10/02/2025
On today's episode of "F**k Around and Find Out":
I'm under the weather today--can't imagine why, considering I haven't had a day off of life for about three weeks--so here's a little time capsule for you, because I wanted you to have som**hing so that you don't forget about me. It's my column from February 10, 2021, and it's really interesting to read, especially in light of where we are today, politically. Let me know what you think.
**
Dems started off Impeachment 2: Electric Boogaloo yesterday by showing the riot video, interspersed with Trump’s remarks (and a special appearance by Squirtle McTurtle) and it is…som**hing else. Watch it. It is hardcore. It’s hard to watch, and there’s stuff that didn’t make it to broadcast, but every American needs to see it. I saw it on NPR’s home page but you can find it easily. Then watch cat videos. Maybe the famous Zoom call with the dude who has the cat filter on.
So we will start with defense, although it wasn’t much of one. Were I Trumplethinskin, I’d get my money back but I doubt he paid these guys anything. Better Call Saul.
Bruce Caskin, one of the last-minute lawyers, started his remarks off with a little history lesson, pointing out that “If the individual state legislatures didn’t adopt the Constitution, we would not have it.” You don’t say. In other news, water is wet. “This trial is not about trading liberty for security. It’s about suggesting that it’s a good idea that we give up those liberties we have so long fought for.” So basically, he’s saying that Trumplethinskin is facing government reprisal for his words. Despite all advice, they’re leaning on the First Amendment. “We can’t possibly be suggesting that we punish people for political sp*ech.” Political sp*ech is one thing—you’re reading some—but he’s forgetting that not all sp*ech is protected.
Let me say that again for those of you in the back.
NOT ALL SPEECH IS PROTECTED.
I was in radio for years and they drilled this into our heads. (That, and the long version of “Inagodadavida” is great to play when you’re hungover and don’t want to talk on the air.) But I digress. Free sp*ech, kittens! Anything that would incite civil unrest, for example, is not protected. Ergo: you incite civil unrest, the guvment gonna come after you and they are allowed to do so, even if you can’t read the name stitched above your pocket.
I really wish law schools would teach that. Apparently they don’t but they should.
So looks like this argument is dead in the water, and they are sticking with it despite 144 Constitutional scholars waving them off.
I also wish they’d show the Senator’s faces while listening to the arguments. It’d be really interesting.
Castor went on to ditch the “election fraud” defense, saying “We are here because the vast majority of the House does not want to face Donald Trump as a political rival in the future…the American people just spoke. And they just changed administrations.”
And he said som**hing very curious: “I’ll be quite frank with you. We changed what we were going to do on account of that we thought the House managers’ presentation was well done.”
Is that a good legal strategy? I’m honestly asking because all this is way above my pay grade.
That explains his bumbling, rambling, obviously hastily prepared defense.
His audience was not impressed and sources say most of the time they had no idea what the f**k his point was. I watched the whole thing for you, kittens, and I’ve no idea either, really, other than OMG FIRST AMENDMENT, BECKY! Look at her butt.
When asked what he thought of things so far, Castor said said he thought it was a "good day" and said he did not anticipate he would make any strategic changes going forward.
David Schoen decided to address the House’s “insatiable lust for impeachment over the past four years” and I don’t know if he always talks like a squirrel on m**h or if he was just nervous. Work your thing out, girl. To back up his claims of lust, he showed clips of people calling for impeachment of Trumplethinskin in 2017 and 2019, including Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, AOC, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Van Jones, various legal scholars, and political pundits, without mentioning why they wanted him impeached. He also bashed the rush to impeach, saying it was ‘‘extraordinarily wrong”. Schoen went on to say that “on the day following the January 6 riot, the House leadership cynically sensed a political opportunity to score points against the then-outgoing President Trump.” As 5 people lay dead at the hands of President Trump. They “completed the fastest impeachment in history, according Donald Trump no due process at all.”
But then, this is the guy who was in talks to take over Jeffrey “If they’re old enough to p*e, they’re old enough for me” Epstein’s defense.
According to the Gray Lady, Trumplethinskin’s anger at his attorneys’ performance was a level 8 out of 10. Part of me kind of wishes I’d been Mike Pence’s fly on the wall just to watch that. You know he threw a lamp and shot the TV.
Now onto the offense.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Lead House Impeachment Manager, kicked things off. Joking that he would not subject listeners to a Constitutional law lecture, he pointed out that their case was based on “cold, hard facts” and set forth several precedents for impeachment under unusual circumstances. The framers of the Constitution rejected a January exception, he said, adding that “If we buy that radical argument that President Trump’s lawyers have advanced, we risk allowing January 6 to become our future.” Early state constitutions also supported impeachment of former officials. “Removal was never seen as the exclusive purpose of impeachment in America. The goal was always about accountability, protecting the society and deterring official corruption.” William Davie of North Carolina said, at the [Constitutional] Convention, “If [the President] be not impeachable whilst in office, he will spare no efforts or means whatever to get himself re-elected.” They saw Trump coming a long time ago. A few other notable names did too.
