WASHINGTON — House prosecutors wrapped up their case against former President Donald Trump on Thursday, arguing that rioters on Jan. 6. thought they were acting on Trump’s orders, that he has shown no remorse or culpability for his role, and warning that if he isn’t held accountable, Trump could try to use a mob to regain power.
“Is there any political leader in this room who believes that if he is ever allowed by the Senate to get back into the Oval Office, Donald Trump would stop inciting violence to get his way?” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the lead House impeachment manager.
“Would you bet the lives of more police officers on that? Would you bet the safety of your family on that? Would you bet the future of your democracy on that?”
The Senate, Raskin said, must act to hold Trump accountable by convicting him and barring him from running for office again.
Manager Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., summed up the argument this way: “I’m not afraid of Donald Trump running again in four years. I’m afraid he’s going to run again and lose — because he can do this again.”
On Wednesday, the impeachment managers wove senators’ Jan. 6 experiences into a narrative, arguing that Trump undermined the presidential election and incited a mob to try to prevent Congress from certifying the election’s results.
They used security camera footage to demonstrate how close the vice president and some of the evacuating senators came to the violent pro-Trump mob ransacking the Capitol. Prosecutors concluded the day by questioning why Trump failed to call off rioters, calling it “a dereliction of duty.”
Senators from both parties praised the managers’ case, but there was no sign it would sway enough Republicans to vote to convict Trump.
Many Republicans say the Senate lacks authority under the Constitution to try a person who no longer is in office.
“I think the whole proceeding’s unconstitutional. I don’t think you have jurisdiction here,” Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told reporters. “Nothing that they have presented has, frankly, addressed that question in a way that I find persuasive or changed my mind on it.”
Another problem the impeachment managers face stems from the fast pace of the proceedings, which are taking place less than five weeks after the attack on the Capitol.
And the managers have presented little direct evidence of Trump’s thinking beyond what can be inferred from his tweets or public statements.
On Wednesday, for example, they presented extensive evidence of planning that went into the Jan. 6 attack, much of it on social media accounts that they said the White House was known to monitor. Trump surely knew, or should have known, that his supporters were planning acts of violence and had a duty to call them off, rather than incite them further, they argued.
But prosecutors haven’t presented conclusive proof that he knew violence was planned, a weakness in the case that Republican defenders of Trump have pointed to.
On Thursday, the prosecutors sought to shore up that part of their case.
Senators should “use our common sense” in examining the evidence, Raskin said. They should look at Trump’s “unavoidable knowledge of the consequences of his incitement and the clear foreseeability of the violent harm he unleashed on our people and our republic.”
But several Republican senators said that the powerfully emotional evidence so far had established the danger the mob posed to the Capitol, but not Trump’s involvement.
Trump’s defense team likely will push that argument further when they begin their side of the case Friday.
The Constitution requires a vote of two-thirds of senators to convict. That means at least 17 Republicans would need to join all 48 Democrats and the two independents who caucus with them to vote to find Trump guilty. Currently the number of Republican senators who appear open to voting to convict is less than half that.
As Thursday’s presentation began, the prosecutors focused on evidence of Trump’s lack of remorse, as well as the harm caused by the rioters.
Trump’s failure to show contrition for his role is further evidence of his state of mind regarding the riot, Lieu told senators.
Thursday’s presentation began with multiple video and social media examples of rioters who said they believed they were doing Trump’s bidding, declaring while inside the Capitol that Trump had sent them, or that they were acting on his orders. Dozens have told judges as part of their defense that they felt they were acting on the president’s explicit instructions.
“Folks, the insurrectionists didn’t just make this up,” manager Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., said. “More and more insurrectionists are admitting they came at Trump’s direction.”
Raskin noted that Trump had a history of praising supporters who acted violently, referring to behavior as long ago as 2015, when at campaign rallies he cheered on violence.
“These tactics were road tested,” Raskin said. “Jan. 6 was a culmination of the president’s actions, not an aberration from them.”
Once House managers conclude, Trump’s lawyers will have up to 16 hours over two days to make their argument. They’re expected to continue to emphasize that Trump’s words were protected speech and that the Senate has no authority under the Constitution to punish a president who no longer holds office.
The defense lawyers are expected to stress that no one argues that the riot is acceptable. But the fault lies with the rioters, not with Trump, they have said.
They are also likely to stress procedural complaints Republicans have raised about the way the House moved to impeach Trump. The House managers barely addressed those issues.
The House moved rapidly to impeach Trump, with little evidence gathering and no hearings before taking the vote — the impeachment managers began writing the article of impeachment while still hiding from rioters — a stark difference from the months-long process that accompanied previous impeachments.
Critics of the process say that some questions may have been answered, and some holes in the case filled, had more time had been allowed for investigation.
"up" - Google News
February 12, 2021 at 07:00AM
https://ift.tt/3peX6a6
Impeachment managers wrap up oral argument. Was it enough? - Tampa Bay Times
"up" - Google News
https://ift.tt/350tWlq
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Impeachment managers wrap up oral argument. Was it enough? - Tampa Bay Times"
Post a Comment