Mediaboss Marketing

Let justice be done, though the heavens fall is a common saying in English jurisprudence meaning that the rule of law must be adhered to at all costs. The second attempt to convict impeached former president Trump has ended in his acquittal, but the post-mortems of the events of 1/6 have only just begun. Any analysis of 1/6 should include a close examination of the role played by former Vice President Mike Pence. His conduct that day reflected the greatest devotion possible to the rule of law.

Of course, anyone will believe in the rule of law when doing so suits him. But Pence showed his devotion even at great personal cost to himself. Adherence to the law required him to preside over the counting of electoral votes which would certify not only Trumps defeat for a second term, but his own as well. Moreover, he did so even as rioters were demanding that he be put to death, and a gallows was being erected outside the Capitol.

Now it might be argued that Pence really had no choice. The law required him to open the sealed electoral votes submitted by the states, preside over their tabulation before Congress, and announce the final results of the count. He had no authority to reject ballots lawfully submitted, accept ballots submitted from any source other than the electors duly chosen by the states, or say or do anything else to alter the final outcome of the vote count. His legally assigned role was strictly ministerial and ceremonial; he had no discretion. So whats the big deal?

Well, Pence could have tried to take the actions demanded by Trump and his supporters in Congress and in the mob anyway. Doing so would have been illegal and ineffective in changing the outcome of the electoral vote. But he would still have been proclaimed a great hero among Trumps supporters in the Republican base and made himself the odds-on favorite to win the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, should Trump choose not to seek it.

But as it is, Pence, for the time being, must settle for the accolades of, of all people, Democrats. To be certain, Democratic praise has been lavish. One of the Democratic representatives serving as an impeachment manager (prosecutor) said, Vice President Mike Pence showed us what it means to be an American, what it means to show courage. He put his country, his oath, his values and his morals above the will of one man. Another House manager said, Even though the count resulted in the defeat of his party and his own candidacy, Vice President Pence had the courage to stand against the president, tell the American public the truth and uphold our Constitution.

How sincere this praise may be is open to question. Remember, these are Democrats offering it, and Democrats only praise Republicans who say and do things that favor Democrats. Democrats relentlessly charged Barack Obamas two Republican opponents for the presidency, John McCain and Mitt Romney, with their all-purpose smear, racism, until McCain and Romney emerged as opponents of Trump. Should Pence actually win the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, no doubt the Democrats will revert to their usual anti-Pence litany of accusations: Hes a homophobic bigot, a religious zealot, a sexual weirdohe refuses to be alone with any woman other than his wifeand a bauble-headed toady constantly nodding in agreement with everything his Master said.

Yet the Democrats praise of Pence, however insincere it may be, is not necessarily unjustified. He truly does seem to have put devotion to the law above his personal political ambitions and even his personal health and safety as well. Its too bad Republicans have not yet acknowledged this and that his presidential ambitions may suffer at the hands of those who think he should have danced at the end of the rope on the Capitol Hill gallows.

Should further investigation of 1/6 confirm the truth of the Democrats description of Mike Pence, then he surely will have earned the praise of all who believe in the rule of law, though the heavens fall. Whether hell actually win that praise from sources sincerely believing in his merit and virtue is a different matter.

Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville and taught politics and government at Tarleton since 1987. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990 to the present). He was Mayor Pro Tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014. He is a member of St. Lukes Episcopal Church and the Stephenville Rotary Club, and does volunteer work for the Boy Scouts of America.Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.

Like Loading...

Related

Original post:
Though the Heavens Fall: Mike Pence and the Rule of Law - The Flash Today

Well, that was a hell of a ride. House impeachment managers wrapped up their opening arguments against former President Donald Trump on Thursday. Trump's defense lawyers take the floor Friday to counter the overwhelming evidence the managers laid out but apparently it won't take them long.

