President Donald Trump’s legal team issued a fierce Saturday reply before opening arguments in his clearing trial, and the Democrats favorably set out their case, saying that the president had broken public reliance on behavior that was a “serious nightmare”. of the founding fathers.
The filings made the arguments that the two sides intended to do when Trump begins impeachation Tuesday seriously in the Senate. The challenge will be to make a case that appeals to the 100 senators who will make the American verdict and public boom for presidential elections in 10 months.
“The President Donald J. Trump used his official powers to force a foreign government to interfere with the United States election for his personal political gain,” wrote the House prosecutors, “and then tried to cover his scheme. by preventing Congress from investigating its misconduct. ”
The Trump legal team, responding to the official Seanad summons for the trial, said that the president rejects “certainly and unequivocally” the charges of abuse and obstruction against him.
“This is a stainless and illegal attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and apply for the 2020 election, just months away,” the president’s filing states. “
The documents are abolished in plain English and structured in plain English, and provided insights into the extent to which the safety proceedings are a political process rather than a normal legal process.
These are the first of a number of filings expected in the coming days as Senators prepare to take their seats to the unusual court of prevention.
The Senators swore an oath that they would make “impartial justice” as the room conveys to consider the two articles that allowed the House last month as there is a balance between the Presidency and the Trump legacy.
One Republican admitted that his votes were being watched closely, Mr Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, acknowledged the political pressure on them.
“I’m going to take my constitutional duties very seriously,” she told reporters from Anchorage on call.
The House ‘s 111 page briefing outlined the injections of prosecutors, starting from Trump’ s phone call to Ukraine and relying on a dozen witnesses’ private and public evidence – ambassadors and national security officers at high government levels – who expressed concerns. about the actions of the president.
House managers wrote: “The only question remains is whether members of the Seanad accept their responsibility at Framers of the Constitution and their Constitutional Oath.”
The Trump team called this article on a “dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president.”
The Trump team encouraged lawmakers to refuse a “poisonous partnership” and to declare “the consent of the American people” by refusing the two items approved by the House.
The Seanad is still debating the basic rules of the trial, in particular the question of whether new witnesses will emerge as new evidence emerges over the actions of Trump Ukraine which posed a risk.
New information from Lev Parnas, an indicative associate of a Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, is being incorporated in the House case. At the same time, the Seanad Democrats would like to call John Bolton, a former national security adviser, among other potential witnesses, after the White House prevented officials from appearing in the House.
For Republicans controlling the Senate 53-47, they can set the rules of the trial – or any four Republicans may enter the course of Democrats to make a change.
Murkowski told reporters that she wants to hear both sides of the case before deciding on calling witnesses and new evidence.
“I don’t know what we need until I get the case,” said Murkowski.
The determined house managers are working throughout the weekend and will be at Capitol on Sunday noon to prepare the case.
Trump’s response to the first salvo summons was in some initial argument rounds. Trump will file a more detailed legal commission on Monday, and the House will be able to respond to the Trump filing on Tuesday.
The Trump team headed by White House counsel, Pat Cipollone and Trump’s personal lawyer, Jay Sekulow, are challenging the boom on procedural and constitutional grounds, claiming Trump was abused by House Democrats and did nothing wrong.
The day filing came after Trump completed his legal team, and added Ken Starr, the former independent barrister whose inquiry into President Bill Clinton, and Alan Dershowitz, Harvard’s law professor. intends to make constitutional arguments.
The White House solicitors and legal staff outside Trump have debated how Monday’s legal briefing should set out Trump’s protective contours.
Some of the administration have alleviated warnings from Seanad Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., That pleadings must be sensitive to the more ancient traditions of the Seanad and leave some of the sharper rhetoric shown during the The events of the House on Twitter and cable news.
Aide Democratic Saturday said that Trump initial filing read more like Trump’s fundraising email than a legal document.
People close to the Trump legal team said that Cipollone would open the president’s opening argument to the Seanad and that Sekulow would follow it. Starr and Dershowitz would have “discrete functions” on the legal team, according to those close to the legal team, who were not authorized to discuss the strategy by name and provided that they were anonymous.
The collision case involves allegations that Trump asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, who was dealing with democratic politics, while the White House held hundreds of $ 400 million in aid. from the former Soviet republic as Russia is hostile at the border.
Government Accountability Office said last week that the administration violated federal law by withholding the funds with Ukraine. The money was subsequently released after Congress complains.
The House’s briefing said, “The misconduct of President Trump is a threat to our democratic processes, our national security, and our commitment to the rule of law. He must be removed.
Trump solicitors argue that the redress items are in themselves unconstitutional and invalid because they do not allege a crime.
Under the Constitution process, it is a political process, not a criminal process, and the president can be removed if found guilty in such judges who consider “high crimes and misconduct.”
Associated press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Becky Bohrer contributed to this report.