Over the past five years, my perception of conservative politicians has changed drastically. I used to think they were mostly people of good will with whom I had a difference of opinion. Not any more. Since 2015 I have watched in stunned amazement as they have abandoned any principle they every pretended to have in cynical pursuit of power. Now I see almost all of them as nothing more than intentional, bad faith goons who will look you in the eye and lie to your face. They know better, but they just don't care.
Except maybe this Sekulow guy. His sloppiness, his incompetence, and his obvious stupidity, all on full display for years, lead me to think he really believes what he says because he doesn't know any better. Before he showed up as a flak for Donnie T. he ran a con game and telemarketing hustle, swindling dumb old people by promising them Jesus in exchange for their money. It was the perfect preparation for his current job.
Team Trump flubs quid-pro-argument in embarrassing fashionThere was a curious moment in the first day of Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial in which one of the president’s attorneys, Jay Sekulow, chided House impeachment managers for using a curious phrase.
“ ‘Lawyer lawsuits’?” Sekulow asked incredulously. “ ‘Lawyer lawsuits’? … The managers are complaining about ‘lawyer lawsuits’? The Constitution allows lawyer lawsuits. It’s disrespecting the Constitution of the United States to even say that in this chamber – ‘lawyer lawsuits.’”
No one had any idea what he was talking about, but eventually it became clear that one of the House managers referenced “FOIA lawsuits” – in reference to the Freedom of Information Act – and Sekulow misunderstood. Nevertheless, the White House, true to form, refused to acknowledge the misstep, and said Sekulow’s mistake was actually correct.
It was a reminder that Trump’s legal team, led in part by a controversial attorney who leads a televangelist’s legal operation, may not fully be up to the task at hand.
AP FACT CHECK: Trump defense misrepresents Mueller findingsWASHINGTON (AP) — In opening arguments of the impeachment trial, President Donald Trump’s defense misrepresented the findings of a special counsel’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election by claiming the president was cleared of obstruction of justice.
A look at some of his legal team’s claims Tuesday during debate on the format of the Senate trial:
JAY SEKULOW, on special counsel Robert Mueller: “We had the invocation of the ghost of the Mueller report. I know something about that report. It came up empty on the issue of collusion with Russia. There was no obstruction, in fact.”
THE FACTS: He’s wrong to suggest that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report cleared the Trump campaign of collusion with Russia. Nor did the report exonerate Trump on the question of whether he obstructed justice.
Instead, the report factually laid out instances in which Trump might have obstructed justice, leaving it open for Congress to take up the matter or for prosecutors to do so once Trump leaves office.
“If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller declared after the report was released.
SEKULOW: “During the proceedings that took place before the Judiciary Committee, the president was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses. The president was denied the right to access evidence. And the president was denied the right to have counsel present at hearings.”
THE FACTS: That’s false. The House Judiciary Committee, which produced the articles of impeachment, invited Trump or his legal team to come. He declined.
Absent White House representation, the hearings proceeded as things in Congress routinely do: Time was split between Democratic and Republican lawmakers to ask questions and engage in the debate. Lawyers for Democrats and Republicans on the committee presented the case for and against the impeachment articles and members questioned witnesses, among them an academic called forward by Republicans.
"One of the hardest things for me to accept is the fact that Kevin Graham has blonde hair, blue eyes and an English last name. This ugly truth blows any arguments one might have for actual white supremacism out of the water. He's truly a disgrace." - Ajax
