The Trump Impeachment Thread

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:28 am

Will trump testify?

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:40 am

Could they stop him?

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:55 am

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:40 am Could they stop him?

Someone has to call him, right? Will they?

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:03 am

The first time around Florida Man just ordered the witnesses not to appear, and Moscow Mitch and Byelorussia Barr shielded him. Won't be the same this time. Can you imagine Florida Man cross examining The Ramen Shaman?

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:18 am

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 11:08 pm Apparently these guys were unwilling to defend the riot by saying there was widespread election fraud.

But also this

I know this is a stretch, but this just may be the craziest thing I’ve heard from Trump.

This case is actually interesting. There are legitimate arguments to be made over whether Trump’s comments at his Trumpaloo MAGA rally on 1/6 constitute incitement to insurrection or were just legitimate political speech. I don’t think the arguments in Trump’s favor on that issue should prevail, but they are still arguments a reasonable lawyer could justify making, especially when put up against comments made by other politicians in the past that didn’t lead to a riot and a charge of insurrection.

Just to repeat: I think those arguments suck and should not prevail, but I’d have no beef with another lawyer who argued them on Trump’s behalf.

Arguing that Trump’s comments were somehow justified because they were true and he really won? That’s insane. I’m not surprised in the least that his legal team is abandoning ship if that’s the angle he’s insisting on pursuing.

But maybe that’s his goal here. If he were to take the more legitimate legal argument that he was NOT, in fact, inciting his MAGA idiots to storm the Capitol in a fit of insurrection because he was the true winner of the election, he would, to a large extent, be rejecting and abandoning them. His legally (somewhat) defensible position would be one that might - more than shooting someone on 5th Avenue - cause some of the diehard MAGA idiots to abandon him.

Maybe that’s a bridge he’s unwilling to cross, whether it be for his hopes of creating a Trump news network of a Trump political party or some other shitty Trump branded thing.

His best legal defense here is not good for his brand. And with a GOP that seems to forget that there was a mob trying to murder a good number of them earlier this month, why not just go for it if you’re Trump? Hire Rudy. Or, better yet, defend yourself. It’s clear that McConnel and the GOP are not going to convict, so just use this impeachment thing as a brand enhancing opportunity. Trump has been de-platformed. He’s been kicked out of office. In some ways, this is his last best chance to completely capture the news cycle and message away.

Anyway, if I were his completely unscrupulous advisor with no care whatsoever for the good of our country, that’s probably the advice I’d be giving him.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:21 am

OOH, I don't ever want to see or hear trump again. OTOH, this is shaping up as the kind of

moment that we're going to have trouble letting go.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:25 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:21 am OOH, I don't ever want to see or hear trump again. OTOH, this is shaping up as the kind of moment that we're going to have trouble letting go.

Yep. Making me have second thoughts about whether this was really such a good idea in the first place. Is this just going to serve to give a de-platformed, out of office Trump a soapbox he wouldn’t have otherwise had access to?

Hoping malchior will soon drop in to make me feel better about this impeachment sequel.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:49 am

Trump has access to a soapbox 24/7 if he wants it. There are three cable news channels that still work for him.

For once, could we stop just operating in fear of what might be, and fucking hold someone accountable? Just one goddamn time?

Hyena · Post by **Hyena** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:22 am

I don't do the Twitter, but someone should post the latest letter from the Lincoln Project's attorneys to Rudy.

Talk about scorched earth...damn.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:35 am

Andrew Fleischman
@ASFleischman

"You're damn right I ordered the code red!"

Quote Tweet
Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

By insisting that his lawyers argue to the Senate that the election really *was* “stolen,” Trump isn’t just refusing to contest the *actual* ground on which he was impeached (that he incited the violence on January 6); he’s effectively arguing that the violence was *justified.*

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:27 pm

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:25 am
Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:21 am OOH, I don't ever want to see or hear trump again. OTOH, this is shaping up as the kind of moment that we're going to have trouble letting go.
Yep. Making me have second thoughts about whether this was really such a good idea in the first place. Is this just going to serve to give a de-platformed, out of office Trump a soapbox he wouldn’t have otherwise had access to?

Hoping malchior will soon drop in to make me feel better about this impeachment sequel.

Not impeaching would have been unimaginable. It would have signaled to everyone that this republic was going to go without even a fight. And since then we've now seen that the Democrats are finally waking up to the consequences of their longtime weakness and inaction. I hate to say they've likely waited until it is too late but if they actually fight at least there is a chance. There is no soothing these mad dogs.

