@Biff
Over in red state country, we've been laughing, hard, for the last 3 months, at the Democrats three-ring circus.
You're late to the party.
@Jaffa Bozare
My friend, we don't laugh at those in red state country, as you refer to it, we pity them their denial of, and lack of access to, everyday truths, justice, morality and the daily news.
Ignorance is the devil's work. He is working hard to spread that plague to every corner of Trump's America. And he is succeeding.
So it is astounding to me and incredible to see common, earnest, hardworking Americans, in every county in the land, glom onto this sociopathic, career con man as the deliverer of their social, spiritual, financial and moral salvation. They have fooled themselves. As Trump says, "I love the poorly educated."
It will take men and women of superior moral courage, immune to self-interest, to stop someone like Trump and to break the fever dream which consumes our republic. As P.T. Barnum said: you cannot cheat an honest man.
I don't expect to find those people in the US Senate.
Without them, I can tell you how this drama ends. It ends with all of us in tears, flailing about, as Trump skates free.
I've no idea what you find so funny.
"As long as they stick with the president as expected"? Why are you pulling punches? Plainly state the facts : as long as Republican Senators follow through with their promise to violate their oaths... You do a disservice to journalism to soften and give cover to grave malfeasance.
3
OK, here is the scenario: You've been put on trial for murder, and you're "facing the chair".
Your indigent, and the state is going to provide you with counsel. You are given a choice between Jerry Nadler and Alan Dershowitz. Who would you choose?
Sometimes, it is important not to read too much into the decisions people make. Dershowitz, is actually one of the few intelligent decisions Trump has ever made.
4
Not that we ever doubted Starr's partisan bias, but now we have clear and absolute proof.
3
Dershowitz, Starr, Trump, Barr, MacConnell and so on are not your well-meaning grandpa- throw in Giuliani though he is not on the team. They form an old man's cabal. Moscow Mitch has said whose side he is on before swearing the oath which is dubious (just a little). It is an informal elderly male junta.
No its not kindly grandpa altruistic through years of self-sacrifice, who cares for the welfare of his descendants. They are well aware they have had most of their lives already. Do not underestimate how calculating they are on this point. That's why they don't care about climate change. Youngsters, don't be naive. Trust them at your peril. They are just trying to have a good greedy time in the little life-span left to them. They don't really care about you any more than you would care about them if they had strokes tomorrow. The welfare of the Republic down the line is not important to them- especially these brigands.
6
Cartoonish and crass. When will this nightmare end?
5
You should know the depth of which Television plays a part in our nation's life. The military C.I.A. Police Feds Television industry made Trump President and now the Democrats are very smartly helping to defend Biden and us with this very truthful and legitimate Trial against a party accustomed to routinely diverting and deceiving America. This IS Justice. May the Democrats tell all they know, without reservation, so that the truth will be known, and America will be cleansed of the fraud that is the Republican military Tory party that rules without regard for our Democratic Constitution.
1
Trump may be in more danger than usual. I note the prior comment that Starr and Dershowitz also represented Epstein who was said to have committed suicide in prison. But I refute that. A prior news report stated that Epstein hurled himself with his noose, but then why didn't the guards, just 15 feet away, hear any loud noise? And was was the first video of Epstein erased? Why was a prisoner in the Pennsylvania prison where Manafort was held, murdered after Manafort was transferred to another prison? Why did Epstein die the night Trump met with big money people in Southampton earlier in the evening. The guards said they slept. Either Epstein was murdered there, or he is somewhere else. He was rich. Put up lots of protection around Trump and tell him not to start trouble. I don't like him, but I don't like war.
1
"But each of them brings his own baggage. Mr. Dershowitz represented Jeffrey Epstein..."
How is that "baggage"?
I thought everyone - including Sacco and Vanzetti, Leopold and Loeb, Bruno Richard Hauptmann (the Lindbergh kidnapper), and O.J. Simpson - is entitled to legal representation under the American system of justice.
Is Elizabeth Warren disqualified from office because she once represented corporations like Dow Chemical, and the Hunt Brothers (oil tycoons)?
2
Dershowitz seems to think Parnas should be charged but the man who was directing his actions should not be impeached for those offenses.
It's hard to believe that's what the framers intended when they draughted the impeachment clause of the constitution.
It's a shame these "all-stars" will only have one basketball to play with. Starr and Dershowitz are both covered with slime from past activities and pronunciamentos.
2
"... morally challenged and disgraced partisans- Dershowitz and Starr ..."
I can't say this about Dershowitz, but as for Starr: He should just crawl under a rock somewhere. During the Clinton impeachment proceeding, many commenters predicted that Starr would wallow in the sexual details. As anyone who's read the "Starr Report" will attest, that's exactly what Starr did.
3
Wasn't it Brett Kavanaugh who helped Starr dig up all the really nasty stuff on Clinton during that impeachment?
3
So who are the prosecutors!? Wimps. The prosecution needs serious people. Adam Schiff does NOT count! Nor do the rest of the “Magnificent Seven “ who so ceremoniously carried the papers to the Senate.
1
Put Donny on the stand and force him to answer questions as the president of the United States or he can take the 5th.
Then, bring in a mop and bucket and clean the mess off the floor, fumigate the room and continue the trial with the other witnesses.
No mop and bucket will be needed unless Bolton testifies and in that case, park the mop and bucket near McConnell and Graham.
I would consider that a perfect day in the impeachment trial of Donald J Trump.
1
Get your money in advance guys. Trump has a habit of not paying his bills.
Ken Starr - he just can't get enough abuse can he?
2
swamp city
2
Starr seems determined to shut down Democrats.
1
StaRR and Robert Ray, aka RR.
You're dealing with true evil America.
They killed the Kennedy's and are desperate to make a bogus Television case about Reagan.
That's why Trump was appointed and why the wall is being built.
Leave while you can.
"In choosing the three prominent lawyers, the president assembled what he regards as an all-star television legal team, enlisting some of his favorite defenders from Fox News. But each of them brings his own baggage. Mr. Dershowitz represented Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender. Mr. Starr was pushed out as a university president because of his handling of sexual misconduct by the football team. And Mr. Ray was once charged with stalking a former girlfriend."
They fit right in.
2
Prof Deshowitz would have added further to his illustrious career and to his major human rights achievments had he said "Thank you, but no thank you".
2
Who's paying for all these lawyers?
1
The GOP makes sure that America has to drink the beaker of Trump to the last drop. No early exit from having elected and inflicted on themselves and the world this Joker.
1
After 40 years, Harvard University removed the emeritus status from a professor who all that time had been harassing women. It should now do the same for media-hound Dershowitz, who allegedly used his law classes to repeatedly preach about how men are falsely accused of rape. The fact that Harvard still bestows status on Dershowitz and took so long to remove that status from another professor indicates the vaunted high quality of overall education may well be in question.
1
I hope those lawyers got their retainer fee up front before taking on this case. Lord knows, they have no chance to collect their billable hours afterwards. Trump is known to pay pennies on the dollar for every invoices he gets from vendors, that is if he pays at all.
2ndly, with that many big egos in the room, not including the biggest 1 Trump himself, I doubt there'll be a coherent argument in the end.
Ken Starr was fired from his last job. Alan Dershowitz last famous client was Jeffrey Epstein.
Let the biggest clown circus begins. I have my popcorn ready.
1
Such a shame that it doesn't include Rudy Giuliani and Harpo Marx.
1
Starr and Dersh - Brought to you by Trump For President 2020, Keep America Great!
2
Dershowitz denies this, and I believe him:
"Dershowitz was even named as a suspect by a couple of Epstein’s victims."
Dershowitz has been famous for a very long time. As he said, it would be foolhardy for him to have risked his Harvard Law School reputation by cavorting with one of Epstein's under-age women. Dershowitz insists these allegations are utterly frivolous. I suspect he's telling the truth and his accusers are not.
1
This just confirms this will be a trial about the Clintons, the Bidens, Obama, and the Democratic Leadership of the last 30 years.
3
Why am I not surprised that these 2 morally compromised guns for hire would be the ones defending Trump. The only people missing would be the O.J. Simpson "dream team" who are no longer available. Birds of a Feather...
1
I fail to see the value to Trump in adding these two has beens to his team. And Dershowitz is such a prima donna that he won't be willing to take a back seat to the lead attorney.
1
The Republicans should impeach Trump and Pence for their coordinated efforts to influence the coming election using previously congressionally approved Ukrainian aid.
They would get rid of Trump, the bully-coward unethical megalomaniac and his untalented family members.
They could get rid of Pence, the shadowy radio show star and incompetent congressman and governor.
It would remove Pelosi as speaker, into the White House.
They would give a decade of ammunition for Fox News and One America News to choke on.
Everybody wins.
Why not just let Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly lead his defense team??? They are just as bankrupt in all things credible as Dershowitz and Starr. For Starr, of all people, who claimed Clinton's transgressions, all of which revolved around him lying about an affair, were felonious and grounds for dismissal from office, to claim Trump is innocent after having done far greater and graver to far more than his wife, is simply . . . Republican hypocrisy run amok. There is no more present a danger to this country than the silly Republican Party who believes law is what they believe it to be - to heck with the Constitution.
3
"Mr. Dershowitz, a Harvard Law School professor emeritus who became famous as a defense counsel for high-profile defendants like O.J. Simpson, Claus von Bülow and Mike Tyson"
As in, people KNOWN to be guilty, who "got off"? That won't help in politics, mate.
What an embarrassing choice of scandal-plagued lawyers in Starr ad Dershowitz. Only the best.
3
Ken Starr. Run out of Baylor amid the coverup of sexual assaults by members of the football team.
What a perfect choice for Trump.
3
If Trump is acquitted, the rewards to Starr and Dershowitz might be a seat in the Supreme Court.
1
Perry Mason, Matlock and Gregory Peck of To Kill a Mocking Bird fame weren’t available?
who's paying for the guy's defense? me the taxpayer?? Like he's a criminal and in paying for his defense? outrageous
1
As Trump desperately patches together his legal team, to defend the indefensible, there are those who see deep genius in the president’s wily moves. For three years I have listened to and read statements from tv pundits, journalists, op-ed writers and commenters to this fine newspaper, which credit the president with all manner of knowledge, skills, genius and abilities.
The president has “long term goals”, is “a master of misdirection,” and “is always thinking three moves ahead.”
As a former mathematics teacher and conscientious voter, I have carefully watched Mr. Trump’s chaotic and unbalanced presidential actions play out over the past three years. I am yet to observe Mr. Trump display a single flash of brilliance, genius or even normal intelligence.
The president paid Michael Cohen to “dissapear” all of his academic records and standardized test scores at every school he’s ever attended. He bribed those institutions into incinerating his scholastic past.
We all would like to believe that every POTUS is far above average in every way.
As for me, I’m sick of hearing a pathological liar with a two-digit IQ score called a “genius.” Trump is not a genius. Not even close. Not in any way.
2
Spoiler Alert:
The boat sinks.
The gorilla dies.
Trump is acquitted.
1
I do not see a gender balance here.
1
The Trump rogue's gallery just keeps growing.
1
What you characterize as “baggage” sounds like the kinds of thing Trump’s supporters regard as badges of honor
From the "If the shoe fits; we've been here before" department, now directed to the president at his Senate trial: "You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
Justice, do not go gently into that good night.
Who is paying the President’s lawyers? How much will be spent on Starr and Dershowitz?
Why is he hiring so many lawyers for his ,in his words, hoax trial? Hopefully, in spite of all his legal eagles, the truth will out and the President will be held accountable for his disregard of the USConstitution when he unilaterally interjected his personal political ambitions into US foreign policy by overriding the directive of the US Congress to deliver arms to the Ukrainian military in his quid pro quo conversation with the new president of Ukraine. He sought interference from a foreign government in US election with his involvement in Giuliani caper to ‘get dirt’ on his primary political 2020 opponent.
Plus, his recently revealed involvement with the indicted co-conspirators in the Giuliani escapades...
Enough is enough...? Epstein & Cohen & Stormy & Flynn & ...Truth and laws are fundamental to our democracy .
You cannot make this stuff up.
Call Monica to explain Starr's perfidy.
Call Ron Goldman's family to explain
Dersh' evil ways.
America has become a morality play,
I'm rooting for good to prevail!
Ken star, gotta love it! He went after former President Clinton with a zeal for having consensual sex but lying about it. Trump has left a wake of destruction, women who were assaulted by him, illegal activities from day one that Trump has foisted upon the American people. Star hitching his wagon to Trump is sure to cement his legacy as another Trump hack and apologist, long may he be tainted by this stain.
Great. See-- it is all clear now:
Lying about a sleazy affair with an adult intern is a high crime demanding immediate impeachment.
Gangster-style shakedowns of a foreign ally under Russian occupation in order to gain political advantage in an election is not a high crime or a misdemeanor. Trivial stuff! Abused taxpayer money. Violated the Impoundment Control Act. Extortion. Blackmail. Selling an ally out to the Russians. Clearly there is nothing to see hear. Not like that very terrible, horrifying lie about a sleazy affair, which involved sex!!! Ken Starr is just the perfect person to litigate this matter. /s/
1
"Time goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday," according to Gibran. Starr and Abernathy are Yesterday.
Good Lord, well both certainly seem to have familiarity with sexual predators, either defending them (OJ, Baylor, Epstein, Weinstein and Trump, or prosecuting a sexual predator and/or being one. Godspeed.
1
Is this the same Ken Starr who was removed
from his position as president of Baylor for
sweeping sexual assault cases under he rug?
2
Dershowitz wasn’t getting invited to parties on Martha’s Vineyard, now he goes to Mar A Lago. That’s what’s important to him.
39
It's back to the future. I remember all those names from the nineties. Not a pleasant time. Same like Trump.
2
Before, during and after this trial, NYT...please list a clear, concise description of each Senators positions and when their re-election is due in their state.
How each one votes and their justification.
How much money follows each one and who contributes or lobbies for their reelection.
What power and control has each Senator, due to their long term of service.
And please explain again why we don’t have term limits for Senators?
14
Any which way djt decides to script this trial, It's official.
"The impeachment of Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States, occurred on December 18, 2019, when the House of Representatives approved articles of impeachment on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress."
You, sir, are Branded for life. The "media-savvy defenders" you have hired can do nothing to annul this act impeachment you now own for; "All the kings' men" have been assigned the impossible task of restoring a broken egg.
We The People, All People have the power to end this made for "television script" on a positive note, vote him out in 2020.
I always remember these words of Nelson Mandela ;
"It always seems impossible until it is done."
9
The prosecutors should call Starr to the stand and just simply read what he said about Clinton and ask him if he said it.
Let his own words indict Trump.
10
“After the House voted to impeach the president [Clinton] largely along party lines, Mr. Trump told interviewers that Mr. Starr was a “wacko” and a “lunatic.” But more recently, he is said to have enjoyed watching him on television.”
Do you get it? Trump’s entire life as a real estate developer and now (god help us) president, is predicated on appearances, salesmanship and ratings.
Not truth, not integrity, nor the common good.
Just “How can I dupe other people into believing what I’m saying or buying what I’m selling?”
I don’t think most Trump supporters will ever have that realization.
11
It is appalling that Ken Starr does not think Trump has done anything wrong while prosecuting Bill Clinton. Clinton's actions did not harm the country while Trump's involvement with a foreign state definitely borders on treason. Trump's entire legal team have their hands dirty.
11
An all star lineup of devil worshipers. 4 shure! 4 shure!
Dershowitz also assisted O.J. Simpson in The Trial of the Centurion.
8
Every point that the Democrats are trying to prove should properly have been taken to the voters between now and November, with both eyes on the electoral college. Trump is trying to turn this great nation into a central Asian oligarchy. You don't prevent that by impeaching him. You prevent that by winning the election where the election is decided. By focusing on impeachment, the Democrats are handing 2020 to Trump.
1
The Trump team dug deep to come up with the equivalent of the Jim Jordan type for the defense.
4
It's amazing how the same guys keeps popping up in Government: Starr, Kavanaugh, Giuliani, Cheney. Enough already. They've caused this Country so much damage and never get held responsible.
7
Television did this.
2
How many times can you sell your soul to the devil?
5
MAGA = Make Attorneys Get Attorneys
5
Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, Jay Sekulow?
What? Jerry Springer wasn’t available?
7
Couldn't get Perry Mason, settled for Dershowitz.
Claus von Bulow, OJ, trump, Mike Tyson, Epstein. Dershowitz is a legend!
4
Can Cape Cod and Nantucket join Martha’s Vineyard shunning Dershowitz? Can our state? Hey how about all of New England? How about Harvard? How about anybody with a moral compass?
9
Why do we care what Bannon thinks again?
3
The core of the Trump defense seems to be this - there was no "crime" committed. They want us to take "crimes and misdemeanors" literally. Of course there were no Federal criminal statures on the books when they wrote the constitution. If we take "crimes" literally can we also take misdemeanors literally? If so, one could be impeached and removed for public drunkenness, littering, reckless driving, etc.
3
Trump has assembled what he regards as an all-star TELEVISION legal team. This demonstrates that he regards this entire process as simply a reality TV show, where he wins if he entertains people enough to get good ratings. He doesn't care if their arguments are valid, as long as they look good on TV.
This is just one more example of how Trump is determined to turn impeachment into a farce of a show trial. It's one more example of the contempt with which Trump treats the nation & the world.
8
Ardent GOP trump supporters including most GOP senators seem to think the Mueller investigation is no longer relevant. They are convinced that the impeachment
trial in the GOP dominated senate will go nowhere. However Mueller said on nation-wide TV that his report did not exonerate trump and that ONCE OUT OF OFFICE he was definitely liable to indictment for criminal deeds most pointedly the deliberate obstruction of justice described in considerable detail in the report! The extensive evidence in the report is geared to support this eventuality. The 2020 election itself then is the vehicle for bringing this trump criminal travesty to a just end.
4
I applaud beefing up with these lawyers who know the world of DC.
Mr. Starr in particular is a shrewd move. since there will be constant comparison to Clinton - inside Senate chambers and in the media.
Who could be better prepared?
As to these members - not privy to tactics - but I suspect they are chosen as much for their legal acumen as for political connections.
Judge Starr has had a long term association with DC folks and probably an unlimited Rolodex.
I expect the senators and POTUS team members will work on questions to be posed thru the Chief Justice.
After all, lawyers never ask a question to which he does not know the answer.
So, I am expecting these members will strive to build a written record with history in mind.
As sure as the sun rises in the east - this is not the last impeachment of a POTUS.
The first and the second impeachment were 100 plus years apart.
The second and third is 20 years.
So, the next one is just around the corner - so detailed records will matter.
After all, they are setting another precedent which will be flogged endlessly at the next and expected Impeachment.
@Neil Once parties learn that the resulting negative from impeachment (loss of seats/power) it will be avoided
This is not surprising given Trump's record and the historical nature of the impeachment. If the Senate majority refuses witnesses-and these paid-for-hire clowns get to control the hearing. You get no re-election of Trump.
When students look back to the history of the United States and why it failed. It will state quite simply that it became a reality show, its government became infested with corruption and lost its way. That’s what’s happening in real time, folks.
4
With this many comments I suspect my thoughts have been covered. But, as theatre this trial will deserve awards. Trump all by himself offers daily clumps of drama alternating with comic relief. His rallies entertain without substance, simple like pro wrestling
If Trump’s presence wasn’t so absolutely frightening though, when you stop to think about it, we could all just enjoy the show. Starr and Dersh who are both burdened heavily with the stink of depravity absolutely belong in this particular trial for this particular man.
The constitution will be sorely tested over the next few weeks. Whatever happens, Trump will still remain impeached. Question: as an impeached POTUS can he still run for a second term?
1
More miscreants for the Defense of the indefensible. He’s as guilty as sin, and only a fool would argue the opposite. These guys are in this for their game, which can be formidable, but, nothing excuses Trump’s insane ideas about governing.
3
Clinton deserved to be impeached for lying about a personal matter but Trump does not deserve to be impeached for using the office to coerce a foreign country to investigate Biden who was representing the will of the U.S. government by withholding military aid illegally and then refusing to turn over witnesses and documents the the Congress? Some legal mind Starr has.
4
who cares. I am no fan of trump, as previous posts indicate.
ignore him. he'll be gone soon enough. even if reelected he will have no influence because both the republicans and putin will eliminate him when he is no longer useful.
mark my words.
2
Everyone gets a defense and lawyers can choose who they want to represent. But Starr, the man who abuse his authority as a prosecutor and then looked the other way at sexual misconduct at Baylor under his leadership should have politely declined. He has done enough damage. If it wasn’t for his out of control hunt of Clinton, Barr would not have been able to manipulate the perception if the Mueller Report.
3
We know Trump is trying his indefensible abuse of presidential power in the court of public opinion, where image is especially important. But why in the world choose the highly tainted Dershowitz and hypocritical Ken Starr to his legal team for a case as significant as Trump's impeachment?
Dershowitz is all tangled up with Jeffrey Epstein and the notorious OJ Simpson case, and Starr, who relentlessly went after impeaching Bill Clinton for lying about a sexual affair, but then turned a blind eye to sexual assault and rape on cam;pus when he was president of Baylor.
Maybe these 2 were the only high profile lawyers willing to further sully their sullied reputations by trying to defend Trump.
Or, maybe this is just Trump's way of further weakening our moral norms and government by adding more highly corrupt and shameless lawyers to his entourage. It is depressing.
One of the tactics of dictators is that they totally demoralize the citizenry so that people despise the government for its dysfunction and become so cynical that they give up and no longer vote.
On the other hand, Trump's base loves this kind in-your-face, brash trashing of the federal government, as do lots of Wall Streeters and GOP big donors and polluters. We can be sure they will vote for Trump in droves--even if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue in full view.
3
Trump has got himself some lawyers. It won't do him any good but at least he has some lawyers. Apologies to Groucho Marx.
I noticed that Groucho has the same accent as Trump;.silly me of course he has they are both New Yorkers.
There is a tiny snippet of tape of Harpo talking and I should not have been surprised but I was surprised anyway that Harpo sounded like Groucho. Of course he did since they are brothers. But how devastating to realise that the loveable and immortal Harpo talked like Trump... well the same accent anyway. I bet he never repeated himself or ranted. Lets not destroy all illusions
1
If Trump did “nothing wrong” why stack your team with 4 more high power lawyers? And whose paying for that? May this national nightmare end in November.
2
Dershowitz is going on about how this conflict between the Executive and the Legislative Branches should be resolved by the Judiciary Branch not by Impeachment.
But the Supreme Court abdicated it’s authority when it failed months ago to reach down and take the legal cases out of the lower courts and resolve this Constitutional Crisis.
Now we have a situation where the President says his people do not have to testify and that is fine with the Senate and the SC and Only Nancy Pelosi in the House is saying that’s not the way things should work.
Actually the President the Senate, and the SC are out of control of the situation and John Bolton has become the final authority on whether or not he will testify.
Can't say I like this idea, but the Constitution does allow it:
"Make the [Senate] vote [on impeachment] a secret ballot and let’s see what happens."
The Constitution is silent on this, and jurors in non-impeachment cases don't have to say how they voted. They can be asked only "Is this your verdict?" (meaning: "Is that what the jury actually decided?", not "How did you vote?")
But Senators are elected, and voters want to know how they decide important matters. There's never been a "secret ballot" in an impeachment trial, and there won't be one here.
2
If ever there were a tool to calibrate the depths and nuances of hypocrisy, Ken Starr is it. Indeed, what a tool he is.
At best a farcical figure, Starr, who for two years took up the public's attention peddling the idiocy that Clinton's adultery rose to the level of a high crime worthy of impeachment, now intends to sell us the notion that Trump's attempt to solicit - or, excuse me, bribe - the head of a foreign state to conspire in undermining a domestic political opponent in the 2020 election is perfectly acceptable in a democracy.
With Starr, the Orwellian laughter never stops...
4
I assume the tax payer pays for these super high priced lawyers?
Is this another feeding frenzy that DJT provides to his elite (paid) supporters? A win win? Now he owns them?
@J J Johnie Jr. "I assume the tax payer pays for these super high priced lawyers?"
Don't blame DJT for the cost. Blame those responsible in November
The smell of desperation wafting from the White House...what a nightmare legal team. Wonder who’s paying them. Doubtful it’s Trump’s money, he never pays.
2
Do they not know any lawyers who have been relevant in the last 20 years, or is Trump just going back to the Fox News greatest hits collection in his time of desperation?
1
Technically, Mr. Dershowitz is not representing the Mr. Trump, he is simply stating his opinion about impeachment. What do you call a surfeit of lawyers? I don't know, but it can't be good.
Why not get the best and these men are tops. President Trump is lucky to have these people on his team.
Starr light, Starr bright
First Starr I see tonight
Wish I may, Wish I might
Understand what Starr sees tonight
1
Look at the characters he chose to rep him both being accused of being a sex offender just like the guy they're trying to represent. And that's not all of their faults. I wonder if Johnny Cochran were alive, if he'd be part of the "dream team". No reputable person would rep trump so I guess he's gotta keep scraping across the bottom of the barrel where the bottom feeders thrive. Will we see the song and dance that we saw in the movie Chicago where Gere put on the pizzazz to keep our eyes off his guilty defendant?
1
Maybe Trump was led to believe he was free to do what he did. Did that President not once say he could do as he liked? Was he reprimanded publicly by the Supreme Court for thinking such a thing, or at least for expressing such a thing? He may not have been merely taunting the Democrat Party but may have actually believed that to be a correct idea to express! Was it a real belief held by him?
So - from recent reports, Dershowitz is walking his role back - not defending Trump but making constitutional arguments. Doesn't this sound more like wanting to be an 'expert' witness - so we are presenting witnesses after all. If the defence team wanted an expert like this, shouldn't they have presented as part of the process in the House???
In the wake of the O.J. Simpson trial, I heard Alan Dershowitz say on a local talk NPR talk show that we might never know who killed Nicole Simpson. It was then that I realized that the people who make the most effective argument in court are the ones who can convince themselves of its rightness, without any regard to the actual truth. Alan Dershowitz is an excellent lawyer because he ends up believing his own spin.
Dershowitz, and Starr, and Ray...oh my! Were they selected for their skills or for their potential to distract? With all of the controversy and negative headlines these three have generated, their presence on Trump's legal team will help keep media focus from Trump and his actions. But are they a credible threat? Probably about as much as the lions, and tigers, and bears were in the Wizard of Oz. What a world, what a world.....
1
Does anyone know for sure who is paying for trumps defense?
1
That's just what you need when you're innocent: A team of the country's best lawyers surrounding you and making sure no additional evidence is heard. Yeah, sure...
1
Ken Starr is an absolutely brilliant choice for the Trump's defense team!
Long ago, Starr labored for years to catch and help impeach Bill Clinton for lying about a consensual affair.
Now, Starr will be defending an admitted sexual predator, impeached for far more serious offenses.
Love that irony!
obviously, also Mr. Epstein is entitled to competent legal representation.
otherwise, these councillors for right in with our President. did he recruit them in a locker room?
I have noticed that along many there is a misconception of what a high crime is. It does not mean a particularly bad crime. It means misconduct by someone in a high place and actually does not have to be a criminal offence:
Following is a definition from Wikipedia:
"High," in the legal and common parlance of the 17th and 18th centuries of "high crimes," is activity by or against those who have special duties acquired by taking an oath of office that are not shared with common persons. A high crime is one that can be done only by someone in a unique position of authority, which is political in character, who does things to circumvent justice. The phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors," used together, was a common phrase when the U.S. Constitution was written and did not require any stringent or difficult criteria for determining guilt but meant the opposite. The phrase was historically used to cover a very broad range of crimes"
Indeed it seems to cover misconduct that is not actually a crime at all in the usual sense.
40
Except that in this instance, it has been proven that the President committed a crime. Nice try though.
Big question is does Trump even need a lawyer....will he wind up ignoring the legal advice he gets ?
Will he inadvertently shook himself in the foot as he usually does ?
7
Just two thoughts to add to the amount of time we all waste to counter this evil man’s claims, who seems to spare no opportunity to bolster his chances of re -election. 1. It was bad enough him interfering in Ukraine in order to damage Joe Biden’s chances of winning. That failed. 2. He now has discovered another method of damaging Biden by trying to create a rift within the Democratic Party. It is blindingly obvious that he would prefer to run against Bernie who he considers as a weaker opponent than Biden. Anyone can see through this and it is nice that Sanders has refuted Trump’s claims.
9
Trump is a reality show con man. This reality show hearing has purpose in the eyes of Trump where diversion, lies, and manipulation will be in the lights for all to experience. Trump is attempting to make people believe that what you see in his reality show... it is normal to be that way. Trump wants you to believe that what he has done... it's just normal... everybody does it.
Reality television, according to Brad Gorham of Syracuse University, has an effect on the behaviors of people in society. He claims that people are easily influenced by reality television because they eventually copy the behaviors portrayed on television and use them in real life.
According to Philip Ross of International Science Times, reality television has a detrimental impact on our perceptions of the world based on an observational study from University of Wisconsin. In this study, 145 students from the university were surveyed based on reality television consumption. This study concluded that reality television viewers believe that the argumentative and conniving behaviors portrayed on television shows is "considered normal in today’s society".
Reality TV Can Be Unhealthy for Participants as Well as Viewers. [HealthLine]
Joshua Marks, MasterChef contestant, suffered serious psychological issues following his appearance on the show and died from suicide a year later.
Glenn, another contestant said it was “An experiment in power and submission and subversion over which I had no control.”
8
This article misuses the phrase “high crimes”. It does not mean a particularly serious crime; it means a crime committed by a person in a “high” office. Likewise, the authors of the Constitution used the word “misdemeanors” in the archaic sense of any crime, not necessarily a crime less serious than a felony.
13
Make the vote a secret ballot and let’s see what happens.
16
Alan Dershowitz was the graduation speaker when I received my MS degree (1997), and Bill Cosby was the speaker when I received my Ph.D. (2002).
If you ever would’ve told me back then what was to become of these two...!
39
And the band plays on...
8
They will surely try to pass off, ridiculous upside down laws, they invent as the real thing.
Seems a lot of that has already been going on.
Look for Barr to agree with them.
9
This is why parody is dead. There's just nowhere to go.
42
@Sarah D. exactly, and that is why the estimable Gail Collins has diminishing returns.
1
These 2 are in good company with trump, mcconnell, graham and the rest of the republicans in congress, always good to see those at the bottom in ethics and morals.
Reprehensible, ALL. Sold what remaining souls they might have had to the devil.
20
I assume taxpayers pick up the tab too?
7
As we did with muller
1
@Nature Mueller actually and he returned something for the cost.
Pocket change. You and our country are obsessed with money. Our debts add up to scores of trillions. Cost of impeachment pocket change.
Think of something important to say.
A blue ribbon team of ambulance chasers.
20
These two ridiculous, morally challenged and disgraced partisans- Dershowitz and Starr- will now join the long file of disgraced men who have embraced the dark side of Trump- Pompeo, Barr, Giuliani, McConnell, Graham.
That is all.
37
@SSS don't forget Sarah Sanders and other hacks in the House, Miller et al.
1
The Republicans sink lower and lower and lower and lower. But still the Republican Senators stay the course, especially Collins. BTW, congratulations to Collins that she now has a lower national image than Moscow McConnell. Maine must be very proud of her as she totally represents this state. Way to go Maine!!!!
25
She is the most disingenuous officeholder in my memory. It should be obvious to all.
Hopefully Maine people will replace her.
1
Not a trial, but a Press Conference!
5
Epstein was defended by Ken Star and Alan Dershowitz. Another Epstein-Trump coincidence? I think not. I want Trump and Barr out of office so we can know who Epstein’s customers are.
31
Does anybody catch the irony of Mr. Dershowitz, famous as defense counsel for Jeffrey Epstein and "high-profile defendants like O.J. Simpson, Claus von Bülow and Mike Tyson", being added to Donald Trump's defense team? Sex offenders, rapists, and wife killers? I think it's entirely appropriate. Birds of a feather flock together.
Maybe they should bring in Harvey Weinstein's defense team, as well. However, they may have to issue hazmat suits for anyone compelled to sit in the same room. How about Adolph Eichmann's defense team? Are any of those folks still around?
43
Don’t forget - Dershowitz also worked for Jeffrey MacDonald. Trump better hope for a better outcome than MacDonald got.
"Mr. Dershowitz has faced questions about his representation of Jeffrey Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offende . . . Mr. Dershowitz helped negotiate Mr. Epstein’s lenient sentence in 2008. He has also been accused of engaging in sex with an underage girl he met through Mr. Epstein; he has denied the claim. "
And let's not forget Dershowitz's gig as a long-running columnist for Playboy. Moves in very elite and respectable circles, that guy.
17
Oh gee, your guys are so hard on your wonderful stable genius - don't you think he probably tried to get honourable, respected lawyers? That is not an easy task when you aren't either honourable or respectable yourself!
17
Does anyone know if Adam Schiff and the other House Managers will have legal backup??
As much as I respect Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff and the other managers, the White House has recruited a top-tier team of legal scholars and experienced litigators.
Even with facts on Dems' side, I fear that they will be outmaneuvered through legal loopholes and shenanigans.
6
@Richard Dershowitz tonight says he will argue for the, get this, unconstitutionality of the impeachment. Apparently, someone forgot to tell him about the part of the Constitution that says the House shall impeach and the Senate shall try. The horse has already left the barn on impeachment, so lolita-express Dershowitz will be reduced to making arguments to give cover for the GOP.
11
@Richard Top Tier? Do you not remember that Starr lost his case in the Senate? And don't you remember that while Dershowitz won his case with the jury in the OJ Simpson case, he lost his own reputation there as well? Are there any people left in the US who actually believe that OJ is innocent of murder? As for raping young girls, the jury may be out on that yet, but Dershowitz clearly was a close pal of Epstein's. As for Starr, rape is just fine if it's committed by people associated with a football team. I'd say those two are the absolute bottom of the barrel as far as personal sleaze goes.
1
Dershowitz and Starr have a critical role in providing testimony that will give cover for the endangered GOP Senators in 2020.
The outcome of acquittal is already predetermined. With that in mind the Democrats are hoping to stain Trump enough to cause him to lose the 2020 election. This seems ever more unlikely with Trump's increasing approval rating.
Almost as good would be for the Democrats to gain control of the Senate. That would stymie anything Trump try to do. With that, the Democrat's main goal is to exploit the process to cause the swing voters to give them the Senate. Dershowitz and Starr have been making well thought out, well spoken Constitutional arguments for Trump and will be a strong force in the process. The endangered Senators can justify voting Republican. It is a brilliant move for Trump defense.
1
@Qcell
44.3% (currently on RCP average of polls) is not “increasing approval rating” as Individual-1 has been 37%~46% for an average below 44% his entire tenure.
@Qcell When the facts aren't on your side, argue the law. Dershowitz and Starr have already committed to the shoddy argument of a 'lack of proof' (never mind the fact that nearly all lines of evidence proven the basic facts beyond a shadow of doubt) by arguing the House 'should have' gone to the courts to compel further testimony.
Two problems with that argument: 1) the case is already a slam dunk without further evidence, and 2) Lev Parnas is willing to testify and, from what I've seen, he is far more credible than anyone in the Trump administration.
1
@Qcell
Trumps increasing approval rating? He's at 42%
Disapproval? 53%
Repubican still like him, Democrats hate him, but the all-important swing voters who may determine the election? They're going cold on the Trump.
Read it and weep:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-may-be-even-more-unpopular-than-his-approval-rating-shows/
1
May I state this for the record?
I'm deeply disappointed in Ukraine's Zelensky's glossing over of Trump's extortion call. He's acted like it was no big deal. No harm no foul. Nothing to see here, folks.
Like what is America getting so excited about? What's a little extortion?
His boxers were in a twist I guess but it looks to me like he failed a very important test as president of the Ukraine.
And now he's playing nice with Putin.
What's up with that?
Meanwhile, we are impeaching a president over the abuse of powering that phone call.
6
@American2020 Zelensky may have to be dealing with Trump for the next several years. He wouldn’t want to be on Trump’s bad side.
1
you might find this perspective on Zelensky's approach, by Alexander Motyl, an expert on Ukrainian history and politics, interesting: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/09/25/welcome-ukrainians-to-the-american-swamp/
@American2020
President Zelensky is fighting a hot war with Russia and relies on US military assistance so he does not have the latitude to speak honestly about Individual-1’s extortion and bribery of his country.
I'm curious--who pays for Trump's lawyers during impeachment? taxpayers or Trump?
6
If all the evidence available (much of which McConnell seems determined to block from consideration in the impeachment trial) proves Trump's guilt...and the GOP majority of the Senate votes against this ... is that not perjury and an imprisonable offence? Or are the senators above the law? What powers does Judge Roberts have?
3
@Ben This is, unfortunately, not a normal trial and senators (very little 's') can vote any way they wish. Roberts is only there for minor procedural matters, but if he were to rule on allowing witnesses (highly unlikely) all it will take is 51 senators to overrule whatever he says.
We are on the very of witnessing the GOP selling out the soul of our Republic for nothing more than a victory in their next primary. Pathetic beyond belief.
Mr. Dershshowitz is as Mr. Dershowitz does. The choice of Ken Starr, however, is wild.
Starr's moral compass has pointed in various directions. Bill Clinton committed an impeachable offense when he lied under oath but the underlying offense was the damage Clinton's did to his family.
When we get to Trump, the underlying mattar is Trump's decision to ignore the law and use appropriated funds to shakedown Ukraine's government. Yet Starr appears poised to argue that Trump's Ukraine caper was a mere trifle.
3
Trump should not be allowed to engage good counsel since we all know he is guilty. Or something.
3
How do I explain this to my two sons?Did we ever have a great country? I think we did.Can we please get back to having America Great Again.I am going on record that I will take less money from my 401k. I am not being factious. I want to live in a country that has a moral compass.That is what I want for my sons and future grandchildren to inherit.That is what I want to share with my fellow countrymen.
9
This should be fun -- like a Corleone family reunion!
33
Two horrible men are now defending a horrible man, anything surprising here?
41
Keep in mind that the massive Monday gun rally in Rich,mond Virginia is not far from Washington. Get your maps now and be prepared to defend yourselves, defense only, from Trump's radical followers. I'm worried about a rich guy's hostile takeover.
11
Don't depend on your phones or GPS. Trump greatly reduced the weather satellites power to unreadable levels last January during the shutdown. Systems will be unusable if Trump acts.
1
@PATRICK FBI arrested some of them. I saw one on Twitter; he had his guns and was heading there. Scary. I reported him
Ken Starr. The original witch hunter. He goes from Whitewater to a stain on an interns dress, while trump goes from Putin/Helsinki to breaking the law per GAO by withholding money from Ukraine for 55 days until he got caught. So similar.
31
Trump is Putin's Puppet. Putin probably has Trump trapped due to money laundering that Trump actively participated in to serve his own best interests. Putin wants Ukraine. Russian Oligarchs and Ukraine Oligarchs are playing a game to see who comes up with the most "cashola" and power. Trump is their pawn. They helped Trump steal the 2016 Election... he will continue to do their bidding if he is reelected in 2020. Every American Citizen needs to show up at the polls in 2020 and make certain Trump is not reelected. We must do this to preserve the integrity of life in the United States for the coming generations. AND... many Americans need to realize how they were USED as PAWNS in the 2016 Election. WE THE PEOPLE must take back our power. We must defeat Trump in 2020. The only reason Trump has such powerful attorneys coming on board is because they are being paid large sums of money by rich elitists and Trump is guilty.
43
Ken Starr? The same Ken Starr that was President of Baylor University and was rightly tarred by the multiple sexual abuse scandals at that school?
Oh, and is the same Ken Starr that all of a sudden - after he felt his neck in the noose at Baylor - said in an interview for a story the NY Times published that well, maybe, Bill Clinton was all that bad after all?
Figures. Trump attracts hacks and criminals and people whose moral compass is either nonexistent or easily swayed by cold hard cash.
31
Isn't this rich? Ken Starr, of all people, will now help defend another sexual assault offender (offender in chief that is), after spending 4+ years prosecuting another sex offender in chief. Starr is the bottom of the barrel.
41
President Trump tried to pressure the president of the Ukraine into exposing the presence of Hunter Biden as a paid member of the board of an Ukrainian oil company. This is a typical approach for President Trump who often tests his powers to influence events. This is another instance where righteousness creates a bigger problem; it ends up exposing everyone’s faults as they try to become “Holier than Thou.” This really is just election politics. You get too much money involved and real life and death issues like gun safety, climate change, and health care get bury beneath a scandal. We look like arrogant Americans with money to waste.
2
Not surprising at all , any lawyer worth his salt will not involve themselves in Trump's imbroglios . Starr and Dershowitz may have made names for themselves ; but they're not exactly clean and somewhat discredited by their actions and representations . You would only hire them to dig dirt to defend the indefensible. They must have something to lose or gain .
10
Like asking Robespierre to represent Louis XIV during the French Revolution. Guessing its all about who holds the power, when. Can't make this stuff-up.
8
I have to assume any lawyer who would agree to represent Trump would insist upon a cash “down payment” of maybe a million dollars; if there was anything left when they were done, they’d return that portion.
I would agree to have my name appear respresenting so obviously fraudulent a character as Trump without getting full payment in advance.
1
The liberals do not like the newly announced legal team for President Trump. This means that these men are excellent and capable of representing him. They will prove President Trump did nothing wrong and that is what upsets them immensely. They would love nothing more than to find him guilty. It will never happen.
3
Mockery does not equal fear.
@KMW
Thanks for the chuckle from the Fringe, man.
1
@KMW
Read the transcript of his “perfect call”. It is all there.
1
Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law professor, made an interesting point tonight on MSNBC.
Countering the argument by Alan Dershowitz's statement than an Abuse of power is not impeachable, Mr. Tribe stated that President Trump could invite Vladimir Putin to take over Alaska and that would not be Impeachable according to Dershowitz's logic.
No, it would not be Treason as we do not have a declared War against Russia.
Oh, sorry, I just gave President Trump a chance to repay his considerable financial debt to Vlad.
14
Alaska would be no loss. Yeah give it back. Stewards folly.
Oh wait. There’s oil there. Never mind.
May the trial be fair to Trump, outlining his wrongs. An issue he needs dealt with is perhaps his lack of comrades: he seems relatively isolated with support coming only from Republicans! He could be like a CEO who thinks he owns the company he is trying to run dominating – perhaps due to corporate successes and every instance of failure, the failures he learnt from – those lower down. Have you equals (who perhaps provide great comradeship)? – to the President – sir the big man leading us here and around the world!
@Mark C. Major He has a lot of friends – I believe – necessarily comrades perhaps within the party he explicitly belongs to. And some are those not wishing any harm comes his way!
@Mark C. Major I mean some of his friends are not Republicans yet are some of they who are wishing no harm against him.
I can be no real friend–
I for zero physical harm against the fellow, I wish.
1
@Mark C. Major I mean some of his friends are not Republicans yet are some of they who are wishing no harm against him.
I can be no friend!
I zero physical harm against the fellow, I wish.
Writers and scholars have argued that impeachment reflects a subconscious need in American society for acceptance of a tyrant, and this phenomenon is just another cyclic example of other, less fortunate nation's experience of obedience to authority and enforced refusal to rebel against an obviously deranged authority.
Well, what's it going to be, America. Seriously.
Will we, the minority or the majority, embrace the current state of support for the Presidency and the right-wing of the Senate
Will we welcome Fascism??
Or will we reject it?
4
Convincing us that political discourse must always end as a zero sum game is the impeachable offense for which both parties are guilty. Just be sure to watch your wallets while you watch the fireworks.
1
Does Starr's involvement force recusal of Kavanaugh, in the event that any of this case goes to the Supreme Court?
7
@Bill Wolfe
Bart K. was Starr’s assistant with Rod Rosenstein when they found that blue dress stain.
What an impressive legacy of legal achievements and impeccable ethical behaviour from these fine individuals for the next generation of young legal minds. Along with lessons from other role models and legal luminaries like Mayor Giuliani and the beloved attorney general, they might learn that not only is justice blind, but as well patriarchal and male, indubitably white, wealthy and well networked, committed to truth, and absolutely worthy of tabloid celebrity. May their contributions to all aspects of American culture, jurisprudence, politics and history become legendary, mythic and NEVER forgotten - nor should the history books ever forget the names of every republican senator who stands with the criminal leadership of the country.
17
@Queenslander
Trump even uses the same phrase that Joh Bjelke Petersen used when journalists questioned him; and that is "don't you worry about that". I called Joh a racist to his face once (true story) and as the Donald might point out, he strongly denied it.
McConnell says this will go from 1pm to 1am, six days a week.
This will not take long.
2
Selecting television personalities Starr, Ray, and Dershowitz further demonstrates that Trump is obsessed with optics. Trump's take on the impeachment trial is that it's one big reality show and given the fact that the outcome has already been determined by a decidedly biased Republican-controlled jury, he's probably right.
5
Don’t be silly. The Republican Senators took an oath to be impartial. “Oath”, a solemn promise often invoking a divine witness.
As Trump often says, “Let’s see what happens”.
Hearing Dershowitz on the talk shows, he seems intent on portraying himself as a neutral party solely there to speak for the Constitution. Perhaps that's so, but he's on the Trump team. He is not an expert called in by the Senate to speak to the issue. That would be more credible.
5
@bounce33
It's laughable that he's neutral. He's just trying to convince the weak-minded that he is.
6
Trump promised to drain the swamp.
Ambassador Yovanovitch, a career diplomat who has earned the respect of all who have worked with her in the US State Department?
NOT an animal in the swamp.
Or if she is, we might all want to jump in. I will.
Has she been under surveillance by Ukrainians at the behest of a Trump-supporting candidate for Congress? Unclear.
Until today, Pompeo has not shown any concern.
He is at least as culpable as Trump. Perhaps more so.
8
Democrats want to go at it?
Hope so.
Trump’s dream team will turn this back on them like Lindsey Graham turned the Kavanaugh accusations around to decimate the Democrats.
3
Actually what was decimated was the Supreme Court.
1
@Dr. John All Lindsay Graham has done for the Republicans thus far is to show the world how low he can go into the swamp to hide his own issues. He is a pathetic groveling man protecting himself by protecting Trump.
2
@Dr. John
Bart K. has been credibility accused of sexual abuse by several women. The FBI never even investigated Bart.
We can only hope that the proceedings in the Senate will not deteriorate into incoherent verbiage that was used in the House hearings. There should be a little more decorum? Right?
3
@Bevan Davies
Defending the indefensible is a very stressful task, even for a Republican congressman or senator.
Jim Jordan, Devin Nunes and Doug Collins nearly came unglued a few weeks ago at the house investigative committee hearings a month ago. Inventing conspiracies. Throwing tantrums. Pretending that childish screaming and grownup dignity can coexist.
Look for more of the same at the impeachment trial
There have been so many actions taken by President Trump which cannot be truthfully explained
or legally defended.
6
Trump is using electronics here, beware.
1
Pam Bondi famously killed the investigation of the con game known as Trump University, then, cashed a fat check from Trump's "charitable" foundation, signed by the Trumpster himself. The criminals have taken over the capitol.
27
I thought Dershowitz was an appellate lawyer. He needs a trial lawyer. Same for Starr. Never thought he was known tor trial work.
Odd choices, but Trump is one odd person.
10
Bannon in his matched wisdom says in this piece
" I strongly believe you need some of the fire breathers from the House, like Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows and Lee Zeldin.”
Next Bannon will suggest not only fire breathers, but also sword swallowers and lion tamers (the clown position has already been taken by Donald himself doubling down as the carnival barker)
Steve has taken heed that his dismantler of the administrative state does indeed want a circus.
12
I would agree totally with your analysis but Bannon despite his right wing populist authoritarian views is very clever, intelligent and we should listen to what he says. The people he favors will so distract the American public, the real jury , that the impeachment trial may prove to have no educational, no informative benefit.
The preceding will fall on deaf ears.
So there’s a method to his madness.
Fortunately those dudes will not be playing a role.
3
Bannon is fairly clever and intelligent, especially compared to Trump. But I would only ascribe those qualities to him in a relative, not absolute sense.
save the money. build a wall.
5
Pam Bondi is the former Florida AG who gave Trump a pass in the Trump University case after he contributed to her campaign. You could have least mention that along with the records of Starr and Dershowitz.
What a rogues' gallery of a defense team!
28
@cl
And remember, Trump used charitable money from the Trump Foundation for that donation to Biondi!! She happily accepted the money from the Trump Foundation as a campaign donation until she finally got caught.
The Republicans seem to believe that as long as you give back whatever you stole when you get caught, all illegal actions magically become legal. Trump withheld aid so he could force a foreign country to help his political campaign, but when he got caught he "gave it back", just like Biondi gave back the donation from the Trump Foundation when she got caught taking it.
5
@cl
For the record, Pam Bondi was also one of Trump’s electors in the 2016 electoral college, despite holding office in Florida at the time.
More evidence that DJT has lost it. He has appointed Fox talking head “stars” as his team. Trump is so wired into Fox that he he doesn’t appreciate the jeopardy. 25th amendment level loss of reality.
11
sure. it probably has nothing to do with the fact that dershowitz is one of the best living defense lawyers in the US
This raises an important question: do you think they'll get paid?
12
Yes, buy us.
1
Nope
When you are defending the guy who has access to the U.S. Treasury, you plan on big payouts.
3
I would like to know who pays for Trump's lawyers?
18
@KLM
We all would. Wonder if the GAO knows. Munuchin is the little Trump minion, just keeps refusing and refusing to provide any information as to Trump's expenses.
3
Will they get paid, or they don't care.
4
Isn't it pathetic that the Dems have their fingers and tossed crossed in the hopes that only 49 repubs vote against including testimony of witnesses like John Bolton and that a whopping four of them support witness participation? Does anyone believe that even if people like Bolton are sworn that McConnell won't rig the testimony rules so that nothing substantive surfaces? How does 45 seconds for direct examination sound, followed by 20 minutes of cross? I'd sooner trust Kim or Erdogan to run an honest trial.
7
@Paul Wertz your comment should motivate ,we, the people to have our voices heard...loud,clear and prolonged. The more we make a noise and together, with the revealing documents & witness evidence now being widely publicized ,the more likely Moscow Mitch will not be able to find the numbers to take control of this “trial”. The Republicans , the sworn jurors ,are now under tremendous pressure to support a “trial” with witnesses,evidential documents and proper due process.....at least that is the hope.
3
It’s a simple defense. House testimony was all hearsay; no witnesses to be called; Ukraine got the money without performing (no quid pro quo); Ukraine president denies any pressure; voice vote. Nays have it. Case closed.
4
@Zev
In other words: Run a monkey trial.
Or, as most Americans would prefer: Hold a real trial. Look at the evidence with unbiased appraisal. Call additional witnesses. Demand that Trump release evidence that he's withheld.
Just like our Constitution calls for.
3
Dershowitz and Starr were both involved in Jeffery Epstein’s defense. Dershowitz was even named as a suspect by a couple of Epstein’s victims. Starr had to resign as president of Baylor University for failing to address rape and sexual assault.
If the Democrats had lawyers with these backgrounds, there is no doubt the Republicans and their Fox News allies would be raising it non-stop at every chance. So what will the Democrats do?
15
It is Jeffrey Epstein's all-star legal team.
It would be good for the country if it led to the same results.
31
@priceofcivilization
Takes too long.
After saying "You need to commit a crime," Dersh slid to "A president can't be impeached," because a president can't commit a crime in office. Later he was on the phone to 1787, explaining that the White House is a 4-year dictatorship, and that there were contradictions in their law essay.
5
Honest question: who pays for Trump’s legal team - taxpayers or himself (via the organization)?
5
Democrats tend to continually equivocate Clinton's impeachment with merely "lying about sex," as opposed to the egregious and treasonous conduct of a mad President. But if you're going to maintain the high ground here, let's remember that Clinton's lies under oath were about the sexual harassment of two female plaintiffs related to the workplace; sex was merely the *vehicle* by which his crimes were alleged, not the *reason* for the allegations. Thus when liberals keep harping on 'only sex' as the key driver regarding Clinton, they're either showing their naivete and/or partisanship - neither of which bolsters their cause, or case against Donald J Trump.
2
@Ronsword
Clinton lied about consensual sex, period. In fact, it is arguable that Clinton did not even lie at all, but just defined sexual intercourse as something different than oral sex, and believed that he could truthfully testify that he had not had sexual intercourse (or what he called "sexual relations").
Clinton never lied about sexual harassment of anyone. If anyone lied about sexual harassment, it is the man whose words about what he did to women were captured on recording - Donald Trump.
But despite Trump's many lies about sex and sexual harassment, this impeachment is not about what Ken
Starr insists are impeachable -- sexual relations that do not include sexual intercourse.
This is about the US President breaking the law and withholding funds he was legally obligated to disperse in order to pressure a foreign country to publicly smear his main political rival, so he could win an election.
And while clearly corrupt rapist enablers like Ken Starr don't think it is a problem for a Republican President to break the law, Starr happens to wrong, just like he was wrong to protect the rapists at Baylor because he wasn't bothered by their actions.
1
@Ronsword
False. Ms. Lewinsky stated often that she initiated the relationship and she was never harassed. The other ‘plaintiff’ was determined to be lying by Starr even though he did inside out upside down backflips to try and pretend she was abused.
@Ronsword
Um, whether or not Dems "show their naivete and/or their partisanship" has no bearing on the case against Trump. If Trump did what the impeachment says he did, then he deserves to be found guilty.
Case closed.
1
By being so deliberately and openly partisan and averse to any sense of lawfulness, haven't republicans committed crimes of moral turpitude and so very clearly violated their oath of office? Shouldn't the election commission of the United States bar these people from ever contesting an election again? We need to put some teeth in our government.
12
Let the showboating begin! I'm almost 65, but even for me this is LOL.
3
This is a by far stronger and more legitimate case for impeachment than was that of Bill Clinton. That Ken Starr considered Clinton worthy of impeachment and Trump not shows that Starr is nothing but a lying and corrupt political hack.
35
They know this will be a sham so they are literally going to troll their opponents. There is no other explanation for this crew.
Dersh and Trump teaming up for this in the wake of the Epstein debacle sure is something.
13
Dershowitz argues that “abuse of power” is not defined in the Articles brought by the House as an impeachable offense; that “bribery” would have been.
He has been implicated in the Epstein scandal and now inserts himself into a high profile defense team where he just may garner some lost credibility.
What frightens me is, as a constitutional argument, he may just be convincing enough to let the most dangerous man in America off of the hook. Why wasn’t bribery “literally” inserted into the document when the interpretation of words means everything?
3
It’s a Kabuki dance. The Democrats are just posturing. They need Trump to continue in office giving him enough time to have a massive nervous breakdown , thereby discrediting the Republican Party and facilitating control of the Senate.
This is a brilliant strategy that only a few clever politicians can fashion. Pelosi is one. She is a brilliant tactician and strategist .
Alan Dershowitz will make an amazing presentation exposing this impeachment as nothing more than Democrats grasping at straws because they never accepted the fact the Trump won the presidency. Dershowitz is brilliant in court and my six sense tells me the managers are not going to be happy about this.
5
dershowitz intentionally misrepresents what are founding fathers intended with high crimes and misdemeanors. historically, the phrase refers to abuse of power.
4
Yes, the comments here indicate the high level of respect for his “abuse of power isn’t impeachable” argument.
2
@Bob
Yes, I am sure the country will definitely believe Jeffrey Epstein's good pal who has been accused of raping underage girls. That's the kind of guy you can really trust. After all, Dershowitz showed such good judgement when he chose Epstein as his best pal so why wouldn't America trust his judgement about Trump and the Constitution.
I do find it interesting that Trump supporters insist Americans would trust the guy accused of raping under age girls over their own eyes and ears. It's clear that Trump supporters would trust Dershowitz over their own eyes, but I doubt the rest of America is as reprehensible as them.
Everyone has a high point in life, the time when they threw that amazing pass in high school...
For Pelosi, that was the impeachment, which is why she made those special pens. She knows that from here on, everything will go downhill for her.
3
I used to love to listen to Dershowitz but his cool factor is in reverse now. He's been throwing shade on the Truth for years and when the Epstein rumors hit, I thought, are you kidding me? Add disgusting and possibly criminal to his homework.
Now, this.
Dershowitz has turned into one of those people who would not walk away when it was time. He over stayed his welcome in the Public Eye and he has become a Public Stie.
And Starr. What guts to act holier than thou after his firing from Baylor.
He needed to zip it and walk away, too, but he has tasted the fire of fame and ah, preaching the sins of presidential adult sexual behavior ( Clinton, how DARE you have fun in the White House?) and it's tantalizing pull was too much to ignore because who gets a chance to jump in the impeachment fray twice (even if it's defending a true sexual predator criminal like Trump)? Still, it's a presidential fray, right?
Two unchecked egos like Starr and Dershowitz defending a bumbling criminal like Trump with McConnell and Graham sweating through their suits by noon.
As Axl sings with glee, welcome to the jungle.
23
He’s going under his own version of the Giuliani transformation. Scary to watch.
2
Trump is an evil genius, I'll give him that.
10
@PS Well, at least you're right about the evil part.
1
Instead of recognizing the historical importance of this epic event Trump and his sycophantic, publicity seeking legal shills will turn this into a disgraceful spectacle. And who loves and craves this type of attention and center stage opportunity to further malign the Democrats, proclaim his innocence and once again incite his ill-informed supporters further dividing the country? The demagogue who shamelessly lies, cheats and bullies and forever sullies the Constitution and the office he has disgraced.
5
This is quite a cast Trump (although most of them are too old) runs with. I’m just waiting for trump to have OJ Simpson to the White House.
16
@Bjh
He could get a Medal of Freedom?
Why not Rudy too? Bet he’s offended over not being invited to be a member of Trump’s “dream team” Didn’t Rudy claim to have a huge treasure trove of newly acquired evidence from the Ukraine that exonerates Trump?
12
@Montessahall
Rudy should be called as a prosecution witness. As a disappointed wannabe defense attorney, he is just another disappointed Governor Christy.
2
If I were Trump, (nah), I might also prefer to have OJ Simpson and J. Epstein's lawyers too. Guilty as charged. No jail time.
They both will be terrific Reality-TV Starr participants that audiences of a certain kind will root for.
Both are made for Fox Murdoch tabloid TV touting. They both have Trump Dissingangryment Syndrome. I wish James M. was the CEO of Fox now. Having a conscience to lead public perceptions is what we could use right now.
3
I guess what amazes me most is that Kenneth Starr still imagines he possesses a reputation for probity.
27
High crimes and misdemeanors--nearly all the discussion around this strange case has been about the high crimes, not the misdemeanors. But as much as the high crimes, it's been the countless little misdemeanors--the lies, the threats,the slanders, the bullying--that has Trump on the cliff edge. Think of the countless times Trump said he'd like to punch this or that guy in the face--aren't they incitements to violence, aren't those misdemeanors? Add up even a few of Trump's lies and you'll surely have the stuff of dozens of misdemeanors, even a high crime or two.
12
Is this the Ken Starr who was forced to leave Baylor University because he mishandled sexual assault accusations?
Thought so.
31
I'm pretty convinced now that the Trump military Wall is meant to keep us Christians in. Don't go towards Venezuela when you leave.
2
Doesn’t matter that Trumps defenders are the worst - they could be two donkeys and still win the case. Because all republicans are sworn in (maybe under oath?) to follow Trump like Lemmings. Unfortunately not into their nemesis but the nemesis of the American people.
7
This is very sad, to me. I feel that the rule of law has been completely subverted under this administration. I honestly never expected to see this in my lifetime.
4
Dershowitz and Ken Starr are a perfect match for Trump. Poor judgement, lack of ethics, the ability to endlessly distort the truth ..all three share the same characteristics. What a team!!
23
It appears the Trump team may be concerned about the specter of a bigger accusation underlying the facts. The appointment of these attorneys is more than throwing money at the case. I am anticipating previously undisclosed accusations beyond what is known.
7
This is a dream team for President Trump. Ken Starr is a star and he should be a real ace to President Trump as should the others. They all support him and will prove he did nothing wrong. He did nothing to warrant impeachment and will be exonerated.
1
@KMW
The intense sarcasm reflected here is very amusing. We all these kind of jokes . Nice!
5
This piece is an excellent tearing-down of the president's legal team.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans still paying attention to this issue won't read this piece and will be unlikely to be otherwise influenced to come to the same conclusions.
Given that, and for better or worse, I expect the president's legal team to serve his interests exceedingly well. History will show whether that redounds to the benefit of the country as a whole.
1
It would just take one Republican senator, whose conscience finally prevailed, to break the logjam. Others would follow.
7
Sad that Ken Starr is lowering his standards to defend Trump. I always thought of Starr as a "good guy". Pepperdine and Baylor University alumni must be so embarrassed by this announcement.
4
You mean the Baylor University that forced Barr’s resignation due to mishandling of sexual abuse cases?
6
A man who was involved with Epstein is s not what a good guy looks like. Starr is as bad as the rest
Wait. Are we talking about the same Ken Starr who distort facts and truth, is chummy with corrupt people, including Epstein? That’s not what a good guy looks like... Starr is as disordered and malignant as the rest of them.
I sympathize with the need for once prominent old men to try to reacquire the limelight. But that is the only reason for these bizarre additions to the "legal team, which you and I are mostly paying for as we pay the White House Counsel to be the primarily defender of Trump in what should be his private capacity. There is no comparison between Trump and Clinton. Clinton got caught in about the same fix as did King David and lied, which is what men routinely do; aside from abusing the intern, that has nothing to do with carrying out the duties of president. Trump, in contrast, engaged with a foreign power against his own countrymen. Enough said.
6
By joining Trump's team, Starr confirms his rabid partisanship , and makes it hard to believe that it did not drive his investigation of Bill Clinton – and ultimately, Clinton's impeachment.
Republicans continue to play a hateful, tribal game.
If extorting a bribe from a foreign official, based on denying $400M in aid to a desperate ally, and stonewalling all investigations by the Legislative Branch, are not cause for removing a President, what is? It's hard to see Starr's and Dershowitz's participation in this tragicomic as anything more than exercises in ego gratification and partisan revenge.
13
I always thought that Trump was less interested in being an actual leader than a Trump prime time TV Show Hollywood walk of fame, Emmy winning starr.
The appointment of Ken and Alan confirm that. Even if he goes to prison for a short time, (his kind go to 5-star luxury hotel jail for a couple of months at best), he will manage to keep his phone and write ghostwritten books while making towering deals. He intends to be St. Trump.
I don't think his ill-health will sustain a second term so if he can manage it and stay relevant above the fold he will.
5
If all else fails, Trump will probably pardon himself. He's got all the angles covered.
Democrats should have went with the stained dress type of evidence. Texts, transcripts and witnesses really don't seem to matter in this process of impeachment.
@gf
Unfortunately, Democrats are completely out-...I'd like to say "classed", but that's not it, is it...foxed, maybe?...whatever, by this remarkably unusual president that we're saddled-with at the moment.
At this late point, many of us are gratified by the fact that this, too, shall pass. Thank God.
1
@gf
Impeachment is the only case a President cannot use his pardon power to erase.
Why would an innocent man hire so many high priced lawyers when he could testify under oath, with one lawyer, and exonerate himself.
28
Does anyone know how much these two great legal minds are being paid? Surely that should be public knowledge.
7
I hope as a taxpayer I am not paying for this. He can afford it though he may not pay them.
7
@Kelly Monaghan
And who pays? Trump? A volunteer donor legal defense fund? Or us taxpayers?
2
@ Kelly Monaghan As for fees, both Starr and Dershowitz will take it out in trade.
3
To state the obvious: While attorneys can give reasons to persuade people, in this specific case 100 senators, why the president should or should not be found guilty and removed from office, they cannot change what really happened and why.
6
These men got a really sweet deal for Epstein, didn't they? Home detention. With visitors.
Maybe the president is hoping he can get a similar good deal.
12
And Epstein continued to traffic in young girls thanks to them
1
The Trump legal team needs more over the hill types to secure the nomination for the best legal defense team ever assembled for the outcome of a trial that is known before it ever started. The funny thing is, after all, is said and done and Trump is acquitted along party lines these jokers will take a bow and tell the world how brilliant they performed. And Trumpians all over the country will stand and applaud the frauds they have become.
12
These are hardly great additions. Just more old men well past their prime with a lot of baggage and dubious reputations but perfect for trump. That said, how many senators perjured themselves yesterday and Roberts did nothing about it. This a sham impeachment when it should have been an honest trial with witnesses and additional information as it pours in like a flood. Hopefully the GOP senators will lose in 202 and then be indicted for their crimes or obstruction, lying under oath, and not standing up for the Constitution. Disgraceful parodies of humans everywhere.
22
@Oyster Bay
I agree they are backward but 202?
On second thoughts... yes you are absolutely right.
4
@Oyster Bay Sadly this country is still dominated by old white men. I'm not going to live to see it change.
With Ken Starr the double standard will become all the more obvious.
14
Two disgraced and disgraceful lawyers to the Trump defense. Perfect!
27
Silly me, I thought dividing the country and disparaging other Americans publicly was enough to boot him out of office. Due to his position, his words are the same as committing an assault and fueled unrest, violence and murder. Verbal assault leading to battery and death. Sound like crimes to me.
9
Are the tax payers paying for Trump's legal team?
12
@reju lavtok Probably, you pay for everything else his highness wants. You've spent untold millions on his visits to golf courses, his countless flights to his Florida castle and all the things his heart desires.
Ken Starr's atrocious behavior as Baylor president in ignoring sexual assaults on female students is far worse than his Inspector Javert turn in the Clinton impeachment.
23
This would be a good time for video and photos of Dershowitz and Epstein’s “girls” to come to light. And Trump as well while they are at it.
27
Kenneth Starr , cited as the “Independent Council”. Clearly he never was.
Let the circus begin, bring on the clowns and performers, aptly geared to entertain the masses and distract them from the substance, whilst American Democracy and decency continues to get burnt to the ground by partisan sociopaths.
14
Trump keeps complaining he wants his Roy Cohn and he picks Ken Starr. Ken's not my idea of a Roy Cohn. Wonder how he's going to react to trump's verbal garbage? At least we probably won't have long to wait for that to happen.
3
Oh the wicked irony. I can’t help but wonder if this ends up with Stormy’s stained dress and blood stained gloves being thrown out of a white Ford bronco speeding down Pennsylvania Avenue.
Where’s the mute button when you need it?
7
Thanks for the chuckle!
"The Baylor board of regents fired school president Ken Starr on Tuesday amid the sexual assault scandal involving the Bears football team, according to HornsDigest.com.
The regents believe that the blame for the school’s failure in handling rape and sexual assault reports falls on Starr, according to the report, and they might not bring punishment down on head coach Art Briles."
The perfect attorney to defend Trump..... Hee Hee!
16
Was Lionel Hutz unavailable?
You have got to be kidding me. Dershowitz “He is participating in this impeachment trial to defend the integrity of the Constitution and to prevent the creation of a dangerous constitutional precedent.” Since when has this administration had the slightest concern for the Constitution? Starr and Dershowitz have both been involved in sex scandals. Only the best and brightest for this team.
17
Starr is 0-1 in impeachment cases. He's about to be 0-2.
10
you are mistaken. Starr was not part of the prosecution in the Clinton impeachment.
It is horrible that both Starr and Dershowitz helped negotiate a lighter sentence for Epstein which closed off permanently restitution for Epstein’s victims while they were never consulted about sentencing.
No victim advocacy for those young women
Dershowitz, a huge Bill Clinton fanboy, and Starr are chosen out of the hundreds of very good lawyers available?
9
the 80's called. they want their lawyers back
16
With the addition of Starr and Dershowitz to Trump’s legal team, It appears that the qualifications to join include ignoring or participating in sexual assault, willfully approving the abuse of executive power and $$$. May they also go down with the presidential sinking ship.
12
When Trump talked about "draining the swamp," I didn't realize he meant draining it to put the creatures on his team.
8
Trump really knows how to pick’um.
Starr sullied his reputation over at Baylor U when he mismanaged a student’s sexual assault inquiry And Dershowitz, known later in his life for ‘everything Epstein’ are two retreads desperate for the limelight.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump’s picks here were just made to taunt every decent person in the country that is in possession of critical thinking skills, people that haven’t been fooled by the Trump con & that are disgusted & heartbroken over America’s slide down the slippery slope to a place where lies & alternative facts Trump the rule of law. Not a place I’d want my children to grow up.
16
Ken Starr establishes a new standard for chutzpah!
6
If there are no witnesses, there is no trial.
2
Are the taxpayers paying these people? Please say we are not.
10
Regardless, in the end Trump will be acquitted, and It is then that Trump will attack with such dastardly vengeance as we have never before seen, as Trump seeks to prosecute and lock up all of his political opponents, and destroy the democratic party.
6
Discredited creatures, plying the gutters of humanity, are the only ones who would sign up for this assignment to defend one of their own.
21
My hoaxified heart goes out to The Donald: Everyone lies except him. He's surrounded by hucksters and hoax, as if his perfection attracts moral disease. It's got to be very stressful.
Maybe his attorneys should sue for personal injury, such harm as no real estate salesman should be forced to suffer.
But one also has to bear in mind what Obama advisor Ben Rhodes noted in part 2 of Frontline's "America's Great Divide": Efforts by officials to brief Trump after the election were met by disinterest, over and over, which professionals found appalling (esp. national security specialists).
Trump never wanted to be president. So, give him some slack. He wanted to fluff his brand and become a Republican insider. Actually playing the part of president is a stressful role.
Relieve him to play golf permanently in Florida before spring, for the sake of making America great again.
10
How is it he can play golf with those bone spurs? It must be very painful?
Maybe he sits in the golf cart and plays?
1
@gary e. davis: So, if Trump never wanted to be POTUS, why did he run in the first place? Was it his idea of a joke? Was it a publicity stunt gone horribly wrong? Or, was It his idea of payback for Obama's wisecracks, directed at him during a press corps dinner?
So, please do us all a favor, and knock off this "lighten up" hooey.
If Trump's presidency is to be looked at as a joke, then the joke's on America, and those who voted for him, appear to have a sick sense of humor; if they have one at all.
1
I taught at Baylor for several years while it was under the leadership of Ken Starr. I was there when Baylor came under fire for not adhering to Title IX when female students reported sexual assault. It was an environment ruled by elitist white males, who hid behind christian values that they expected everyone else to follow but they did not. Baylor is rolling in money, steeped in an elitist white patriarchal mentality, and hides behind a christian image of being a caring community. It is an environment reeking of misogyny, sexism, and discrimination against women. Females that report unethical and illegal behavior through established policy and procedure are immediately retaliated against with lightening speed. I know from experience. I'm not surprised that Starr is on the defense team for Trump. He runs with the wealthy, old, male, white-privilege crowd who feel they are the chosen to enact the laws, ethics, values, and principles we all have to follow but they don't.
39
It's a show trial both because of the seemingly preordained outcome and because Trump is an entertainer, not a president. Ken Starr? Fodder for Clinton haters. Alan Dershowitz? A familiar face for the Fox and Friends crowd. On the fateful day James Comey announced reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton Donald Trump said "it will be bigger than Watergate" - he was projecting his own desire, and fate.
7
Come on, Don, add Rudy...make it really fun!
22
"Trump Legal Team to Add Starr and Dershowitz for Senate Trial"
Ray and Starr investigated President Bill Clinton for impeachment and remember that Bill Clinton won that little event and Ray and Starr had to go off as losers.
Ken Starr was also appointed to investigate the White Water case. "The Whitewater controversy, Whitewater scandal, or simply Whitewater, was an American political controversy of the 1990s. It began with an investigation into the real estate investments of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their associates, Jim McDougal and Susan McDougal, in the Whitewater Development Corporation. This failed business venture was incorporated in 1979 with the purpose of developing vacation properties on land along the White River near Flippin, Arkansas. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy
Starr lost that one also because nothing was ever found to go after the Clinton's.
2
Are the US tax payers pay the bill to defense trump?
3
@Lle The Democrats who voted for impeachment will, if they lose. From their reelection funds.
@Lle American taxpayers are paying for his White House council attorneys.
As writer Peggy Noonan said, and I paraphrase, She hasn't heard one Republican exclaim Extortion? Bribery? no, that doesn't sound like Trump!
4
Who is paying all these high-powered attorneys for Trump?
Who is paying for Giuliani's whirlwind world tours and his stays in the priciest of world-class hotels?
Is Trump diverting Federal funds in some way to pay for these illegal activities?
Is Putin paying for this activity?
Everyone knows that Trump won't pay a dime of these legal fees, so why are all these lawyers signing up to work for a proven deadbeat client?
7
While I have been hugely disappointed, really appalled, by Dershowitz defending Trump, it is not worthy of Ms. Haberman and NYT to describe him as a ”celebrity lawyer,” one “who became famous as a defense counsel for high-profile defendants like O.J. Simpson.” That is neither fair nor accurate.
For years I respected Dershowitz as a man who defended our constitutional rights by representing clients who were victims of over-reaching police and prosecutors, whether the clients were guilty or innocent. The rationale, as I understood it, was that governments start by mis-using their power against the most-reviled members of society -- and move on from there.
1
@CJN It's true that Dershowitz has been a great defender. Once I thought of him as a modern day Clarence Darrow. But as well as being a defense lawyer, he has chosen to make himself a conservative celebrity. Sort of as if Clarence Darrow had chosen to spend his weekends with John D Rockefeller and Henry Ford. In this case, he is certainly not stepping in as a great defender -- Trump is in no need of defenders -- Dershowitz is just playing the part of the big-name right-wing celebrity. Too bad.
Dershowitz publicly complained last year that his actions were hurting his social life on Martha’s Vineyard- he wasn’t getting invited to parties. Now he goes to parties at Mar A Lago- that’s what matters to him.
Legal team, thats a positive, I thought Mr Trump will Ignore the whole trial and cause a constitutional crisis, we will find out when witnesses are called.
2
“[Alan Dershowitz] said that he “worried about the precedent” set by the two articles of impeachment, which he described as “too vague and open-ended,” and absent “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Maybe Mr. Dershowitz needs a law school refresher. Abuse of Power is a misdemeanor and Obstruction of Congress can be either or both high crime and misdemeanor.
Having said that, Trump, like anyone else, is entitled to the best defense available. If he thinks these people are the best, I say go for it. Of all the things Trump has said or done, this is the gnat on top of the heaping pile of detritus.
14
Dershowitz and Starr were both involved in Jeffery Epstein’s defense. Dershowitz was even named as a suspect by a couple of Epstein’s victims. Starr had to resign as president of Baylor University for failing to address rape and sexual assault.
If the Democrats had lawyers with these backgrounds, there is no doubt the Republicans and their Fox News allies would be raising it non-stop at every chance. So what will the Democrats do?
