I’m sure nobody reading this blog is a frequent viewer of Fox News. While that’s understandable, you do miss some gems. This “discussion” of impeachment between Rudy Giuliani and Jeanine Pirro is one of those moments. First, Giuliani starts babbling about how abuse of power is not specifically listed in the constitution, along with high crimes and misdemeanors, as if that somehow renders the issue moot. Giuliani fails to recall that Bill Clinton was charged with abuse of power, and if Nixon had not resigned, abuse of power charges were to be levied against him as well. It’s pure poppycock, but Giuliani keeps going.
Then Jeanine Pirro gets rolling, saying that a bad precedent is being established and from here on out, “you’ll be able to impeach a president if you don’t like the color of his tie,” and “how do you say that obstruction isn’t a misdemeanor or a high crime?” This is word salad flailing at it’s zenith. The fact that it is between a purported judge and a former prosecutor of some note is what is stupifying. They’re not making any effort to translate legal concepts for lay people, they’re just throwing a lot of legalese out there, hoping to impress the rubes who listen to Fox News, that poor King Donald is indeed being ill-used, with outraged tones and gestures, masking their incomprehensibility. It’s scary to see this level of propaganda, seriously.
Then Giuliani goes on to conflate an impeachment hearing with a normal civil court hearing, and even he must know that’s bullshit. Andrew Napolitano was asked on Fox News earlier in the week about the same thing and he said that it was comparing apples and oranges.
Then Giuliani goes on to talk about “an indictment for eating ice cream.” Really, it’s there, around 3:55. Pirro then goes on to declare that “I used to do that,” meaning dismissing cases based on indictments for eating ice cream — or equally specious causes of action. Pirro is utterly clueless, and that’s where this actually goes into high comedy. She’s looking at Giuliani searchingly and hoping he’ll drop some pearl of wisdom and all he’s doing is confusing the hell out of her — because he’s raving like a lunatic. There is not one sentence that the man says that makes common sense, let alone is any kind of a statement of jurisprudence.
Then Giuliani switches gears. First he says that all that’s necessary at the Senate trial is for a lawyer to ask Chief Justice Roberts to “dismiss the case” — which is an impossibility. Trump is impeached for now and all time. Whether he gets acquitted in the Senate is a separate issue, but there’s no way he’s unimpeached. Then Giuliani switches to how great an idea it would be to actually have the trial. Forget four minutes of babbling against the unfair, illegal trial, now Giuliani is really onto the tactic that matters, and that is having the trial. “Because you’ll get to know all about Biden. You’ll hear what a crook he is. He made money in Iran, he made money in China, he made money in Iraq. Make him point man — millions of dollars for the Biden crime family.”
It is unbelievable, on a certain level, that Giuliani is spewing this level of pure sewage. Somewhere along the line, something happened to him, and he decided to sell his name and whatever cache he may have ever had, to the highest bidder — which right now is Donald Trump. Giuliani is on the same level as Sean Hannity, worse even, because Hannity never was a federal prosecutor or mayor of New York. Whatever Giuliani decided to chase down the rabbit hole, he is either unaware, or doesn’t care, that he went straight to Hell.
The rest of the interview blathers on, with Pirro going to her next talking point, the whistle blower, and getting no response, moving past it.
Then Pirro asks Giuliani, the Jurist Jenius Joker, if, once the Chief Justice “dismisses the case” if impeachment in the House can somehow be “erased” — and this is the holy grail, right here. This is what Donald Trump dreams of happening, is somehow, he’s going to wake up, please daddy, to find out that impeachment was only a bad dream.
Giuliani replied, “Well then it becomes the only impeachment that’s ever been dismissed for being non-constitutional. And I would say, if it’s non-constitutional, it’s null and void.” Null and void are contract terms, how Giuliani is applying them to the political mechanism of impeachment, is something that would render a first year law student the laughing stock of the class.
He went on, “It shouldn’t have happened. It was totally illegal.” Pirro concludes that it all should be null and void, and it would be nice if somehow there was a ray gun we could all take and point at the TV screen and nullify the two of them out of existence and into the void. This is one for the books.
The only thing kookier than this is going to be when Alan Dershowitz starts bastardizing legal concepts. Just wait and see.
Here’s Trump’s retweet, endorsing it all, because to him this sounds just great. Make a mental note, folks, this is who we are in the year 2020. And remember, this level of embarrassing idiocy is being transmitted to the rest of the world.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2020