Edit: I thought the analysis in your previous post was pretty much right. Trump can't rely on the law as it stands. He aspires to *be the law*. Still I think its always important to recognize that there also isn't a whole lot of strategy there. We can always rationalize it about brand and there is a little of that in there. Still, he is the ultimate sore loser. He can't ever lose. He can only be cheated. That is not a man you should ever give any sort of power to less the Presidency. Once he won, the next best outcome that didn't involve him attempting a coup would have been to win both elections and then possibly he would leave on his own terms in a 'normal' way. Once it was ripped away his broken psyche exploded in rage. All of this flows from that. He was and never is going to accept any electoral loss as legitimate. His brain won't allow for it.

RunningMn9 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:49 am Trump has access to a soapbox 24/7 if he wants it. There are three cable news channels that still work for him.

For once, could we stop just operating in fear of what might be, and fucking hold someone accountable? Just one goddamn time?

Unfortunately that isn't the kind of country we live in anymore. Heck maybe never was. We've long decided that the powerful needed to be forgiven for the unforgivable. Maybe it is why this keeps getting worse as time passes.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:08 pm

Florida Man:

That's me in the corner
That's me on the hot seat
Losing my attorneys...

Jaymon · Post by **Jaymon** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:48 pm

If Trump appears and answers questions, there is no way he would not lie. Thats what he does. He lies. A dem could ask him "how tall are you" and thats it, he answers with a lie and is guilty of lying to congress. One wonders if Trump bothered to read up on that particular section of law, especially that part about not needing to be under oath to be found guilty of lying to congress.

But would it actually get enforced? Would he get his 5 years, or 8 considering this is about domestic terrorism? Getting him to testify in person must be like the holy grail for the Dems, but can they actually do anything with it if he shows up?

my source

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:51 pm

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:18 am
Arguing that Trump’s comments were somehow justified because they were true and he really won? That’s insane. I’m not surprised in the least that his legal team is abandoning ship if that’s the angle he’s insisting on pursuing.

I don't think that's the argument he trying or wants to make. He's doesn't care to argue that his speech was justified - he just wants a platform to argue that there was fraud and he really won the election. He knows he's not going to be impeached no matter what so why argue the point. He just wants a platform to make his crazy fraud accusations.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:56 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:35 am By insisting that his lawyers argue to the Senate that the election really *was* “stolen,” Trump isn’t just refusing to contest the *actual* ground on which he was impeached (that he incited the violence on January 6); he’s effectively arguing that the violence was *justified.*

No lawyer here but if the impeachment was run anything like a legal proceeding, wouldn't such an argument be ruled out of order, not relevant to the proceedings, and not allowed to be made? Whether he was defrauded or not, that's not relevant to whether he incited an attack on the Capitol. It doesn't address his guilt or innocence.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:28 pm

It's a political process. The rules are as defined by the body. It'd be right to say they follow our legal traditions to some degree. Still, as far as I know they set blocks of time for arguments from each side and the rules don't establish boundaries of applicability like courts do. However, all the presiding officer does is decide if the body is following the rules they all agreed to. It wouldn't be Leahy telling people to get to a point, etc.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:32 pm

Grifman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:51 pm
Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:18 am
Arguing that Trump’s comments were somehow justified because they were true and he really won? That’s insane. I’m not surprised in the least that his legal team is abandoning ship if that’s the angle he’s insisting on pursuing.
I don't think that's the argument he trying or wants to make. He's doesn't care to argue that his speech was justified - he just wants a platform to argue that there was fraud and he really won the election. He knows he's not going to be impeached no matter what so why argue the point. He just wants a platform to make his crazy fraud accusations.

Yep, I said this exact same thing to my buddy yesterday when we were laughing about Stephen Miller saying that they will hire a team soon, like they have all the time in the world and his current weeks' attorneys leaving is no biggie.

