Listening to this: npr.org/2019/12/10/786…

You can leave questions here while I contemplate my next thread.
It is a historic moment.

twitter.com/ultralite001/s…

Young 'uns will tell their grandchildren.
They're not calling it bribery because calling it that is problematic, and this isn't a criminal trial.

They said "solicit and pressure."
In colloquial terms, that would be bribery and extortion, but there are solid reasons for avoiding the criminal code.
twitter.com/DrSleeps/statu…
The Senate will look at public opinion.
The framers expected this when they decided not to give the power of removal to the Supreme Court, and instead gave it to Congress.

Clinton's public approval went UP after he was impeached . . .

twitter.com/HeatherRose_Ar…
. . . which sent a clear signal to the Senate.

Talk to people, spread the word, write letters, put a sign on your lawn.

The goal is to save democracy, which means hemming Trump in right now so cheating is harder.

It means duplicating the 2018 election results in 2020.
The investigations will absolutely continue.

House is making clear that they're not playing politics with timing. Expert witnesses said "If this isn't impeachable, nothing is," and Trump presents an on-going threat.

Not impeaching right now . . .
twitter.com/Enigma462003/s…
. . . undercuts those arguments.

The cases continue. The attempt to get financials continue.

Remember in 2016 the talk of the October Surprise?

The terrible timing happened because Russia interfered.

Suppose the natural result of Trump's stalling and stonewalling. . .
. . . is that the 2020 election has a Summer of October surprise that blows the GOP reelections to smithereens, allows Democrats to say, "The GOP knew this all along and tried to hide it from you.

I have an idea about this👇

The House Managers. . .

twitter.com/HeckYeahQPQ/st…
. . . call present the case at the Senate trial.

What stops them from saying, "We call McGahn" or "we call Mazars and order them to bring documents."

They'll refuse, but now they're defying a trial in progress on live TV with cameras rolling (will cameras be rolling?). . .
. . . some things are complicated. Some things are simple.

People understand that innocent people don't try to hide evidence. Also there you have it: Live proof of Contempt of Congress.

Any evidence obtained between now and the trial can certainly be introduced.
This may not be possible as a matter of law.

In the Clinton impeachment, voting on the articles was treated like voting on a bill: Once the vote happened, the matter automatically transfers to the Senate.

There are also good policy reasons against it.
twitter.com/reader_jean/st…
The experts testified about what makes an impeachable offense, and which are more serious.

Private crimes (like tax fraud) are embarrassing and obviously point to dishonesty, but that's not what the framers had in mind as impeachable . . .

twitter.com/justinparkhurs…
The framers wanted to impeach behavior that threatened the Constitutional order and showed abuse of office for personal gain. Exactly like what Trump did in Ukraine, and with his obstruction and stonewalling.
See: twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield…
On the other hand, if the documents . . .
. . . show that Trump is in thrall to Russian oligarchs, that also undermines the Constitutional order.

If something like that comes out 5 months before an election, you won't have to worry about Trump getting elected.

If that comes out along with proof that . . .
. . . the GOP leadership knew and knowingly shielded Trump, you'll watch a tsunami of anger hit the GOP from the general public.

(and of course they knew. Yale Prof. @TimothyDSnyder and @just_security have outlined it in detail) but it hasn't sunk into the public consciousness.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security 💠We don't know for sure (although probably)
💠The House must do its duty and the facts warrant impeachment
💠The public is educated as to the tricks Trump is trying to pull. Remember the antidote to the firehose of lies is raincoats on the population.
twitter.com/StephanFrost/s…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security Nah. They're entirely separate issues.

"My client also does good things," doesn't help with conviction (but it might with sentencing)

I don't think you have to worry about Trump shutting down the government this year and tanking his approval ratings😉
twitter.com/ProfessorHipps…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security #1: Pelosi will be criticized no matter what she does. Being the most powerful woman in the country has its drawbacks.

#2: They are using the Mueller case to show pattern and practice. That way they don't have to litigate it and prove it . . .

twitter.com/catvideos6/sta…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security . . . they just use it to show that this is the kind of thing he does as a matter of habit or practice.

This has a names in evidence law. The rules of evidence don't apply, so we'll just give it as common sense: He did it before. He's doing it now. He'll do It again.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security Tip: The correct answer to any legal question is "it depends."

Right now, the House GOP are shielding Trump.

What if the Senate GOP decides not to? What if they decide they need a fair and open trial or they'll get roasted in Nov 2020.
twitter.com/stormingorman6…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security No.

