Trump’s Impeachment Defense to be Led by a Crackpot Team of Two Hasbeens


In the shadow of January 6, the day-after crept stealthily into being in the middle of the night, uncertain of its place in history but destined to be reactionary. By dawn, the storming of the Capitol by MAGA’s coup klutz klan, made all the more devastating by a mind-boggling lack of defense, dominated national and international conversations. Social media was awash with outrage and heartache which melded into a single voice calling for law, order and justice.

The transgressors were shuffled into two groups: perpetrators and instigators. The first was a mishmash ranging from gullible cult followers to violent white supremacists. The second group comprised the organisers and enablers. Atop the pile: Trump, boated with narcissist self-aggrandizement, the vainglorious leader of a treasonous plot to overthrow democracy.

For four long, agonizing years, America suffered through Trump’s contempt for the law, his disdain for order and his evasion of justice. The Mueller investigation was abruptly curtailed when Bill Barr was nominated for AG. Impeachment failed to get a conviction in the Senate because of blind and belligerent partisanship. Pence, the insipid lickspittle, doesn’t have enough pluck to approach the Trump toadies in Cabinet and suggest a 25th Amendment intervention.

So the coverup-in-plain-sight continued, bolstered by an historic mountain of republican lies swallowed whole and normalised by the media. All the while the MAGA movement gained numbers, gathered conspiracy theories, and sank deeper into the mire of a dangerous cult.

The rest of America held on, waiting for November 3, 2020, when they could finally act to rid themselves of Trump and his corrupt administration. The depth of their need drove over 80 million to vote for Joe Biden, over 80 million votes for decency, over 80 million to decisively and lastingly dump Trump. And when victory was finally announced, the relief was palpable.

But for Trump, loss was unacceptable and constituted what psychiatrists called a narcissistic wound. They instantly went on alert and warned anyone who would listen.

Meet Bandy X Lee, forensic psychiatrist, violence expert, editor of “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump,” and president of the World Mental Health Coalition. For five years she and other mental health professionals tried to get the media to interview them, to listen to them, to heed their warnings. But they didn’t and they constantly got it wrong, missing every indication of danger.

The day before January 6, Dr Lee wrote of her concern for the public’s safety.

The following day, 5 people died and more than 50 were injured in the storming of the Capitol, a coup plotted in Trump’s presence and carried out by his order. He ensured a large gathering by holding a rally in the Ellipse, a park near the White House. There he spent an hour igniting the fires of grievance entitlement then whipping the flames into vengeful rage and rebellion. At the end of the speech, he aimed his newly-forged weapon at the Capitol.

…we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.

…So we are going to–we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we are going to the Capitol, and we are going to try and give–give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re try–going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

Transcript courtesy of abc news.

Of course Trump lie and didn’t walk with them. He went straight to his armoured car and was whisked back to the White House where he could watch the insurgency unfold on C-Span and CNN in comfort.

But almost all the rally crowd went; the wolves in front leading obedient sheep. What organisation there was beforehand cracked and broke in the mindless fervor of a mob unleashed, causing indiscriminate damage wherever they went.

The coup ultimately failed but in the attempt, Trump crossed the red line. No longer was it Democratic vs Republican Americans. As insurrectionists entered those hallowed halls, chanting their disrespect, escalating their grievance into violence, moderate Republicans became one with Democratic Americans in expressing horror at what they were seeing.

The first calls for legal repercussions were aimed at the insurgents. They had photographed and videoed themselves breaking the law, oblivious to the fact that in doing so they were providing evidence for law enforcement and destroying any possible defense in the process.

They were quickly joined by calls to arrest, censure and/or expel the Republicans who’d objected to congressional certification of electors in a handful of states. Their verbal venom had further inflamed hostilities that led directly to the uprising.

But the loudest calls were aimed at Trump and echoed Dr Bandy Lee’s call on January 5 which she reiterated 3 days later.

Resignation wasn’t going to happen so focus narrowed to two options: 25th invocation or impeachment. Social media was instantly awash with stories about both, the facts lost in a sea of speculation.