Trump's lawyers reportedly don't believe they'll need the full two days available to them to make their shoddy, legally questionable argument to acquit their client, which has some senators thinking that the trial might wrap up as soon as Saturday. That's assuming, though, that the Senate doesn't vote to allow witnesses to be called.

Neither Democratic nor Republican senators seemed particularly enthusiastic about the idea of witnesses. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., indicated Thursday that the managers haven't decided whether they want to call people to the stand yet, saying, "They will make that decision after the opening arguments of both sides."

Now, you may think this case is a slam dunk for the managers. You may think that there's zero chance that enough Republicans will vote to convict the former president and that we might as well end this sooner rather than later. But if Democrats choose not to call witnesses, they'll be leaving a huge opportunity on the table.

As solid as the managers' case is, it will likely still need the extra emphasis of witnesses testifying under oath before the senators vote on the article of impeachment. And the level of incompetence that we've seen so far from Trump's attorneys, Bruce Castor and David Schoen, makes me think that any of their attempts at cross-examination would do little to bolster their case.

With that in mind, I've come up with a short list of witnesses the managers should call. These witnesses are chosen not just for their ability to confirm the case that's been made, but also for their proximity to Washington, which would allow them to appear on the Senate floor on short notice. And, as I noted before, the Senate has full authority to issue subpoenas to compel them to appear.

Of all the Trump officials who resigned in the aftermath of the riot, it would be wisest to call former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao

Trump himself has declined to appear, but former Vice President Mike Pence should be the top choice to testify. It's Pence whom the impeachment managers zeroed in on as one of the rioters' main targets. And it is Pence who angered Trump on Jan. 6 ahead of the rally by saying he wouldn't overturn the election results. We should hear from him in his own words about what happened that morning and whether he believed Trump's lies about the election results.

Then, of all the Trump officials who resigned in the aftermath of the riot, it would be wisest to call former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao. Chao wrote in her resignation note to her staff, which Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., cited Thursday, that "our country experienced a traumatic and entirely avoidable event as supporters of the president stormed the Capitol building following a rally he addressed." She added that it "troubled" her "in a way that I simply cannot set aside."

It seems reasonable to invite Chao to sit for an explanation of just what she meant and what role she believed the former president played in the attack on the Capitol. (It doesn't hurt that Chao is married to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., which could keep the defense from going after her too hard.)

Several senators could be brought to the stand, but freshman Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., jumped to the top of the list Wednesday. Tuberville confirmed on the record that on the day of the attack he received a call from Trump but had to hang up on him abruptly. "I said, 'Mr. President, they just took the vice president out, I've got to go,'" Tuberville said. As several people have noted, that call happened before Trump's tweet threatening Pence further as the mob was already inside the building. Tuberville should recount that phone call under threat of perjury.

Democrats should absolutely call in FBI Director Christopher Wray to bolster their statements about how foreseeable the violence Trump incited actually was.

While the impeachment managers have already artfully detailed the dangers and injuries that Capitol Police officers faced during the insurrection, it would be worth bringing one of them in to speak directly about events. My preference would be to hear from Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a mild heart attack from the multiple Taser hits the mob administered.

Speaking of law enforcement, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., recently threatened that if Democrats call witnesses, then Republicans will "want the FBI to come in and tell us about how people preplanned this attack and what happened with the security footprint of the Capitol." To which I say ... sure of course, Democrats should absolutely call in FBI Director Christopher Wray to bolster their statements about how foreseeable the violence Trump incited actually was. He could also speak to the indictments filed so far in which rioters have said they looked to Trump for guidance.

And finally, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows should absolutely be compelled to give his version of events. That's one of the biggest black holes right now in the official record, despite the news reports of Trump's apparent delight. Meadows was reportedly with Trump all day, and he would be able to speak to his mood and actions in a way that would solidify the charge that for hours, the former president did nothing to stop the mob he incited.

Alternatives to those six speakers could include either former White House counsel Pat Cipollone, who was also with Trump on Jan. 6 and could speak to the many attempts to subvert the election after Nov. 3, and former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who could answer questions about the delay in deploying the National Guard.

