'A permanent asterisk': Acquittal at hand, Democrats sow doubt about Trump trial

[USALiberal]

Were it up to Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), historians would mention President Trump’s all-but-certain impeachment acquittal much the same way baseball fans mention Barry Bonds’s career home-run record — an achievement destined to be obscured by an eternal cloud.

While Trump, unlike Bonds, does not stand accused of benefiting from performance-enhancing drugs, Democrats started this week to make an aggressive case that the Republican-led Senate’s decision Friday to end Trump’s trial without summoning witnesses or documents should cast grave doubt on its outcome.

The charge has been led by the most senior Democratic officials as it grew increasingly clear this week that Republican senators would vote to reject additional evidence and pave the way for a largely partisan verdict.

Hours before the Senate voted Friday, Schumer declared any acquittal at such a trial to be “meaningless.”

“If there are no witnesses, no documents in this trial, there will be a permanent asterisk next to the acquittal of President Trump written in permanent ink,” he said, harking to the punctuation mark that once accompanied contested records in sports almanacs.

On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declared flatly that Trump “will not be acquitted” regardless of the vote.

“You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial,” she said. “And you don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation.”

Prior to Trump’s trial, the Senate has held 15 impeachment trials, including two for a president. All had witnesses.

Pelosi, who dominated the impeachment debate, steps out of the spotlight

The Democratic rhetoric was, on one hand, an early attempt to salvage what promises to be a crushing political loss. After warning for months about the dangers of a partisan impeachment, Pelosi led the House down that path after allegations of grave misdeeds emerged from the Trump administration — only to find the GOP ever-willing to stand by Trump in the face of damaging revelations.

More at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-permanent-asterisk-acquittal-at-hand-democrats-sow-doubt-about-trump-trial/2020/01/31/b0756a52-4447-11ea-aa6a-083d01b3ed18_story.html

[Blues Heron]

1. who writes this milquetoast shite?

in ANY context a trial without witnesses is a sham, an outrage, yet here there's "maybe some doubt" . these writers are brainwashed.

[USALiberal]

3. But we knew they would reject witnesses! nt

[Iliyah]

2. Fuck that "The Democratic rhetoric was, . . .

on one hand, an early attempt to salvage what promises to be a crushing political loss".

"crushing USA's loss", there I fixed it.

[DarthDem]

4. Silly Analysis

That's arrant nonsense about Pelosi and a "crushing political loss." But expected nonsense from the media. No one, including Pelosi, Schumer or anyone else, thought that this president would be removed from office or that "Republicans" - maybe quotation marks will serve them instead of an asterisk - would do the right thing in any meaningful way.

The question has always been messaging after the acquittal. And with regard to that messaging, I think it's going to be easier than the media and some others think. It's there for the taking. "Republican" senators decided that they didn't need to hear from witnesses or examine any documents in a so-called trial, and thus felt there was no need to challenge the actions of a president who will do anything, including involving foreign adversaries in our elections, for his political gain.

Time to spread that word.

[llmart]

5. Yes, and our meme must be the same as Pelosi's...

"You can't be acquitted without a trial."

[iamateacher]

7. I agree

Well said, DarthDem

[zonemaster]

8. ...that's President Asterisk, to you.

Nancy Pelosi should straight-up introduce him as "President Aterisk" at the SOTU - assuming she doesn't pull the plug on his appearance, altogether.