AuthorTopic: Cippolone and Sekulow Are Professional Prevaricators  (Read 174 times)

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17911
    • View Profile
Cippolone and Sekulow Are Professional Prevaricators
« on: January 21, 2020, 04:20:23 PM »
The first thing Trump's lawyers tried to do in the opening statements in the Senate impeachment trial was to mischaracterize the house proceedings in ways that anyone who observed them closely knows was false.  They are taking a page from Trump's own playbook. The facts aren't important, You just have to repeat whatever you want to be believed enough times and people will believe it,

Follow the link below to Vox to read this story in a better format, complete with Tweets.


Trump’s lawyers began the impeachment trial with a blizzard of lies

The opening statements from Trump’s lawyers indicated that gaslighting will be a key part of their strategy.

By Aaron Rupar@atrupar  Jan 21, 2020, 4:15pm EST

 US-POLITICS-IMPEACHMENT
Sekulow (L) and Cipollone (R) arrive at the US Capitol on Tuesday. Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images
The opening debate of the Senate impeachment trial on Tuesday afternoon was supposed to be merely about the trial rules. But in quintessential Trump fashion, members of President Donald Trump’s legal team wasted no time telling a number of lies before things really got going.

Though getting facts wrong might be somewhat understandable in the context of extemporaneous statements, these falsehoods came in the context of prepared remarks read by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and personal Trump attorney Jay Sekulow. And if that approach is indicative of how the rest of the trial will go, casual watchers may end up with an understanding of the timeline of Trump’s Ukraine dealings and ensuing impeachment that’s at odds with reality.

Falsehood No. 1: Trump’s lawyers claimed Republicans didn’t have access to key information during House impeachment inquiry
As part of an effort to portray the process that resulted in Trump’s impeachment and trial as a partisan witch hunt, Cipollone at one point complained that “not even [House Intelligence Committee chair and impeachment manager Adam] Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF,” or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, which is basically the secure facility that members of Congress used to review classified information pertinent to the impeachment inquiry.


Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
"Not even Mr. Schiff's Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF" -- this is a blatant lie from Cipollone
 Embedded video

2,902
1:38 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,516 people are talking about this

This assertion is not true. As a number of reporters pointed out, not only did Republicans involved in the impeachment have access to the SCIF, but many of them also used it.


Garrett Haake

@GarrettHaake
 Cipollone says “Not even Mr. Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF” during impeachment investigation. 

That’s 100% false. Any member of the three investigating committees could attend, and many Republicans did!

19.8K
1:32 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

8,029 people are talking about this

As part of a made-for-TV stunt, House Republicans did storm a SCIF in October to protest Democrats not providing Republicans who were otherwise uninvolved in the impeachment inquiry with access to closed-door depositions. However, Republicans who are members of one of the three committees involved in the process had the same access as Democrats.

When the trial resumed after a brief pause following Sekulow and Cipollone’s statements, Schiff noted that Cipollone made “a false statement” about access to the SCIF, saying, “I will tell you this: He’s mistaken. He’s mistaken ... [Republicans] got the same time we did.”

Falsehood No. 2: Schiff “manufactured” Trump’s comments during the July Zelensky call
That wasn’t the only easily refutable lie pushed by Cipollone during his opening remarks on Tuesday. At another point, he alluded to Schiff’s paraphrasing of Trump’s now-infamous July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “When Mr. Schiff saw that his allegations [about Trump abusing his power] were false, and he knew it anyway, what did he do? He went to the House and he manufactured a fraudulent version of that phone call. He read it to the American people, and he didn’t tell them it was a complete fake,” Cipollone said, echoing a talking point that Trump has incessantly used to discredit the impeachment inquiry.


Ryan Goodman

@rgoodlaw
 Another new low.

White House Counsel for President of United States on the floor of Senate engaging in disinformation.

Repeating false claim that Schiff “manufactured a false version of that call.” The call transcript was ALREADY PUBLIC, Schiff was obviously paraphrasing it. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1219704524933357568
Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
Pat Cipollone is falsifying the timeline of the Ukraine scandal. (The first Trump-Zelensky call was never a major subject of controversy and Cipollone is pretending to be made about Schiff paraphrasing.)
  Embedded video

2,924
1:42 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,354 people are talking about this

But those comments are a gross mischaracterization of what Schiff did. Schiff paraphrased the phone call for dramatic effect and made clear he was doing so. Though his decision may have been ill-advised — I criticized it at the time because it provided Trump with grist to diminish the proceedings — in no way did Schiff try and bamboozle people into believing Trump said things he didn’t say.


