doing by either Biden and even if there were, extorting a strategic ally locked in a life and death struggle with a foreign adversary is not a legal way to prosecute a crime.

    The other points were equally lame and/or totally cherry picked snippets out of context. The famous phone call where Trump told Sondland out of the blue “No quid pro quo. No quid pro quo” was an obvious bit of cover-your-assery after Trump’s criminal behavior became known to Congress. How stupid does PJMedia think its readers are to make THAT a defensive point? Never mind. Rhetorical question.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “other points were equally lame and/or totally cherry picked snippets out of context”

      In a legal or even debate sense we call what they’re doing as a “logical fallacy” and the cult cannot function on that intellectual level.

      So accordingly, the smart GOP types are manipulating the ignorant masses; Shameful.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. You are probably right about not calling witnesses, but not for the reasons you stated. Yes it is up to the prosecutor to prove guilt. Yet, if that were the case alone, then there would never be the need for a defendant to hire and attorney, testify himself or present exculpatory evidence such as alibis, etc.

    But that is in front of an impartial jury that, absent a defense, will have little choice but to convict unless the prosecutor is totally incompetent.

    But the Senate is not an impartial jury. It wasn’t ever one, but this is the first totally admitted one with a majority leader who boasts about the lack of impartiality and his strategy sessions with Trump. Witnesses will not help Trump since the acquittal is fait accompli. They can only hurt should Bolton and Mulvaney be forced to come clean.

    But even if Bolton were to testify that Trump demanded dirt on Biden and to hold Zelensky hostage, too many Senators are chicken.

    Or, to put it another way, Trump does not have to prove his innocence since the outcome is already bought and paid for.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “Trump does not have to prove his innocence since the outcome is already bought and paid for.”

      Trump does not have to prove his innocence under any circumstances. But worse for you is that your slander about the fix being in is now moot, because the prosecution’s case has already failed on the merits.

      I don’t doubt that you will persist in repeating the slander, but it is a waste of time. The burden will forever be on you to show that the jury was corrupt in some way that prevented a proper outcome, and now you can’t.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Slander?

        Was there any doubt about the outcome after McConnell bragged about strategizing with the White House?

        Asking for advice and permission from the regime over which the Senate is supposed to exercise Constitutional oversight?

        That is not slander, that is the absolute truth.

        And I keep saying it because it is the truth. Not that truth makes a whit of difference to Trump, his toadies, the GOP, and the red hatted fans.

        You wanted a Monarch like Barr wants, well, you are doing your best to trash our nation and the Constitution by supporting this con man.

        IMHO, of course.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. RE: “Was there any doubt about the outcome after McConnell bragged about strategizing with the White House?”

        I would ask the question differently: Was there any doubt about the outcome after the hearings in the House?

        Acquittal in the Senate became a forgone conclusion based on those hearings and the final draft of the articles of impeachment alone. McConnell’s strategizing has nothing to to with it, unless you can show that conviction in the Senate was a likely outcome. That’s what makes your claim slander.

        RE: “You wanted a Monarch like Barr wants, well, you are doing your best to trash our nation and the Constitution by supporting this con man.”

        Don’t be ridiculous. I could just as validly accuse you of wanting Congress to be the Monarch, with the presidency a vassal.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “I could just as validly accuse you of wanting Congress to be the Monarch, with the presidency a vassal.”

          Well, Congress is the people’s house. Much less chance of a dictatorship if the president’s powers are curtailed than the other way around.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Trump defense team obliterated the Democrat case and blatant attempt to rig the 2020 election. No but, but, but there’s more if we can ask just a few more people isn’t going to change that. A witness swap was proposed but Democrats rejected it. Too frickin bad. So now we have to hear the lie that Republicans wouldn’t allow more witnesses into the 2020 election. I think Pelosi truly didn’t want to step in this pile of poop but her unherded cats left her no choice. All that remains to be seen is how badly they suffer on election day for this foolish election conspiracy. Cheers

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “ I think Pelosi truly didn’t want to step in this pile of poop but her unherded cats left her no choice.”

      You almost got it right. Trump left her no choice.

      For grins, it might have been Trump’s scheme for years. “Let me keep doing more and more outrageous things until the House has no choice. After all, I have the Senate in my pocket like Corleone had the NY judges in his.”

      We don’t deserve the brilliance of Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Important e-mail from the SSA…

    Scammers are pretending to be government employees. Scammers will try to scare you and trick you into giving them your personal information and money. They may threaten you or your family and may demand immediate payment to avoid arrest or other legal action.
    DON’T BE FOOLED!
    IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS CALL:
    1. Hang up!
    2. DO NOT give them money or personal information!
    3. Report the scam at OIG.SSA.GOV!

    It’s not off-topic considering that there are people here who believe Trump and his lawyers.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s