President Trump’s Defense, by Robert Gore | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

Posted by $ straightlinelogic 7 months, 2 weeks ago to Government
10 comments | Share | Flag

I thought I had said all I was going to say on “Ukrainegate” in my article “Make the Truth Irrelevant.” Then I read a column on the Internet by Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan whose very title: “Trump’s Defenders Have No Defense” (WSJ, 11/21/19) bespeaks its idiocy. Unfortunately, it also represents a lot of what’s being peddled by the mainstream media.

How would Noonan or anyone else outside Trump’s circle know whether he does or does not have a defense when the rules of the only body that has pursued the case against him preclude him from offering a defense? In the House impeachment hearings, Trump’s defenders cannot call their own witnesses, cannot confront the whistleblower whose complaint launched the case, cannot challenge hearsay evidence and have it excluded, and cannot probe the motives or possibly illegal behavior of his accusers.

Noonan further embarrasses herself with the following: “As to the impeachment itself, the case has been so clearly made you wonder what exactly the Senate will be left doing. How will they hold a lengthy trial with a case this clear?” She reveals her own ignorance of the law and facts of this particular case, and complete lack of decency or sense of fair play, rendering such a judgment after hearing only one side of the case.

Noonan has prompted this analysis of possibilities concerning Trump’s defenses in a Senate trial. It assumes that standard American judicial rules, procedures, and principles will be in force during the trial. Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I am an inactive member of the California Bar Association and have never practiced law.

This is an excerpt. For the complete article please click the above link.
SOURCE URL: https://straightlinelogic.com/2019/11/26/president-trumps-defense-by-robert-gore/#more-42955


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 7 months, 2 weeks ago
    The underlying 'political benefit' that is being proposed is that by uncovering evidence that Biden did, indeed, use the office of Vice President to benefit his son, that Trump would benefit from his elimination as an opponent.

    Firstly, that's would by no means be clearly a benefit to Trump. I think he would love to run against Biden. The socialists would be uninspired and Biden is his own worst opponent. He's failed every time he's tried to run on the national stage except when he was being carried by Obama. I think Trump would easily defeat Biden -- and I bet Trump thinks he could beat "sleepy Joe" too..

    Secondly, it is very revealing of the Democratic thinking that they equate having an investigation to "digging up dirt". Sort of explains their continued investigation of Trump, doesn't it. Investigations are supposed to find the truth. They are impugning the Ukraine by assuming that they would just make stuff up -- of course they know that has already happened in 2016.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 7 months, 2 weeks ago
    Very good essay, Robert. I watched some of the Schiff Circus and it was pitiful. way too much hearsay. overhearing phone conversation or interpretation of such, diplomat's severe dislike of Trump's foreign policy. These deep staters and the Dems think they run the country and government, they have lost the concept that the citizens of this country pay their salary. I'm still of the opinion the DC bureaucracy needs to be swept clean. We, the citizens should be able to say to these DeepStaters "Your Fired"!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ gharkness 7 months, 2 weeks ago
    I hope the Republicans do drag the trial out as long as possible. They need to make sure that every single person that has something good to say, says it. Goodness knows, enough people have said bad, and then not been able to back up their assertions! The public needs to be reminded, every single day, of how the Democrats tried to overthrow a sitting President.

    Side note: small typo in the paragraph beginning "At the very least, Trump should be able to...." That sentence ends with "trails," and I am pretty sure you meant "trials." Since I wasn't reading for mistakes, there may be others but nothing jumped out at me except that one.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 7 months, 2 weeks ago
    I am so glad I cancelled my WSJ subscription a long time ago, more precisely when the gradual shifting to the left became too offensive to tolerate.

    Noonan is a relique from the past. She made her name during the Reagan years and that time it appeared she was a principled conservative.

    Then came Obama and Peggy became doe eyed, following the Anointed One in his spiritual realm.

    She got stuck there. After she was ridiculed a few times, she swung back and forth, making the full transition to an anti-Trumper after 2016.

    She is littering the Journal with her chutzpah and it beats me why the WSJ is keeping her, although I suspect it is precisely because of the Reagan years, giving some shine to the otherwise degrading rag, in case some people still think she is the real thing.

    She is a typical "elite", living in the Ivory Tower, with the slightest idea of what the real world is about.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo