Jonathan Turley: The Single Exchange That Reflects Glaring Hole in Impeachment Case

Since the lone article of impeachment was ceremonially walked from the lower House chamber to the upper Senate chamber, there was a lot missing in Impeachment 2.0 that we saw in the first account. As such, there’s a boatload of issues with the Democrats’ impeachment case against former President Donald Trump.

Perhaps the most central issue is there was no hearing in the House, no witnesses or evidence presented, and no record of the case from which to work. Essentially, the House Managers are scrambling all over the place and are making this up as they go along presenting a case based on feelings, anonymous sources, and articles from clearly biased news outlets that reflect inaccuracies. Moreover, they neglect the timeline in that the attack on the Capitol was actually transpiring as President Donald Trump was still on the stage giving his speech.

The House Managers continue to pull things out of the hat which aren’t true and are at odds with their stated theory of the case.

Insert George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. The distinguished law professor pointed out how this problem failed Democrats when they were pushing their case and Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) claimed to be quoting Utah Senator Mike Lee about a conversation with President Donald Trump on the phone on Jan. 6. As a senator, Lee now serves as a juror. When this accusation rang out, Lee quickly jumped up and said that what Congressman Cicilline was claiming was false.

Supposedly Trump mistakenly called Lee instead of Sen. Tommy Tuberville.

Here is what Cicilline said in part: “Sen. Lee described it … Sen. Lee then confirmed that he stood by as Sen. Tuberville and President Donald Trump spoke on the phone. And on that call, Donald Trump reportedly asked Sen. Tuberville to make additional objections to the certification process.”

Lee had not confirmed that’s what was said. Moreover, and according to the Deseret News, what Lee actually said and what was left out from the Democratic presentation was that “Lee said when he later asked Tuberville about the conversation, he got the impression that Trump didn’t know about the chaos going on in the Senate chamber.”

The House managers left out that part, which directly contradicts its narrative that Trump knew about the riot and was relishing it as he was calling to further delay the electoral certification. If true, the House’s timeline argument would lose coherence, if not collapse entirely.

The House repeatedly argued that Trump wanted the riot and then used it to delay the proceedings. Yet, this call occurred “shortly after 2 p.m.” and, according to Lee, Trump did not appear to the senator to be aware of the extent of the chaos. A few minutes later, at 2:38, Trump tweets, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

Essentially, this development blows their theory of the case that President Donald Trump was supposedly aware and pushing the events that transpired and, on top of that, then urges people to “stay peaceful.” Ultimately, this strikes another blow at the legitimacy of this alleged incitement.

Turley indicates this snap impeachment has left Democrats without a record or established facts from which to work. This ultimately boils down to whatever point they make or connection they try to present is likely wrong and could be easily blown apart by anyone with genuine knowledge of the events that took place on January 6th.

As a nonlawyer friend recently put it, he could easily defend the former president free of charge based on the ‘evidence’ the House Managers have produced.

House Managers cases is akin to a house of cards described in the movie “My Cousin Vinny.” Their ‘evidence’ includes citing media articles that are unreliable and trial by innuendo and conjecture versus the actual facts. They’ve failed to establish anything about Trump’s direction or involvement.

Turley said that the Lee issue revealed the whole problem with the case. Pretty hard to prove a case when you have no real evidence or witnesses.

This is a waste of time, resources, and shows that Democrats are not interested in solving the real issues facing the American people and, what’s painfully obvious, former president Trump continues to live rent-free in the heads of Democrats everywhere. They’re obsessed!