Presidents Day, 2025

Protests were held in Cheyenne, and in Casper, today.

If Trump isn't demented, what is he?

I've consistently advocated the theory that Donald Trump has a rapidly progressing case of dementia, and I'll stand by it, even though I have no qualifications to maintain that at all.

But what if he isn't demented. How do you explain his behavior?

We'll take a look.

He's just stupid

This is a real possibility.

There's no real reason to believe that Trump is intelligent.  His success in business, which is often cited is pretty much based on his having inherited a vast amount of wealth.  As studies have shown, people who inherit a lot of money are likely remain wealthy no matter what.  It actually takes real effort for them to fall down into a lower economic class.

There's plenty of evidence that Trump is simply dumb.  He appears to say whatever floats through his head he adopts the views of people around him without thought, he asks questions of his aid that are really, well, dumb.

And really stupid people often tend to be either profoundly kind, or profoundly mean.  Trump seems to fit in to the latter category.  The nuances of morality that most people have require some degree of intelligence.  Trump simply lacks that, perhaps, so being really mean just comes naturally to him.

How then did he get to be President?

Well one thing is that people tend to assume that wealth equals smarts.  He has a lot of money, so he  must be smart, right?

Nope.

But as people tend to believe that, they tend also to fill in the blanks for the stupid person so that their support of him is rationalized.

In the past, we saw that a lot with sports.  Some sports figure may be as dumb as a box of rock, but as people want to idolize him, they make excuses for everything the person says or does.

And the entire celebrity worship thing in American culture is part of that.  People take seriously things celebrities say, as they must be smart, or they wouldn't be celebrities, right?

To add to it, the dumb int he public eye tend, normally to be protected by handlers, which Trump was up until very recently.  Now that he's not the stupidity of much of what he says and does is really coming to the forefront.

Finally, intelligence is complicated.  There are polymaths who are sort of universally intelligent, but there are also people who can excel at one thing without really being smart at anything else.  Trump clearly has skills as a salesman.  That frankly seems to be the only talent he has.

On that, I've known a few salesmen really well and often been surprised by how little interest they have in the topic of what they sell, or anything else.  An extremely successful real estate broker I know, for example surprised me when he revealed he had once been a car salesman.  They are, however, both sales.

A car salesman that I knew once surprised me in a conversation by revealing he really knew nothing about automobiles at all, and wasn't interested in them.  Cars bored him pretty clearly, but he was really good at selling them.  Selling is what interested him.

Trump may very well be like that.  He has good sales skills, which doesn't mean he's really very interested in anything he's selling.

A problem with the stupid is that they won't acknowledge it.  I don't think its true that most stupid people don't have an inkling they're dumb, but how they react to it is different.  Some simply accept it.  Others reject it.  Some seek constant affirmation that they aren't dumb.  Trump seems to fit into that category.

Aiding that, we'd note, is that he's been surrounded by people who have been telling him that he's really smart his entire life.  Everyone has witnessed something like that personally, where somebody is protected from reality until they simply don't know what it is.

There's sort of a Chauncey Gardiner element to this, we'd note.  In the film Being There, a simple minded man is mistake for a genius and becomes an advisor to the President simply because of his appearance and apparent station in life.  It's very difficult for most people to accept that somebody who has achieved apparent success isn't extremely smart.  I recall my mother, for instance, being of the view that Barrack Obama must be a genius (I'm not saying that he wasn't) because he was a lawyer.  It doesn't take smarts to become a lawyer, and one of the most successful ones I ever met with not a smart man at all.  He was just lucky.

Added to this, people, once they latch on to a figure, tend to attribute their own values to him.  We've seen this in spades with Trump. He's not a religious man, but people believe he is. There's no reason to believe he cares about most of the populist agenda, unless doing so aids him personally, but people believe he does.

The scary thing here is, unlike the first time when Trump had people to real him back in, he doesn't now.  If he's not demented, and therefore not capable of being removed, he can do pretty much any dumb thing he wants to over the next four years.

He's simply narcissistic and amoral.

Full bore narcissism and complete amorality is really rare.  Even people that most other people accuse of narcissism are capable of at least some empathy.

Likewise, complete amorality is very rare as well. Even people with loose morals usually have some.

