SURPRISE! Trump’s Impeachment Defense Begins with 6 ‘Facts’ that Are All Lies

The day that Donald Trump has been waiting for (and whining about) has finally come. It’s the day that marks the commencement of his Fox News Legal Team’s presentation of his case against removing him from office now that he has been irrevocably impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Donald Trump, Impeach

Of course, everyone has already heard the case that Trump’s lawyers will be making. They have been making that case relentlessly on Fox News for weeks. The case that Fox viewers haven’t heard is the one by Democrats. That’s because Fox News chose to shield their snowflake viewers from any exposure to reality. Instead, they aired their own regularly scheduled, Trump-fluffing programs during prime time rather than the Senate hearings. They even admonished their viewers not to watch the hearings at all because Fox’s shills would watch for them.

To no one’s surprise, Trump’s defense was littered with familiar lies. His White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, led off by falsely characterizing the House impeachment hearings, saying that Democrats “lock[ed] everybody out of it from the President’s side.” In fact, Democrats invited the White House to participate, but the invitation was rejected in a letter from Cipollone himself. And all Republican members of the three committees holding hearings — Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight — participated and were given equal time.

Following Cipollone’s flagrant fictionalization of events, his deputy, Mike Purpura took center stage with what he said were the “six key facts that have not, and will not, change.” (video below) Let’s take a look, shall we?

FIRST: “The transcript shows that the President did not condition either security assistance or a meeting on anything.”
Actually, there has been no transcript released, only a memo purporting to summarize the phone call between Trump and Zelensky. And in that memo Trump is plainly seen to condition aid with a demand that Zelensky “do us a favor, though.” Trump then stated his interest in a conspiracy theory about a a Democratic computer server, and the Biden family. There was no discussion of corruption whatsoever.

SECOND: “President Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have repeatedly said that there was no quid pro quo and no pressure on them to review anything.”
In fact, Zelensky had to be careful not to upset Trump at the risk of losing the aid. You can’t ask a hostage if he’s under pressure and expect a candid answer. Zelensky told an interviewer that he didn’t “want us to look like beggars.” Then went on to say that “If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.” What’s more, Trump himself confessed on national television that he did condition aid on a demand that Zelensky help him smear Joe Biden. When asked directly what he hoped to get from Zelensky, Trump said “I would think that if they’re honest about it they’d start a major investigation into the Bidens. It’s a very simple answer. They should investigate the Bidens.”

Third: “President Zelensky and other high ranking Ukrainian officials did not even know the security assistance was paused until the end of August, over a month after the July 25 call.”
Not according to the Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister who said that Ukraine was aware of a U.S. freeze in military aid as early as July.

Fourth: “Not a single witness testified that the President himself said that there was any connection between any investigation and security assistance, a presidential meeting, or anything else.”
Not true. Several witnesses (i.e. Gordon Sondland, Alexander Vindman) said that Trump had made a such a connection. But if Trump’s attorneys are concerned that there wasn’t sufficient testimony from first-hand witnesses, then why is Trump prohibiting staffers like Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, etc., from testifying? Why would he block testimony from those he says would exonerate him?

Fifth: “The security assistance flowed on September 11, and a presidential meeting took place on September 25, without the Ukrainian government announcing any investigations.”
What Trump’s team isn’t saying is that those things occurred only after he got caught. They were an attempt to paper over his criminal behavior after the fact.

Finally: “The Democrats blind drive to impeach the President does not, and cannot, change the fact, as attested to by the Democrats’ own witnesses, that President Trump has been a better friend and stronger support of Ukraine than his predecessor [President Obama].”
You can hardly call threatening a country with the loss of critical military aid during a war as “friendly.” And even if there were cursory signs of friendship, that doesn’t excuse Trump’s unlawful behavior. Furthermore, Trump has been a far better friend to Vladimir Putin and Russia, the country that is invading and annexing parts of Ukraine.

If this is any indication of how the Trump defense is going to go as it proceeds through next week, we are in for some hefty heapings of falsehoods and misdirection. They haven’t even even gotten to the Bidens yet, as Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow promised to do. But rest assured, that will come. And the whole of the Trump defense will be built on distortion and deception. But that’s only because they can’t defend Trump on the facts.

