Quantcast
Connect with us

Conservative pro-impeachment congressman explains why Democrats ‘made a strategic error’ by ignoring the major flaws in GOP witness Turley’s testimony

Published

on

Four legal scholars testified at the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment hearing on Wednesday: three of them argued in favor of impeachment (Pamela Karlan, Noah Feldman and Michael Gerhardt), while Prof. Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School argued against it. Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, a former Republican turned independent and right-wing proponent of impeaching President Donald Trump, analyzed Turley’s testimony in a December 5 thread on Twitter — outlining some flaws and asserting that House Judiciary Democrats made a mistake by not using those flaws to their advantage.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Democrats made a strategic error in not engaging more with Turley,” Amash posted. “They need to persuade people in the middle and missed an opportunity by spending most of their time questioning their experts rather than Turley, whose testimony was potentially most damaging to President Trump.”

Although Turley argued against impeaching Trump during his testimony, he made an effort to sound reasonable and pointed out that he didn’t vote for Trump in 2016. Moreover, Turley disagreed with Trump’s assertion that his July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was “perfect” — which is something that, according to Amash, House Democrats should have pounced on.

“Turley said Trump’s call was ‘anything but perfect,’” Amash tweeted. “Why didn’t Democrats ask him to expound on this? Turley also said impeachment might be justified with a complete record. They should have pressed him repeatedly on the White House’s responsibility for denying certain evidence.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Amash, in his Twitter thread, added, “Turley acknowledged that Trump’s actions were improper, potentially impeachable, and worthy of further investigation. Democrats failed to capitalize on these admissions from a GOP legal scholar because they were too busy obtaining less effective testimony from their own experts.”

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Another weakness of Turley’s testimony, according to Amash, was a failure to outline the different roles that the House of Representatives and the Senate have when it comes to impeachment. Articles of impeachment are handed down by the House, then passed along to the Senate to vote “guilty” or “not guilty.” The House doesn’t have the power to remove a president from office, only indict — while the Senate makes a determination of guilt or innocence and can only convict with a two-thirds majority. President Andrew Johnson and President Bill Clinton were both impeached by the House but acquitted in Senate trials.

“When making historical comparisons or discussing standards of proof, Prof. Turley, like Judiciary Republicans, consistently conflates impeachment in the House and trial in the Senate,” Amash tweeted. “The House simply *charges* impeachable offenses, and there’s clearly probable cause for charges.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

John Roberts caused a ‘crisis of democratic legitimacy’ — it’s ‘entirely fitting’ he has to preside over his mess: columnist

Published

on

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts was blasted in The Washington Post on Thursday for his culpability in creating the dynamics that resulted in President Donald Trump -- and his impeachment.

"There is justice in John Roberts being forced to preside silently over the impeachment trial of President Trump, hour after hour, day after tedious day," Dana Milbank wrote. "Roberts’s captivity is entirely fitting: He is forced to witness, with his own eyes, the mess he and his colleagues on the Supreme Court have made of the U.S. political system. As representatives of all three branches of government attend this unhappy family reunion, the living consequences of the Roberts Court’s decisions, and their corrosive effect on democracy, are plain to see."

Continue Reading

2020 Election

Democrats have a powerful case against Trump — but they keep making a key mistake

Published

on

On the floor of the Senate, House impeachment managers have delivered a thorough, factual and compelling case for removing President Donald Trump from office. He abused his power by using his office to induce Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into launching investigations of his political enemies, and then he obstructed Congress in its efforts to uncover the details of this scheme.

The managers’ ability to present the evidence for these charges for hours on end has been impressive, and they’re earning plaudits for their furtive efforts, even though removal of the president remains supremely unlikely.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Internet cheers as Val Demings lays out President Donald Trump’s wrongdoing in powerful speech

Published

on

On the third night of the impeachment trial, Rep. Val Demings (D-FL) stood up and forcefully laid out President Donald Trump's misconduct in Ukraine on the floor of the Senate.

Demings, a former police chief and a longtime voice for the president's removal, was roundly cheered on by commenters on Twitter:

I had never heard of Rep. Val Demings of Florida, until now on @NPR, but man, #valdemings for President. She was fantastic. Excellent speech. @RepValDemings #impeachment

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image