Aaron Blake

@AaronBlake
 Cipollone on Schiff's summary of the call: "He read it to the American people, and he didn't tell them it was a complete fake."

In fact, Schiff disclosed up-front that his summary of what Trump said on the call was "shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words."

231
1:34 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

97 people are talking about this

And there was more
Cipollone wasn’t alone in getting basic stuff wrong. Sekulow’s opening statement, which served as an extended complaint about process, also managed to mangle the facts (he claimed House Democrats delayed transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a longer period of time than was actually the case) and mischaracterize the impeachment process (he said Trump “was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses” during the House inquiry when, in fact, the White House declined to do so).


Cheddar News

@CheddarNews
 Sekulow: "The President  was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses.... denied the right to access evidence... and denied the right to have counsel present at hearings. That's a trifecta, a trifecta that violates the Constitution of the United States." #CheddarNews
 Embedded video

12
1:36 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

See Cheddar News's other Tweets

Although most of the impeachment trial is still to come, the way Cipollone and Sekulow handled their opening statements suggests the White House is confident they have little to worry about from Senate Republicans, some of whom have indicated they would like to hear from witnesses as part of the process.

Facts, not to mention a sense of shame, will not get in the way of the narrative that Trump’s legal team intends to push about Democrats having it out for the president — and Cipollone and Sekulow are betting that the American people will either agree with them or won’t be able to see through it.

Schiff made clear that he also views Cipollone and Sekulow’s false claims as part of a strategy. After the aforementioned break, he mentioned a number of the lies and said, “Why don’t they have a better argument to make on the merits?”


Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
SCHIFF: "When you hear them attack the House managers, what you're really hearing is 'we don't want to talk about POTUS's guilt ... so we'll attack the House managers b/c maybe we can distract you for a moment' ... why don't they have a better argument to make on the merits?"
 Embedded video

2,466
2:31 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

831 people are talking about this

When Schiff wrapped up, the next speaker — Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) — also devoted some time to debunking the false claims Cipollone made about both Trump and executive privilege.

The news moves fast. To stay updated, follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter, and read more of Vox’s policy and politics coverage.

Trump’s lawyers began the impeachment trial with a blizzard of lies
The opening statements from Trump’s lawyers indicated that gaslighting will be a key part of their strategy.
By Aaron Rupar@atrupar  Jan 21, 2020, 4:15pm EST
Share this story
Share this on Facebook (opens in new window)
Share this on Twitter (opens in new window)
SHARE
All sharing options
 US-POLITICS-IMPEACHMENT
Sekulow (L) and Cipollone (R) arrive at the US Capitol on Tuesday. Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images
The opening debate of the Senate impeachment trial on Tuesday afternoon was supposed to be merely about the trial rules. But in quintessential Trump fashion, members of President Donald Trump’s legal team wasted no time telling a number of lies before things really got going.

Though getting facts wrong might be somewhat understandable in the context of extemporaneous statements, these falsehoods came in the context of prepared remarks read by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and personal Trump attorney Jay Sekulow. And if that approach is indicative of how the rest of the trial will go, casual watchers may end up with an understanding of the timeline of Trump’s Ukraine dealings and ensuing impeachment that’s at odds with reality.

Falsehood No. 1: Trump’s lawyers claimed Republicans didn’t have access to key information during House impeachment inquiry
As part of an effort to portray the process that resulted in Trump’s impeachment and trial as a partisan witch hunt, Cipollone at one point complained that “not even [House Intelligence Committee chair and impeachment manager Adam] Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF,” or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, which is basically the secure facility that members of Congress used to review classified information pertinent to the impeachment inquiry.


Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
"Not even Mr. Schiff's Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF" -- this is a blatant lie from Cipollone
 Embedded video

2,902
1:38 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,516 people are talking about this

This assertion is not true. As a number of reporters pointed out, not only did Republicans involved in the impeachment have access to the SCIF, but many of them also used it.


