Since the utterly laughable saga of Impeachment 2.0 apparently must proceed, Trump’s legal team has already released their initial thoughts on the trial, with one looming word at the forefront: acquit.
After all, the proceedings completely defy the purpose of impeachment in the first place, which is to remove a President from office. Trump is no longer in office. Democrats’ likely theft, or at minimum, manipulation, of the election assured that.
Yet, even though Trump is no longer in office, the Democrats apparently still want to “punish” him anyway, which not only flies in the face of the “unity” Biden lied about, but also basic common governance sense.
After all, with COVID apparently spiraling out of control (likely will just get more and more dramatic as the months pass), along with massive unemployment in predominantly leftist lockdown states, something suggests that chasing impeachment of a private citizen is probably not the best use of time or resources.
Then again, Democrats excel at waste and incompetence, which means a sham of an impeachment trial is right up their aisle, especially since it requires no real work no their behalf (Do they ever really work, or do they just endlessly posture?)
Fortunately, Trump, as coolheaded and collected as ever, has readied a defense team in response to the sham of an impeachment trial, and the defense team has already made its position rather clear to anyone who bothers to hear Trump’s side.
The defense team made it extremely clear that Trump never committed any crimes; on the contrary, he “faithfully” fulfilled his duties as the American president.
“It is denied that the 45th President of the United States ever engaged in a violation of his oath of office …
To the contrary, at all times, Donald J. Trump fully and faithfully executed his duties as President of the United States, and at all times acted to the best of his ability to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, while never engaging in any high Crimes or Misdemeanors.” [Source: Fox News]
Amen. After all, Trump was clearly in favor of law and order, whereas Democrats were in favor of … other activities. Of the rioting, burning, looting, shooting, and murdering variety. Good times.
Oh, as a side note, Kamala Harris’s overly generous bail fund not only managed to free a violent perpetrator twice, but the same perpetrator has just landed in trouble again for violence. Good going, Harris. Your little bail fund is the antithesis of law and order.
And she’s just one of many terrible examples.
Clearly, since Democrats are not exactly the brightest bulbs in the pack, it is not really surprising that they continue to shriek and blame Trump for actions they themselves have taken, then turn around and insist that it was Trump who was engaging in such actions all along.
Even more humorously, given the disdain that Democrats have expressed for law and order over the summer, it is quite amusing they are suddenly pretending to be legal scholars now in this joke of a trial. Especially when the individual on trial has long stood with the police, military, and every other entity that protects, rather than destroys, America.
And, given Trump’s great respect for the Constitution, which has flown out the window in light of King Biden’s nearly 50 executive orders, it is unsurprising that the Constitution forms a formidable cornerstone of the Trump team’s defense.
“Donald John Trump, 45th President of the United States, respectfully requests the Honorable Members of the Senate of the United States dismiss Article I: Incitement of Insurrection against him as moot, and thus in violation of the Constitution, because the Senate lacks jurisdiction to remove from office a man who does not hold office.” [Source: Fox News]
Hey, “fact checkers” … Why don’t you start with the Constitution before you start railing against everyone else? Oh, that’s right, the First Amendment pertains to free speech, which is clearly beyond offensive to the sensitive snowflakes masquerading as America’s young “adults”.
Other damning information against this sham of a trial includes the fact that Chief Justice John Roberts refuses to oversee it, which should be a rather large clue to the lack of constitutionality involved.
In fact, “kangaroo court” seems more fitting … and certainly more aligned with the “vision” that Democrats have for the United States in the future.