581
@S. Jackson
I hope that they each got a very large prepaid retainer for the representation.
12
@S. Jackson
I opened the comments expecting to see Dershowitz and Starr trashed and I did not disappoint myself.
Dershowitz is a brilliant legal mind that follows the law. Since this is an impeachment trial, In that context I would judge him by the merit of his constitutional arguments.
11
@S. Jackson
This fact of Starr and Dershowitz having represented Epstein does raise an ominous question of other involvements, in essence, the prime subject, and fear of disclosures that required the best attorney's money could buy.
30
Dershowitz and Starr were both involved in Jeffery Epstein’s defense. Dershowitz was even named as a suspect by a couple of Epstein’s victims. Starr had to resign as president of Baylor University for failing to address rape and sexual assault.
If the Democrats had lawyers with these backgrounds, there is no doubt the Republicans and their Fox News allies would be raising it non-stop at every chance. So what will the Democrats do?
5
Hopefully, Kenneth Starr will be able to differentiate between a president lying about having sex with a White House intern after she delivered pizza to the Oval Office and high treason. What if Donald Trump's "perfect phone call" had been to Vladimir Putin instead of the current president of Ukraine? There's a question even Trump supporters have difficulty answering.
5
Doesn't matter who defends Trump because they have no defense. All evidence and testimony proves Trump's guilt. All these clowns can argue is that the law is not the law and the constitution is not the constitution. Everyone who hooks their fate to the Trump Titanic, falls off and drowns, their reputation in tatters. I guess these fellows have nothing to lose because their reputations were destroyed already.
13
@kay The trouble is, it's pretty likely that they will win, and consider it a triumph for years to come. They will lose their reputations among some of us, but among others, they will be heroes.
3
The defense of the President (if not Trump) is pretty easy.
He is commander in chief and conducts foreign policy. He must have the latitude to bob and weave which congress lacks. Perhaps he has doubts about the wisdom of giving congressional approved aid to Ukraine because of some piece of information that has come to him in the course of his duties. Why should he not have the latitude to zig-zag a bit.
Actually, the President has a slush fund congress gives him which he can use anyway he sees fit. (unless they've changed that?). I believe he doesn't even have to account for how it is spent.
Then there's the issue of the truth being a defense in libel. Suppose it is true that the Bidens were corrupt. Suppose there was reasonable grounds for supposing they were corrupt and a delay in waging war on Russia seemed the judicious choice. After all, Pelosi has said all roads lead to Putin.
My sense is that Dems have to make the case that they had no choice in the matter of impeachment given Trump's incompetence, which means they have to make him look incompetent.
With things going they way they are going in the burning Amazon/Australia, NoKorean nukes, Hongkong, Iran, Kurdistan, Yemen, and the dictatorships sprouting up everywhere, I worry that impeachment may be a too narrowly focused distraction but I trust Nancy's political sense.
2
The meaningful part of this process, during which it was demonstrated that Trump broke the law as he sought to secretly manipulate our 2020 election, is over. McConnell and others have already told us the Senate part of this will be a charade. I glance at what the Senate does these days but otherwise pay it no attention.
7
So Trump's team are high-powered attorneys and Pelosi's team are mostly politicians (Nadler, Deming, Lofgren and Jeffries) with little or no courtroom experience. Doesn't seem fair.
@B. T.
You are misinformed. There's a lot of actual courtroom (trial) experience on the prosecution team. Trump's team is largely has-been appellate lawyers who've become media hounds.
2
Trump said get me lawyers who appeared on FOX. He wants ratings, like crowds. Both long ago became immaterial and irrelevant.
6
Who is on Pence’s legal team. When the chips are down, Trump will sling it off on those closest to him.
5
At Trump's impeachment trial, the Senate must and should insist on seeing relevant documents and calling witnesses who can provide direct, first-hand evidence about Trump’s actions.
Will Republican Senators show independence from Senator McConnell and President Trump, and vote to demand to hear testimony of witnesses such as former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton and Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, as well as to see emails and other documents now being blocked by the President? That is the question facing all Senators, including Republican Senators Martha McSally of Arizona, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Susan Collins of Maine, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, and Mitt Romney of Utah.
No Senator should forget that hearing from relevant witnesses and seeing key documents is exactly what constitutes a trial. Because if Senators don't understand that, they don't deserve their seats and should be voted out-of-office when next up for re-election.
5
Tell me who's paying for all this legal muscle?
7
That’s what I’d really like to know. I don’t think taxpayers should.
2
The role of Mr. Starr and Mr. Dershowitz is not to defend Mr. Trump and secure his acquittal. Many experienced lawyers have already told us that the case against Mr. Trump is very strong.
Their roles must be one of creating confusion and chaos to serve the needs of two groups of people: The Republicans in Congress and Mr. Trump's base.
The Republicans badly need confusion to surround the impeachment process, so that they can claim later on that the two charges against Mr. Trump were not based on strong evidences. They clearly realize that their failure to do so, could jeopardize their chances for re-election.
And there has to be enough confusion and chaos so that those forming Mr. Trump's base may be able to convince themselves on election day that the whole impeachment business was "a hoax" and Mr. Trump has been as innocent as Saint Francis of Assisi!
21
The Senators' votes are far from clear:
"As long as Senate Republicans stick with Mr. Trump as expected, his accusers will not be able to muster the two-thirds vote required for conviction."
Since the Republicans have over half of the Senate, Trump would win if "Senate Republicans stick with Mr. Trump" even if only a simple majority were required. To convict Trump, a couple of dozen Republican Senators will need to vote against him. That seems unlikely now, but it could happen.
If Trump wins, he'll probably get re-elected. If Trump loses, Pence will become President, and presumably will run as the incumbent in November. If so, he may get re-elected, but his odds will be much lower than Trump's. Even so, incumbents rarely lose. Jimmy Carter lost in 1980, but his opponent, Reagan, was very popular and unemployment was high. Bush the Elder also lost to Bill Clinton in 1992, but Ross Perot siphoned off a good deal of the vote (neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton has ever won more half of the votes). Before Carter and Bush, one has to look way back in history for an incumbent who lost his re-election bid. It has happened (at least if unemployment is high), but it's rare.
@Commenter Pence will be the incumbent, but a very special case incumbent. Sort of like Jerry Ford, an incumbent who didn't get re-elected. And Pence is actually more unpleasant than Trump, in many ways. He's an ultra-conservative religious fanatic, with no trace of Trump's crowd-pleasing phony populism. Trump enjoys his adoring crowds, but nobody has ever seen Pence enjoy anything. Of course, anything is possible, maybe the country will want to turn to a dour moralist. I'm afraid that's a moot point though, as the Republican Senators will almost certainly ignore the facts and the Constitution, and acquit Trump. And he will have a pretty good chance of replicating his electoral college win. But we'll see.
Trump’s dream team - a bunch of TV lawyers who have never tried a case or cross-examined a witness.
Only a very stable genius would think this is a good idea.
5
OK, so let me get this straight...and upfront Mr. President you need some serious marketing support. By estimates the Mueller investigation cost $16 - $30MM and resulted in indictments and jail sentences for many DIRECTLY related to the issues. In the case of Ken Starr, in 1996 dollars it was $57MM by one estimate. It started out as Whitewater but ended up with a charge of lying (albeit under oath) for a sexual affair. Not to mention that Mr. Starr said that no one is above the law and the law is the law. Really? Is there possibly an adult in the WH that can have this discussion? Geez, I'd have a field day with this in my working days as a marketing, consulting, and operations executive against my competition.
5
With this team and the current president, all they need is Judge Judy. It's laughable that there will be possibility that justice will prevail.
6
@JG Meaning what? Judge Judy is a vehement opponent of trump.
Ken Starr pursued Clinton ruthlessly for four years and finally nailed him by entrapping him in perjury. Yet, he is going to defend Trump in a "trial" in which the jurors have taken an oath to be impartial, but have already declared they will violate it. Perjury on a grand scale.
24
@Rose
Rose. This is America. More fun than Australia.
2
I wonder how much they're being paid and I'm afraid us taxpayers are paying the bill. There's no doubt, "they go low"!
5
They’re conducting a seance to get Johnny Cochran back on line. #dreamteam
36
Epstein’s lawyers for a friend of Epstein’s? Who like their client are accused of sexual crimes? Sounds like a pervert’s convention.
51
Starr will point out there's nothing sexual. Dershowitz will argue that impeachment is always unconstitutional. Go team.
14
Dershowitz is no positive. His reputation has gone downhill as he has aged. I would assume he has a search for relevance.
12
@Philip W
I would think exactly the same thing. If I didn't know anything about the law.
5
@Philip W His legal reputation, maybe, but not his reputation for public controversy. Trump isn't looking for skilled lawyers here, he's looking for confusion and insults flying...
1
What a bunch of whiners, isn't this what all you wanted ?
Why cry ?
Kenn Starr and Alan Dershowitz will be defending our President and you whiners can't say enough bad things about them. This one is not the same, that one has changed. Blah, blah, blah.
Hey quick heads up, we all change. In college I worked for Jimmy Carter's campaign. Now I send money to the Trump camp.
Nothing is supposed to remain the same, as we age we view life differently, I am not as concerned now as when I was a youth about pollution, life is better now, the air is cleaner, so is the water. Things have changed. They will change again.
All these political things that seem so horrible are really not, this is what politicianns do. None of this is important.
9
@Tom ,
What, exactly are you concerned about, if not pollution (of all things?). What do you care about? Don't you understand that without progressive policies our water and air would be a filthy mess? Things will change, no doubt, but as I get older, and I'm about your age, I am working so they might change for the better. I will work against the cynicism that seems to accompany ageing, an ailment you seem to have embraced ; to me it is still important that the president isn't a criminal who has demonstrably abused the power of his office for personal gain.
7
Junkman, the only ones crying foul are Trump and his supporters. Tweets and rants seem to be the only defense the GOP has come up with. Good luck at the trial, regardless of how members vote the American people can see a rat and it’s about time it is removed from the White House.
9
Speaking as one who is fast closing on 60, I haven't given up on the world yet. Aging is no excuse for ceasing to care about the environment. Even though I don't have children, I'd like future generations to be able to breathe freely. We can thank the progressives of the past for our relatively clean air and water, achieved through regulations. Certainly the greedy industrial powers wouldn't have curtailed their pollution without being forced to do so.
8
What is this, a bad TV show?
16
Allan Dershowitz is a liar. He has been accused of having sex with an underage girl. His opening statement whenever he speaks is about how nonpartisan he is. He spends most of his time at Fox TV. He has been carrying Trump's water for at least the last three years. His position is the same as Barr's: Trump can do anything he wants because he is president. Dershowitz is a phony. He says he cares about the constitution. Don't believe him. I firmly believe that he gets aroused when he's in the presence of unsavory people-Epstein, Trump etc. I hope the Democrats add Lawrence Tribe to their team.
36
@Jerome
I disagree with most of Tribe's views on the Constitution, but there is no denying that he is a brilliant, albeit very liberal, lawyer. But unlike Dersh, Tribe is not a trial lawyer.
2
@Jerome I hope Roberts acts like a Chief Justice and not a partisan hack or just another Trump sycophant.
6
Who needs to pay tens of millions of dollars for the "Dream team" of defense lawyers?
Vladimir Putin would do it for free.
He has to protect his investment in his Manchurian Candidate President.
26
Great comment! Right on target.
2
Dershowitz saved Claus von Bulow. Guessing he will ensure that Trump also receives the best justice money can buy.
11
@MSPWEHO
Did you have a problem with defendants spending millions on defense when the accused was Bill Clinton?
3
@GMooG I thought Clinton should have resigned office. Al Gore would have been an excellent president and we likely never would have had to endure George W Bush's presidency.
As far as spending millions on defense, my only problem is that rich people get representation that poor people cannot. The system is rigged to favor the rich, powerful and well-connected. And that stinks.
Justice? U are so funny!
1
The audacity of Starr and Trump. Starr had nothing but thought it was okay to investigate forever even when the original purpose was disproved. He’s spoken against this impeachment as if what Clinton did (bad but not for personal political or financial gain) was appropriate. What a liar.
10
Of course, we’re not surprised. Star lost the last one. Figures his odds are better with this one. The fix is in! These Republicans have no conscience whatsoever!
7
@GCAustin
Starr wasn't in "the last one."
2
Only the best and brightest! (Sarcasm)
6
@JCAZ
Really? Starr & Dersh against Schiff & Nadler?
I'll spot you some points.
2
Why are you Americans Democrats and Republicans so scared that you won’t even dare bring Donal Trump in? In Russia calling out Putin is a nonstarter. I now start to think that American actually wants a dictator.
7
Dershowitz just sealed his deal on the huge, I mean YUGE, public shunning he’s going to get Up-Island this year. In fact not just there but everywhere. He might as well book his upcoming vacations at Mar-A-Lago because surely he’ll be embraced by YUGELY welcoming arms.
18
Blackmail is illegal is it not? working with a foreign government to manipulate our election is illegal is it not? This is the epitome of white male privilege.
9
@R4L
This is an example of the logical fallacy called "assuming the conclusion." Usually doesn't work out; ask Hillary.
5
Having lived through the holocaust, I can only imagine the pride Alan Dershowitz's family members must have, seeing him defend a man who said "fine people" were walking with Neo Nazis.
49
Let me know when the Dershowitz’ list their Martha’s Vineyard digs.
13
Big shrug. I would be impressed if Laurence Tribe joined Trump’s team.
3
All criminals. Yes, including Starr and Dershowitz. Starr presided over Baylor University during a period of rampant fraud and corruption. Dershowitz caught up with Epstein. Fitting.
15
So...Epstein's attorneys plus a convicted stalker. Why am I not surprised?
14
I feel positively nauseated. Starr? Dershowitz? Shades of the sexual humiliation of a president, a stalker's bloody murder, sexual abuse of minors, defending the indefensible. Everything and everyone associated with this president is shady.
24
I grimace in revulsion.
19
When he has to hire Dershowitz it is absolute proof of guilt!
23
Let's also not forget Dershowitz also was the prime reason for Norman Finkelstein in losing his professorship, over the academic debates of the Palestine situation, and what Zionism has played into the apartheid there.
Calling another academic a liar, should've long made Dershowitz lose his own professorship at Harvard. You know the same college that plays apartheid with Asian American admissions?
He and Wolf Blitzer (yes that CNN's Wolf Blitzer) Palestine debates shows a deep merge between Israeli politics in the U.S. politics, at the expense of the American public and Middle East lives.
We don't need that type of "showmanship" in our politics nor the hate it brings. More so in an impeachment trial. a serious offense that needs sober and sane presentations, not more three ring circus acts.
2
As for Dershowitz..Perhaps Trump likes the guy who got Epstein off from the abuse of underage female children. No doubt Trump knows when the FBI finally releases the trove of evidence taken from Epstein's house..a lawyer with "that" background will be required. Combine that with OJ..it will be a show for certain..
11
At every opportunity, Trump marches back to the bad old days of right-wing extremist lunacy, with Joseph McCarthy’s rabid attack dog, Roy Cohn, as his mentor and patron saint. Just the other day, I read a ‘conservative’ opinion piece attempting to draw solace from a comparison of Trump’s impeachment to the impeachment of Andrew Johnson — whom the Senate declined to remove from office. Said opinion neglected to mention that Andrew Johnson is without doubt the most incompetent, unhinged and destructive man ever to occupy the White House - the one man most responsible for the rise of Jim Crow and the persistence of virulent racism after the Confederacy’s Civil War defeat and the emancipation of its slaves.
Just out of curiosity, are my tax dollars paying for the ever-expanding ‘dream team’ of Trump’s mouthpieces — who are likely paid around $1000 an hour each for painting lipstick on this pig? It’s insulting enough to watch as our self-proclaimed (and likely illusory) billionaire blows over $100 million a year of federal funds on travel expenses and associated security for himself and his family, not including the bills he refuses to pay the municipalities required to host his idiot fringe ‘rallies.’
And then squeezes food stamp recipients to make them more ‘self-sufficient.’ If this were not so repugnantly evil, it might be funny. But it isn’t funny.
21
@chambolle According to an NPR article, taxpayers pay the salaries of White House lawyers, and trump's campaign fund pays legal fees related to his campaign. The artucle doesn't say specifically whether the campaign fund will pay for trump's impeachment lawyers, but I'm going to guess that it will happen that way. Assuming trump actually does pay up. 😏
3
Will Starr and Ray be asked about the leaking of info they did during the Clinton impeachment thru Kavanaugh.
8
Starr and Ray aren't on trial, and they aren't witnesses, champ
Anyone who went after the ultimate conservative bogeymen--the Clintons!!--must be an ethical, aboveboard type of person.
2
Sleaze representing sleaze. I guess Giuliani was not available, too busy digging up dirt on the Bidens.
12
Another legal dream team out to defend the innocent, just like OJ.
8
Here I thought Ken Starr would have been relegated to the past by now, but no. Only DJT could bring this guy back for a second stab at helping to divide the nation further. Donnie likes guys who cover up sex crimes. What a disgrace.
17
Let’s see if our US senators will be so cowardly as to confirm that in our country wealthy litigants can have all the justice that they can buy!
6
Fascinating comments. I love this aspect: we live in a capitalist society. Million of people dream of becoming super-rich and, of course, famous. And what's the worst thing people can say about lawyers like Alan Dershowitz or Donna Rotunno? What is the ultimate, absolute insult?
"They're doing it for the money and attention."
Can Mr. Rogers say "Cognitive Dissonance"?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
This is a historical case in which the rogues gallery are the defendant, the defense team, and Mitch McConnell & Co.
6
Dershowitz again! The man who keeps selling his resume to the highest bidder. Not worth saying anything about Ken Starr. His problems at Baylor speaks volumes about him. Exactly the type of guys that Trump would hire and the exactly the type of people who would agree to work on behalf of a despicable person.
18
Trump claims all this hullabaloo and impeachment nonsense is his punishment for a perfect call. Perhaps, now that he has reunited with his old Epstein pals Dershowitz snd Starr, he could make some imperfect calls and enjoy some nasty punishment on Fantasy island.
5
Great news.
Not only will these guys help the President but they will also make Pelosi’s clown posse look like the underhanded weasels that they are.
2
Won’t help your president. When you have a terrible client and no defense, even the best attorney can’t help.
6
So many bad guys, so little time. I remember when Dershowitz used to be respected.
10
@CP
He still is. But only by those of us who can separate our politics from our evaluation of other people's talents.
2
Ken Starr. A national disgrace, historically. Adding to his blemished record. Perfect, as Trump says.
10
Dershowitz and Starr will have one job. they can;t really dispute the facts so...
Dershowitz will argue that it really wasn't that big a deal and Starr will argue that it wasn't a High Crime
8
I wonder if they are going to make a tv series about this years later.... law and order Csi Washington DC ... based on a true story of inspired actual events...
2
The Democrats might as well pack it in.
