I think it is the make them all go to sleep with “water is wet” arguments.
Also, ‘vote following what your red citizens tell you about Trump, please do represent even their lunacy.’
The people ON THE TRUMP FORUM are aghast at what a shitty job this guy’s doing.
I believe that mr castor is trying for the “y’all are the cool heads” of government defence. That the Congress impeached in the heat of the moment, and the cool heads of the senate can stop this trial.
A sheep baaing in a field will convince the crazies on the right that they were right.
Anything that agrees with them will confirm their suspicions, anything that disagrees with them will even more so, and something completely unrelated is the nail in the coffin.
They are crazies, as you even say, trying to mollify them, to act in a way that will rationalize their crazy is futile.
So, forget about the crazies on the right, they are irrelevant, as they will be crazy no matter what you do.
“If this guy (Castor) was stuttering, he’d be the lawyer from My Cousin Vinny.”
What trump forums? I wanna watch.
Castor now playing both the slippery slope and “you wouldn’t like the other side doing the same thing to your guy” cards.
Hope Donald got this guy at a steep discount.
Professor @BrianKalt of Michigan State University, who is a member of these boards has published an article in Slate, stating that Trump’s lawyers are misusing his research on impeachability of ex-presidents.
In several places, they cited me as though I had concluded something when in fact I had concluded the opposite. … I said the exact opposite of the proposition for which they cited me.
Next, circling back, I saw a citation to my discussion of the Federalist Papers: … This was disingenuous.
And the citation to Madison? I thought it was odd for them to cite me citing Madison rather than just citing Madison directly. So what content had I added that supported their proposition? Here’s what I wrote: “Taken out of context, Madison’s statement that the President ‘is impeachable at any time during his continuance in office’ would seem to rule out late impeachment.” Then I explained why, taken in context, it did no such thing. … I could go on like this for longer than a Slate article allows, pointing out other errors, omissions, and misrepresentations
Wow…name-dropping Eric Holder and the “Fast and Furious”? Is he going to talk about Solyndra next?
Castor made a mention about the prosecutors of the rioters are not implicating the former Cheeto in the charges, implying that the Cheeto is not being accused. Forgetting that several rioters already implicated Cheetolini (we were following him!)
Trump isn’t going to like this current argument that the American people looked at Trump’s conduct and chose Biden as a result.
I was thinking he drew the short straw when the firm got the Trump defense contract. That or he’s the most junior partner in the firm.
When the law is against you, pound the facts.
When the facts are against you, pound the law.
When both the law the facts are against you, pound the table.
This guy isn’t even pounding the table.
I thought listening to the impeachment trial was going to stress me out. Boy was I wrong. This is comedy gold!
Trump’s impeachment lawyer just told the Democrats that they should go arrest Trump. Cool.
That, actually, might be a real defense. Most experts say it is Constitutional, but some disagree.
However, Moscow Mitch’s idea of “well sure, lets do a trial, but right after the recess” then “nope, sorry, too late!!” has too much Lucy and the Football thing going.
So he’s arguing that Trump should stand a regular trial? I could get behind that – after the impeachment’s conviction.
You mean…
From Maggie Haberman, NY Times:
Alan Dershowitz, who was key in arguing in defense of Trump during the first impeachment trial, just said of Castor while speaking on Newsmax, “I have no idea what he’s doing.”
So the defence is, if the election doesn’t go your way, throwing an insurrection is okay fine?
This fellow is a bit more animated.
I believe we have the shoe pounding trump lawyer.