Jamie Raskin: Trump’s accusation against accusation amounts to ‘absurd constitutional arguments’

Jamie Raskin: Trump’s accusation against accusation amounts to ‘absurd constitutional arguments’

by

The Maryland Democrat’s comments on a caucus call Wednesday provide a preview of how House executives plan to stab the former president’s defense during next week’s hearing, while also voicing their argument that Trump was responsible for the incitement of the deadly riot at the Capitol on 6 January. Trump’s lawyer meanwhile said on Wednesday that the defense would focus on the ‘technical’ reasons why Trump should not be convicted and that he would avoid Trump’s false allegations of widespread election fraud.

Both the house management and Trump’s legal team filed preliminary legal orders on Tuesday ahead of the trial, which begins on February 9. Both parties are expected to submit another round of preliminary injunctions before the trial begins the next day.

Trump’s lawyers argued Tuesday that it is unconstitutional for the Senate to hold an indictment for a former president. Trump’s team also claims that the former president’s speech on election fraud does not incite the rioters and that it is protected by the first amendment. “The 45th president exercised his first constitutional right to amend his conviction that the election results were suspicious,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

But Raskin argued on the Democratic call that Trump’s remarks at a January 6 rally before the rioters attacked the Capitol were not the speech of the first amendment. His comments were not like screaming fire in a crowded theater, Raskin said, but like a fire chief, according to the source, sending a crowd to the theater.

Raskin adds to the call that extremist elements in Russia and Germany view the storming of the Capitol as a major victory for 21st century fascism.

In their indictment Tuesday, the House prosecution team rejected the constitutional argument that the Republicans of the Senate collapsed as a reason to acquit Trump, pointing to the Senate’s precedent for the trial of a former official and the fact that the house Trump is accused of while he is still in office.
Trump's prosecution lawyers have a history of involvement in controversial lawsuits

That will be one of the key questions at next week’s hearing, although Senate Republicans already indicated last week with a 55-45 process that they would highly unlikely condemn Trump.

However, House Democrats are preparing a complicated case to set out the events of January 6 and how Trump was ‘separately responsible’ for the deadly riot, in which one Capitol police officer was killed and dozens injured. This includes using video footage of the riots in the Capitol and showing how the insurgents said they were acting on behalf of the president.

Raskin told Democrats Wednesday that one Capitol police officer lost three fingers during the attack, and that someone was likely to lose his eye.

A ‘Technical’ defense

Trump’s attorney Bruce L. Castor, who spoke to the KYW News radio station in Pennsylvania on Wednesday, said he intends to focus on Trump’s’ technical ‘defense, and that he is not being pressured to’ trying to set up a defense that relies on Trump’s false and unfounded allegations of widespread election fraud.

“There are a lot of questions about how the election was conducted across the country, but that’s for another forum. I do not believe it is important to litigate in the Senate hearing because you do not need it,” Castor said. said.

“I said I was not going to drive the road,” he added. “Nobody put me under pressure. It has not even been discussed yet. I do not know where people have the idea that was a litmus test to defend the president. ‘

Of course, while the lawsuit that Castor and David Schoen filed Tuesday to defend the former president did not claim the election was stolen, it did, of course, include some of Trump’s false allegations about the election. The documentation in response to the House indictment alleges that “insufficient evidence exists that a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th president’s statements were accurate or not, and he denies that they were untrue.”

Senate Republicans have publicly warned Trump’s team not to try to argue election fraud during the trial. Texas Senator John Cornyn said this week it would be a “disfavor” for Trump’s defense.

Castor said the indictment plans to argue that the Senate does not have the jurisdiction to prosecute Trump because he is no longer in office, as well as that Trump’s speech on Jan. 6 before the riots in Capitol did not comply to the criminal definition of incitement and that it is protected by the first amendment.

‘Just because someone gave a speech and got people excited does not mean it’s the reason for the speakers; ‘it’s the people who got excited and did what they know are wrong that are guilty,’ Castor said. “That’s the focus we’re going to take.”

Questions threaten over next week’s trial

It is still unclear how long the Senate hearing will last – as Senate Democrats have hinted that they want a speedy hearing – as well as whether the House Democrats will call witnesses, such as someone before and during the president’s mindset and motivation can speak. the Capitol riots. The House’s description accuses Trump of ‘neglect of duty’ for failing to respond to the riots by activating the National Guard or calling out the insurgents attacking the Capitol.

“No idea,” Raskin said of how long the trial will last.

Asked if he believes it will include witnesses, Raskin said: “I think everything remains to be seen in the Senate.”

In his preference, Raskin said ‘justice’ when he entered the living room.

This story was updated on Wednesday with further developments.

.Source