Sen. Bill Cassidy Declines To Say Whether He Doubts Trump Incited the Capitol Riot

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) says he is holding off on making a judgment call as to whether former President Donald Trump incited the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Cassidy was asked if he has a doubt that Trump bears responsibility for the violence. He said, “Ask me after I hear the defense arguments.”

“You don’t make a decision as a juror until you hear both sides. Period, end of story,” he added.

He stressed that he would not make a decision on how he plans to vote until he hears arguments from Trump’s legal team to refute the charge that he incited the riot.

Cassidy said the House impeachment managers have done “very well” in the arguments. He noted that they laid out a timeline “in which you see the events unfold” and “the president’s inaction in calling out support for the police officers.”

Watch the video below:

He also noted that the managers pointed out that while lawmakers were being evacuated, Trump was calling senators and asking them to vote to decertify the electoral votes.

He said he hopes Trump’s legal team can explain Trump’s actions.

Cassidy initially voted to declare the impeachment trial unconstitutional, as IJR reported.

However, after the opening remarks from the impeachment managers, he voted to let the trial proceed.

In a statement after his vote, Cassidy explained his decision, “We have heard arguments on both sides on the constitutionality of having a Senate trial of a president who has since left office. A sufficient amount of evidence of constitutionality exists for the Senate to proceed with the trial. This vote is not a prejudgment on the final vote to convict.”

“If anyone disagrees with my vote and would like an explanation, I ask them to listen to the arguments presented by the House Managers and former President Trump’s lawyers. The House managers had much stronger constitutional arguments. The president’s team did not,” he added.

Responses

  1. If any posters are constituents of Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, or Mike Lee and you have asked them for what the actual PLAN is post acquittal? HOW do we explain to the world without them ROTFL at us that the 45th POTUS attempted a coup and incited an insurrection and the majority of Republican Congressmen and Senators are okay with it? Surely there must be a plan for the consequences of their actions—-or is this one more thing they want Biden to clean-up for them?

  2. Ahem…

    Why are Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham (members of the so-called jury) meeting with the defense lawyers behind closed doors? That is HIGHLY unethical!

    1. GC hater… They didn’t want you staring at there crotch and licking your lips… what did you think they were doing… you make everybody nervous when you do that…

      1. “there crotch…”? Sometimes I think individuals pose as Trump supporters in an attempt to make them appear obtuse. Is that your intent?

    2. WHY do you consider ethics when examining the actions of ANYONE from the Trump Party? That was difficult for me to type the word in the same sentence with Trump Party. Ethics is not part of their makeup. It is comparable to expecting a dog to adhere to rules of etiquette. Lower your expectations because R’s can’t conceive incorporating ethics in their decision making.

      Schoen is claiming the defense will take less than 4 hours. The perfect defense would be proving that Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz BOTH told the public that Trump is a “pathological liar.” Play the tapes of them doing so in 2016. A video of a montage of Trump’s lies starting with evidence of the birther claim and ending with Trump’s claims the insurrectionists were members of Antifa. (There has to be at least an hour’s worth of tape just in the last year.) Then simply play a video of Graham, Lee and Cruz claiming the OBVIOUS. If the insurrectionist BELIEVED the voter fraud nonsense, that was ON THEM. NOT Trump. Every individual with a functioning brain knew he was LYING and play the tape again of Cruz and Graham telling the public Trump was a pathological liar. Rest their case.

      1. “WHY do you consider ethics when examining the actions of ANYONE from the Trump Party?” Phyllis

        Mainly because we are SUPPOSED to be a country of laws and rules. Jurors having a private meeting with defense lawyers is highly frowned upon under ANY circumstances.

Comments are closed.