Much of Twitter is misunderstanding Bruce Castor’s speech at Trump’s impeachment trial because much of Twitter is absolutely NOT Bruce Castor’s audience.

This man is on it. He knows he only needs to keep *over 1/3 with him. Then more so, he needs the American nation on his side.

Honestly, Twitter misunderstanding what Bruce Castor is doing right now is like Twitter misunderstanding how Brexit & Trump won back then

“Why fear the people who were smart enough to pick you?” (*Listen*)
And yes, ditto for David Schoen. He knows who his audience is.

And he’s on target.
Two different audiences
1) Castor: public opinion
2) Schoen: the law
Oooooh, he held up the Red book. OUCH 😖😆
Schoen has landed multiple legal blows.
Schoen clearly came in after playing “Mama said knock you out” on loop
Schoen just knocked out Apollo Creed in Rocky II
Rasking just waived his 30 mins right to rebuttal to all that? Wow.
Early indicator:
56-44 voted to proceed.

So 44 voted not to proceed, which is more than 1/3 objectors needed to acquit, as an indicator.

More from Maajid أبو عمّار

Analysis

The US Supreme Court has ducked hearing the case of Trump, Texas & 17 other states, on a procedural issue

They did not comment on any recent newsworthy fraud allegations

Trump still refuses to concede, so what are his remaining long shot legal routes?

Read my THREAD:


1) There is still this dormant PA Republican Party vs Boockvar US Supreme Court case, but it may remain dormant, since the Court already indicated yesterday that it (understandably?) simply doesn’t want the serious heat on this one


2) Mon Dec 14th Electoral College need to cast their votes alongside their states’ choice (the crux of the dispute)

Matters escalate if:
i) the Electoral College is tied

ii) “faithless” electors don’t vote for their state candidate

Note: in the key swing states, this is legal


OR:

iii) the House rejects some Electoral College votes, resulting in neither candidate receiving a majority.

3) If the above long shot occurs (aren’t we already in unprecedented times?) what happens next?

Under the 12th Amendment, when the House meets Jan 6th they can refuse to approve the Electoral College votes. They instead vote on a 1 vote per 1 state basis

Trump wins that vote.
THREAD:
Instead of attacking those of us raising it, why aren’t mainstream “liberal” journalists on here as outraged as we are about how many senior Democratic Party figures seem to have been compromised by Chinese spies?

Genocide is non-negotiable

#TAGG 🧿

See examples:

1) Dem Senator Feinstein’s staffer for 20 years outed as a Chinese spy


2) Dem Eric Swallwell caught in a female Chinese spy’s snare:


3) Dem Senator Boxer registers as a foreign agent for Chinese surveillance firm:


3) Dem Hunter Biden allegedly invests in Megvii, a firm accused of helping to round up Uyghurs using A+++ facial recognition technology
Texas is disputing US election results in 4 swing states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin & Georgia

Under Article III, US Supreme Court settles disputes between 2 or more states

Due to safe harbour, Trump’s remaining legal routes are narrow after

Brief analysis:
The Texas case is about the contested swing states’ executive & judicial branches VS their legislatures, on mail-in ballot rules

On Tuesday before safe harbour, SCOTUS rejected a similar lawsuit brought by Republican Rep. Mike Kelly

But a 3rd & eerily similar case has been with Justice Alito (as circuit judge for PA) & the Supreme Court since before the election. It’s about this very same executive & judiciary VS legislature dispute. That case, PA Republican Party vs Boockvar, may be decided in time, or not


The below is also worth noting:


There is also the issue of ‘safe harbour’ being said to only be “procedural”. This view rests on a reading of the Bush v Gore Supreme Court ruling.

More from Politics

I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.


Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel

He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:

He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:

He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party

You May Also Like