Impeachment witness Jonathan Turley calls White House defense ‘sophisticated and effective’

During the House impeachment hearings, the only constitutional “expert” brought in as a witness without an agenda was Jonathan Turley.

Now, as the Senate trial unfolds, Turley — himself no great lover of Trump — has come clean about his opinion on Trump’s defense team. According to the Daily Wire, Turley admitted that he believes Trump’s legal team did a “particularly good job explaining its position on refusing discovery and also the unfair process.”

Massive blow to Dems’ case

When the House impeachment hearings moved to the Judiciary Committee, constitutional experts were called in to clarify the process outlines and requirements of the Constitution when it comes to impeachment.

Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University, has a history of criticizing Trump, but he was generally neutral during the hearings and called facts in all cases for what they truly were.

He has now watched this process play out in both the House and Senate trial, and he seems to believe that Trump’s legal team now holds a significant edge in this argument, which is devastating for Democrats.

Low-key is better

One of the observations Turley made was that Trump’s legal team is taking a far different approach — a low-key approach that is paying off in a huge way.

Democrats came out of the gate swinging, throwing out lies and making accusations that did not play well with Turley or most Americans.

Several of head impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) opening statements have already come under scrutiny because they were blatant lies or debunked accusations against Trump.

Even so, it was Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) that Turley believes made the biggest mistake. Turley stated: “One of the things you teach law students is that when you make arguments to juries, make sure you don’t insult the jury.”

He went on: “That is, you don’t want to make statements that make them feel stupid or ascribe any bad motivations to them, and if there was one major blunder during the argument it was Jerry Nadler, who got ahead of the skis a bit and said that the Senate could be engaged in a cover-up, and when he said that, people on the floor recounted later that there was sort of a hush, a reaction from the Senators.”

Turley’s observation was reflected by several Senators at the end of the week and it even resulted in Chief Justice John Roberts ordering both sides to dial down the rhetoric.

Turley concluded that “the White House gave a concise opening, relieved the jury, and pushed the main argument to Monday with a larger television audience. It was a sophisticated and effective strategy that paid off. A very strong start to their case,” he added.

Share on facebook
Share to Facebook

Latest News