While the rules of interviewing witnesses have yet to be agreed upon, the process doesn't have to drag out the proceedings. Each side could take one day total, eight hours each, to question these witnesses and any others. While a witness an hour or so is a pretty fast clip, it would also preclude any weird tangents or nongermane questioning. And, well, on a personal level I just really want to see what would happen if Schoen or Castor tried to trip up Wray or Fanone on the stand, not to mention having Pence and Tuberville unable to lie or dodge questions.

The managers have done an admirable job planting the events of Jan. 6 firmly in the historical record. Now they need to go one step further. In historians' parlance, they need to incorporate true primary source material from witnesses on hand into the catalogue of abuses that they've already compiled against the former president. They may not guarantee a conviction. But we, the American people, deserve to have their voices included.

Read more from the original source:
Democrats need to subpoena Mike Pence, Elaine Chao and others to testify at Trump's trial - MSNBC

Grinning between a thick, grey turtleneck and a red MAGA beanie, a woman named Dawn Bancroft described her experience storming the U.S. Capitol in January. With her friend happily looking on, she spoke in a selfie-style video that would later appear in an affidavit from federal prosecutors bringing criminal charges against her. "We got inside. We did our part," Bancroft crowed. "We were looking for [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)] to shoot her in the friggin' brain, but we didn't find her."

But what if Bancroft had found her? How real was the risk of violence to disfavored officials during the sedition at the Capitol? One of the impeachment managers in the Senate trial of former President Donald Trump for inciting the riot, Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Co.), on Wednesday argued the mob "would have killed [then-Vice President] Mike Pence if given the chance." Is he right? Was Pence or Pelosi, or others like Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in true danger?

Many, like my colleague Matthew Walther, believe the answer is no. This was my initial take, too. I know people who would have happily attended the rally that became this riot, and when I imagine how they would have behaved inside the Capitol, I can't envision them hurting anyone. But I've come to believe there's a mistake in that thinking. The correct measure of the danger here is not what the average individual rioter would do. It's the behavior of the mob, and mobs of nice, normal, nonviolent people can and do kill.

Suppose Bancroft had come upon Pelosi without reinforcement from the angry crowd. I believe she would have confronted her: cursed, yelled, maybe even tried to steal Pelosi's phone or papers (many of the rioters left with congressional property and documents in hand). But I don't think Bancroft would have "shot her in the friggin' brain" in that one-on-one setting. Likewise, had one, isolated member of the "hang Mike Pence!" crowd encountered him alone, I expect the former veep would have emerged physically unharmed. (Granted, there were some in the crowd who seemed more capable of individual violence think of the zip ties and tactical gear but they were relatively few.)

But suppose Pelosi (or any similar target of the mob's ire) had stumbled, alone and unprotected, into a crowd of 100 or 1,000. Suppose they take notice. Suppose Pelosi tries to argue with them. Suppose she utters some phrase or makes some gesture they find particularly intolerable. Suppose she starts to text for help. Suppose one rioter smacks her phone from her hand. Suppose she tries to pick it up, and another rioter slaps her hand away. Suppose the whole seething group suddenly realizes no one is there to intervene. No one can stop them certainly not Pelosi herself, aged 80 and dressed in heels and a narrow dress in which she couldn't run. There was no immediate consequence for the slap. There would be no consequence for another slap. And another. And is it really so difficult to imagine Pelosi ending up dead?

It wouldn't have happened with a noose or a single bullet to the head nothing so orderly and neatly attributable to one or two people. It would have happened with the mob's quarry cowering on the floor being kicked to death, each rioter contributing only one or two strikes, doing just a small part, a part they could rationalize, a part they could tell themselves wasn't the proximate cause of death.