Garrett Haake

@GarrettHaake
 Cipollone says “Not even Mr. Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF” during impeachment investigation. 

That’s 100% false. Any member of the three investigating committees could attend, and many Republicans did!

19.8K
1:32 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

8,029 people are talking about this

As part of a made-for-TV stunt, House Republicans did storm a SCIF in October to protest Democrats not providing Republicans who were otherwise uninvolved in the impeachment inquiry with access to closed-door depositions. However, Republicans who are members of one of the three committees involved in the process had the same access as Democrats.

When the trial resumed after a brief pause following Sekulow and Cipollone’s statements, Schiff noted that Cipollone made “a false statement” about access to the SCIF, saying, “I will tell you this: He’s mistaken. He’s mistaken ... [Republicans] got the same time we did.”

Falsehood No. 2: Schiff “manufactured” Trump’s comments during the July Zelensky call
That wasn’t the only easily refutable lie pushed by Cipollone during his opening remarks on Tuesday. At another point, he alluded to Schiff’s paraphrasing of Trump’s now-infamous July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “When Mr. Schiff saw that his allegations [about Trump abusing his power] were false, and he knew it anyway, what did he do? He went to the House and he manufactured a fraudulent version of that phone call. He read it to the American people, and he didn’t tell them it was a complete fake,” Cipollone said, echoing a talking point that Trump has incessantly used to discredit the impeachment inquiry.


Ryan Goodman

@rgoodlaw
 Another new low.

White House Counsel for President of United States on the floor of Senate engaging in disinformation.

Repeating false claim that Schiff “manufactured a false version of that call.” The call transcript was ALREADY PUBLIC, Schiff was obviously paraphrasing it. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1219704524933357568
Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
Pat Cipollone is falsifying the timeline of the Ukraine scandal. (The first Trump-Zelensky call was never a major subject of controversy and Cipollone is pretending to be made about Schiff paraphrasing.)
  Embedded video

2,924
1:42 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,354 people are talking about this

But those comments are a gross mischaracterization of what Schiff did. Schiff paraphrased the phone call for dramatic effect and made clear he was doing so. Though his decision may have been ill-advised — I criticized it at the time because it provided Trump with grist to diminish the proceedings — in no way did Schiff try and bamboozle people into believing Trump said things he didn’t say.


Aaron Blake

@AaronBlake
 Cipollone on Schiff's summary of the call: "He read it to the American people, and he didn't tell them it was a complete fake."

In fact, Schiff disclosed up-front that his summary of what Trump said on the call was "shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words."

231
1:34 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

97 people are talking about this

And there was more
Cipollone wasn’t alone in getting basic stuff wrong. Sekulow’s opening statement, which served as an extended complaint about process, also managed to mangle the facts (he claimed House Democrats delayed transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a longer period of time than was actually the case) and mischaracterize the impeachment process (he said Trump “was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses” during the House inquiry when, in fact, the White House declined to do so).


Cheddar News

@CheddarNews
 Sekulow: "The President  was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses.... denied the right to access evidence... and denied the right to have counsel present at hearings. That's a trifecta, a trifecta that violates the Constitution of the United States." #CheddarNews
 Embedded video

12
1:36 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

See Cheddar News's other Tweets

Although most of the impeachment trial is still to come, the way Cipollone and Sekulow handled their opening statements suggests the White House is confident they have little to worry about from Senate Republicans, some of whom have indicated they would like to hear from witnesses as part of the process.

Facts, not to mention a sense of shame, will not get in the way of the narrative that Trump’s legal team intends to push about Democrats having it out for the president — and Cipollone and Sekulow are betting that the American people will either agree with them or won’t be able to see through it.

Schiff made clear that he also views Cipollone and Sekulow’s false claims as part of a strategy. After the aforementioned break, he mentioned a number of the lies and said, “Why don’t they have a better argument to make on the merits?”


