Impeachment Trial Or Cover Up: Jill Wine-Banks Can Tell

Impeachment Trial Or Cover Up? Jill Wine-Banks Can Tell

Impeachment Trial Or Cover Up? Jill Wine-Banks Can Tell You With Nixon Era Experience

Now over 70% of voters want a fair trial. Republicans want a cover up. Over 51% are ready to remove Trump before the evidence is seen. They want to see the documents, emails and photos. Also they want to hear from the witnesses and see them questioned. Republicans want none of it made public. When team Trump has no ability to point to a single witness that can refute the Articles of Impeachment.
That is not a pretext to simply dismiss the charges and reward Donald Trump for colluding with a hostile foreign power to undermine our democratic process. Midnight Mitch hopes to hide the whole affair from the public with bizarre overnight scheduling and media blackouts. No hiding from fake national security concerns. An embarrassing fact about Trump is not a matter of national security or executive privilege. As if you can claim privilege over someone who you claim you don’t know.

Get the whole story from Jill Wine-Banks’ book The Watergate Girl

She broke the glass ceiling while concentrating on the Nixon criminal investigations. Nixon set the template that Trump met and exceeded. Click Here to get your own copy.

Moscow Midnight Mitch the Con
Don’t look in here! NO!!! Don’t Click here!

So to expound on this I’ve assembled three media appearances of former Nixon Impeachment team member, Jill Wine-Banks. She can authoritatively say whether this Senate Action is an impeachment trial or a partisan Republican cover up.

I’ll start with snippets of the panel discussion from Face the Nation.

Face The Nation:

The way Democrats structured and delivered their case, would you have changed anything you saw

Jill Wine-Banks:

I wouldn’t. I think they get an A+ for their presentation for their content in terms
of both the law the facts the history. They’ve really hit it right on target. They have made the case completely clear. It’s hard for me to see how any unbiased person could listen to the presentation
and not vote to convict, and how anyone could vote to, can to vote period. Without hearing more evidence when there is obviously more means you can’t exonerate him.
Because if you think there’s not enough evidence to convict now and you vote against hearing more evidence, how can you ever say that the president was exonerated? You can not. It’s just not logical. So I think they really have done a good job in showing why it matters to America. Why Ukraine matters, why national security is endangered, and why he needs to be removed.
So that he doesn’t keep doing this and doesn’t set a precedent that the next President, that the Republicans won’t like, may do the same thing. Although I think that any Democrat would be much more moral and would never do these things.
As a young lawyer, absolutely I remember Tom Railsback. I remember Representative Hogan. I remember how many Republicans were part of drafting the Articles of Impeachment and voting for them. It was a time before there were just, you know. Then there were only three networks and we had all the same facts. Everybody agreed on the facts, and now we live in a bubble where we believe one set of facts. People who watch Fox believe another and so we’re not gonna get to the same place, but it was a time of bipartisan factual-based things.
It’s what gives me some hope. That there were people sitting in the Senate who will listen to the facts. Because the case laid out was absolutely crystal clear that the crimes were committed. That impeachable offenses were committed. The law is clear. I would be very interested to hear Dershowitz and what he has to say now. As opposed to what he said in 1998. Because he was right in 98 and now he’s taking an opposite position and he’s wrong. He’s just wrong.

Sexy Stephie
Stephanie Miller is on the air during morning drive hours

Sexy Stephy Says:
One way to fight back is buy Malcolm’s book The Plot to Destroy Democracy and read it and give it to everybody you know.
See other Malcolm Nance posts -click here

 

 

Then she went on the Stephanie Miller Show. I believe it went like this.

Stephanie Miller:

Hello, good morning, Jill Wine-Banks. You’re so precious. So I have obviously so much to talk about, but of course I have to go to what Carl Bernstein said, of Watergate Fame of course. He said, the most important moment for the Republican Party since the censure of Joe McCarthy and the impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon. In which Republicans became great heroes and Patriots. Now we’re looking at Midnight Mitch and the so called world’s greatest deliberative body really embracing a cover-up that is there for all to see.
Impeachment trial or cover up -Jill's seen it before

That’s what this is about. It’s about preventing the information from becoming known and seen by the American public.

He noted how the impeachments of Johnson and Clinton, their word, had been no problem about knowing the truth of the facts but in the impeachment of Trump he said we still have a factual problem here because the president and those who work for him and Mitch McConnell have impeded the facts from the very beginning and here we are Jill.

Jill Wine-Banks:

Here we are right on the first day of the next impeachment. Carl is 100% correct and we just heard it again. If you were listening to the preamble to the trial, both Senator Schumer and Representative Schiff and Nadler we’re talking about the rules and they are outrageous. It is a lie to say that they are the same rules as governed the Clinton impeachment.
This idea of rushing it so that you have a 12-hour day is obscene and ridiculous. The Senators will not be able to pay attention to facts and evidence for that long. Of course, we don’t even know if there are going to be any evidence or witnesses. They haven’t agreed to that yet. So how do you make an opening statement?
When, normally in an opening statement, you say witness one will say this, witness two will say this. This is what you are going to hear during the course of the trial. Well, how can you say that? We don’t know who is going to be allowed to be put before the Senate. That is a big mistake. It’s a strategic error for everybody, it is definitely a cover-up by any Senator who votes for those rules.
Not just shame on Mitch McConnell. Shame on anyone who votes for them.