One thing made clear at the Clinton Senate trial was that the Senators are both judge and jury.

At the same time, this isn't a normal court, so the usual rules that apply to jurors and judges don't apply.

If the Framers wanted this to be . . .

twitter.com/MaskeSue/statu…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security . . . a normal trial, they would have given the task to the judiciary.

Instead they gave it to elected officials beholden to their constituents.

twitter.com/OhRuleOfLaw/st…
I have several threads on this. Check my blog. Search for "firehose"
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security Yes, but the pardon power, like other presidential powers,
cannot be used corruptly.

He can't pardon his way out of this, don't worry. That would be more abuse of power.

twitter.com/saltut99/statu…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security You can make your own. twitter.com/ConnieFleeger/…
If someone has ideas for a good yard sign slogan, add it here. (If not that many people get this far down into the thread, I can try later with a separate tweet to get ideas)
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security I can't see how this would help the GOP. twitter.com/stsa7535/statu…
If they want to shield Trump, the way to do that is to have a trial and find him not guilty, not leave an accusation hanging over him.

I think the GOP Senators are caught between a rock and a hard place right now.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security The way the trial generally works is that the House Managers act as prosecutors, the president's lawyers defend him, the Senators are judge and jury (and the chief justice presides)

I can't imagine him not mounting a defense.
It's hard to imagine. . .
twitter.com/mindyanns/stat…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security . . . Senators (judge and jury) also taking the role of defending the president.

But we're definitely through the looking glass already, so I don't put anything at all past the Trump-FOX-GOP.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security I can see the arguments on both sides.
twitter.com/ProfessorHipps…
Personally I think a laundry list of Articles would be a bad idea.

Focussing on the behavior that the expert witnesses pointed to as dangerous and what the framers intended for impeachment has advantages.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security "Except in cases of impeachment" is understood by constitutional scholars to mean that a pardon can't undo or stop an impeachment. (I know of no serious constitutional scholar who says anything else)

I've seen some non-lawyers misread this.

twitter.com/GodcallsBS/sta…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security Yes, for federal crimes, but Pence can't undo the impeachment. twitter.com/vwinsloe/statu…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security There is no legal reason why more articles of impeachment can't be brought later. twitter.com/BobJohnson1933…
But consider what a production it is. All those hearings!

Last spring, some of the people saying "Just impeach right now" didn't really understand the process . . .
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security The process of impeachment is like a federal investigation and grand jury proceedings.

Trials can go quickly (a person can be convicted in a day) but the investigations and process to get to the indictment takes lots of time.

This took MONTHS and they went at lightening speed.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security Because I haven't been part of the discussions and debates and because I don't know what is in the thousands of pages of documents given to the Republicans over the weekend, I hesitate to substitute my judgement for the people who have access . . .

twitter.com/JemezStargazer…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security . . . to that information.

I also have a lot of respect for @BarryBerke, @danielsgoldman, @NormEisen, etc.

My training as an appellate lawyer is to see both sides.

In this case, I really do see both sides, that includes understanding why the House is moving forward now.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen When witnesses become available, I'm sure they will question them, yes. When documents become available, they'll decide what to do with them.

There are measures short of impeachment, like censure.

How about this . . .

twitter.com/Enigma462003/s…
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen "The House votes to censure Donald J. Trump for taking unprecedented steps to hide from the American people the fact that he is financially beholden to Russian oligarchs" and then include evidence that all these years, he's been propped up by Russian money.

And . . .
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen . . . Trump's own obstruction caused this censure to happen 9 weeks before the election.

In other words, the timing wasn't because Democrats played politics.

It was because Trump obstructed.

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen It would make no sense for the burden of proof to be
beyond a reasonable doubt (the standard for criminal trials)
twitter.com/H2OandPowerLaw…
This is more akin to a civil proceeding.

The question is whether Trump keeps his job.

Criminal trials involve . . .
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen . . . loss of liberty, property, and (in capital cases) loss of life.

Trump wants the highest possible standard to make it harder to remove him.

This is why I'm glad they didn't talk about bribery, because this will confuse people into thinking criminal standards apply.
@TimothyDSnyder @just_security @BarryBerke @danielsgoldman @NormEisen This is out now. I was so busy answering questions, I didn't see it.

nbcnews.com/politics/trump…

Article 2 is Obstruction of Congress, which goes to Trump's attack on the Constitutional order.

Create an account for weekly updates and features such as bookmarks & reading history.