They would need to be able to tell themselves that, because after the mob mentality had faded, the horror would have set in. This is exactly what makes mob violence and the crowd mentality that facilitates it so terrifying: People do things as members of groups which they truly would not consider if the responsibility for that action fell to them alone. "The mob rushes in where individuals fear to tread," as a character explains in B.F. Skinner's Walden Two.

Psychologists like Skinner have varying explanations for the phenomenon, and I don't pretend to know which is most correct. But whatever the reason why, that this behavioral shift happens is undeniable. The behavior of a crowd is not simply the sum of its individual participants' independent choices. There emerges a distinct esprit de corps joyous in a festival audience, jingoistic at a military parade, destructive or even murderous in a mob. Each small escalation encourages another, each act of violence committed without objection by its observers builds a new group norm of acceptable cruelty.

Dawn Bancroft almost certainly wouldn't have murdered Pelosi, despite her brags in her video. But a roomful of Dawn Bancrofts? Yes, they might well have killed someone they hated if they'd had the chance.

Read more:
Would the Capitol mob have killed Mike Pence? - The Week

House Democrats use maps and never-before-seen security footage to show how close rioters got to members of Congress on January 6th. USA TODAY

House managers wrapped up their first day of arguments during the second day in former President Donald Trumps historic impeachment trial.

The managers highlighted several videos of previously unseen security camera footage from the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection, detailing how close lawmakers and their staff were to potential violence.

Several GOP senators were emotional after the videos, calling them disturbing.

House managers attempted to paint a picture that not only did Trump avoid calling off the rioters that day which Rep. Joaquin Castro described as Trump leaving everyone in the Capitol for dead" but also through his tweets, campaign speeches, and rhetoric in the months leading up, he was directly responsible for fueling the crowd.

The House prosecutorsalso relied on previous protests and acts of violence from Trump supporters, such as when Trump supporters attempted to run a Biden campaign bus off the road and protests at election centers, as examples ofincidents where his supporters acted upon his words.

Trumps legal wasnt swayed by the footage played Wednesday, with lawyer Bruce Castor saying there was nothing new that the public and Senate didnt already know.

Yesterday, we said we didn't dispute that the breach of the Capitol is a terrible thing, and that mob violence is something that President Trump abhors, so we didn't learn anything today we didn't already know, Castor said as he left the Capitol. As a matter of fact, I wonder why we sat through eight hours of videos that arent under dispute.

He added that no changes were planned on their legal team or in their presentation, even after criticism over his performance.

The trial will resume at noon Thursday.

Savannah Behrmann

Impeachment prosecutor Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., told senators a story from the final weeks of President Donald Trump's administration during his last presentation Wednesday evening.

In a last-ditch attempt to force more objections to the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6, Cicilline recounted that Trump had reportedly attempted to call Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., but reached Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, instead.

As Cicilline spoke about Trump telling Lee to do more to object to electoral votes, Lee shook his head furiously and scribbled on a sheet of paper "this is not what happened." He then handed it to Trump's attorney David Schoen.

As proceedings concluded, Lee stood up to tell senators the account was incorrect, and he demanded the remarks be struck from the record. There was confusion in the chamber for several minutes as the senators worked to figure out what exactly was happening.

"I'm the only witness," Lee said. And as the only witness on the call, he said he "never made those statements."

Eventually, Rep. Jamie Raskin spoke from the dais that the comments would be removed and that they were not pivotal to the Democrats' case. The Senate gaveled out shortly after.

Nicholas Wu

After the House managers presentation, senators expressed how moved they were, particularly by the unseen security camera footage that displayed how close the senators were to the mob on Jan. 6.

Several key Republican players expressed how upsetting the footage was.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said, It was obviously very troubling to see the great violence that our Capitol Police and others were subjected to. It tears at your heart and brings tears to your eyes. That was overwhelmingly distressing and emotional.