Except for the lying under oath part (good point, had not thought about that), what's Trump's downside here? I really don't see one. Just from HIS perspective:
1. He really IS pretty much above the law, and knows that he will not be convicted in the Senate trial.
2. He IS now, the Republican party (they should just go ahead and change the name already, it's really getting ridiculous) Trump ATE the GOP, basically. This trial is the burp.
3. He's invincible (kinda related to 1)
4. He LOVES to hear himself talk, and not sure if there are time limits imposed on lawyers, but if he represents himself (I totally see this as a real possibility) he could potentially bloviate for hours about whatever the hell he wants to (stolen election, no way he could lose since his crowds were so big, etc)
5. He could be as nasty as he wants to be to any Dems or RINO's asking him questions, and his already god-like rep with his minions would go from "I'll die for you, you magnificent orange bastard!" to "I will do ANYthing you want me to" Making libs look weak on TV in front of a HUGE national, and maybe intl audience? Priceless.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:10 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:32 pm Except for the lying under oath part (good point, had not thought about that), what's Trump's downside here? I really don't see one. Just from HIS perspective:
1. He really IS pretty much above the law, and knows that he will not be convicted in the Senate trial.
2. He IS now, the Republican party (they should just go ahead and change the name already, it's really getting ridiculous) Trump ATE the GOP, basically. This trial is the burp.
3. He's invincible (kinda related to 1)
4. He LOVES to hear himself talk, and not sure if there are time limits imposed on lawyers, but if he represents himself (I totally see this as a real possibility) he could potentially bloviate for hours about whatever the hell he wants to (stolen election, no way he could lose since his crowds were so big, etc)
5. He could be as nasty as he wants to be to any Dems or RINO's asking him questions, and his already god-like rep with his minions would go from "I'll die for you, you magnificent orange bastard!" to "I will do ANYthing you want me to" Making libs look weak on TV in front of a HUGE national, and maybe intl audience? Priceless.

I don't entirely agree. For instance, I don't think he loves to hear himself talk. Rather, he loves to hear his followers cheer. Think of how uncomfortable he was in every interview that wasn't a Fox Pundit tongue bath.

There are recordings of Trump in depositions. He's extremely halting and unimpressive. In a senate rather than judicial context, there is a good chance that he'll just try to walk out when the questions get tricky.

But even if he stands to gain among his worshippers from the process, we would be foolish not to push ahead with the trial and to make it as rigorous an accounting as possible. This could hardly hasten the death of the Republic more than just letting everything slide.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:19 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:10 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:32 pm Except for the lying under oath part (good point, had not thought about that), what's Trump's downside here? I really don't see one. Just from HIS perspective:
1. He really IS pretty much above the law, and knows that he will not be convicted in the Senate trial.
2. He IS now, the Republican party (they should just go ahead and change the name already, it's really getting ridiculous) Trump ATE the GOP, basically. This trial is the burp.
3. He's invincible (kinda related to 1)
4. He LOVES to hear himself talk, and not sure if there are time limits imposed on lawyers, but if he represents himself (I totally see this as a real possibility) he could potentially bloviate for hours about whatever the hell he wants to (stolen election, no way he could lose since his crowds were so big, etc)
5. He could be as nasty as he wants to be to any Dems or RINO's asking him questions, and his already god-like rep with his minions would go from "I'll die for you, you magnificent orange bastard!" to "I will do ANYthing you want me to" Making libs look weak on TV in front of a HUGE national, and maybe intl audience? Priceless.
I don't entirely agree. For instance, I don't think he loves to hear himself talk. Rather, he loves to hear his followers cheer. Think of how uncomfortable he was in every interview that wasn't a Fox Pundit tongue bath.

There are recordings of Trump in depositions. He's extremely halting and unimpressive. In a senate rather than judicial context, there is a good chance that he'll just try to walk out when the questions get tricky.

But even if he stands to gain among his worshippers from the process, we would be foolish not to push ahead with the trial and to make it as rigorous an accounting as possible. This could hardly hasten the death of the Republic more than just letting everything slide.

Oh I am in total agreement that it needs to happen. I just think that it will benefit Trump more than it will America.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:44 pm

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:16 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:10 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:32 pm Except for the lying under oath part (good point, had not thought about that), what's Trump's downside here? I really don't see one. Just from HIS perspective:
1. He really IS pretty much above the law, and knows that he will not be convicted in the Senate trial.
2. He IS now, the Republican party (they should just go ahead and change the name already, it's really getting ridiculous) Trump ATE the GOP, basically. This trial is the burp.
3. He's invincible (kinda related to 1)
4. He LOVES to hear himself talk, and not sure if there are time limits imposed on lawyers, but if he represents himself (I totally see this as a real possibility) he could potentially bloviate for hours about whatever the hell he wants to (stolen election, no way he could lose since his crowds were so big, etc)
5. He could be as nasty as he wants to be to any Dems or RINO's asking him questions, and his already god-like rep with his minions would go from "I'll die for you, you magnificent orange bastard!" to "I will do ANYthing you want me to" Making libs look weak on TV in front of a HUGE national, and maybe intl audience? Priceless.
I don't entirely agree. For instance, I don't think he loves to hear himself talk. Rather, he loves to hear his followers cheer. Think of how uncomfortable he was in every interview that wasn't a Fox Pundit tongue bath.