Alexander Hamilton pointed out in Federalist 1 that “The greatest danger to republics and the liberties of the people comes from political opportunists who begin as demagogues and end as tyrants, and the people who are encouraged to follow them.” (My grandmother made me read the Federalist Papers in high school. They haunt me. Explains a lot, doesn’t it?)
Another founding father, John Quincy Adams: “I hold myself, so long as I have the breath of life in my body, amenable to impeachment by [the] House for everything I did during the time I held any public office.”
Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO), House Impeachment Manager then spoke. Watch this guy. Amazing orater and he’s going to go places. Giving me Cory Booker vibes.�He pointed out that Trump was not impeached for “run of the mill corruption.” He was impeached for inciting a violent insurrection that “desecrated our seat of government.”
He cited many constitutional scholars, and Chuck Cooper, a well known conservative lawyer.
Basically: Impeachment protects American people from officials who abuse their power, who betray them. It exists just for a case like this one. “It is hard to imagine a clearer example of how a President could abuse his office inciting violence against a co-equal branch of government while seeking to remain in power after losing an election.”
Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), House Impeachment Manager was next. His take was this: Impeachment is not about just removing someone from office. Impeachment exists to protect our Constitutional system “to keep each of us safe. To uphold our freedom. To safeguard our democracy. It achieves that by deterring abuse of the extraordinary power that we entrust to our Presidents.” He also emphasized that the Senate DOES have jurisdiction for impeachment.
The prosecution, he says, will provide evidence that Trump alone is responsible for inciting the assault on the Capitol, and he pointed out that he and his colleagues could well have been killed. “We will also prove that his dereliction of duty, his desire to seek personal advantage from the mayhem, and his decision to issue tweets further inciting the mob… attacking the Vice President already compounded the enormous violence.”
Then he twisted the knife. Savage, and I am here for it.
“We also know how President Trump himself felt about the attack. He told us. Tweet at 6:01:
‘These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!’” I have a feeling all those tweets are going to come back and haunt him, like that weird guy you dated 7 years ago that still texts you every few months out of the blue and won’t get the message.
When that tweet was sent, Cicilline added, “Dozens of police and other law enforcement officers lay battered and bruised and bloody.”
After all this, the vote was 56-44 in favor of the Constitutionality of the whole thing. Six Republicans voted yes, and they are the usual suspects with one surprise.
Bill Cassidy (R-LA) voted yea, and he had previously voted against impeaching Orange Foolius. He changed his vote after Foolius’s legal team did not make a “compelling, cogent case”. "President Trump's team were disorganized. They did everything they could but to talk about the question at hand. And when they talked about it, they kind of glided over almost as if they were embarrassed," Cassidy said.
"One side's doing a great job. And the other side's doing a terrible job on the issue at hand."
The others:
Susan Collins R-ME
Lisa Murkowski R-AK
Ben Sasse R-NE
Mitt Romney R-UT
Pat Toomey R-PA
These guys give me hope. Those I listed above are keeping an eye on their job, and their responsibility and their oath of office. They haven’t let petty partisan squabbling dictate their actions and they should be commended for that. They aren’t afraid of people being held accountable for their actions. They likely risked their careers to do the right thing, and I hope that’s remembered.
Some other reactions to today’s festivities for you:
"The President's lawyer, the first lawyer, just rambled on and on and on and didn't really address the constitutional argument," Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said following the hearing.
Texas Sen. Creepy Cruz said he did not think Trump's representation "did the most effective job."
Both Republicans still voted against proceeding with the trial, further proving that this is a partisan fight, and not a vote for the right reasons. To vote to convict would be recognizing that Trump is the epitome of Republicanism—this is what the party has come to, because they have nothing else but violent rhetoric and lies and misdirection—and they aren’t ready to admit that to themselves. They, too, played a role in the events of January 6, and they know it. They stood by and did not say a word as Trump pushed the boundaries of his office further and further, becoming more and more deranged, until it culminated with an attack on the Capitol. They enabled him, they covered for him, and they refused to hold him accountable or curb his impulses. They know this, but can’t face it. Witness Rand “Perm Weasel” Paul doodling on a pad of paper as the insurrection video played this morning in the House, according to the WaPo. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) was studying papers in his lap, as were Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Marco Rubio (R-FL). They can’t face up to what they’ve done. Or they just don’t care. Either way, they never will. Don’t pay the ferryman.
What do the police do when they encounter a suspect attacking a person with a weapon? They remove the weapon.
Donald Trump has used his public office as a weapon, and it needs to be taken away from him.
And that’s all I’ve got for you today, kittens.