Trump's lawyer argues against constitutionality of trial 1

Trump’s lawyer argues against constitutionality of trial


Bruce Castor argued that the 2nd impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump was unconstitutional and would divide the country.

#TrumpImpeachment #CNN #News


  1. I’m not a lawyer, but his arguments against are all probably, might be, and could be… really seems out of his league.

    1. I agree that he definitely seems that he didn’t know what he was getting himself into. He certainly came off like he’s only had a week or two to come up with a defense.

    2. Make It Go…
      it can’t be out of his league…he quoted, Lincoln…and, well, we know that if someone quotes, Lincoln…they’re “probably,” a wise man…or “might be,” a just man…and, definately, “could be,” an honest man…but, most certainly, NOT A LIAR…NOT A MAN WHO SPEAKS THE WORDS OF LINCOLN…!!!

  2. Ok so let’s throw a bunch of things against the wall ( that we thought of last night over a few beers)and see what sticks.

    1. @Michael Williamson they can also vote to bar him from holders by public office ever again. Using your reasoning, a president could commit any type of high crime and misdemeanor in his final days or hours in office and not be held accountable

    2. @S
      They first have to convict him of anything. Let’s use our brains for a moment, we are born with them for a reason. Time to learn how to put it to good use.

      If they want to bar him from ever holding office, they first need to charge and prove his guilt. The impeachment process isn’t for indictments. It’s simply the removal because President’s have certain immunity benefits per the office of President. The way they are trying to convict him is unconstitutional, there’s no jury, no judge, no fair representation of the law on his behalf. His basic rights as a private citizen are all being violated. If we are going to go by the fact he was impeached as a sitting President, Chief Justice Roberts should be allowed to hear this case. As it was done with Clinton. He’s not. Violation #1. He is subject to jurors who are not biased. Who can give their verdict based solely on the facts given in a court of law. Not impeachment trial, which is purely political. The senate is acting as the jurors, the majority of them hate this man. Violation #2.

      Skip this sham of a trial and go straight with charging him and going through the courts. Not in the manner we are seeing

      But be careful what you wish for, I have a feeling this nonsense will backfire on all the Democrats and GOP.

    3. Considering you have to have the 2/3 vote he may not care. I think it’s really difficult to change minds and with the way it stands Trump won’t get impeached.

    4. @Francis Peter Well if you tell someone whom hates me enough lies about me to break into my house and kill me doesn’t make you guilty of the crime unless you tell him to kill me personally.
      The person whom tried to kill me was mentally weak and susceptible to your emotional manipulation but your intentions lie within a grey field.
      Legally, we don’t know and can’t say for sure that your intention was to kill me or was just simply banter.
      A POTUS doesn’t have to be responsible, literate, educated, rich or poor; he’s only got to get elected. He isn’t forced to be any hollywood poster child. Presidents are a reflection of the people whom elected them after all.

    5. @Tyeler Nowell Cancel culture is censorship therefore in it’s presence there’s no free speech.
      If the government doesn’t protect free speech from the mob then there’s no free speech and the ruling party is using social media to it’s own benefit.
      If your people are censoring the opposition out of their own will you wouldn’t stop them…..would you? No , because it benefits you and it does so happens to fall within a legal grey line where censorship is legal.
      The people can choose to censor each other and if they censor each other then you don’t have to do any of the dirty work.
      Basically own the media, own social media and big think tanks and you’ll have a one party system without anyone ever noticing. That is… with the expeption of a phew intellectuals whom will only comment on anonymous forums because they know they should fear the state.

  3. *Sometimes I’ll start a sentence and I don’t even know where it’s going. I just hope I find it along the way.*

    1. @Evan Kellison When the attorney you’re rooting for is so bad he literally says “Arrest him!” at the end of opening statements, so you have to go make fun of CNN watchers to let off steam.

    2. @Jessica Edlen When the charge against you is so easy to defend in court, you get a personal injury attorney who works for publicity to defend you while the other 3/4 of the senate is getting ready to acquit.

  4. Sorry, this person needs to read the constitution much more thoroughly & come back with a better argument. A lot of words, no substance.

    1. @Michael Williamson have done. Freedom of speech has limits… can’t yell fire in a crowded theater and such… the Capitol riot is same as. Stop trying to defend that orange piece of garbage.

    2. @maria tomasi Bla bla bla… go study this… go read that…you don’t know anything about this… come back after that…
      Heard it all; read it all.Your reply is so generic it’s nauseating.

    1. Think about this though. We have liberty and if you don’t have liberty, than there is no liberty. And if we have no liberty we are without liberty. Also, 9-11. Boom you just lawyered.

    2. He is an imbecile. There is no defense, and he still decided to be Trump’s counsel. He is definitely not getting paid.

    1. @mugwump242 in that case you may want to cite Maxine Waters as your prime example (u dummy- as I stated previously). Hehehe Bwahahaha Another Google attorney

    2. @mugwump242 missed the “main point”? I don’t think you’d know the main point if it were tattooed to ur forehead. But then again ur immunity 2 factual information is remarkable. However, being a sh.thead is legal sweetie. Glad ur not bashful about it. I’m happy 4 u!

    3. @mugwump242 This has a Better Call Saul, representing the three teenagers who broke into a morgue and had sex with a severed head on video kinda vibe. Except this clown isn’t as good of a lawyer.

  5. “Congress shall make no law” Twitter is not congress. Impeachment is not the making of a law. Not relevant. He may as well be telling me that water is wet for all the good it does.

    1. Thank you. That speech was a waste of paper and minute of my life, it had no true substance and was not related to the constitution at all. It was a speech calling the party to protect trump.

    1. Also: apparently the Roman Republic no longer exists?

      You’d think they bring something like that in the news!

  6. Trump’s lawyer’s meeting in private before heading into the Senate: “We will lose if Senators vote on whether he’s guilty of the charges so don’t even go there. Talk about ice cream if you like but do not talk directly about the charges.”

  7. Donald got the legal representation he deserves, ill equipped to deal, not capable of getting anyone of substance just like his administration!

  8. You can’t give me a ticket officer because when I stopped to talk to you, I wasn’t speeding anymore.

  9. I’ve been listening to this guy for 10 minutes can anybody tell me what he is talking about other than The impeachment trial

  10. Yes, Republics fall from within, when power is invested in those who care only for its use to benefit themselves.

  11. Is this drunk? What in the world is he talking about? Certainly this is not the best tRump could do for a defense lawyer.

    1. I guess the attorneys he hired are the best he could get since most attorneys won’t work for him. Seems the pickings got very slim.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.