There are recordings of Trump in depositions. He's extremely halting and unimpressive. In a senate rather than judicial context, there is a good chance that he'll just try to walk out when the questions get tricky.

But even if he stands to gain among his worshippers from the process, we would be foolish not to push ahead with the trial and to make it as rigorous an accounting as possible. This could hardly hasten the death of the Republic more than just letting everything slide.

If he tries to walk out please tell me someone gets to cuff him and force him to stay. Please.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:26 pm

Remus West wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:16 pm
Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 7:10 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 6:32 pm Except for the lying under oath part (good point, had not thought about that), what's Trump's downside here? I really don't see one. Just from HIS perspective:
1. He really IS pretty much above the law, and knows that he will not be convicted in the Senate trial.
2. He IS now, the Republican party (they should just go ahead and change the name already, it's really getting ridiculous) Trump ATE the GOP, basically. This trial is the burp.
3. He's invincible (kinda related to 1)
4. He LOVES to hear himself talk, and not sure if there are time limits imposed on lawyers, but if he represents himself (I totally see this as a real possibility) he could potentially bloviate for hours about whatever the hell he wants to (stolen election, no way he could lose since his crowds were so big, etc)
5. He could be as nasty as he wants to be to any Dems or RINO's asking him questions, and his already god-like rep with his minions would go from "I'll die for you, you magnificent orange bastard!" to "I will do ANYthing you want me to" Making libs look weak on TV in front of a HUGE national, and maybe intl audience? Priceless.
I don't entirely agree. For instance, I don't think he loves to hear himself talk. Rather, he loves to hear his followers cheer. Think of how uncomfortable he was in every interview that wasn't a Fox Pundit tongue bath.

There are recordings of Trump in depositions. He's extremely halting and unimpressive. In a senate rather than judicial context, there is a good chance that he'll just try to walk out when the questions get tricky.

But even if he stands to gain among his worshippers from the process, we would be foolish not to push ahead with the trial and to make it as rigorous an accounting as possible. This could hardly hasten the death of the Republic more than just letting everything slide.
If he tries to walk out please tell me someone gets to cuff zip tie him and force him to stay.
Please.

FIFY

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 4:41 pm

We joke, but that's the real issue here. We can parade him around through the process, and make ourselves feel better I guess, about doing the right thing (it IS the right thing IMO), but the reality is that NO ONE WILL TOUCH THIS GUY. Our leadership has not the singular will to punish him, so he will not be punished.

Because he is still SO feared by most of the now minority GOP members, they will do nothing. And it comes down to constituents in a lot of cases....SO many people out there revere him as a God, or at least they are extremely vocal about it. Hell, there was a state on Friday I think, whose GOP submitted a proposal for a state holiday in Trump's honor, as "The Best President Evarrrrrr" or some such nonsense. (please someone if you have that link, pop it in here, I'm generalizing)

As long as we are living with "Trump Madness", the dude is untouchable, as much as it galls me (and I am sure, most of the Democratic leadership). I mean, Democrats control the Executive AND both legislative branches, and they can't do anything concrete to him! It's court/impeachment theater. And it will be a massive platform and bullhorn for him to spread and continue his BS. AND it will weaken the impeachment process probably. Not to mention send a VERY clear signal to future (smarter) wannbe authoritarians that you really CAN do pretty much anything and get away with it (as long as you have VERY tight control over your core minions).