But not always, in either case.

Indeed, it's well know that psychopaths have no empathy for other people.  And some of them, we'd note, are pretty smart.  According to some, Julius Rosenberg, the Communist spy, was an example of all we've mentioned here.  He was really smart and only cared about himself.

Trump was raised in an environment in which only success mattered and only money determined what was success. That was the Trump culture, and by all available evidence, Trump took to it and thrived in it.

Nothing other than Trump matters to Trump.  That's pretty much it. And given that, cheating on spouses, dumping associates, switching positions, lying, and screwing the entire nation are okay if it benefits his view of himself.

And that explains why he completely baffles his opponents and why his admirers admire him. Those opposed to him cannot grasp how anyone can't see through Trump.  Those who admirer him can't bring themselves to believe that he doesn't care about them whatsoever, or the country, or anything other than himself.  

Normal people don't behave like Trump to that degree. Trump's an example of what the world would really be like if John Lennon's Imagine ruled the day.

Trump sees a world in which there are no values, no religion, and nothing, other than Trump getting all he can get.

I'd note, however, that in a way, Trump, if viewed this way, is the ultimate expression of his generation, the "Me Generation".  Not everyone, or even most, in it, but the generational ethos as a whole.  What matter was "me", not much else.  Trump expresses an extreme form of that, even if he acquired it at home from a father who was definitely not part of that generation.  That also makes it easier for his acolytes to vote for him, as some of them growing up sort of viewing the world that way themselves.  Other, however, likely most, really believe that Trump cares about their cost of living, their pocketbooks, and making "American Great."

Well, as we know, Leopards won't eat my face.

He's a Goodfella

Not literally, but rather by association.

Trump developed his real estate business in New York at a time at which if you were going to get by, you were going to deal with the mob.  If he has just as big of "big brain" as he claims, then he would have picked up how mobsters work, which to some extent is on bluff and threat.

The best example is from the movie The Godfather, which was closely based on the real behavior of the New York mafia.  When they wanted Jack Wolz to do something, they put a severed horse's head, from a beloved horse, in his bed. Wolz, who wasn't harmed himself, caved to their demands.

Trump constantly makes bluffs and threats, and in fact quite often his adversaries give him what he wants.  That may be his undignified and reprehensible negotiation style.  If a person is immoral enough, and unprincipled enough, that works. . . right up until it doesn't.

There's no "art" to this deal.  It's brutish.  

And, of course, sooner or later, it doesn't work.

And when that day comes, you have no friends.

Indeed, somebody ought to give Trump the test now.  When he says "I need this" somebody ought to say, come and get it.  

Harold Hardrada asked Harold Godwinson "How much of England will you give me?".  Godwinson replied "six feet, because you are bigger than other men".   In this administration, and soon, somebody is going to tell Trump "fuck you, and the horse that you rode in on", and the whole bluff thing just goes down the tubes.  Once you can't back a bluff up, it's implodes really quickly.

And then, you have no friends at all.

Here, for example, Denmark ought to tell the US to get its Space Farce base out within a few days.  We'd have to.  And if I governed Panama, the Canal  would actually be run by the Chinese within a few days.

Whatcha Gonna About It?

Not much.

And his supporters?

They'll just all claim they were never actually for him.

That's not the only possibility.

The Kremlin Candidate

Trump is a Russian asset. The only question is, is he knowingly one, or not, and why.

It's worth noting that it would truly be a master stroke politically if you could get your man into the Oval Office, if you were one of our enemies.  And then he could go about wrecking things on your behalf, destroying alliances, the economy and even simply our place in the world.

Nobody has every proven that Trump is a knowing Russian asset.  He's definitely a Russian asset, to be sure, but it may simply be because of his view of the world and his childish admiration of strong men, and maybe his wanting to be one.  Maybe its because on the eve of his own death, he wants to be remembered for something, and the only think he can think of is to be remembered as an American Napoleon.

But his relationship with the Russians has never been explained.  Do they have something on him, and if so what?

Many have wondered about this very question, but nothing has been proven.

Still, he's successfully taken a page out of the Nazi Party's book and broad cast lies so consistently that large sections of the US population believe them.  And now he's threatening our allies, and has to be taken seriously.