The trick to bringing order to disorder is to choose reliable sources. Christine Pelosi has a direct link to her mother, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and is a stickler for accuracy.

Trump did not resign. Pence not only reneged on his promise to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer that he’d discuss invoking the 25th with Cabinet chiefs, he refused to take their calls the next day. So, impeachment it is.

As Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff is a senior member of the House leadership team. Many believe him to be the Speaker-in-waiting. His voice carries a lot of weight in the House.

Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Rep Jerry Nadler, is also urging quick action and supports bringing Articles of Impeachment directly to the floor.

Precisely when it will happen is still under discussion. However, we can narrow it down to next week, sometime between Monday, January 11, and Wednesday, January 13. The sooner the better in most people’s views.

It’s been a circuitous route but finally we’ve circled back to the headline. Trump knows he’ll be impeached a second time. He must be expecting a Senate trial soon too because he’s already choosing his defense team.

Also interesting is who will not be on his defense team the second time round.

So was Pam Bondi, the blonde who bombed. Evidently she’s not being reconsidered – by anyone.

Turning now to more practical considerations: what would be the betting odds with this defense duo?

Lev Parnas, former friend and business associate of Rudy’s, weighs in with his suggestions for Trump’s defense.

Now that’s a very interesting question, Lev – let’s ask former Nixon White House Counsel, John W Dean.

Line of laughing emoji

My favourite not-a-lawyer tweet goes to Tom Straw.

Nope, he doesn’t. He promptly accepted and is already trying out his defense on the media. (He’s claiming constitutionally protected speech.)

Good point, Derek!

So roll on Monday and may you carry impeachment over the line in the House.




Help keep the site running, consider supporting.


    • Giuliani is 76 going on 86, Dersh is 82 and they’re not only past it, they’re both completely bats! Besides that, Giuliani is a co-conspirator so he’s going to get kicked off the team anyway. The same will be true for Sidney Powell and Lin Wood. Trump’s running out of lawyers.

    • Sometime in the next 3 days Trump will be impeached again and McConnell will have to schedule a Senate trial. Enter Trump’s batshit crazy legal defense! But it’s hardly surprising he’s down to the absolute dregs now. He and his allies have burned through a great many lawyers with some 62 nuisance cases around the country. He’s well and truly run out of the half-decent lawyers!

    • Actually, it’s really interesting that he’s been so quick to put a team together. I wonder who told him that the House was about to impeach him again? I also wonder if they told him that McConnell wants to delay the trial until an hour after Biden is sworn in. That’s interesting timing because, if both the Georgia Senators-Elect are sworn in and seated by then, the instant VP Kamala Harris is sworn in, the Senate will have a Democratic majority and Schumer will become Majority Leader and take over the trial.

      • The catch with that reasoning is that impeachment requires a 2/3 majority. We would need enough repubs to support it. We would definitely have better chances of success.

      • Um, that makes NO sense. With all due respect, “an hour after Biden is sworn in” and Trump is no longer “impeachable” since he’s no longer President. He’ll be a private citizen (and subject to any number of other legal matters that have been in the works, awaiting the magic hour of 12:01 pm EST, Jan 20).

        You simply CANNOT “impeach” a former President. There’s absolutely NO penalty involved. If McConnell (to use a sports analogy) decides to run down the clock after being presented the articles of impeachment from the House–and he’s under NO obligation to pursue a trial post haste–then that’s that. No impeachment trial; no impeachment. BUT, even supposing he does hold the “trial” after Biden’s sworn in, what penalty happens? There’s only ONE penalty that happens following a Senate conviction: Removal from office. But, Biden will be in that office at the time of that presupposed conviction.