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:08 pm

It may do all of that but it will also be a huge flashing warning sign for anyone thinking about voting republican in the future. Each one of them that fails to hold him accountable can and should be hammered on it during the next election they are up for. If their district strays into sanity they will get ejected from their positions post haste and thus help the Dems maintain control. The scary part right now to me is all the election laws being brought forth to "safe guard" elections from all the non-existent voter fraud. If they succeed in passing that crap they could easily suppress enough vote to swing Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and others further right giving minority rule the title of "only" rule.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:46 pm

I didn't see it until now but apparently Graham is being awful on multiple fronts - here he is threatening to make it a "long trial" and he'd "bring the FBI in" if the Democrats call witnesses. As to the FBI, that is a thing that many of us want to happen anyway. I'd personally love to hear what the FBI has uncovered so far as long as it doesn't affect their ability to continue to push the case forward.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:24 pm

Remus West wrote:The scary part right now to me is all the election laws being brought forth to "safe guard" elections from all the non-existent voter fraud. If they succeed in passing that crap they could easily suppress enough vote to swing Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and others further right giving minority rule the title of "only" rule.

Yep. “Election security” is the new gerrymandering.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:26 pm

Wow, Graham looks like shit. Must be having trouble sleeping at night for some unknown reason.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 3:04 pm

The Dems risk aversion is a huge problem. Until they go into battle with the will to win, rather than avoiding the fight altogether because they may lose, they will keep getting rolled by these GOP all-or-nothing gambits.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Feb 02, 2021 3:23 pm

I wonder if they'll let me volunteer to help with the Dominion lawsuit? You know, refresh the attorneys' water, bring them paper and pencils, mop up Rudy's torrent of hair dye as he sweats bullets.

I'm seriously looking forward to their lawsuit. Of all the things that are happening, that seems the most likely to really hurt these assholes in Trump's camp.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:15 am

When I see Trump or hear his name I just want to say to him "Go away now old man"

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:26 am

Daehawk wrote:When I see Trump or hear his name I just want to say to him "Go away now old man"

We have a semi-enforced rule in our house that Trump is now "He Who Shall Not Be Named." Whatever he did, said, or is planning to do, I no longer care.

Paingod · Post by **Paingod** » Wed Feb 03, 2021 11:08 am

YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:26 amWhatever he did, said, or is planning to do, I no longer care.

Yep. I stopped paying attention to him the moment he shuffled his sad wrinkled ass out of the White House for the last time. He occupies zero head space right now.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:04 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:28 am Will trump testify?

Betsy Klein
@betsy_klein

House Mgr Raskin sets a 5p Friday deadline for Trump to respond to invite to testify: "Whereas a sitting President might raise concerns about distraction from their official duties, that concern is obviously inapplicable here. We therefore anticipate your availability to testify."

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:09 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:04 pm
Kraken wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:28 am Will trump testify?
Betsy Klein
@betsy_klein

House Mgr Raskin sets a 5p Friday deadline for Trump to respond to invite to testify: "Whereas a sitting President might raise concerns about distraction from their official duties, that concern is obviously inapplicable here. We therefore anticipate your availability to testify."

Or we will will enforce our powers with a STRONGLY-worded letter of admonishment. The power of PRECEDENT always prevails, and no scofflaw is safe from its shade throwing stinkeye! If you don't show up, history will remember your impudence!

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:09 pm

Unfortunately:

Peter Alexander
@PeterAlexander
Asked if Trump will testify during his impeachment trial next week as Democrats have requested, Trump’s lawyer Bruce Caster tells @NBCNews
: “No.”

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:13 pm

Smart move on the lawyers' part. trump can't be compelled to self-incriminate, and would surely perjure himself.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:13 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:09 pm Unfortunately:

Peter Alexander
@PeterAlexander
Asked if Trump will testify during his impeachment trial next week as Democrats have requested, Trump’s lawyer Bruce Caster tells @NBCNews
: “No.”

Bummer. Was eagerly waiting for my, “Did you order the crowd to storm the Capitol?” “YOU’RE DAMN RIGHT I DID!” moment.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:16 pm

If the Dems had any sense (they don't) they would hammer the image of Florida Man as a coward afraid to face his accusers. Have to leave that to TLP.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:35 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:13 pm Smart move on the lawyers' part. trump can't be compelled to self-incriminate, and would surely perjure himself.

Can't they subpoena him? He could plead the Fifth, and might well do so, but that's not exactly a good look for him or the GOP politically.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:52 pm

El Guapo wrote:
Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:13 pm Smart move on the lawyers' part. trump can't be compelled to self-incriminate, and would surely perjure himself.
Can't they subpoena him? He could plead the Fifth, and might well do so, but that's not exactly a good look for him or the GOP politically.

I think we are past the GOP or Trump worrying about bad optics. “Bad” in the traditional sense of course.