If Trump is a bought and paid for Russian asset, and largely only cares for himself, he's in an ideal position to simply bring the United States down.  He can alienate our relationship with our allies, destroy our economy, leave us a wreck, and turn us against each other.

And that's the best evidence that he's a Russian asset. That's exactly what he's doing.

Soviet literacy poster.

Related threads:

Hubris and Strange Coincidence.

What is wrong with the Putin supporting right?

A question that should be asked. Who are the dupes, fellow travelers, and assets? Op eds and the Russians.

President Biden Delivers a Farewell Address to the Nation

A farewell address, and a couple of comments.

My fellow Americans, I’m speaking to you tonight from the Oval Office. Before I begin, let me speak to important news from earlier today. After eight months of nonstop negotiation, my administration — by my administration — a cease-fire and a hostage deal has been reached by Israel and Hamas, the elements of which I laid out in great detail in May of this year.

This plan was developed and negotiated by my team, and it will be largely implemented by the incoming administration. That’s why I told my team to keep the incoming administration fully informed. Because that’s how it should be: Working together as Americans. This will be my final address to you, the American people, from the Oval Office, from this desk, as president. And I’ve been thinking a lot about who we are and, maybe more importantly, who we should be.

Long ago, in New York Harbor, an ironworker installed beam after beam, day after day. He was joined by steel workers, stonemasons, engineers. They built not just a single structure, but a beacon of freedom. The very idea of America was so big, we felt the entire world needed to see the Statue of Liberty, a gift from France after our Civil War. Like the very idea of America, it was built not by one person but by many people, from every background, and from around the world.

Like America, the Statue of Liberty is not standing still. Her foot literally steps forward atop a broken chain of human bondage. She’s on the march. And she literally moves. She was built to sway back and forth to withstand the fury of stormy weather, to stand the test of time because storms are always coming. She sways a few inches, but she never falls into the current below. An engineering marvel.

The Statue of Liberty is also an enduring symbol of the soul of our nation, a soul shaped by forces that bring us together and by forces that pull us apart. And yet, through good times and tough times, we have withstood it all. A nation of pioneers and explorers, of dreamers and doers, of ancestors native to this land, of ancestors who came by force. A nation of immigrants who came to build a better life. A nation holding the torch of the most powerful idea ever in the history of the world: that all of us, all of us are created equal. That all of us deserve to be treated with dignity, justice and fairness. That democracy must defend, and be defined, and be imposed, moved in every way possible: Our rights, our freedoms, our dreams. But we know the idea of America, our institution, our people, our values that uphold it, are constantly being tested.

Ongoing debates about power and the exercise of power. About whether we lead by the example of our power or the power of our example. Whether we show the courage to stand up to the abuse of power, or we yield to it. After 50 years at the center of all of this, I know that believing in the idea of America means respecting the institutions that govern a free society — the presidency, the Congress, the courts, a free and independent press. Institutions that are rooted — not just reflect the timeless words, but they — they echo the words of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” Rooted in the timeless words of the Constitution: “We the People.” Our system of separation of powers, checks and balances — it may not be perfect, but it’s maintained our democracy for nearly 250 years, longer than any other nation in history that’s ever tried such a bold experiment.

In the past four years, our democracy has held strong. And every day, I’ve kept my commitment to be president for all Americans, through one of the toughest periods in our nation’s history. I’ve had a great partner in Vice President Kamala Harris. It’s been the honor of my life to see the resilience of essential workers getting us through a once-in-a-century pandemic, the heroism of service members and first responders keeping us safe, the determination of advocates standing up for our rights and our freedoms.

Instead of losing their jobs to an economic crisis that we inherited, millions of Americans now have the dignity of work. Millions of entrepreneurs and companies, creating new businesses and industries, hiring American workers, using American products. And together, we have launched a new era of American possibilities: one of the greatest modernizations of infrastructure in our entire history, from new roads, bridges, clean water, affordable high-speed internet for every American.

We invented the semiconductor, smaller than the tip of my little finger, and now is bringing those chip factories and those jobs back to America where they belong, creating thousands of jobs. Finally giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for millions of seniors. And finally doing something to protect our children and our families by passing the most significant gun safety law in 30 years. And bringing violent crime to a 50-year low. Meeting our sacred obligation to over one million veterans so far who were exposed to toxic materials, and to their families, providing medical care and education benefits and more for their families.

You know, it will take time to feel the full impact of all we’ve done together. But the seeds are planted, and they’ll grow, and they’ll bloom for decades to come. At home, we have created nearly 17 million new jobs, more than any other single administration in a single term. More people have health care than ever before. And overseas, we have strengthened NATO. Ukraine is still free. And we’ve pulled ahead in our competition with China. And so much more. I’m so proud of how much we’ve accomplished together for the American people, and I wish the incoming administration success. Because I want America to succeed.

That’s why I’ve upheld my duty to ensure a peaceful and orderly transition of power to ensure we lead by the power of our example. I have no doubt that America is in a position to continue to succeed.

That’s why my farewell address tonight, I want to warn the country of some things that give me great concern. And this is a dangerous — and that’s the dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a very few ultrawealthy people, and the dangerous consequences if their abuse of power is left unchecked. Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead. We see the consequences all across America. And we’ve seen it before.

More than a century ago, the American people stood up to the robber barons back then and busted the trusts. They didn’t punish the wealthy. They just made the wealthy play by the rules everybody else had. Workers want rights to earn their fair share. You know, they were dealt into the deal, and it helped put us on the path to building the largest middle class, the most prosperous century any nation the world has ever seen. We’ve got to do that again.

The last four years, that is exactly what we have done. People should be able to make as much as they can, but pay — play by the same rules, pay their fair share in taxes. So much is at stake. Right now, the existential threat of climate change has never been clearer. Just look across the country, from California to North Carolina. That’s why I signed the most significant climate and clean energy law ever, ever in the history of the world.

And the rest of the world is trying to model it now. It’s working, creating jobs and industries of the future. Now we have proven we don’t have to choose between protecting the environment and growing the economy. We’re doing both. But powerful forces want to wield their unchecked influence to eliminate the steps we’ve taken to tackle the climate crisis, to serve their own interests for power and profit. We must not be bullied into sacrificing the future, the future of our children and our grandchildren. We must keep pushing forward, and push faster. There is no time to waste. It is also clear that American leadership in technology is unparalleled, an unparalleled source of innovation that can transform lives. We see the same dangers in the concentration of technology, power and wealth.

You know, in his farewell address, President Eisenhower spoke of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. He warned us that about, and I quote, “The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power.” Six days — six decades later, I’m equally concerned about the potential rise of a tech-industrial complex that could pose real dangers for our country as well.

Americans are being buried under an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation enabling the abuse of power. The free press is crumbling. Editors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact-checking. The truth is smothered by lies told for power and for profit. We must hold the social platforms accountable to protect our children, our families and our very democracy from the abuse of power. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence is the most consequential technology of our time, perhaps of all time.

Nothing offers more profound possibilities and risks for our economy, and our security, our society. For humanity. Artificial intelligence even has the potential to help us answer my call to end cancer as we know it. But unless safeguards are in place, A.I. could spawn new threats to our rights, our way of life, to our privacy, how we work, and how we protect our nation. We must make sure A.I. is safe and trustworthy and good for all humankind.

In the age of A.I., it’s more important than ever that the people must govern. And as the Land of Liberty, America — not China — must lead the world in the development of A.I.

You know, in the years ahead, it’s going to be up to the president, the presidency, the Congress, the courts, the free press, and the American people to confront these powerful forces. We must reform the tax code. Not by giving the biggest tax cuts to billionaires, but by making them begin to pay their fair share.

We need to get dark money — that’s that hidden funding behind too many campaign contributions — we need to get it out of our politics. We need to enact an 18-year time limit, term limit, time and term, for the strongest ethics — and the strongest ethics reforms for our Supreme Court. We need to ban members of Congress from trading stock while they are in the Congress. We need to amend the Constitution to make clear that no president, no president is immune from crimes that he or she commits while in office. The president’s power is not limit — it is not absolute. And it shouldn’t be.