When asked if he knew how close to danger he was that day, Romney said he did not know until the footage shown at the trial, and was looking forward to thanking Officer Eugene Goodman when I next see him.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, stated: Im angry, I'm disturbed, I'm sad. We lived it once, and that was awful. And we're now reliving it with a more comprehensive timeline. ...The evidence that has been presented thus far has been pretty damning.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the managers case was riveting and it reinforces my belief that it was a terrible day for our country.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., the one surprise GOP vote yesterday to continue the trial, said the managers presentation was very powerful.

On the second day of Trump's Senate impeachment trial, House Democrats showed security footage from the Capitol riot that had never been seen before. USA TODAY

A few staunch GOP senatorswho voted against continuing the trial yesterdayhad emotional and strong reactions to the managers case Wednesday.

Sen. Lankford, R-Okla., got emotional at one point during the footage, and said seeing all those videos again brought back the memories of that day.

There's a lot of emotion, he said. It's tough to be able to walk through that. That was a horrible day for the entire country.

Trump impeachment: Senators whisper, take deep breaths as violent footage of Capitol riot plays

Lankford said he talked with his seatmate, Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, about the footage rekindling one persons escape, someone Lankford said hes close with but wouldnt name.

I was recounting the story to Steve of their particular escape. And it just came over me again, thinking that through for them, he said.

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said he went to talk to staff and aides after watching the footage, explaining it was reliving a horrible day.

I talked to some of the staff afterwards and, you know, for them they were in a worse position than we were, he said. I talked to some leadership staff and they were, you know, in their offices and people were banging on the doors. And that was a lot more frightening.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the Republican whip, said the presentations were very effective. They had a strong, strong presentation put together in a way that I think makes it pretty compelling."

However, despite the graphic footage, several GOP senators say they cannot convict because of concerns about the constitutionality of convicting a former president.

"We want justice. But that doesn't mean that we can go against what we believe to be constitutionally limited authority," Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., told Capitol Hill reporters.

Savannah Behrmann, Christal Hayes and Nicholas Wu

U.S. Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman watches never-before-seen security footage of rioters storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, during the second day of former President Donald Trump's second impeachment trial on Wednesday. Goodman, who has been lauded as a hero, warned Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, the rioters were headed his way. Goodman also directed the mob away from the Senate chamber and toward other officers.(Photo: Brandon Bell, AP)

The Senate chamber went quiet as House impeachment managers offered the first pieces of never-before-seen footage.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, held her head between her hands several times as clips played. She jotted down notes sporadically between videos.

Allturned their heads, almost in one motion, as the first radio transmissions and footage played loudly on a pair of TVs in the chamber. Nearly every senator sat attentive for the footage.Some, like Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., readjusted their chairs to get a better view. Several senators in the back row of the chamber, including Mark Warner, D-Va., stood for several minutes to see the screens.

Senators mostly remained motionless. Some jotted down notes, others leaned in toward the screens, and quite a few whispered to one another as more and more videos were shown to them.

Sen. Kysten Sinema, D-Ariz., shook her head several times during several clips. During one that showed rioters banging on the doors of the Capitol, she held her hands on her stomach and to her chest for several moments, appearing to take a deep breath.

Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga. who was sworn in after the attack, continued staring at the screen even when it turned black after several clips played. He bowed his head for several moments and had his hands clasped.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., crossed her arms and shook her head several times after Democrats played footage of a man who stormed House Speaker Nancy Pelosis office.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., pointed to the screen as impeachment managers played a clip showing Vice President Mike Pence being evacuated from the Capitol. He whispered to several senators seated nearby.

As the Senate went into recess for dinner after Swalwell finished his presentation, Sen. James Lankford appeared to get emotional at his desk, bending his head down. Sen. Steve Daines, who sits next to him, put his hand on Lankfords arm as if to comfort him.

Christal Hayes

New security footage showed senators being ushered out of the Senate chamber in a single-file line to safety.

Swalwell says he paced it off and they were just 58 steps away from the mob.

Additional footage showed police officers blocking the rioters in at one end of the hallway, stopping them from reaching the senators and their staff as they ran toward safety.