Aaron Rupar

@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
SCHIFF: "When you hear them attack the House managers, what you're really hearing is 'we don't want to talk about POTUS's guilt ... so we'll attack the House managers b/c maybe we can distract you for a moment' ... why don't they have a better argument to make on the merits?"
 Embedded video

2,466
2:31 PM - Jan 21, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

831 people are talking about this

When Schiff wrapped up, the next speaker — Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) — also devoted some time to debunking the false claims Cipollone made about both Trump and executive privilege.

The news moves fast. To stay updated, follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter, and read more of Vox’s policy and politics coverage.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/21/21075791/trump-impeachment-lawyers-jay-sekulow-pat-cipollone-opening-statement
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 04:22:50 PM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17911
    • View Profile
Re: Cipollone and Sekulow Are Professional Prevaricators
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2020, 06:13:52 PM »
Poliifact confirms Cipollone's claim from today with regards to SCIF was......FALSE.





In Senate trial, Pat Cipollone was wrong on GOP access to SCIF depositions

By Louis Jacobson on Tuesday, January 21st, 2020 at 4:43 p.m.


White House counsel Pat Cipollone arrives on Capitol Hill on Jan. 21, 2020, the first full day of President Donald Trump's impeachment trial. (AP)
On the first full day of President Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone claimed that House Democrats had run roughshod over the president’s procedural rights by denying Republicans access to key parts of the investigation.

Cipollone had several complaints, but one stood out to us as clearly wrong.

"Not even (House Intelligence Chairman Adam) Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF" during the House impeachment investigation, Cipollone said on the Senate floor Jan. 21. (A "SCIF," which stands for "sensitive compartmented information facility," is a secure government facility where classified intelligence can be discussed without eavesdropping.)

Cipollone’s assertion echoed one made by, and on behalf of, a group of Republicans who staged a sit-in at the House Intelligence committee, to protest what they argued were unfair ground rules for the Republican minority during the House impeachment inquiry.

On Oct. 23, more than 40 Republican lawmakers disrupted witness testimony by storming the SCIF where depositions were under way, chanting, "Let us in!"

At the time of the sit-in, Republicans could argue that that the impeachment hearings had only taken place behind closed doors and without transcripts being formally released. (Those transcripts were later released to the public, minus redactions for national-security reasons.)

But what about access to the depositions at the Intelligence Committee? Were all Republicans banned? No.

In the recent impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., instructed three House committees — Oversight, Intelligence and Foreign Affairs — to carry out an investigation that the House Judiciary Committee eventually used to draft articles of impeachment. All three committees and all of their members had access to depositions in the SCIF.

There are nine Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee, 17 on the House Oversight Committee, and 21 on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

All 47 of those Republicans have been able to participate and ask questions in the interviews and depositions held to this point, Ashley Etienne, Pelosi’s communications director, told PolitiFact last October. Independent experts told us the same thing.

Some Republican House members, such as Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, who organized the Oct. 23 protest, were kept out of the hearings not because of their party affiliation, but because they did not sit not on the relevant committees. (Democrats who weren’t on the committees were kept out as well.) Some, such as Rep. Ted Yoho of Florida, chose not to attend despite being able to do so.

The proof is also in the transcripts that were publicly released: Republican lawmakers and staff asked questions of witnesses, with the witness responding under oath.

One analysis by Philip Bump of the Washington Post found that Republican lawmakers made extensive use of their questioning powers in the deposition of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a member of the National Security Council. He did this by tallying up the number of lines devoted to each party’s remarks in the transcript that was eventually released.

"About 44% of the transcript is made up of questions or answers from Democratic members or staff," Bump wrote. "About 41% is from the Republicans. The remaining 15% was discussion and objections."

Neither the White House nor Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign replied to our query asking for evidence that backed Cipollone’s claim.

Our ruling
Cipollone said, "Not even Schiff’s Republican colleagues were allowed into the SCIF" during the House impeachment investigation.

Not only were they allowed in, but there’s voluminous evidence in the deposition transcripts that they asked questions extensively and received answers under oath.

We rate the statement False.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2020/jan/21/pat-cipollone/senate-trial-pat-cipollone-was-wrong-gop-access-sc/
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 07:57:29 PM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
3394 Views
Last post January 13, 2017, 05:02:25 PM
by RE
35 Replies
6223 Views
Last post December 29, 2015, 05:42:57 AM
by Eddie