And in a democracy, there is another danger — that the concentration of power and wealth. It erodes a sense of unity and common purpose. It causes distrust and division. Participating in our democracy becomes exhausting and even disillusioning, and people don’t feel like they have a fair shot. We have to stay engaged in the process. I know it’s frustrating. A fair shot is what makes America America. Everyone is entitled to a fair shot, not a guarantee, just a fair shot, an even playing field. Going as far as your hard work and talent can take you.

We can never lose that essential truth to remain who we are. I’ve always believed, and I told other world leaders, America will be defined by one word: possibilities. Only in America do we believe anything is possible. Like a kid with a stutter from modest beginnings in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and Claymont, Delaware, sitting behind this desk in the Oval Office as president of the United States.

That is the magic of America. It’s all around us. Upstairs in the residence of the White House, I’ve walked by a painting of a Statue of Liberty I don’t how many times. In the painting there are several workers climbing on the outstretched arm of the statue that holds the torch. It reminds me every day I pass it of the story and soul of our nation, and the power of the American people.

There is a story of a veteran — a veteran, a son of an immigrant, whose job was to climb that torch and polish the amber panes so rays of light could reach out as far as possible. He was known as the keeper of the flame. He once said of the Statue of Liberty, “Speaks a silent, universal language, one of hope that anyone who seeks and speaks freedom can understand.”

Yes, we sway back and forth to withstand the fury of the storm, to stand the test of time, a constant struggle, constant struggle. A short distance between peril and possibility. But what I believe is the America of our dreams is always closer than we think. And it’s up to us to make our dreams come true.

Let me close by stating my gratitude to so many people. To the members of my administration, as well as public service and first responders across the country and around the world, thank you for stepping up to serve. To our service members and their families, it has been the highest honor of my life to lead you as commander in chief.

And of course, to Kamala and her incredible partner. A historic vice president. She and Doug have become like family. And to me, family is everything.

My deepest appreciation to our amazing first lady who is with me in the Oval today. For our entire family. You are the love of my life and the life of my love.

My eternal thanks to you, the American people. After 50 years of public service, I give you my word, I still believe in the idea for which this nation stands — a nation where the strength of our institutions and the character of our people matter and must endure. Now it’s your turn to stand guard. May you all be the keeper of the flame. May you keep the faith. I love America. You love it, too.

God bless you all, and may God protect our troops. Thank you for this great honor.

My first comment is that I fear what is coming.   No matter how he is looked at, Donald Trump is not committed to democracy and dark fears about dictatorship are not unwarranted.  Republicans who are willing to disagree with Trump are all but extinct, and Trump himself is backed by a movement in the population that would crown him king and excuse all of his massive failings.

The incoming administration will change the country.  We just don't really know how.  It may prove to be a temporary ineffective bridge to National Conservatism, which would also remake the country.  Or it may be four years of increasingly bizarre behavior.

That the country whose blueprint was laid out in the Great Depression and then constructed in the wake of World War Two has passed into history cannot be doubted.  The country that fought in the Second World War, albeit only after being attacked, and then contested the Soviets during the long Cold War is gone, replaced by one that has retreated into isolationism and even power worship.  The society that proposed a Square Deal, was given a New Deal, and aimed for the Great Society is also gone, and along with it, aspects of the Civil Rights Era.

American Exceptionalism is dead.

Gone too, probably, are the increasing lurches to the left which followed the Vietnam War and Watergate.  Indeed, they helped kill the era that has just died.

What comes up now, we don't know.  It could be something like the conservative Canada of before World War Two, if Trump is removed or dies early on.  Or it could be simply a second rate shit who that will descend into a comic version of itself, with an increasingly lower standard of living and behavior.

It is up to Americans on what we get.  We can accept the Trump oligarchy or resist it.

Biden is at least partially to blame for where we are now and that should not be forgotten.  He was supposed to be a bridge from Trump to a new era, but hubris wouldn't allow him to keep his promise not to run again.  A massive failure of the Federal judicial system is also to blame, being unable to bring in a conviction of a man within a year when it clearly should have.

The founders, Benjamin Franklin told us, gave us a republic, if we could keep it.  We have, but whether that will really last the next four years is an open question.  People, particularly Trump Republicans, will claim any doubt on that to be absurd, even as they make odd arguments about republics not being democracies.  Much of the public will simply go numb, and already has.