2
Why, the Republicans have been cowering for some time now.
6
Sexual predators represent a majority of Trump’s defense team.
15
Yes, but Trump supporters look the other way for some reason. How in the world can his supporters admire such a dishonest, unethical, and frankly, totally ignorant man. So many of them are women, too.
His legal team is as corrupt as their client.
You name it...
Jay Sekulow, here is the excerpt from NYTimes:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/01/us/politics/trump-sekulow-impeachment.html
Mr. Sekulow; his brother Gary; his father, Stanley; his law partner Stuart Roth; and their business associates were sued for fraud and securities violations. They declared bankruptcy, leaving a trail of unpaid debts.
Sounds familiar?
Another headline from Daily Beast
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-just-hired-jeffrey-epsteins-lawyers-alan-dershowitz-and-ken-starr
Alan Dershowitz
Trump Just Hired Jeffrey Epstein’s Lawyers
Pam Bondi another one from this rogue lineup
trump university...
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/us/politics/pam-bondi-donald-trump-foundation.html
New Records Shed Light on Donald Trump’s $25,000 Gift to Florida Official
What a team of unscrupulous characters.
They all deserve each other, btw he called Dershowitz a lunatic and disaster in not so distant past.
11
Alan Dershowitz seems to be devoting the latter portion of his career to palling around with and defending the worst human beings our society has to offer - Jeffrey Epstein and now Donald Trump. Ugh.
12
Let me get this straight - Trump, who had unprotected sex with a porn star (among others) soon after the birth of his last child and who brags about grabbing women by the crotch, now wants to be represented by Dershowitz, a pal of Jeffrey Epstein, who has also been accused of having sex with underage and/or trafficked girls (not to mention his defense of O.J.), and Ken Starr, who was removed as President of Baylor (a supposedly "Christian" school) after a sex assault controversy involving the school's football team. Geez. Could this get any more bizarre? Can Trump or his so-called evangelical "Christian" supporters go any lower? Don't answer that.
23
What a politically terrible country the United States has become The president is a liar, bully and mentally unstable. The Republicans have no back bone and the Democrats are fighting an impeachment war they will not win. Anyone with at least a 40 watt brain knows Trump is a criminal now and before he was the supreme leader. It's a very sad state of affairs.
10
Starr and Dershowtiz………..How fitting
Is it any wonder that the legal profession is so often held in such little regard?…………..
9
Adding more "cess" to the "pool."
11
Starr has been a party hack for three decades.
Dershowitz is a washed-up publicity hound, not to mention a pal of Jeffrey Epstein.
Only the best people !!
5
Swamp trump of muck, pollutants, and poison is getting more putrid...starr and dershowitz...yuck...
However, def perf men to be trumps chief liars...
How is starr not complaining that the House did not bring forward any articles regarding trump's affairs, girlfriends, and complaints of sexual assault? The trump's check to cohen to pay off trumps lover took place while trump lurked in the oval office...
More hypocrites join trumps sewer-like swamp...cannot wait to see the quotes to come out from the past utterances of this tiny, sleepy men (tiny in morals, minds, and mankind)
2
It is perfect that Ken Starr, whose team clearly benefited from those "elves" like Victoria Toensing who is involved in Trump's Ukraine corruption, would help Trump.
It is perfect that the man who covered up for rapist football stars at Baylor would be helping to cover up for Trump. And it is perfect that Trump's pal Jeffrey Epstein's friend Alan Dershowitz would be helping Ken Starr.
1
I hope Dershowitz performs the same way he did in the Mike Tyson trial
2
See you one and raise you one
Dems should bring in Laurence Tribe.
Constitutional Law is his forte.
3
Dershowitz and Starr, more nightmare than dream team, at this rate Trump would be better off with Cellino and Barnes
4
So, are these lawyers going to do what has been impossible for all the other Trump defenders?
Provide exculpatory evidence?
Including exculpatory evidence for Trump's co-conspirators?
3
With the new additions to Trump's legal team, his impeachment trial will be a clash of legal titans. Unfortunately for Trump such a clash is not good when both are representing him.
3
The White House Counsel, and Mr. Trump's personal lawyer should both recuse themselves from this duty since new evidence shows they could be witnesses to the Presidents 'drug deal'. It would be the honorable thing to do, but Mr. Trump has no use for honor, witnesses, or reality. In any case, good luck Presidential legal team trying to use the Presidents view that he can do no wrong as a defense.
1
These attorneys are joining a case where the fix is in for their client.
3
I have no confidence is the institution of Harvard that produces the most elite educated leaders with such controversial ethics.
1
If they think that Starr will add legitimacy to the Republican effort they've forgotten what a reputation destroyer the Clinton trial was for him. He lost credibility long ago.
Dershowitz is only completing the total collapse of his reputation in the last couple of years.
4
@cort These two are like the gilt and gilding in Trump’s condos, decorative, in questionable taste, but not very functional.
4
Alas, after rejection at venues like those on Martha’s Vineyard, Dershowitz has finally been invited to a party that will have him. And Ken Starr: Well, he spent millions and millions of taxpayers’ dollars and many years on a witch-hunt into Whitewater, having no success as special counsel until Bill Clinton fell into an ego trap of his own making. Then he moved on to be disgraced at Baylor University over his mishandling of other sexual controversies there. It appears both these men are looking for some sort of social/career redemption in a trial that will clearly be decided by jury nullification. Only in a world dominated by Trump and his similarly corrupt compatriots could either of them expect to find respect. They now nestle in Trump’s basket of deplorables.
7
Does anyone else feel like they are living in s time loop that started in the late 80s?
2
I go with my cousin, Vinnie.
5
Trump has always relied on high priced lawyers to get him out of his self inflicted jams. Although he doesn't really need them for their legal skills this time - because the outcome of the trial is already rigged - he just needs them to flimflam the gullible portion of our electorate.
8
Gearing up for a show trial fit for any given dictator.
The show starts soon, maybe some sound and fury. Maybe not, sometimes these things work better in rooms without cameras. Republican men will strut and proclaim self righteously. The verdict was never in doubt.
The truth will not be served. We will be reminded how badly our country has failed.
3
@Chickpea And Susan Collins will dither, explain how she intends to study to all of the evidence carefully and vote accordingly, dither some more. complain about possible presidential overreaching, prevaricate, then vote to clear him of all charges
2
Note @ Alan and Ken:
Get (and cash) your checks in advance.
3
Well, I guess this is as close as Trump can come to getting the late, unlamented, utterly unscrupulous and contemptible Roy Cohn on his team.
3
Dershowitz is persona non grata on the Vineyard.
@Joseph Patrick O'Malley
and he wears that as a badge of pride, as he should
1
If the motion to remove Trump is dismissed, there are grounds here to declare a mistrial, given that McConnell has publicly declared that he will refuse to honor his constitutional duty to act as an impartial juror.
9
note the judicial branch has absolutely no say regarding impeachments.
@Bot Gone Rogue
stop. just stop. you have no idea what you are talking about
1
It's hopeless. Most of the commenters here, like Rachel Maddow, have absolutely no idea what they're talking about, but don't let that slow them down.
Well, there will be nothing to the trial and is just a circus anyway but you have to question whether you want Epstein mentioned in every article along with Trump's name! There can be no doubt Trump is in charge of his side of the show however.
1
What should we call this? Window dressing in an empty storefront in a ghost town? These lawyers won't have to do anything in terms of Trump's defense; Moscow Mitch will take care of that. There will be no real trial. It is all for show.
7
I think it is an advantage that Trump has the best possible legal representation of his choosing for the forthcoming Senate trial. This, for the sake of American-law integrity and client right. Trump’s dismissal, if it comes to that, would then be as acceptable as possible for all concerned. Due to Republican Party stacking in the Senate, the same actually ... if not more so. The concern is, Will the trial be fair? Competent argument in order to tease out the truth for the sake of the truth ... the lying and bullying demeanor of Trump notwithstanding ... is critical to what America is and seeks to become. The ploy of Trump in suggesting early on he welcomed impeachment is now evident as such ... an attempted ploy/ con that didn’t work.
Kenneth Starr?!
This is the guy whose personal ethics at Baylor are at least as questionable as Bill Clinton's?
The Republicans are clearly draining the swamp for their new hires.
8
Hmmm, if memory serves correct, these are the same attorneys who helped get Epstein a mere 13 months in jail, with his days spent at his mansion... seriously
9
Trump wants to say, the partisan House impeached me, but the important Senate exonerated me-the House action was a hoax but the Senate verdict is the most important!For certain he will say this-is the Senate going to abdicate their duty for serious deliberation as they prostrate themselves before a lying, lawbreaking Trump who has brought so much chaos and condemnation to our country?
3
The purpose of these ‘big’ names on the team is to give credibility to acquittal by biased jury. The big names can bought and sold and that is why they are two faced.
4
Perhaps Trump has a calculation: Dershowitz got O.J Simpson off on a murder charge when most of the evidence pointed to guilty.
But unlike the Simpson case, the American people will be the real jury being formed this November.
4
Alanis Morissette will have to revise her song about irony after Starr helps defend Trump. Although Dershowitz, defender of the likes OJ, Epstein,Weinstein and now Trump, will be operating in his wheelhouse; a perfect capstone to his career defending the indefensible. Although if you think about it, this client will be his Magnum Opus since Trump embodies pretty much every fault of those dubious top three clients, but all rolled into one package.
5
How much are these guys getting paid?
3
And paid by whom ?
Clearly, so many herein think Trump should just go into this Democrat show trial with a court-appointed attorney fresh out of law school.
You know, because innocent people don’t need a defense in the face of a multiyear disinformation campaign by Democrats, ‘progressives,’ and their media adjunct.
2
@EGD innocent people also usually forbid those with knowledge from testifying. And innocent people don’t usually bury their “perfect” phone calls in top secret government hideaways where no one will find them.
4
It’s not a criminal trial. If there is no validity to the charges of impeachment, then why should Trump need a lawyer at all?
2
Prof. Dershowitz is about to become even more unpopular on Martha's Vineyard. On the bright side, he has certainly brushed up on his game of Solitaire.
7
OK then, perhaps the House should line up Prof. Anita Hill, Michelle Obama, and Ralph Nader for the prosecution.
3
@Charles Dean
Since none of them has been inside a courtroom in 30 years, if ever, they'll fit right in with Schiff and Nadler
Empty witness chair, call Clint Eastwood.
2
Now it’s confirmed. Donald Trump is definitely the bad guy, the evil billionaire villain in a super heroes comic strip. It’s now up to the American people to be the super hero and save the world from destruction on Election Day 2020.
2
The throughline in Ken Starr’s career from at least 1990 is his involvement with sexual allegations—from using Monica Lewenski as a pawn, to defending child molester Jeffrey Epstein, to the indifference to assault at Baylor. Starr has proven his bonafides to defend Trump.
4
Only clown missing from this team is My Cousin Vinny
11
I have no confidence in Dershowitzs' claim of serving our Constitution when he serves a moneyed individual over the best interests of hundreds of millions of us Americans the Constitution intended to protect. This isn't as much about the Constitution as much as claims that Trump broke the law, now confirmed by some. If he wins, he can remember he put the interests of one man over the many. I do understand Trump's right to a good defense, but claims of defending the Constitution is arguable when it is being followed to stop known tyranny.
3
After such a distinguished career as a University President, I'm surprised anyone guilty would consider getting Mr. Starr for a defense-team member.
4
Whether like or agree with this president, he has the right to counsel and presumed innocence under the law— the last two words are key in that most folks don’t really know what that means in this case.
These two lawyers have immense experience with records that have been consistent on constitutional law that is well respected among scholars, despite the attempts to diminish that by calling them ‘celebrity lawyer’ or criticizing prior experience.
Careful thinkers understand the menacing behavior of this president, but also realize that a fair fight is more than a partisan one.
2
@Jules OA,
That's hilarious because he has wanted to "Lock Up" Secretary Clinton without charge or trial since before he was appointed president.
8
@Jules OA Not much of a fight when the jury has announced its verdict before the trial begins. About the only kind of a case these two are any good for anymore.
5
@Jules OA Trump/GOP do not fight "fair". Mitch kills all 300 Democratic bills in the House. Trump today killed Michele Obama's school lunch guidelines that gave kids healthy lunches;why; because it had Obama on it. Trump/Right Wing attacks the press "Fake News" for anything they dislike. "fair" is not a word in GOP Vocabulary; Win is
3
So the attorney who was behind the impeachment of President Bill Clinton is now the attorney for the President who has been impeached? Sounds like a good plot for a movie sequel: "A Starr is Re-born." Unlike the original movie, the sequel promises to be a horror flick.
24
Dershowitz hasn't been in the news since OJ and he misses being relevant. Ken Starr is a legend in his own mind.What kind of lawyer skills will they display if there are no witnesses? You have to know Trump is thinking there will be four GOP Senators that are going to jump ship.Just what Trump needs Pontificating Dershowitz. A blow heart defending a blow heart should be interesting.
9
Dershowitz has been in the news, but not for good reasons. His association with Weinstein and Epstein and accusations of sex abuse of his own. He’ll fit right in with Trump.
5
Why should you need a team of high powered lawyers if you are as innocent as Mary Poppins?
18
Why don't you ask Hillary Clinton that question? When she was accused in her email scandal of violating all sorts of government rules and laws, she hired two of the most high-powered law firms in the US, and spent millions on her defense. does that make her guilty? or just smart?
@Stein
Yes, of course. That's why when she was in legal hot water with her emails, Hillary hired a bunch of law students & interns, instead of a "team of high powered lawyers" that cost over $3 million. Oh wait, she didn't.
Saul Goodman wasn't available.
28
Trumps Defense Team = People way past their “ sell by “ dates carrying heavy baggage, inexperienced trial lawyers and political hacks.
The “ base “ will eat it up. Just like the “ lawyers “ they see on TV...
12
Dershowitz, the man who uses the patently fantasist “ticking time bomb scenario” to justify legalizing torture. He and Trump and just perfect together.
10
@RGT
It was John Yoo who provided the legal rationale for torture in GW Bush administration. He is currently a law professor and director at UC Berkley law school.
Great stuff for SNL!
15
... Because nothing screams "innocent" like hiring one of the country's top criminal attorneys.
5
Just when you thought things couldn't get any slimier...
21
Trump's "legal team" reads like a rogues gallery of disgraced lawyers.
With Starr's years-long fishing expedition against Clinton leading only to proof of consensual sexual contact and his conveniently looking the other way at Baylor as football players sexually assaulted women added to Dershowitz's obvious decline as an attorney coupled with his worrisome relationship with Epstein and the many allegations of Dershowitz's inappropriate sexual relationships with underage girls, you have to wonder, 'Is this the past Trump could get?'
(When you're as guilty, and as stubbornly impulsive, as Trump is, the answer is yes)
14
Oh great let's add 2 brilliant men that sold their souls many years ago to the team that will "defend"the biggest grifter ever to reach the highest office of our country.
17
One solution to all of this mess would be a constitutional amendment requiring that the president and vice president must resign from any party affiliation while in office.
No attending political rallies, no fund raisers for their party's candidates, no secret meetings with party leaders.
The president is supposed to be doing the business of the people, not the business of a political party.
12
I read the Starr report report when it came out. To see his name again representing Trump is like reliving the horror of it all again. It is worth noting that Brett Kavanaugh wrote parts of the Starr report, and it was highlighted during his hearings from the Supreme Court, that he proposed very lewd and sexually descriptive language for the Starr Report. If anything goes to the Supreme Court, look how it is all stacked now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/07/11/brett-kavanaugh-trump-and-what-the-starr-report-says-about-impeachment-annotated/
10
" Mr. Trump told interviewers that Mr. Starr was a “wacko” and a “lunatic.” So Trump now wants this acclaimed sexologist to be part of his defense team. Not long ago, Lindsey also described Trump as a choice between taking poison or shooting oneself. Can stranger things happen?
13
Alan Dershowitz is a publicity hound which explains why he is
defending Trump. He claims he is doing it to protect the Constitution because the words "high crimes and misdemeanors" do not appear in the impeachment articles. However, the Government Accountability Office said that Trump broke the law by withholding the money from the Ukraine so Trump's act qualifies as a misdemeanor.
7
Adding Ken Starr is so over the top but it does serve to remind us that Republicans tried to impeach a President for lying about having sex with an intern. Seems silly now, right. So how can they ignore or minimize an actual crime like withholding aid to a country for a political favor (an investigation of a former US Vice President at that - shocking). The bottom line here for me is that the Senate has too much power (and is totally corrupt). The people are no longer represented by Congress -- our democracy is in free fall and there is no integrity left to save it.
9
A 3 letter word: Sex, in our world seems to carry more peril than any known explosive; not only is it avoided but more often than not prohibited for its capacity to excite.
Sex associated to Barr or Dershowitz seems more related to scent like a scandalous perfume. It precedes them like a fanfare.
2
Except for Trump. GOP= ends justify the means.
Kudos to whichever aide somehow managed to talk Trump out of putting Perry Mason on the team
10
Dershowitz will certainly add his usual quota of fog to the proceedings. How ironic to see Starr in there after his shameful past.
4
I hope he lawyers have taken into consideration Trump's usual method for settling bills - accept a few cents for each dollar you charge or go and sue me!
7
what's this going to cost the American Taxpayer?
5
Gee, news flash: Kenneth Starr isn't non-partisan.
6
@Everyman
Newsflash: Lawyers aren't supposed to be non-partisan. That's the point.
1
As an aside, we now need an update on the dizzying who’s who of trump associates in jail or being tried for crimes, not forgetting that the impeachment process is being held against a backdrop of Trump’s associates falling like dominoes.
5
I read a handful of the comments to this news story and added to other comments from other stories over the past several months and have reinforced may assessment that the once proud Democrats who represented the working man and stood on the forty yard line of political issues ready to compromise has now become the party of hatred. Hatred to the point that if one disagrees with them they turn to viscous slander to make their point. They have tarnished their party and more than likely haven't realized what they have done and how long it will take to regain the respect they once had. Even if they achieve their goals to impeach the president or to gain political control it will take a generation or more to gain any kind of recognition as a serious member of Americas political landscape.
This commentary comes from an 81 year old, registered as an Independent, and born before the 2nd world war. Gone are the days when the President and the Speaker of the House from different parties could share a drink at the end of the day. Compromise and understanding are words that have left the lexicon and replaced with" If you see them in a restaurant or a gas station confront them and tell them they are not wanted".
No my fellow Americans I fully expect to be admonished for my comments here but that will not change what you have turned into. Ask yourselves this question...When was the last time you had a serious discussion with a member of an opposing party on any opposing issue ?
4
@Fred I won't admonish you. I was raised to treat others with respect no matter who they are or what they believe.
