Print 
PDF
Infallible?
Yes, it's infallible.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says, "We saw a strong case, an infallible, undeniable case for the impeachment of the president."
Democrat, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who is participating in the impeachment trial in defense of the Constitution, says it's both fallible and unconstitutional.
Trump lawyers may quickly move to have Pelosi's case thrown out.
Be informed.
Speaker Pelosi is trying to reassure herself and her followers.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the press, "The American people have seen the allegations, and they're allegations. We need to see more evidence that would be continued in the documentation."
For us little people, not of the elite, that means she knows her case is very weak, and is hopeful the Senate can come up with more evidence to support her weak case.
She says the Senate Republicans are not willing to help her because "they're afraid of the truth."
But this is what caught my attention: She says,
"We saw a strong case, an infallible, undeniable case for the impeachment of the president, so no future president would ever think she or he could get away with what President Trump has been getting away with in his view."
And she said, "Public opinion will have a lot to do with this."
- The adjective "infallible" means "incapable of making mistakes or being wrong." It's ironic that biblical Christians profess that God's Word, the Bible, is "infallible", while progressives and the religious Left profess their work or words to be infallible. Progressivism replaces God with man.
- According to her words, a good part of her impeachment is to use Trump as an example for future Republican presidents who might try to do something she and her people disagree with. Or someone they don't like.
- It's curious that she says, "Public opinion will have a lot to do with this." Does this mean her actions as purely political? If she really wants to allow the public to have a "lot to do with this," why can't she just wait for the public to vote in November? That allows for the public to have a great deal "to do with this."
Democrat Alan Dershowitz has become a pain in the neck for Nancy and her crew.
Dershowitz, a highly respected, well known Harvard law professor for 50 years and former ACLU board member---and a Democrat who voted for Hillary, will be, in effect, defending President Trump in that he has joined the Trump defense team. The professor is careful to explain that he is only going to be defending the Constitution, not a personality.
He says he will argue that the two articles of impeachment---abuse of power and obstruction of Congress---are not impeachable offenses.
He told ABC'S George Stephanopoulos,
"I strongly believe that abuse of power is so opened- ended---half of American presidents in history, from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to Roosevelt, have been accused by their political enemies of abusing their power."
He said, "The Framers didn't want to have that kind of criteria in the Constitution because it weaponizes impeachment for partisan purposes."
Dershowitz reminded ABC that "I'm not here for a political discussion. I'm a liberal Democrat who voted against President Trump and who voted for Hillary Clinton."
"I'm here," he said, "to present a constitutional argument the way I did in the Clinton impeachment and the way I argued when I was on the national board of the ACLU in the Nixon impeachment."
What to expect from President Trump's legal defense team.
Yesterday, the lawyers representing President Trump released their "Trial Memorandum of President Donald J. Trump." This is a link to the entire 171-page memo.
The New York Post reported what we should expect today and in the days following from President Trump.
The Post says in part:
Trump’s legal team argues that the president should be swiftly acquitted because the Democrat-led House overstepped its authority and committed a “brazenly political act … that must be rejected.
“The Articles of Impeachment now before the Senate are an affront to the Constitution and to our democratic institutions. The Articles themselves — and the rigged process that brought them here — are a brazenly political act by House Democrats that must be rejected,” a statement accompanying the document reads.
“They debase the grave power of impeachment and disdain the solemn responsibility that power entails. Anyone having the most basic respect for the sovereign will of the American people would shudder at the enormity of casting a vote to impeach a duly elected President,” the statement continues.
The administration accuses House Democrats of gloating after passing the articles on a mostly party-line vote on Dec. 18, and asserts that they had to be warned by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over their behavior.
“Upon tallying their votes, House Democrats jeered until they were scolded into silence by the Speaker. The process that brought the articles here violated every precedent and every principle of fairness followed in impeachment inquiries for more than 150 years,” the statement reads.
“Even so, all that House Democrats have succeeded in proving is that the President did absolutely nothing wrong. All of this is a dangerous perversion of the Constitution that the Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.”
On Sunday, Senator Lindsey Graham had this to say about Nancy Pelosi:
"I think she is a very religious person. But when it comes to Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi may pray for him privately but she's orchestrated the church from holy hell."
Pray for President Trump.
Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful.