Impeachment Day 6: The Return of Kenneth Star

Avatar

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire.

Related Post Roulette

5 Responses

  1. Avatar Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    I admit to not knowing what’s going on. Both sides are declaring victory with every passing day and neither side is yet complaining about the quality of the referees.

    Until that changes, I have no idea who is winning.Report

  2. Avatar George Turner
    Ignored
    says:

    Judging by viewership, the trail has been a dud. The network soap operas that got bumped had higher ratings.

    Every now and then my housemate, a top-notch trial attorney (and a Democrat), pops out of his bedroom to get a snack, and if the trial is on break I can get an update from him. He has listened to every word, and I think even wears his earbuds to the bathroom. He says Trump’s attorneys have absolutely destroyed Schiff’s case, and he noted that his Democratic friends on Facebook have given up on impeachment and are now actually irritated that their party went forward with no case.

    He also says that Trump’s attorneys are very good lawyers and have shown great skill and experience, and he wondered about their normal fields of practice. He contrasted that with Schiff, who two days ago he described as a an inept boob who, though fairly eloquent, obviously never spent much time arguing cases, nor apparently did the rest of his team, though the former judge wasn’t too bad.

    Last week my housemate was pretty irritated with Schiff’s opening statement, saying Schiff was mixing his closing argument in his opening statement, which is always a mistake. If a prosecutor starts off by denouncing the defendant as a “piece of lying, thieving, child-molesting scum”, then during the evidence phase the jury just lets the evidence bounce off, thinking “Yeah, but the prosecutor is out to get the guy because the prosecutor utterly despises him.” A competent prosecutor opens by calmly telling the jury what the evidence is going to show, and then they go through the evidence phase and let the jury realize what the evidence indicates, and only in their closing does the prosecutor sum up with “piece of lying, thieving, child-molesting scum.” Both Schiff and Nadler also attacked the Republican senators, and it’s just not wise to attack “the jury.”Report

    • Avatar Philip H in reply to George Turner
      Ignored
      says:

      I doubt your housemate is a Democrat – none of the ones I’m in touch with were upset about Mr. Schiff or the impeachment. Schiff did calmly tell the jury what the evidence would show, but as they have been bought off by the defendant they don’t care. We know this because after weeks of haranguing about the lack of first person “someone who talked directly to Trump” John Bolton basically gives them said on a platter, and they either ignore it, or say it doesn’t arise to an impeachable offense. Because apparently since it was ok for Obama to spy on Trump during the campaign for no reason (never mind the intelligence community all but saying there were Russian assets in the campaign staff) it must be ok to dummy up a fake investigation on spurious grounds of Mr. Biden and his son.Report

  3. Avatar DensityDuck
    Ignored
    says:

    SO does this count as a “vote”, or is my prediction of “no vote in the Senate” still good?Report

  4. Avatar CJColucci
    Ignored
    says:

    I wish I could take credit for it, but someone watching this said: “Does Ken Starr know he’s Ken Starr?”Report

Leave a Reply

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