Impeachment Managers Argue Trump Is ‘Singularly Responsible’ For Capitol Attack

Enlarge this image


In a pre-trial brief released on Tuesday, House impeachment managers argue former President Donald Trump whipped a crowd of supporters into a «frenzy on Jan. 6 and incited the ensuing riot at the U.S. Capitol.





Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images



hide caption



toggle caption


Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images



Politics
READ: House Impeachment Managers’ Brief Outlines Arguments For Senate Trial Of Trump



Politics
Amid Grief, Rep. Jamie Raskin Leads Trump Impeachment Effort In Senate

The managers, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, argue that Trump is «singularly responsible for the riot that overran the Capitol on Jan. 6, damaged the historic building and left five people dead.

«It is impossible to imagine the events of January 6 occurring without President Trump creating a powder keg, striking a match, and then seeking personal advantage from the ensuing havoc, they write.

There was no immediate comment from Trump’s office or his legal team, although they were expected to file a response to the impeachment article later in the day.

The events of Jan. 6

The managers walk through the lead-up to that day, when members of Congress were counting Electoral College votes, noting that for weeks Trump refused to accept the results of the 2020 election and perpetuated baseless claims that he won in a landslide and the vote was «stolen from him.

«He amplified these lies at every turn, seeking to convince supporters that they were victims of a massive electoral conspiracy that threatened the Nation’s continued existence, they write. «But every single court to consider the President’s attacks on the outcome of the election rejected them.

With his options dwindling, they say, Trump turned to the Jan. 6 rally in Washington.



Capitol Insurrection Updates
Hundreds Identified, More Than 100 Arrested In Connection With Capitol Insurrection



Politics
Trump Names New Defense Team Ahead Of Senate Impeachment Trial

The House managers say Trump took the stage after Rudy Giuliani had called for «trial by combat, and Trump’s son had warned Republican lawmakers not to finalize the election results.

«Finally, President Trump appeared behind a podium bearing the presidential seal. Surveying the tense crowd before him, President Trump whipped it into a frenzy, exhorting followers to ‘fight like hell [or] you’re not going to have a country anymore,’ the managers write. «Then he aimed them straight at the Capitol, declaring: «You’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.’ «

They continue: «Incited by President Trump, his mob attacked the Capitol. This assault unfolded live on television before a horrified nation.

The managers argue Trump did nothing to call the riot off, which they say was a «dereliction of duty. And his first statement about the violence, hours later, told the crowd, «You’re very special.

The question of constitutionality

In their brief, the impeachment managers also make their argument for the constitutionality of impeaching and convicting a now-former president.

In a vote last week, 45 Senate Republicans voted that impeaching a former president is unconstitutional — a line of defense that Trump’s legal team is expected to employ during the trial.



Analysis
There Is Precedent For Trying A Former Government Official, Established 145 Years Ago

The House managers argue that there is precedent for holding former office holders responsible for their actions, although none of those instances involved a president.

They also argue that common sense argues in their favor, saying «there is no ‘January Exception’ to impeachment or any other provision of the Constitution.

«Presidents do not get a free pass to commit high crimes and misdemeanors near the end of their term, they write. «The Framers of our Constitution feared more than anything a President who would abuse power to remain in office against the will of the electorate. Allowing Presidents to subvert elections without consequence would encourage the most dangerous of abuses.

The managers also try to tackle another potential defense Trump’s counsel may mount — that Trump’s words to the crowd on Jan. 6 are protected by the First Amendment.

The managers say that’s not so for several reasons.

The First Amendment protects private citizens from the government, but not government officials from accountability, they say.

The First Amendment also doesn’t prevent Congress from removing an official whose statements undermine government interests.

«No one would seriously suggest that a President should be immunized from impeachment if he publicly championed the adoption of totalitarian government, swore an oath of eternal loyalty to a foreign power, or advocated that states secede from and overthrow the Union — even though private citizens could be protected by the First Amendment for such speech, they argue.

Finally, even if Trump’s actions while still in office were to be treated like the acts of a private citizen, he still wouldn’t be protected by the First Amendment, they say, because speech that incites violence and lawless action is not protected.