In my opinion, the concept of bipartisanship or compromise died when the current Senate leader decided not to consider any judicial nominees from the Obama Administration, send them to committee or put them to a vote. The laws of this country says president appoints all federal judges, the Senate considers and confirms. No Supreme Court nominee was just blocked, never sent to committee and never sent for a floor vote (absent a scandal where the nominee withdrew -- like Fortas). He also refuses to send for debate or floor vote any legislation that addresses serious problems we all face.
Compromise and bipartisanship depend on a faithful, trustworthy partners.
6 of the 17 senators serving on the House Judiciary Committee that voted out articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon were Republicans. I think we can safely say that we aren't working that way now.
And I'd remind you that for every angry liberal, there is an angry MAGA supporter calling us "libertards", etc. Chanting to "lock someone up" or "deport them" (including citizens of the US elected to public office)!
It would be awfully nice to live in a country where people of goodwill work towards a common goal of making this country a better place for all of us. But I'm not holding my breath. Because I am talking to people of different views all the time. But that goes both ways.
7
Your comment is very one-sided if it only mentions the hatred of Democrats. Perhaps examine the other side of the issue.
5
I’ve had a number of such conversations. Have you?
2
I have heard Alan Dershowitz glibly assert in radio interviews that there are no grounds for impeaching Trump because he did not "commit a crime." But this sidesteps the framers' fundamental rationale for putting impeachment into the Constitution, which is to hold a president accountable for abuses of power. As Madison, Hamilton, Mason et al saw it, a crime might be involved as a reason for impeachment, but the critical point is that an abuse of power need not be a crime. You would think that a former Harvard professor of law would know better.
14
With Kenneth Starr on board of Trump’s defence team, Democrats have all the justification to call on key witnesses like John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney etc. to testify, even if Republicans try to block new witness testimony.
In arguing for witnesses, Democrats can point to the extraordinarily wide net for testimony that Starr cast in his five-year investigation of Clinton, which included interviews with ex-boyfriends of Lewinsky and the White House window washers.
It remains to be seen whether Starr and Alan Dershowitz will do Trump any good. Their own controversies could overshadow their efforts to defend him.
5
@J. von Hettlingen
You are confused. Starr's investigation preceded the impeachment of Clinton; it was not part of it. Pointing to Starr's broad investigation as a reason for allowing more evidence in Trump's impeachment trial makes no sense. Especially since, like the Starr investigation preceded Clinton's impeachment, so did Mueller's investigation precede Trump's impeachment.
1
No doubt Trump adding such Starr power to his legal teal will be enough to push the proceedings to a sweeps-month-level ratings boost.
James Madison can surely rest easy for eternity now, knowing his proverbial "tragedy and farce" have finally come to pass.
2
I thought that no self-respecting lawyer would take on this case, and then the news that these two had stepped up. Now I'm sure that no self-respecting lawyer is taking on this case! (As a member of the Bar ... I'm grossly embarrassed by both of them.)
15
I actually think Trump feels cheated out of a win by McConnell's public vow of bias. In Trump’s insecure mind, the more he loads up with ‘starr’ talent (pun intended) the more he can claim that his acquittal in the Senate (so assured that a team of high school debaters could defend him) was due to the strength of their case and the merits. Trump craves legitimacy, and has ever since the Russia tainted elections.
1
All the Trump enablers will be tainted by history, not that it would ever matter to them.
The country will be regained, and the mob won't win.
4
Lovely. And they're both connected to Epstein. How low can you go. We shall find out.
7
This does not bode well for the Democrats. They are not going to have this trial their way. There are only two ways available: either no witnesses or all witnesses (that's is including both Bidens and others). Neither is good for the Democrats. They will lose this battle and bad. So brace yourself up.
1
@Gennady
How about we treat this just like the Nixon and Clinton impeachments, have a fully televised trial and we can all see and judge the credibility of those testifying? A full trial with direct testimony and cross-examination and all of us can see and judge for ourselves what evidence the Senate relies on.
It's worked twice during my lifetime.
3
The Biden’s have nothing to do with whether Trump abused his power or committed obstruction of justice. Even if the Biden’s are guilty as sin of whatever crime you have dreamt up for them, Trump still abused his presidential power and committed obstruction and should be impeached.
4
@KKW
Nixon was not impeached; there was no trial.
2
These has-beens are perfect for Trump's team. Like Trump and Rudy and Bill Barr, they're all old privileged men trying desperately to stay relevant. I have faith that the country will survive their corrupt attempts to hold on to power. We are better than this!
3
Trump did more than blackmail for a favor, or quid pro quo; millions for an investigation. Being that Ukraine is in grave danger from Russia to the east where Crimea has already been taken, Trump took advantage of the young Zelensky's fear of Russian invasion to get his political investigation. It was more than blackmail, it was aiding the enemy, Russia.
4
Dershowitz fails to see that the House, in acting on its role in drafting impeachment articles, is in no way creating any Constitutional 'precedent'. It is merely acting on what the Founders foresaw and created as a mechanism to remove a corrupt/malfeasant President.
It is Congress' place, not Mr. Dershowitz's, to determine the terms of indictment and act thereon. His 'opinion' on the matter has no bearing.
4
@dmckj
Just plain wrong. Why don't you let the lawyers handle the legal stuff, and you can take care of the maple syrup?
2
Robert Ray, the fellow who took over from Starr and wrote that voyeuristic report (remember the detailed account of the stains on that dress), has already published his arguments against impeachment in Time last month:
https://time.com/5720748/impeachment-trump-flawed-legal-theory/
Perhaps he already knew he would be on the team then? It certainly was a good chance for him to push the narrative, as a supposedly expert independent columnist.
He argues that an explicit quid pro quo cannot be proven, therefore no 'high crimes and misdemeanours' occurred. He forgets the non-cooperation of several key witnesses prevented obtaining evidence.
6
Step right up, step right up! the Greatest Show on Earth is about to begin and you do not, I repeat, do not want to miss one second of this spectacle. We have an all star cast of heroes and and demons, the good the bad and the ugly. Never before in the history of this planet has there been such intense, I say intense, interest in a story as yet still unfolding. No pushing, no shoving please, there is room for all. Come one come all for the greatest story ever to be told.
What? Trump makes a "perfect" phone call to Ukraine and the next thing one finds out is that he needs a large team of heavyweight lawyers to defend himself.
Perhaps he's finally in a place where he has to deal with something that everyone else with a functioning brain knows.
3
Donald Trump must allow witnesses at his Impeachment Trial in the Senate. Trump tells all the Republicans what to do;so it is really his decision. If the Senate does a lightning fast ;"Trump is innocent " with no witnesses;America will always know it was a whitewash; ignoring facts to get a pre determined innocence. For Trump's own good; he should allow witnesses or forever have a huge cloud hanging over him; and all his Republican allies. Ray Sipe Dist 18. Florida
1
When Chief Justice Roberts swore in senators yesterday for the start of Trump’s impeachment trial, he asked them to say two key words: impartial justice.
Just weeks ago—and in direct conflict with the oath he took yesterday— Senate Majority Leader McConnell said just the opposite: “I’m not an impartial juror.” He and his Republican allies in the Senate continue to oppose calls for witness testimony in the trial, despite the fact that doing “impartial justice” means hearing witness testimony and seeing all relevant documents. It means conducting a fair trial.
The need for witness testimony and evidence is indisputable, especially after the damning allegations that emerged this week in Lev Parnas’ interview with Rachel Maddow and the finding by the Government Accountability Office that the Trump administration broke the law by withholding security assistance aid to Ukraine.
Senators must and should summon witnesses and demand demand previously denied government communications bearing on impeachment. Only then will the Senate be fulfilling its constitutional duty and responsibility. Anything less is an abdication of its responsibility and a dereliction of its duty.
The Senate is on trial just as much as Trump is.
Every senator swore an oath to do impartial justice. Will they keep it? Or is an oath simply an empty gesture with no meaning or consequence?
2
I was thinking just now, 3:25 pm
A predictable argument is that the rich always get away with murder because they pay for the best lawyers. Did Starr or Dershowitz ever do much pro bono work? If Dershowitz really believes first in the Constitution? Would he serve one rich man's interests over hundreds of millions of Americans?
1
@PATRICK
Profound insight. Just because Trump can somehow pay doesn't mean either one is obligated to take on this particular case.
This just gets more and more like a circus side show.
Dershowitz and Starr have more ‘baggage’ than Trump. I guess they are there mostly to go on talk-shows.
This whole administration has been like a very bad reality show - Trump is the celebrity Apprentice President - time to face the ‘Board Room’ and be FIRED!
1
Well now, just how much legal horsepower does it take to defend lawsuit before a frivolous senate?
1
It would be useful to update this story to include the fact that Ken Starr was fired from his job at Baylor University for mishandling the investigation of the sexual assaults by Baylor football players, some of whom were later convicted. Mishandling is a polite word for shielding the football players. That such a person is on the floor of the US Senate during an impeachment trial is an insult to Americans in the #MeToo era who care about justice.
53
Starr? LOL
Dershowitz? Wasn't he connected to Jeffrey Epstein?
31
@Richard Marcley
I think the accusation was that he was literally connected to someone not of age. Epstein facilitated.
4
@Richard Marcley
Look up BAYLOR. And look up Starr.
4
Getting the band back together
6
"More recently, Mr. Dershowitz has faced questions about his representation of Jeffrey Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender who committed suicide in a New York City jail in August."
Should be: More recently, Mr. Dershowitz has faced questions about repeatedly raping one of Epstein's many child victims, due to a welter of evidence pointing to his guilt and outlandish inconsistencies in his story.
28
Ken Starr or Alan Dershowitz, doesn't matter no match for the heavy hitters Nancy Pelosi brought out....NONE.
6
Democrats should call Maria Farmer and Virginia Giuffre as character witnesses for defense attorney Alan Dershowitz.
They know him rather intimately.
30
Just IMAGINE a juror during jury selection baldly stating they will vote to acquit before the trial even starts.
In what alternate universe would such a juror EVER be allowed to participate in the trial?
Our system is a bad joke from beginning to end. It was designed BY the corrupt, FOR the corrupt. Period.
23
@VoiceofAmerica "Manifest destiny" is a belief that the US should conquer the world.
Let Mr. Dershowitz be on notice that the American people fully understands the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" and the right of every defendant to a vigorous defense, but...
A lawyer still has an obligation to the truth, and is prohibited from lying, dissembling, misrepresenting to benefit a client, and NO sophistry or distortion will be tolerated. Any statement attaching a subject to a a predicate to in the form of a declarative (as opposed to an interrogative) sentence must be objectively, verifiably true, according to what you know to be the evidence. A question is a question, a declaration is a declaration; do not conflate (thus exploiting ambiguity and equivocation) these by uttering questions as declarations/facts, nor the latter as the former. Be explicit, clear, and unequivocal in everything you say or ask.
You will be accountable for everything you say, be it in the form of a question or a declaration (which in every case must be strictly, verifiably true). If you ever must present a theoretical proposition, it must be 100% clear *and explicit* that it is merely a theoretical proposition, as opposed to a confirmed fact.
You must never use histrionics or tone to achieve rhetorical effects blurring any of the above distinctions.
You may do your job providing a vigorous defense, but if you depart one iota from these standards, resorting to lawyerly tricks or sophistry of any kind, you are **personally** responsible and accountable.
4
@Andrew: Lawyers are supposed to be "officers of the court" who do not burden the the system with matters of law they should be able to explain to clients before taking their money.
2
Who pays for Trump's attorneys hired to defend him during the impeachment trial? Trump pay? Taxpayers?
9
Every defendant is entitled to the best possible defense.
3
@Charles Becker
Fair enough, but these three??! The day irony died.
1
Sometimes it is best to cop a plea.
1
So Mr. Starr thinks getting fellated in the oval office and lying about it is grounds for impeachment, but enriching yourself on taxpayer dollars in violation of the constitution and undermining the sanctity of the 2020 election is fine?
The depths of GOP hypocrisy never cease to amaze.
60
@EMT
It gets better than that. Starr went out of his prurient, self-righteous way to *uncover* the consensual sex that took place in the Oval Office, but went out of his way to *conceal* the non-consensual sexual assault that was happening at Baylor.
How I remember Whitewater and how much I hated Starr!
I still do.
Ken Starr is a disgrace to the legal profession as are all of the defense team in this impeachment process.
While the subject of the impeachment by law is entitled to defense, guilt is clear, making any defense implicitly and politically reprehensible. Ken Starr long ago showed himself as willing to play dirty to attain an ill-founded political goal. He can be expected to repeat his crafty but biased maneuvers.
12
Some people will do anything for money and fame.
14
This must be why when I saw Dershowitz last night on Hannity he said the GAO’s report had it totally backward and it was the House that was wrong, not Trump who had every right to block the Ukraine military aid money for policy reasons. Anybody can say anything I suppose.
10
Money talks and both of these legal shills heel. They have no decency.
13
Both of these guys (Dersh & Starr) are relegated to `ambulance chaser' status.
Dersh is stooping to defending the likes of Epstein and Weinstein after his headlining in doubting DNA evidence in the Simpson trial.
Starr couldn't miss with the evidence on Lewinsky's dress. (can you imagine Trump giving up samples for comparison?) More recently he was booted from Baylor over his mishandling of sexual assault cases.
9
Ken Starr knows Trump is guilty. I even saw him comment on Fox that "Trump really covered his tracks well." These guys take cases just to win, self-promote, and make money when they don't need to. They're verging on sociopathic.
13
If the impeachment is a hoax, why bring in a legal team? Just asking for a friend.
16
Whatever their baggage might be the addition of Starr and Ray indicate that at least someone in the White House understands that a Senate impeachment trial is not a “hoax” but is a real thing.
I suspect the republicans will use Dershowitz at the end of the trial where the evidence will clearly show Trump is guilty of the articles but they can then hide behind Dershowitz’s proclamation that such behavior does not rise to Constitutional high crimes & misdemeanors.
338
@Mr. Bantree
I respectfully disagree. I believe that the only thing the addition of Starr and Ray indicates is that Trump wants the trial coverage to include as much talk about the Clinton impeachment as possible.
42
@Mr. Bantree "...evidence will clearly show Trump is guilty...but they can hide behind Dershowitz's proclamation that such behavior does not rise to Constitutional high crimes & misdemeanors." Therefore the democratic nominee for president can place a call to the PM of Canada, the President of France, the President of China (all of whom will be happy to sling any dirt they have on Trump to help the dem candidate win.) And it can be all out in the open, since the Republicans are OK with this, right? A brand new world we live in.
45
@Mr. Bantree ,
Yeah, obstruction of Congress and justice. Just a slap on the wrist.
14
I come to these sites and to the comment section to see a variety of opinions. So I don't know whether almost everyone commenting in this piece are all liberal-thinking or all just hate Donald Trump.
I myself don't hate Donald Trump. Didn't vote for him and won't vote for him in the next election, but I am trying to discern if all the comments I am reading are "hand-picked" by the NY Times or is almost everyone in this comment section a sounding board for liberals?
I have read a number of comments but have not seen one that voices a different view from the rest.
A little depressing when the comment sections of "The Paper of Record" becomes an echo chamber.
4
It’s not a echo chamber if it’s True.
2
It’s not an echo chamber and there are plenty of people from every political persuasion here. Including no shortage of trolls and bots. But there has been a change in attitude lately, not just here but also on Twitter. Trump’s diehards haven’t changed at all, but most of the people in the middle have had enough of Trump.
Based on your comment it sounds like you have some kind of bias against liberals. I wish more Americans would worry about the future of the nation and less about their personal pet peeves and personal political alliances.
I also wish everyone would stop using the word hate. I’ve been accused of it. I don’t love him, I don’t like him, but I don’t hate him. His behavior scares me.
As for him personally, I feel sorry for him. He’s looks and sounds ill. The GOP and the right are using him, and will abandon him completely when he doesn’t serve their purpose any longer. He’s completely in over his head. He crosses boundaries that presidents are not supposed to cross because he doesn’t know where the boundaries are. He’s not capable of keeping himself out of trouble and is not eager to take advice from those who can. It’s painful to watch.
We need a capable president. This one is not.
7
@Rozie James It all sounds the same because everyone sees the same thing: the truth.
3
Even if Trump is guilty of an impeachable offense half the country doesn't care. I actually heard someone refer to an impeachment as some type of an award or metal since Trump is only the 3rd president to get one. Trump at this very moment has speech writers whipping up a comical narrative about how Democrats salivated for 3 years only to find out they were denied, not only in public opinion but also in the courts. As I mentioned from a previous post I have also heard that he is going to coordinate a rally at the same time as a Democratic primary debate so he can live stream it to his crowd all while making live commentary. I can only assume to rally his base. The lawyers Trump has chosen are great indeed and are selected to examine the Bidens, Schiff and the whistleblower should the Democrats keep pushing the witness issue. And yes we should pay for this since it was a sham from the beginning.
3
Who's paying for all this legal 'advice'? And why does he need this much firepower for a "hoax" or a trial with potentially no witnesses or evidence?
7
Because this is America.
Having sex with an intern and lying about it.
Asking a foreign government to investigate a political rival (in order to influence an American election), withholding Congressionally-approved military funding (until the quid pro quo is revealed), and obstructing any investigation into the matter.
Kenneth Starr never had any integrity. But judging from those two crimes, only one rises to removal from office.
11
I can’t believe I have to despise Ken Starr all over again. I’m so tired.
27
Showtime, ladies and gentlemen. Dershowitz and Starr are celebrity attorneys, which means they perform like carnival barkers at county fairs. "Come inside the tent, and I'll show you a President of the United States, all dressed up and shiny."
None of these defense attorneys will argue the facts, of course. It will all be mis-direction and red herrings, card tricks and smoke, Robert Redford and Paul Newman in "The Sting." If either of these two were Constitutional attorneys, they wouldn't be caught dead representing the Main Grifter. The only question is who is paying their exorbitant fees: Trump (no); the RNC (not likely); taxpayers (BINGO).
14
Too bad they can't bring back Johnny Cochran. He at least had some style.
9
Andy Kaufman, rest in peace, is somehow behind this.
14
Laugh out funny! Thank you for a light moment at an otherwise dismal time.
1
I doubt anything will come of this as long as the Senate marches in lockstep.
Let this at least drain his coffers. Add more lawyers please.
3
Alan and Trump have a lot of things in common. They both liked to party with Epstein.
16
Question: Why would someone sully their reputation?
Answer: Everything Starr has done in his life ends this way.
10
Obviously the days are over when lawyers were admired for taking on controversial cases and unpopular causes.
4
At least you admit that defending Trump is an unpopular cause. That’s better than pretending that most of America supports the creep.
1
The laws in these United States are so great, that, if one is innocent, one does not need a flotilla of lawyers to prove as such.
13
Is Starr on the team to prove that impeachment always fails? To solidify the links between Trump and Epstein (a tag-team job with "I kept my underwear on" Dershowitz)? Or to mark his failure to address the sexual assaults by the Baylor football team while he was president of the university?