When Caesar crossed the Rubicon and deposed the Senate, most Romans didn't know that they no longer lived in a republic. They wouldn't actually know that for years, by which time they were worshipping men as gods.

Sic Transit Gloria Mundi.

The Second Impeachment Trial of Donald Trump

January 26, 2021

We've obviously never had two "trailing posts" on a Presidential impeachment trial, as there's never been two before.

And apparently according to the Senate, which will be conducting one, there still will not be.

Amy Howe reports on her excellent Supreme Court blog that Chief Justice Roberts will not be presiding over this trial, as Donald Trump isn't the President.  The Chief Justice presides over Presidential impeachment trials.

Roberts will not preside over impeachment trial

Which begs the question, can Donald Trump, private citizen, be impeached at all?

Indeed, that's a question we've already begged.

Monday at the Bar: Can The Senate Try An Ex-President?

The Article of the Constitution that allows for impeachment states as follows. 

Article II, Section 4: 

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

"[S]hall be removed.

As we also earlier noted:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, 

Hmmm. . . .

Love him or hate  him, here's the problem.  The text of the Constitution talks about impeachment in terms of "removal".  You can "extend" a punishment up to removal.  That's the top penalty.  By implication, you have to be capable of being removed.

Or so it seems to me.

And the fact that the Senate has now determined that Roberts won't preside means they know that  they're dealing with a lesser impeachment.

But there's no such thing. The Constitution doesn't say that the Senate can reach out and try private citizens, which is what Trump is.

I understand why they're so upset. And I understand the House voting to impeach Donald Trump.  It was in fact doing something, he was still the President. And if the Senate had reconvened quickly, something that would have defied its recent history and behavior, it could have held a type of trial.

But, it didn't.

So we'll now have a trial with an early motion to dismiss for unconstitutionality.  If the Senate Pro Temps rejects the motion, and he will, it'll go on, but any conviction, if there is one (and by now the heat of the moment has cooled enough that seems increasingly unlikely), it'll be appealed to the United States Supreme Court.  The Court will then hold, if it takes it up, that only a sitting President can be impeached.

And is it even wise.  A conviction in an impeachment trial will, at most, prevent Donald Trump from running again.  But he's 74 years old now.  If he were to run again he'd be 78 at that time.  Granted, Joe Biden is that old, but Biden is just starting out.  We'll see what we think of electing Presidents that old when he's leaving office at age 82, assuming that the stress of the occupation, and it is stressful, hasn't worn him down so much that in four years it'll be President Harris who is running as an incumbent.

At any rate, Trump said he'd be back "in some form".  If he's convicted in an impeachment, that fuels his fanatic followers with the belief that he was a victim of a conspiracy and now the Democrats and "establishment" Republicans are seeking to torpedo him at all costs, as he'll be reelected, irrespective of age, again.  That will add to their ardor for a man whom some of them are now questioning.  And if he's going to try to retain control of the GOP, it'll aid that.  If he's not going to try to retain control of it and bolt, it would add to that, although that would likely only temporarily hurt the GOP.

There remains, I'd note, plenty of legal processes which can still be undertaken, some of which likely will be.  Invocation of the 14th Amendment may be a possibility. And certainly criminal prosecution is.  

But impeachment?

Well, we're going to have an impeachment trial. . .and appeal. . . 

On other matters, a Florida Republican House members is coming to Wyoming to speak in Cheyenne at the invitation of an Albany County member of the legislature to speak against Elizabeth Cheney.

Cheney is taking a lot of heat form county GOP bodies but she's not in some news outlets.  Comments from readers in the last Sunday issue of the Tribune were overwhelmingly in her favor.  Either the readership of the Tribune is much more to the left of the GOP rank and file, or the county organizations are much to the right of it.  I suspect it's the latter.

January 29, 2021

Rand Paul introduced a resolution to dismiss the impeachment trial.  45 Republican Senators voted for the resolution.

January 31, 2021

Donald Trump's entire impeachment defense legal team quit.

The reason that his lawyers departed with less than two weeks to go is, apparently, that they wished to mount an actual legal defense based upon the problematic constitutionality of impeaching a private citizen, given that Trump is now out of office.