This footage was played twice during the trial by Swalwell.

Trump impeachment: Harrowing new footage shows how close mob got to Pence, Congress

Other security footage showed Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer hurrying up a ramp in the Capitol building basement near the Senate subway with his security detail.

Seconds later, he and his security detail are seen turning and running back, with the officers closing the glass doors and use their bodies to keep them closed.

Swalwell said they had been close to encountering the mob.

Savannah Behrmann

Richard Barnett, the Arkansas man who was photographed with his feet propped on a desk in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office on Jan. 6, had a 950,000-volt stun gun tucked into his waistband, Rep. Stacey Plaskett, D-Virgin Islands, revealed.

House impeachment managers showed security footage of staffers rushing to safety, locking themselves in rooms just minutes before rioters into Pelosi's offices.

Plaskett played audio from one of Pelosi's aides pleading for help in a phone call after staff members barricaded themselves in a conference room.

"They're pounding on the doors trying to find her," the staffer whispered into the phone.

A Pelosi aide later said they could hear the mob rummaging through her offices and yelling, "Where are you, Nancy?"

Plaskett argued the mob of rioters intended to harm Vice President Mike Pence and Pelosi, threatening violence against both as they ransacked the Capitol.

"President Trump put a target on their backs and sent his mob to hunt them down," she said.

Courtney Subramanian

Listen to U.S. Capitol Police radio calls as they attempt to hold back pro-Trump rioters during the January 6 electoral vote. USA TODAY

Rep. Stacey Plaksett, D-V.I., one of the Democratic House prosecutors, showed new security footage detailing some close calls from the Capitol breach.

One video showed Vice President Mike Pence as he was spirited out of the Senate chamber on Jan. 6. Pence was seen turning his head around as he was taken out of the chamber at the same time rioters smashed their way into the Capitol.

"The mob was looking for Vice President Pence because of his patriotism, because the vice president refused to do what the president demanded and overturn the election results," Plaskett said.

Pence, in his role as the president of the Senate, had been presiding over the chamber on Jan. 6 as it counted electoral votes.

Plaskett also showed videos of rioters calling for Pence's death that day, and a video from another rioter calling Pence a "treasonous pig."

"They were talking about assassinating the vice president of the United States," Plaskett said.

Another video showed Officer Eugene Goodman, who has gone viral for video of him redirecting rioters from the doors of the Senate chamber, running and passing Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, in the hallway and directinghim to turn around.

Romney turns andstarts running to safety.

Nicholas Wu and Savannah Behrmann

Del. Stacey Plaskett. who represents the U.S. territory of the Virgin Islands, laid out evidence to argue former President Donald Trump "welcomed and amplified" his supporters plans for Jan. 6 by whipping them up and praising them for violent behavior in the weeks leading up to the attack.

Plaskett pointed to one incident in Texas in which a caravan of Trump supporters deliberately tried to run a bus carrying Biden-Harris campaign workers off a highway. One truck adorned in Trump flags eventually crashed into a Biden-Harris campaign volunteer's car. Trump "made light" of the event, Plaskett said, by retweeting the video with a fight song and exclaiming "I LOVE TEXAS!" After the FBI announced an investigation into the incident, Trump tweeted: "In my opinion, these patriots did nothing wrong."

"Engaging in violence for him made them patriots to Donald Trump," Plaskett said.

She argued Trump encouraged members of the Proud Boys, an extremist group with ties to white nationalism, who were present for the Jan. 6 Capitol siege as well as a pro-Trump protest in Washington, D.C., in December, which escalated into violence between rallygoers and counterprotesters.

When asked during a September debate whether he was willing to condemn white supremacy and militia groups, including the Proud Boys, Trump said, "Stand back and stand by." The words were later used as a Proud Boys slogan, and Trump supporters were spotted wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the phrase at Trump rallies.

Trump did not attend the Dec. 12 march but tweeted throughout the day, including one morning tweet that read: "We have just begun the fight."