        Also, as Cherl points out, it takes a 2/3 majority to fully impeach a President. Also, there IS the slight matter that, generally speaking, the Vice-President is NOT the “President of the Senate” when it comes to impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States; that role is reserved for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (The VP *may* oversee impeachment proceedings for “lesser” officials–such as federal judges and Cabinet secretaries–but NEVER for POTUS. The Founders realized that *might* lead to a slight “conflict of interest” if you had the power to try the only person between you and control of the entire country.) The Chief Justice HAS to decline to cast a tie-breaking vote, but, again, since a “guilty” verdict without any punishment is ultimately meaningless, breaking a tie vote doesn’t really do anything. I mean, woo-hoo, Donald Trump was impeached but wasn’t removed from office. Can you imagine a civil or criminal case where the defendant is found guilty but incurs no punishment for the wrong?

        • You’re right that he can’t be impeached after his term is up but that’s not at issue here because he’ll be impeached in the coming week, hopefully tomorrow.
          Following impeachment a Senate trial has to be conducted regardless, apparently, of whether the president is sitting or not. If he’s convicted, the penalties will include loss of:
          > security detail
          > presidential pension
          > presidential title
          > travel expenses
          and all other perks associated with a post presidential position.

          • What about his ability to run for a federal office in the future? Isn’t that a penalty after a conviction too?

          • “In 1876, Secretary of War William Belknap was investigated
            In 1876, Secretary of War William Belknap was investigated by the House for corruption. Just minutes before the House was set to vote on his impeachment, he raced to the White House and handed his resignation to President Ulysses Grant.

            The House went ahead and impeached him anyway, and the Senate proceeded to have a trial. A majority voted to convict, but not the two-thirds required, so he was acquitted. The scholars in the second camp point to this example to bolster their argument that even after leaving office, a president could be convicted and barred from holding future federal office.

            Could Trump sue to stop a Senate trial? He could try, but it would be a tough case to win, because the Constitution says the Senate shall have “the sole power to try all impeachments.”

      • Nunes, likely. Or McCarthy, who, as minority leader, would know. (He objected to unanimous consent for the introduction of the articles.)

  1. Sitting here in a prayerful attitude, palms together, except while typing, I am hoping oh so very much!! that this will happen. I want to watch.

    • Actually, it will depend on the timing of the Senate trial. McConnell told House Dem leadership that he won’t schedule the trial until an hour after the inauguration. If the two Senators-elect from Georgia are already seated, then the instant VP Kamala Harris is sworn in, the Senate will immediately switch to a Dem majority. That means Schumer will take over as Majority Leader and he will oversee the trial. They’ll still need 2/3 to convict and that’s where people power comes in. I’m encouraging people to start lobbying the “soft” Republicans first thing tomorrow.

      • It sounds like Mitch wants to wash his hands of the responsibility or bringing his to the floor or not bringing it. This way it’s all on Schumer. It sounds like Mitch is walking a high wire here and he may fall into the pit of vipers i.e. radical Republican crazies.

        • I agree that Mitch wants to wash his hands of the whole thing. He doesn’t want to be the majority leader when the only president in history is convicted in the Senate. Though why he’d pause at that and not every other horrible thing he’s ever done would be almost laughable if it wasn’t so cowardly at a time when ridding the country of a dangerous madman is critical to public safety.

  2. The article[s] of impeachment get introduced on Monday – it’s a pro-forma session. Likely won’t get to the Senate before the 20th, which is actually okay: he can still be impeached, and they wouldn’t need to do a full trial on the floor.

    • Thanks, PJ. Yeah, I’m getting the same info. If McConnell does schedule the trial for the 20th and both Senators-elect from Georgia are seated already, then the instant VP Kamala Harris is sworn in, the Senate will switch to a Dem majority and Schumer will take over. Meantime, I’m encouraging people to start writing, calling, faxing and emailing the “soft” republicans from tomorrow, to lobby them for their trial vote.

    • Not that I’ve heard but Twitter is suggesting he consider the lawyer from The Simpsons. I admit I haven’t seen the latter’s work but the Twitteratti are confident he’d do the job, or possible: do a job on Trump!

  3. Looks like Rudy won’t be suiting up. New York Bar Association has opened an investigation into the January 6 seditious conspiracy involving Donald Thump, Donald Thump Junior and the wife of Clarence Thomas


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

The maximum upload file size: 128 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here