Trump wants to argue, once again, that the election results were fraudulent.

The trial commencement date had already been delayed so that Trump could hire a defense team.

While no one has said it so far, what this should make clear is that anyone taking this on is going to be faced with a client who is going to demand to continue to perpetuate the myth he won the election, and that is what will be his main focus. This presents a serious risk of turning the proceedings into a complete circus. Trump already is ware that the GOP will not vote to convict and therefore there's really no downside to his attempting this as it will reinvigorate his loyalists.

February 5, 2021

The House impeachment managers asked President Trump to testify at his upcoming impeachment trial.  Trump refused.

February 10, 2021

The Senate voted that it had jurisdiction to proceed with the trial 56 to 44.  Both of Wyoming's Senators voted that they did lack jurisdiction.  Senate Minority Whip McConnell continues to inform his body that they may vote their conscience, but absent something really wild, it seems unlikely that these percentages are unlikely to change.

The opening statements were heard.

Those who watched them (I did not) reported that the prosecution's opener, which related events to a video clips, was extremely moving.  In contrast, the defense opening statement has been characterized as "rambling" and "weird".  Both can be found on Youtube.

February 12, 2021

The House Impeachment Managers wrapped up their case yesterday.

As a practicing trial layer, these impeachment trials are, I must say, really odd.  If these were run by practicing trial lawyers, there would be live witnesses, examination and cross examination.  Personally, if I were prosecuting the trial, I'd call Donald Trump, whom I figure would be a train wreck of a witness, as well as Mike Pence and the members of his family.  I'd also call a lot of the insurrectionist. 

This isn't, of course, how this is being done.  Instead, it's all prepackaged presentation.   I'm sure the defense will be as well.

February 13, 2021

It was revealed by one of the ten Republicans who voted to impeach President Trump yesterday that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy called President Trump during the insurrection.  Trump was unsympathetic with McCarthy's efforts to get Trump to act and stated that he guessed the insurrectionists "are more concerned about the election than you are."

February 13, Cont.

The Senate, with five Republicans going along (interestingly including Lindsey Graham) has voted to have witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial.

This is related to the item just above in which a member of Congress has reported that Trump was informed of the presence of the insurrectionist and reacted as noted.  That Congressman will be called as a witness.  Trump's lawyer responded by suggesting that he'd need to call over 100 witnesses.

Frankly a trial without witnesses, as noted above, is bizarre.  So no matter how else it might be looked at, this is a move towards litigation normalcy.

February 13, Cont.

No witnesses were called, apparently as none were willing to voluntarily come forward.

The vote was held and and Trump was found not guilty of the charges, although there were more votes to convict the former President than in any prior Presidential impeachment trial.  Seven Republicans crossed over to vote for the measure, which put it ten votes short of passing.

Mitch McConnell gave a blistering indictment of Trump in a post trial statement.  It was in some ways more damning than that given by the House presentation.  He excused his no vote on a legal argument, arguing that there was no jurisdiction to impeach as Donald Trump was no longer in office, a semi problematic argument given that McConnell's refusal to take the measure up earlier caused the trial to occur after the inauguration.  McConnell is clearly walking a tightrope in an effort to restore the GOP to conservatism and  he's now doing so in the face of a threat from significant Republican donors to withhold funding from those Republicans who voted not to convict the former President.  McConnell surprisingly suggested that Trump might be liable for criminal or civil prosecution and therefore hasn't escaped justice yet, although that would have the effect of putting any Federal prosecution under Joe Biden's watch.  Trump, for his part, has already released as statement that he has big plans.

Therefore, while its really too early to tell how this will shake out long term, Trump's legacy now includes two impeachment trials and more votes to convict in the second than any other in American history.  He still refuses to yield to the truth regarding his electoral defeat and is making sounds that he intends a comeback.  His base, while shrunk, remains and remains a potent force.  Republican numbers overall, however, have decreased as the party hemorrhages members following the insurrection.  The net result may be that Trump's base may retain control of the party, but its shrunken numbers may may have already damaged it beyond repair for the 2022 and 2024 elections.

Message to Nebraska GOP State Central Committee

Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse on being censured.

You are welcome to censure me again.  But let's be clear about why this is happening. It's because I still believe, as you used to, that politics isn't about the weird worship of one dude.

Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse.

Op eds. Two to draw from.

The Tribune ran a couple of interesting op eds regarding recent stories involving or surrounding Representative Cheney.

The first was by a former head of the Wyoming Republican Party, Ron Micheli.  Micheli is highly conservative but of the traditional Republican type.  He's on record lamenting the alt right drift of the GOP in Wyoming.

He now writes opinion pieces, and his on recent events can be found here:

Micheli: We have seen gadflies like Gaetz before

Of note, Gaetz in not only portrayed as a gadfly by Micheli, the headline says Gaetz is.  Backing this up, Gaetz stated yesterday he was willing to resign from the House to defend Donald Trump in the upcoming impeachment trial, if Trump were to ask.

Trump's not going to ask.

Trump's legal problems have really created an odd sideshow for politicians who want to try to advance their careers in odd legal ways by associating themselves with him.  Ted Cruz, for example, earlier offered to argue one of Trump's election challenge cases in front of the Supreme Court, as if having Ted Cruz argue that case does anything much more than to advance the career of Ted Cruz.  Really silly.

The other was by Christine Hillegass, a psychologist living in Livingston Montana.

Hillegass: Voting her conscience is a positive

Micheli's opinions can't be discounted, given his relationship to the GOP.  Hillegass' probably can be by some, as she lives in Montana, not Wyoming, but they're interesting nonetheless.

Monday at the Bar: Can The Senate Try An Ex-President?

Lots of people are asking the same question.

And now NPR is taking a look at it:

Can The Senate Try An Ex-President?

Frankly, I think the answer is no, and the example of Richard Nixon is a good one. Sure, he'd been pardoned, but an impeachment might not really remove the incidents of being convicted in an impeachment.  If Congress thought there was any chance that they could have tried a President after he left office, they would have impeached Nixon.

And the text of the Constitution is clear:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, 

"[N]ot further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office . . . 

It doesn't say "removal. . . or disqualification".  It says not further than "removal. . . and disqualification.

Of course, you could argue, and now the argument will be made, that those punishments are the highest that can be meted out, but lesser ones can be as well. So they're a cap. And you could still find a person disqualified to hold office.

Sure, that's true, but by the same logic you could find an aged bank robber who passes away prior to his trial liable for the full measure of a sentence as well.  

And that's the problem.  Impeachment is for removal.  

And the fact that impeachment is for removal means we're now going to see the government tied up in the circus of an impeachment trial followed by some sort of appeal to the United States Supreme Court. . . assuming that a motion to dismiss isn't entertained and granted by Justice Roberts, who has the misfortune of presiding over all of this.  It'll be a giant distraction, and a distraction at the very period where Biden, if he's to have a successful Presidency, needs to act.

And there are alternatives.  If President Trump is guilty of crimes, which it is argued an impeachment does not actually require, he could be charged and tried for those.  Indeed, a long investigation in New York is still pending and seems likely to.  If he's convicted of any felony, he's likewise be unable to hold further office, and there's be additional penalties at that.

Which is why he'll likely attempt to pardon himself on the way out the door.

But, at least in my view, you can't pardon yourself.  It's never been tested, of course, but I doubt very much you can do it, and when that's reviewed by the Court, the Court will hold that. To hold opposite would be to place the President above the law.

None of which is an argument in any fashion to the effect that the entire post election administration denying the results of the vote fiasco shouldn't be looked at. Real damage has been done to our democracy and the insurrection was inexcusable.  The basic gist of impeaching the President would be due to the insurrection, the full facts of which we really aren't aware of in regards to guilt.  At a bare minimum, Trump was careless with his words and that fueled the violent storming of the Capitol.  That may or may not be a crime under conventional law, but under the Constitution, it might amount to a "misdemeanor" in context, a topic that we dealt with way back during the President's first impeachment.  Which means that the impeachment trial may end up being essentially a prolonged hearing which may be worthwhile undertaking in its own right, for fact finding purposes.  And they likely feel that they simply can't stand and do nothing.

Which gets me back to some earlier made points, one being that if Nixon had been tried back in 1973, which would have required Ford not pardoning him, we wouldn't be enduring this now.