Sexy Stephie
Stephanie Miller is on the air during morning drive hours

Sexy Stephy Says:

One way to fight back is buy Jill’s book The Watergate Girl to read it and give it to everybody you know. It’s a book to bridge the generations
Get the book -Click Here

 

Stephanie Miller:

Well it’s extraordinary Jill. As a prosecutor, Chuck Schumer tweets, under this resolution Senator McConnell saying he doesn’t want to hear any of the existing evidence. He doesn’t want to hear any new evidence. A trial with no evidence, no existing record, no witnesses, no documents, isn’t a trial at all. It’s a cover-up.
Even this fact that, well, let’s talk about Roberts in this. Is he going to allow Midnight Mitch to have a trial which he’s clearly trying to force it into the middle of the night so no one sees it. They will control when the cameras on and when they aren’t. You tweeted, Roberts should insist that he will not preside for twelve hours. He still has to be alert during the morning.
This is a cover-up on steroids. We should all protest. And I agree, and aren’t you heartened by the polls? 70% of Americans want to hear witnesses in a real trial. Over a majority 51% want him removed now, without seeing a trial.

Jill Wine-Banks:Senate impeachment trial

Well yes of course. I’m slightly heartened but in the end, Mitch McConnell controls it, and the Republicans control it. So it’s not just Mitch McConnell. It is all the Republicans and you have to keep that in mind. It’s people like Mitt Romney who said, well after all this I’ll think about it. No, you should think about it now.
If you want to have a fair trial. You have to have a fair trial and that means you have to have witnesses. You can’t just have a summary opening statement and the difference is here. First of all I would have also liked Chief Justice Roberts to have said before he administered the oath to the Senators. A warning which is. It is okay to have a bias. I have to ask you all now, if you have a bias, are you able to set it aside so that you can judge impartially on the evidence presented in this Senate Chamber. That’s the standard for any juror in any criminal trial.
You’re allowed to have read the press coverage you’re allowed to have formed an opinion. As long as you’re willing to say that you are capable of setting aside that opinion that the facts could change your mind.

Stephanie Miller:

Can Roberts do you think, will he chime in about witnesses? Will he will he let them do this sham trial in the middle of the night? What do you think?

Jill Wine-Banks:

You know, I don’t know. I’ve listened to all the people who are much more familiar with him and it’s divided opinion as to whether he will do what Chief Justice Rehnquist did. Which is to remain as quiet as he possibly could and to take no positions. To rule on nothing. Or whether he will be the tiebreaker in case it’s 50/50. Whether he will say, at least rule now, even knowing you can be overruled.
If I were him I would certainly say. That’s a relevant witness, that’s a witness that should be heard, that witness has nothing to do with the charges brought here and so that witness should not be heard. I know you can tell which witnesses I would is. I think that’s what he should do. Then if he’s overruled, Americans can judge for themselves whether they think it’s fair that they decided that they know better than the Chief Justice of the United States about what is a relevant witness. Also that they aren’t willing to listen to that evidence.
Trump's criminal administrationMalcolm Nance is the greatest author and intelligence expert in the anti-Trump resistance movement. He told you so before and during the Trump election campaign. Now he is back with more confirmation and information about the most criminal White House occupants ever to seize power. Also their domestic terrorists. Another must-read from Nance.See other Malcolm Nance posts -click here
“The Plot to Betray America: How Team Trump Embraced Our Enemies, Compromised Our Security, and How We Can Fix It”

Stephanie Miller:

So curiously, behind the scenes, they’re trying to stop Lev Parnas from testifying. Here’s an interesting
question someone brought up. How was Trump gonna claim executive privilege to block Parnas’ evidence and testimony while claiming he’s never met him? [Jill laughs] That wasn’t meant to be a joke, but thank you. Jill Wine-Banks:
When you say it out loud it just shows ho ridiculous it is. Really? Truly, I never met him and now there’s pictures of him as you know, with all of Trump’s children. I mean, he’s known him for many many years. That’s not the issue and you know obviously Richard Nixon knew all the people involved in Watergate.
It doesn’t mean that he approved and knew in advance that they were going to break in.
So there can be differences. It doesn’t mean that he knew. I want to hear a Lev Parnas testify about how he knows that the president knew. Of course, Rudy Giuliani could certainly tell that, but he’s such an unreliable witness given his crazy background. You know, all of the witnesses that the Democrats have requested are high-risk witnesses. I don’t know what Bolton’s going to say. It clear he wants a future in the Republican Party.

Stephanie Miller:

That’s what I said earlier. That we want to hear the truth and we don’t even know what he’s gonna say.

