Former 74-year-old President Donald Trump’s Jewish Defense Attorney David Schoen asked Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who’s also Jewish, to pause the trial to for the Jewish Sabbath or Shabbat. For practical reasons, observant or orthodox Jewish stop working sundown Friday, resuming work sundown Saturday. “We respect their request and of course will accommodate it,” said Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman, referring to Schoen’s request to not work on Shbbat. Trump’s other attorney, former Philadephia DA Bruce Castor, has no problems working on the Jewish Sabbath. When you consider that most Congressional proceedings finish before sundown anyway, it should have no practical impact on the length of the Trump’s second impeachment trial. Trump already signaled to lead impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) that he will not testify at the Senate trial.
Raskin issued a stern response to Trump’s decision, telling the former president that failure to testify would be inferred as an admission of guilt, something so off-the-wall that it deserves mention. No criminal defendant is required to testify against himself or subject himself to cross-examination without an inference of guilt-or-innocence. Raskin knows it’s inappropriate to signal to a jury, in this case the U.S. Senate, that failure to testify by a defendant in a quasi-criminal procedure would result in an inference of guilt. Plenty of defendants in criminal cases do not testify at their own trials. Raskin’s statements already raises concerns that House impeachment managers don’t have much of a case against Trump, other than appealing to senators’ most obvious biases and prejudices during the trial. Raskin must prove, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt, that Trump committed “incitement of insurrection.”
House’s 81-year-old Speaker Nancy Pelosi.(D-Calif.) charged Trump Jan. 13 with “incitement of insurrection” of the Jan. 6 melee, where some members attending Trump’s last speech earlier in the day stormed the Capitol and vandalized government property. House impeachment managers have to prove beyond-a-reasonable doubt that Trump incited his audience to break law. Trump’s attorney’s Schoen and Castor have an easy legal case defending the president, despite Democrats’ and the media’s case against the president. Unlike the partisan indictments of Trump made by Democrats and the press, Raskin won’t convince 17 Republicans to vote for impeachment If you listen to the talking heads in the media, Trump guilty as charged of high-crimes-and-misdemeanors for delivering a speech. When Democrats put on their media case, it won’t stand up to any legal standards, including whether it’s constitutional.
Democrats and the media have been calling the Jan. 6 riot and mob scene an “insurrection,” taking a word from the Constitution to make it look impeachable. But when you consider Trump did not ask anyone in his Jan. 6 audience to break the law, Democrats are going to be hard-pressed to convince too many Republicans to convict the president. While there are some Republicans that think it’s politically correct to convict the president, most Republicans think the entire impeachment proceeding is unconstitutional since Trump is out of office. Under the House Article 1 impeachment authority, impeachment was designed to remove a president from office for high-crimes-and-misdemeanors, including “treason, bribery and other high-crimes-and-misdemeanors.” Delivering a speech is protected under the First Amendment and is not considered illegal under the Constitution.
Democrats and the media contend that Trump incited a riot by telling his crowd that the Nov. 8, 2020 presidential election was stolen from him or rigged. Trump isn’t the only Republican that thinks that voter irregularities took place in the last election cycle. Never before in U.S. history have universal mail-in ballots been used for voting, making it difficult, if not impossible, to collect, process and tally votes within state election laws. Democrats and the press often say that there was not proof of election fraud presented by Trump’s legal team to the satisfaction of any U.S. court. But Trump’s Constitutional consultant John Eastman, in constructing a brief for the State of Texas, said the nature of universal mail-in balloting made it impossible to prove election fraud, whether it existed or not. Democrats have a high burden of proof that Trump was guilty of “incitement of insurrection.”
Whether or not one of Trump’s lawyers works after sundown Friday evenings should have no bearing on delaying the Senate trial. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)., ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, wants a short trail with neither side calling witnesses. If Democrats play portions of Trump’s speech, they’ll find fiery rhetoric but no attempt by Trump to encourage anyone in his audience to break the law. Calling the Jan. 6 riot and mob scene and “insurrection” tortures logic and legal definitions because the misfits that stormed the Capitol and defaced government property did not possess the weapons needed to for an insurrection. Armed with cell phones and taking selfies does not qualify as an armed rebellion, revolt or insurrection. Democrats and the media get their show trial, one last public attempt to haze Trump, something they did for four years of his presidency.