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.


9 thoughts on “SURPRISE! Trump’s Impeachment Defense Begins with 6 ‘Facts’ that Are All Lies

  1. And here’s what we got. Democrats take 8 hours to very clearly state their case and the facts. The Tyrant worshipers take 2 hours to lie their f*cking asses off.

    Guess which side the FucksPods will spend 100% of their time covering?

  2. Besides, with a name like Pasquale “Pat” Cipollone, how appropriate he’s defending a mob boss. However incompetent and imbecilic the mob boss keeps proving himself to be….

  3. The trumpelsiltskin’s defense team strategy is to keep on gaslighting everyone. They deny and are willfully ignorant of all of the legal testimony presented and are unethical and morally corrupt bottom dwellers.

    • Morally corrupt bottom dwellers is right. They ingest sh*t that even catfish would reject & spit out in distaste. Worse yet, they constantly spew out even worse sh*t, that nothing with a mouth on it would even touch.
      If this is supposed to be a trial, with all the weight that implies, why does it seem that the defense is able to just stand up & lie, lie, lie — with no rebuttal? No facts with evidence presented. No cross-examination & no rebuttal to defense lies for their client.
      It makes this look kind of like a real trial to the untrained eye, but is really still a sham!
      A 1-sided, manufactured load of BS from defense that goes unchallenged, cuz’ factual evidence is absent, as are any prosecution witnesses they requested.
      We should do this with ALL civil & criminal trials out here in the real world. I’m sure defendants would be thrilled, since almost impossible to convict of anything w/o presenting hard evidence & when no matter what defense att’ys say, it goes uncontested.

  4. “Sip-baloney?” I always thought one should chew baloney, not sip it. Might choke on it.

  5. You’ve had so much sh#t stuffed down your throat over the course of 3 1/2 years only a Idiot would believe anything from the loony left. If you were worth a damn, as a reporter you would of done research on both sides!
    You need to grab an Enema, sit and flush for awhile, because your full of it, just like those so called house managers, aka .. liars!

    • Thanks for that excellent example of a StormTrumper comment. Completely devoid of substance.

  6. Now, we have Ken Starr proving himself an idiot. From CNN:

    Trump defense team member Ken Starr argued that the US is in the “age of impeachment.”

    “Indeed, we are living under what, I think, can aptly be described as the age of impeachment,” Starr said.
    He continued: “In the wake of the long national nightmare of Watergate, Congress and President Jimmy Carter collaboratively ushered in a new chapter in America’s constitutional history. Together in full agreement, they enacted the Independent Counsels Provisions of The Ethics and Government Act of 1978. But the new chapter was not simply the age of independent counsels. It became, unbeknownst to the American people, the age of impeachment.”

    Starr, who served as independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation, called impeachment “a weapon to be wielded against one’s political opponent,” but not used against early “controversial presidents,” like Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay.

    First, since when was Henry Clay president, Ken?

    Second, you seem to have forgotten your OWN use of impeachment as a political weapon against Bill Clinton, since you did EVERYTHING to find SOMETHING to bludgeon Clinton — and you STILL found nothing.

    Impeachment has ALWAYS been used as a political weapon. The Democratic Congress censured Andrew Jackson because he was too independent, which was promptly expunged the minute the Jacksonians regained power. Not exactly an impeachment proceeding, but it amounted to the same thing. The Radical Republicans wanted to remove Andrew Johnson for not obeying their orders, but saw no reason to question his all-consuming racism.

    And the Republicans tried to impeach Clinton simply because he was a Democrat (which was the sole reason they push to get Barack Obama impeached), and used ANYTHING they could think of, starting with an investigation of a land deal no one ever found something remotely illegal, and ending with an initially consensual affair.

    Said before, our two-party system is now dead because “Republicans” have now proven themselves traitors to the American people, and “Republicans” will do ANYTHING to impeach a Democratic president while claiming it is unconstitutional or criminal to impeach a “Republican” president. This is simply terrifying.

    To quote Oliver Cromwell, a message to the falsely-named “Republican” Party: “Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance. . . . I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place. . . . In the name of God, go!”

    • Ahhh…Kali…I think I love you! LOL

Comments are closed.