Sexy Stephie
Stephanie Miller is on the air during morning drive hours

Sexy Stephy Says:
One way to fight back is buy Jill’s book The Watergate Girl to read it and give it to everybody you know.
Get the book -Click Here

 

Jill Wine-Banks:

Exactly. I mean, we may not hear the truth. We’ll hear his testimony, doesn’t mean it’ll be the truth. Because you can color the truth. You can evade, you can just put it in a way that makes it sound like one thing when it’s really another. So I don’t trust that he will necessarily be the best witness ever, but if you’re gonna have the facts, if you’re going to have- You can’t exonerate unless you’ve put all the possible evidence in front of someone. If you are barred from putting out the evidence he will never ever, ever be exonerated.

he will never ever, ever be exonerated

Simply cannot. Just logically, if I don’t have an opportunity or if my opportunity is at 2:00 a.m. when no one is listening, you know, a tree falls in the forest and there’s no one there. Is there a sound? I think this idea of 12 hours and and remember one of the reasons that the trial is starting at 1:00 is because Chief Justice Roberts has an actual job. To hear arguments in the court, but there are only arguments today and tomorrow. There is not another argument set until February I think the 23rd.
So they don’t have to start at 1:00 o’clock. They could start at 9:00 in the morning, but even if they did but the Senators can’t sit from 9:00 to 9:00. For 12 hours and absorb anything. I don’t care who you are, no one can.

Stephanie Miller:

That’s what their goal is. That we won’t absorb the true level of criminality here.

Jill Wine-Banks:

Exactly. Exactly. it’s just wrong.

Stephanie Miller:

You know what? What we didn’t have in Nixon. We don’t say we didn’t have social media, didn’t have DVR’s and I just think that human nature, Jill, is gonna work toward us here. This is such an obvious ham-handed cover-up. I think people that already 70 percent want to see witnesses are are gonna see exactly what’s going on and they’re gonna be more motivated to watch this. Or find out what happened in one way or another.

Get the whole story from Jill Wine-Banks’ book The Watergate Girl

She broke the glass ceiling while concentrating on the Nixon criminal investigations. Nixon set the template that Trump met and exceeded.

Click Here to get your own copy.

Jill Wine-Banks:

Well possibly, but if the 12 hours each day is simply Senators making a presentation, that’s the same thing as having Mueller testify. It’s not the same as hearing a witness. I don’t want to hear Muller or Schiff describe what happened. I wanted to hear the witnesses he sought, I want them to testify.
We’ve seen some of them in the House hearings, but there’s a lot of new information. That’s information I want to see and the House should reconvene the hearing if it has to, to get this to the public.

Stephanie Miller:

I love hearing you dismantle Dershowitz and others. Legal brief ignores GAO conclusion that he didn’t violate federal law also ignores that no such crime is required for impeachment. Goes on to say, abuse of power is exactly what our founders intended as grounds for impeachment and the facts prove that Trump abused his and endangered our national security for his own personal benefit.
Finally, you said even the Republican’s scholar at the White House hearing said abuse of power was an impeachable offense. Surely that is why Republicans had to turn to Dershawitz to argue otherwise. Which of course is diametrically opposite to what he argued in the Clinton impeachment.

Trump’s Senate trial is a cover up!

Jill can recognize a cover up!

 

Jill Wine-Banks:

When I wrote that it was before we had put before us his television appearance. That he was saying exactly the opposite of what he’s saying now. He said in 98 that abuse of power is exactly what impeachable offenses are and it is clear. I mean, anybody who reads the language of the Constitution or who reads the Federalist Papers or the debates about the Constitution.
It’s quite clear that they intended to make sure that it was broad enough to cover more than treason. Which involved waging war against our country and bribery. And bribery is not bribery under a federal statute. There was no federal criminal code at the time the Constitution was adopted.

Stephanie Miller:

I mean how about this news that it was not a joke that Trump’s looking to make bribery legal. I’m like oh of course, of course. In the new Very Stable Genius book out today, he literally said that, right? He said it’s so unfair American companies aren’t allowed to pay bribes to get business overseas. We’re gonna change that. So he’s gonna see if he can make everything illegal he does, legal. Right?

Jill Wine-Banks:

It is like living in a science fiction world and I don’t believe in science fiction, but actually there’s some part of me that says this cannot really be happening. This is too incredible.
Everything that we’re saying is true and 40% of Americans are listening to Fox News. Hearing something that is saying none of what we’re saying is true. That it’s a witch hunt or a hoax, and and I’m debating whether I should wear my witches against Trump today or what. I mean I think I’m gonna wear an ostrich, okay? Because that’s what’s happening here.

Resist Trump Halloween Costumes and Stuff
Rise Up In Resistance!

There’s more Jill on Stephanie Miler’s Show Here

The trump trial and cover up parallels with the Nixon Impeachment.
Get the whole story from Jill Wine-Banks’ book The Watergate Girl

She broke the glass ceiling while concentrating on the Nixon criminal investigations. Nixon set the template that Trump met and exceeded.
Click Here to get your own copy.

 

 

Leave a Reply

No Way, Comrade!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept that my given data and my IP address is sent to a server in the USA only for the purpose of spam prevention through the Akismet program.More information on Akismet and GDPR.