"This was not a coincidence," Plaskett said. "Donald Trump, over many months, cultivated violence, praised it. And then when he saw the violence his supporters were capable of, he channeled it to his big wild historic event."

Following the December march, Trump became actively involved in the planning for the Jan. 6 rally that preceded the Capitol attack, Plaskett said.

"The exact thing that happened on January 6 that was their goal," Plaskett said. "And they said out loud on sites that the Trump administration was actively monitoring."

Courtney Subramanian

At the crux of Democratic prosecutors argument to convict Donald Trump is the notion that the then-president knew exactly what would happen when he encouraged his followers at a rally near the White House to head to the Capitol on Jan. 6.

This was not just one speech, Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pa., told the senators referring to the weeks and weeks of deliberate attempts by Trump to overturn the election. The only thing different about his speech on January 6 from all these other times was that he was no longer telling his base just to stop the steal. He was finally telling them now is the time to do it.

Dean forensically picked apart his speech (nearly 11,000 words, she noted) lasting nearly 40 minutes.

She noted that while he mentioned that his supporters should march peacefully to the Capitol, he only used that word once. In contrast, she said, he uttered the word fight or fighting 20 times, including one line where he said they needed to fight like hell to save our democracy.

We know how the crowd responded to Donald Trumps words, she told the senators. And he knew how they responded to his words.

Ledyard King

Rep. Ted Lieu told senators former President Donald Trump was "a man so desperate to cling to power that he did everything he could to keep it, and when he ran out of non-violent measures, he turned to the violent mob that attacked your Senate chamber on Jan. 6."

The California Democrat said that in his quest to stay in office, Trump determined anyone who stood in his way was an enemy, even his Republican allies.

"Let me be very clear," Lieu said. "The president wasn't just coming for one to two people, or Democrats like me. He was coming for you, for Democratic and Republican senators. He was coming for all of us. Just as the mob did at his direction."

Lieu pointed to Trump's failed efforts to pressure former Attorney General William Barr to find evidence of voter fraud. He said that when Trump continued to make that demand, even after federal investigators found no evidence of widespread fraud, it "was a bridge too far" for Barr, prompting his resignation.

"Trump's actions time and time again make clear that he would do anything, and pressure anyone, if it meant overturning the election results," Lieu said.

His final desperate attempt to stay in power centered on the false belief that Vice President Mike Pence had the authority to refuse to certify the election results in the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6. Trump mounted a campaign on social media and at rallies aimed at pressuring Pence to use this imagined power to overturn the election.

"Behind closed doors President Trump applied significant pressure to his second in command," Lieu said, citing news reports that Trump would tell anyone he could to call on Pence to refuse to certify the Electoral College result. Lieu said it was those efforts that fueled the mob's calls for Pence's hanging. But Pence "refused the president and fulfilled his duty," Lieu said.

"Even after the Capitol was attacked; even after he was personally targeted; even after his family was targeted; Vice President Pence stood strong and certified the election. Vice President Pence showed us what it means to be an American."

See the rest here:
Live impeachment updates: Second day of Trumps impeachment trial wraps up - USA TODAY

The U.S. militarys top command was unaware that Vice President Mike Pences nuclear football was at risk of being captured by rioters during the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitoluntil they saw it on TV this week. U.S. Strategic Command only became aware of the close call after seeing a video played at the Senate impeachment trial Wednesday that showed Pence, his Secret Service agents, and a military officer carrying the briefcase with the classified nuclear-launch information running down a flight of stairs inside the Capitol to get to safety, a source told CNN. The vice president always has a backup of the presidents football in case the president becomes incapacitated. Kingston Reif, an expert on nuclear-weapons policy at the nonpartisan Arms Control Association, told CNN the incident ought to raise further questions about the rationale for the anachronism that is the football.

Continue reading here:
Mike Pence's Close Shave With Nuclear Football at Capitol Only Realized by Military When They Saw It on TV - The Daily Beast