15
Ken Starr seems like a very bad choice, strategically. Two obvious questions for him:
1. Why did you advocate for impeaching Clinton for lying about an affair, but you claim Trump's actions aren't impeachable?
2. Why did you interview everyone for the Clinton case--including Monica Lewinsky's hairdresser--but won't interview anyone for this case?
Alan Dershowitz's--and Ken Starr's--credibility is also hugely questionable given their decision to represent Jeffrey Epstein.
41
Trump asking people who defended guilty sex offenders sounds about right.
30
At least we can rest assured that in this case, the glove WILL fit. But it's also clear that senate republicans would still support the murderous little dictator even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, or, say, assassinated a foreign national in contravention of US and international law, or locked thousands of children in cages and chased away their parents. Americans can't tell the difference between TV and real life any longer, and republicans have become good at exploiting the faithful's penchant for make-believe. What a horrid nation of dupes the USA has become. FOX Entertainment is at the core of this brainwashing idiocracy.
15
These selections are about theatrics and distraction - more of the same strategy that continues to work for Trump. And we all gobble it up. He's a lunatic, marketing genius.
7
Have Dershowitz and Starr been informed? Trump has a way of blurting and Tweeting his major decisions while enthroned.
8
This will be a kangaroo court complete with clowns.
13
@Technic Ally you’re a genius this will be a great cartoon
3
Starr? Really? Didn't understand high crimes and misdemeanors and was thoroughly unconvincing in 1999, and couldn't understand how to do the right thing at Baylor. And Dershowitz the alleged child molester? Both wreak arrogance. They'll convince nobody. And I assume there is no way now Sekulow will take the lecture. He'd have to explain how Parnas is under the umbrella of Presidential immunity while simultaneously someone the President refuses to acknowledge is in his orbit.
8
The real question is who is paying Dershowitz? I doubt it is Trump.
6
@Dave Allan -- We taxpayers are.
I'll add mine to the cacophony of voices venting disdain for these two ignoble menaces.
I place them in the same league as war criminals like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. Only this time, Dershowitz and Starr's gutter sleaze factor is a war-and-crime on morality and human decency.
These two cannot pass up the chance to bask in a tangerine-glow of the lowest common denominator of humanity- in fact, their new client is a perfect match for their skill-sets: Experts at mishandling truth.
Thus, they have found their perfect political Epstein and OJ.
6
Dershowitz will go down in history as the man who defended OJ, Jeffrey Epstein, Klaus von Bulow, Harvey Weinstein and Donald J. Trump. He should be ashamed of his legacy.
39
If Trump is acquitted, all future US presidents will have a power of an emperor, and the democracy will be dead. Is Trump really worth it for GOP?
9
@Marco please explain how trump would be emperor
1
@Marco
This is what conservatives have dreamed of for 200 years!
3
@CD Marco didn't say that Trump would be an emperor. He said that future presidents will have greater powers that endanger democracy. His point is valid, and easy to interpret.
2
Dershowitz and Starr were both involved in Jeffery Epstein’s defense. Dershowitz was even named as a suspect by a couple of Epstein’s victims. Starr had to resign as president of Baylor University for failing to address rape and sexual assault.
If the Democrats had lawyers with these backgrounds, there is no doubt the Republicans and their Fox News allies would be raising it non-stop at every chance. So what will the Democrats do?
22
Nothing. There are fighters who would stop this charade but those aren’t in position in this game.
1
Perfect. Saves me the time for posting the same thoughts.
1
@S. Jackson Most news media talk about only bad Trump except Breibart and Fox. I feel good about bipartisan game playing at random fell as a salaciousness in public eye.
Humm, maybe we should judge Trump by the company he keeps.
Alan Dershowitz, known for being Jeffrey Epstein lawyer as well as house guest.
Ken Starr left his post at Baylor after complaints he mishandled sexual assault complaints involving football players.
9
@Ben P
You forgot to mention trumps "mo", Roy Cohn!
3
Republican senators apparently have no shame and no loyalty to anything except their personal power and money. They should be ashamed vowing impartiality while saying, and knowing, the fix is in. I never knew how weak our system of government was until these lawless Republican senators became powerful.
12
@PatriotDem Who one votes for counts. Not voting is equivalent to voting for the opponent.
4
Unless they confiscate control of Trump’s twitter account and cancel his rabid rallies it doesn’t matter who tries to defend him.
I used to plead that twitter shut him off but now I say let him tweet tweet tweet.
4
Trump doesn't know that India has a border with China,
but he does understand TV. He is such an egomaniac,
I'm sure he even wants his embarrassing trial to be entertaining.
5
Trump is obviously guilty.
9
Is Fox going to cover the trial?
Or are they only the exclusive advertiser?
9
The nightmare team
14
How much longer until these guys get the moniker “Dream Team II”?
3
I like to think that Kenneth Starr will be like a tabula rasa for Putin the Russian. And he won’t even know it.
5
Mr. Dershovitch more recently was involved with the human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. He was apparently a client or guest at Epstein's various parties that featured children (or underaged-women as the media likes to describe them) for sexual service to rich men.
14
This is when everyone who cares should be protesting at the Capital... starting today.
8
@whipsnade Unfortunately this is not France or Hong Kong. Americans won't get off the couch.
1
A fitting choice for President Trump. He chose well. The perenially pious and loathesome Kenneth Starr, who shamelessly covered up for sexual predators at Baylor University as its former President, (some of that school 's football players have since been incarcerated) and world class sleaze Alan Dershowitz. Both were also paid defenders and apologists for Jefferey Epstein, proven abuser of underage girls. We never really knew the man who who relentlessly pursued Bill Clinton over consensual sex did we? But now we do. And now he is back to defend a morally bent President. The "moral majority party" and its evangelical enablers just keep winning, don't they? And to think that Starr and Dershowitz are the kind of perverted legal ilk that often recommend and offer the rest of us musings on who should sit on the country's Supreme Court. Nothing succeeds like success, I suppose.
12
Starr and Dershowitz have a long record of not being interested in the truth. Starr is a lifetime rank partisan. Dershowitz is a lifetime publicity hound, just like Mayor Rudy. How appropriate that these two will be defending the most-documented liar of human history.
13
More cess in the trump pool.
20
Is this a joke?
6
Trump's legal team might as well be labeled Raging Bull.
4
Let the circus begin! Dershowitz!
5
isn't Alan Dershowitz a pedophile? why would anyone want him on their defense team...oh, right, the president is likely a pedophile as well.
21
Why did he add a pedophile to his defense team?
13
@Matt Jones Equal opportunity employer.
5
Because he can’t have Bill Barr defend him, at least in this trial. I’d bet money he tried.
2
@Matt Jones No one watching Fox will ever know this.
What an ugly bunch of people.
15
Dershowitz involved with defending pedophiles...
11
Prepare for O.J. 2.0. Dershowitz and Starr are the new F. Lee Bailey and Johnnie Cochran. They will make a mockery out of the justice system and tarnish our constitution yet again. This "trial" is shaping up to be another colossal farce with a preordained verdict of "not guilty". The only question remaining will be whether Americans vote innocent or guilty in November. Step Right Up to the great American circus!
5
I wonder how much Alan and Ken's hourly fees will be? What additional charges they add as expenses including personnel?
Will Trump include those fees in financial disclosure when he reveals his personal and business tax returns? He "forgot" to include the Stormy Daniel payoff obligation.
Will they reveal full itemized accounting of the Trump family Secret Service and family perks, profits and charges since 2016?
4
Parallels continue to be drawn. Yet, there is no comparison. What Bill Clinton did and even what Richard Nixon did pales in comparison to what Donald Trump has done, is doing, and with high probably will continue to do if acquitted.
5
I'd love to be proven wrong but the Republican majority in the Senate were broadcast on live TV LYING to the American public and the world when they collectively swore to be impartial jurors to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Before and after the procedure to open the Senate trial, they collectively voiced their support for McConnell and his proclamation that no witnesses would be called and that he was coordinating efforts with the White House.
So we can see that 45 could have a first year law student as lead council and it would be the same. A circus and total disregard for the constitution, the will of the people, and Congressional decorum.
Embarrassing time in history to be an American.
4
My Republican senator Pat Toomey's office confirms he will listen to opening arguments from both sides before deciding whether he should vote yes or no on Senate witnesses. Sounds like the party line. Schiff et al have better oratorical skills and evidentiary knowledge.
5
All Democrat senators running in the Democrat primary have stated, on a debate stage no less, that they support Trump’s impeachment and removal for office.
Why are they expected to be “fair jurors,” and shouldn’t they recuse themselves considering their votes to convict will help their campaigns?
2
I’ll accept that, assuming that McConnell and pretty much the entire Republican caucus, who have similarly declared their intention to be anything but impartial, do the same.
6
All the GOP can do is smear the witnesses, the Democrats, and the process itself. They know there is no actually defending Trump.
1
@RGT
They are not running for office against President Trump.
1
Add anyone to the legal team you would like, the fix is in. Its the Republican Senators that will be the story. 67 votes could save our democracy, watch them try to save their jobs instead. Watch and remember.
6
This is all part of the larger hyper-Conservative / Republican plan and power grab to save the “downtrodden” (Right wing America)” from the less deserving.
I can hardly wait to see what the election cycle brings us.
1
People whose words and actions are memorialized in accessible public records should give come consideration to what their future descendants might think of them.
1
It doesn’t matter who is on 45* defense team, because he knows more than all his defense attorneys . They are there for show of force, “don’t mess with me” attitude.
Conventional wisdom suggests that anyone hitching his/her wagon to Trump is trashing their reputation. In selecting Dershowitz and Starr, Trump has selected two individuals who have already done that! But you wonder why any female would join Team Trump.
Now it's over to you, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Mitt, Senators Lee and Alexander- to defend the Constitution and the rule of law. American values or partisanship?
4
Is what's upsetting people here is that we are now going to have a fair trial? I see Dershowitz on cable news all the time and he seems like a stand up guy to me. From the soundbites I don't think he believes his client is guilty of anything. I'm pretty sure I heard the word patriot used.
1
Stand up guy. Hilarious. Google his position on legalizing torture.
Was Judge Judy unavailable? She has far more TV time than those other legal hacks, not to mention higher ratings. Doesn't that, ipso facto, mean she's more qualified?
4
Maggie, why didn't you mention that Kenneth Starr was also part of the defense team that got Epstein his sweetheart deal in Florida in 2008? I would think, as a highly competent reporter you wouldn't leave out such a cogent detail of the man's resume when you included Dershowitz's participation. I've observed that almost no reporter adds this detail when they report on him; all they mention is the Clinton case. Bizarre.
5
She did so. It’s in the article.
1
I get the joke, but it bothers me that Trump isn't taking this seriously, and Senate Republicans have proven he doesn't have to.
The only way to get rid of a corrupt president is with an election or an impeachment, and he's been impeached for abusing his power to corrupt the election.
Dictators aren't just above the law, they need to demonstrate there is no law. Like McConnell's behavior, it's intimidation by mocking those of us who still believe we live in a constitutional democracy.
3
Guess who Starr's deputy was while he was Solicitor General? That's right, John Roberts, now Chief Justice.
8
Reality TV star picks Central Casting comedy defense team.
2
Where is William Jennings Bryan when our leader really needs him?
Anyway, the more self-important windbags Trump has defending him, the longer this will go on, and the more likely the con men are to bumble and stumble.
Starr and Ray are salt in Democratic wounds - two people who hounded the Clintons for years until they got their "impeachable" offense.
trump lawyers are like mafia lawyers, law is not about justice, or “the spirit and intent of the law.” It is about manipulating the ambiguous characteristic of words to get around justice and the spirit and meaning of the law.
1
Trump still thinks this is a tv show, staging it with media ready personalities. Why should he worry about the rule of law when he can call on the gang to garble facts on Fox? Next up, Kanye.
5
And, who is paying for Trump's defense?
1
@Tim hopefully the same people that created this whole mess. The Democrats.
I believe the Senate is subject to certain legal rules regarding Impeachment. Due process is a Constitutional requirement in any trial. Is due process limited to the judicial Courts or to any gubernatorial entity acting as a Court, including the Senate. If not, is the Constitution violated? If so, can a Senator declare that he/she will not admit witnesses or listen openly to evidence?
1
due process is a right of the accused, not the accuser
2
The completely compromised and perhaps unconstitutional GOP strategy is an extension of the defense lawyers' goal to win acquittal even if their client is guilty. Justice, which is what most people think the legal system should be about, is not the court defense attorney's responsibility. But this is not a normal trial, but a trial for removal of an elected official. It is a trial for which the Senate is the jury, not a team of defense lawyers. MCConnell and his GOP backers for the most part understand this distinction, but do not care that their constitutional responsibility is to judge whether the defendant is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. They are sworn to be impartial, yet some have already publicly stated that they have made up their minds before the trial, that they oppose hearing sworn testimony from witnesses,. Others have admitted that they are working in concert with the defendant's attorneys and other representatives. Should this not be considered unconstitutional activity, or at least a mockery of the US Constitution? The statements of McConnell, Graham, Paul and others of their ilk make this trial sound more like something out of a movie about organized crime rather than the solemn business of defending this republic from those who would reject the ideas and ideals of the Founders of the Nation and the Framers of the Constitution.
12
@Harvey Green: It really is touching to see just how little justice matters to people who preach that it only happens after death.
1
Dershowitz's high-profile client list:
O.J. Simpson
Jeffrey Epstein
Harvey Weinstein
Donald J Trump
I think this needs no further explanation
73
We’re you ever accused you would love to add your name to that list.
As much as I despise Trump, and condemn his ways, nonetheless he is entitled to his defense and counsel of his choosing.
If he deems it to be his best strategy to select these personalities then it should be respected. Accepting that principle is what makes us strong.
3
@Rob Nothing trump does is worthy of respect. NOTHING!
6
Trump should testify, otherwise it’s just a plan to give him 4 more years.
4
@Rob: One easily gets the measure of someone from those they choose to represent themselves.
3
Given the way Trump never addresses mistakes or bad decisions openly and sincerely, and how he tries to represent every outcome as a success, these two men will conform perfectly with Trump's wishes. Prepare to hear both repeating the President's misrepresentations and evasions.
5
Well, this is good. Thank god DJT is stuck in the past and not very, how should we put it, on the ball. Bringing in these ghosts from the past is clearly going to help his case - not. Even slightly less alert people will hopefully notice that defending the president now when you have tried to impeach another (of opposite political color) for lesser offenses is so obviously questionable that even if senate votes to keep Trump in office, he will fly out of the WH after the election to face the multitude of trials that await him after.
3
The necessary contortions of logic here are making my head hurt. Dershowitz I can at least understand. He has a history of defending all sorts of people often turning to rights and process and precedent. I can see a logical Trump defense based on these types of principles. But Starr? In the Clinton investigation, he followed every path, uncovered every misdeed and pursued whatever transgression. Apply these tactics to Trump and there would be 50 articles of impeachment.
12
Interesting that the team to defend him from a claim of abuse of power, was itself either directly involved in abuse of power over underage girls or involved in covering up and protecting the practice of such abuse.
11
Trump did this for show only. These are TV lawyers, hired to put on a show, not defend Trump based on facts. It's the first episode of Trump TV's "Impeachment Apprentice" ,a Mark Burnett production!
6
1. Each time a GOP member of Congress lies about the importance of hearing new relevant discoveries...
2. Each time the president says "I don't know this man/woman"...
3. Each time members of his administrations say "to the best of my knowledge, I don't recall"...
Each time, I suggest reporters and politicians fighting for our democracy take a lesson from boxing and "rope a dope." Just how do you do that in this context? It's simple...
1. "So Senator Graham, you don't think we should hear any further evidence. Assuming that to be true, in what other areas of your work at congress are you not looking for more evidence that might benefit your assessment of critical situations? Isn't that a part of your duties as a Senator?"
2. "So President Trump doesn't know a man who he has taken several photos with and spoke with on at least a few occasions. Assuming this to be true, what do you suppose that means about all those people he takes photos with at rallies? I guess they probably don't matter too much either..."
3. "So Mr. Pompeo, you don't recall learning hearing that one of your ambassadors might be under illegal surveillance. Given all that we know about these texts messages, I wonder about what other things you don't recall that might be putting our service members and diplomats in danger...
7
Can’t wait to hear all about the Biden’s !
It is indeed peculiar how the truth as we ordinary people see it, needs to be proved as lies by these two venerable lawyers. The difference between a great lawyer and a truthful public is probably based on perception. We see clearly, what there is before us, while they have perfected the art of looking for what it is they would like us to see. Two blind men leading the rest of the blinded republican Senate. Together they seek to deprive America and the world of their collective vision.
3
So now that Ken Starr is an official part of Team Trump, am I correct in assuming Stormy Daniels will now be called as a character witness?
15
It will be a spectacle to watch Starr & Graham category do a live 180-degree reverse on the senate floor. It still misses something to spice it up - probably a Newt? If this can invent and bring a Clinton to the mix, it will be a bonanza! This will be an excellent case study across many dimensions for generations - from legal to political to constitutional to morals to individuals!!
2
Ethical and competent legal advocates are not interested in pleasing the client but in providing the best legal advice and representation which they can provide. It's not that they do not appreciate the wishes and concerns of the client. But often what the client wants and what the law can provide are not the same, and that means disappointed clients. An attorney who seeks to gain from a client or to remain favored by the client is inclined satisfy the client's desires rather than the client's best interests legally.
Starr showed his partisanship in his pursuit of anything which may lead to Clinton being impeached. In the end, all he could find was a married man lying about adultery. Technically, Clinton obstructed justice by lying, but practically, he did nothing that violated his oath of office. Republicans wanted Clinton gone because his policies annoyed them, and for some reason they thought that their policies were the only possible right ones for the country, so Clinton was ruining their country. They were being silly. Starr will represent Trump because he is a Republican President.
Dershowitz has been excusing Trump's every act for three years, frequents Trump Florida retreat, and has been in Trump's social circle for a long time. He will represent Trump in order to make Trump happy.
6
If you think this is making headlines hold on tight!
I just read that Trump is going to hold a rally at the same time as an upcoming Democratic primary debate. He is going to live feed it into his rally and make live commentary to his crowd about the candidates. I wonder if that too will make headlines.
2
@RS...trump’s pep rally on primary day will be like all the other rallies. Geez, between tweeting, golf, rallies and “Fox and Friends”, one wonders how he finds time to scribble his Sharpie on what’s put in front of him.
If they're getting paid - wait, of course they're getting paid - the question by whom has been raised by many on this thread; it's a very fair question. If it's Trump personally, I hope they have a huge retainer because he ain't paying them after the fact. Especially if he's convicted or, most likely, it goes so badly that Lev Parnas shoots to the top of the Democratic ticket.
1
Here’s hoping that Ken Starr’s record of losing at impeachment trials continues.
6
This guarantees we will thankfully be spared the ridiculous theatrics of Jim Jordan who has been lobbying hard to be on the defense team.
4