Cybersecurity – A British Perspective

The US has never really had a “cyberczar.” Arguably, though, the U.K. has. The head of the National Cyber Security Center combines the security roles of NSA and DHS’s CISA. To find out how cybersecurity issues look from that perspective, we interview Ciaran Martin, the first director of the NCSC.

In the news roundup, Paul Rosenzweig sums up recent successes in taking down the NetWalker  and Emotet  hacking networks: It’s a win, and that’s good, but we will need more than this to change the overall security status of the country.

Jordan Schneider explains the remarkable trove of leaked Chinese police records and the extraordinary surveillance now being imposed on the Uyghur minority in China.

Enthusiasts for end-to-end encryption should be worried, Mark MacCarthy and I conclude. First, the EU – once a firm advocate of unbreakable encryption – is now touting “security through encryption and security despite encryption.” You can only get the second with some sort of lawful access, an idea that has now achieved respectability inside Brussels government circles, despite lobbying by e2e messaging firms based in Europe. On top of that, there’s a growing fifth column of encryption skeptics inside the firms, whose sentiments can be summarized as, “I’m all for cop-proof encryption as long as it isn’t used by lawbreakers who voted for Trump.”

Paul brings us up to speed on the Office 36 – I mean the SolarWinds – attack. Turns out lots of companies were compromised without any connection to SolarWinds. The episode shows that information sharing about exploits still has a ways to go. And if you’re a lawyer who’s been paying ten cents a page for downloads from the federal courts’ electronic filing system, whatever you’ve been paying for, it isn’t security. The attackers got in there, and as a result, we’ll be making sensitive filings on paper.  First voting, then suing – more and more of our lives are heading off line.

Does China want your DNA, and why? I have a truly scary suggestion, and Jordan tries to talk me down.

The Facebook Oversight Board has issued its first decisions. Paul and Mark touch on the highlights. I predict that the board will overrule Trump’s deplatforming, to surprisingly little dissent.

Jordan and I dig into two overviews of U.S. tech and military competition. It starts to feel a little incestuous when it turns out we all know the authors – and that Jordan has invited them all to be on his excellent podcast, ChinaTalk.

In short hits,

  • I predict that Beijing will fight CFIUS to the last dollar of TikTok revenue. And could easily win.
  • I question YouTube’s demonetization of the Epoch Times, but Jordan has less sympathy for the paper.
  • I’m less flexible about Google’s hard-to-justify decision to block the ads of a group that (like most Americans) opposes Democratic proposals to pack the Supreme Court.
  • And if you’re wondering how dumb stuff like this happens, the L.A.Times gives an object lesson. Faced with a campaign to recall California governor Newsom, the Times dug into the online organizations supporting recall.  Remarkably, it found that the groups included a lot of the same kinds of folks who came to Washington in January to protest President Biden’s victory. Shortly after that drive-by festival of guilt by association, Facebook banned ads supporting the recall movement. 

And more!

Download the 347th Episode (mp3)

You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug!

The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

 

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3pGPE8N
via IFTTT

Thousands Protest the Arrest of Putin Rival Alexei Navalny

dreamstime_xl_209187759

More than 5,000 people were arrested across Russia on Sunday during the second round of protests over the imprisonment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

Video from the day depicts police, equipped with riot gear and batons, frequently beating protesters before dragging them away.

Despite the government’s strong warning against doing so, thousands of people took to the streets in opposition to Navalny’s continued detainment. Navalny’s wife, Yulia, was among those arrested. She was later released and fined 20,000 rubles ($263).

During the week leading up to Sunday’s protest, the Russian government placed several Navalny supporters under house arrest, claiming that their calls for protests which would violate COVID-19 restrictions are a threat.

Navalny has made his name as an anti-corruption crusader and adversary of President Vladimir Putin. He was arrested on January 17 for failing to meet with probation officials while recovering abroad from an August poisoning linked to the Russian government.

Demonstrators in Moscow had originally planned to rally in front of the offices of Russia’s Federal Security Service, the agency Navalny claims was responsible for poisoning him, but a heavy police presence forced them from the area.

In a press conference on Monday, the Kremlin called the demonstrations illegal and accused protesters of antagonizing police.

“There can be no conversation with hooligans and provocateurs,” said Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s press secretary. “The law should be applied with the utmost severity.” 

Russia’s crackdown on demonstrators has sparked condemnation from international leaders.

“The U.S. condemns the persistent use of harsh tactics against peaceful protesters and journalists by Russian authorities,” tweeted U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “We renew our call for Russia to release those detained for exercising their human rights, including Aleksey Navalny.”

Navalny appeared in court today for violating the terms of his probation for a 2014 embezzlement conviction that critics say was orchestrated to keep Navalny from running for office. If convicted, he faces up to 3 1/2 years in prison.

When asked why he had not provided documentation to prison service officials as to his whereabouts, Navalny responded angrily, CNN reported.

“Why are you sitting here and telling the court you didn’t know where I was?” he said. “I fell into a coma, then I was in the ICU, then in rehabilitation. I contacted my lawyer to send you a notice. You had the address, my contact details. What else could I have done to inform you?”

Navalny cited Putin’s announcement that the president personally allowed him to be flown out of the country for treatment: “The president of our country said live on air he let me go to get treatment in Germany and you didn’t know that, too?”

Prior to the proceedings, police blocked pedestrian traffic in the area with barricades and detained dozens of protesters. Navalny supporters have called for further demonstrations this weekend.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2MKBG7w
via IFTTT

Thousands Protest the Arrest of Putin Rival Alexei Navalny

dreamstime_xl_209187759

More than 5,000 people were arrested across Russia on Sunday during the second round of protests over the imprisonment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

Video from the day depicts police, equipped with riot gear and batons, frequently beating protesters before dragging them away.

Despite the government’s strong warning against doing so, thousands of people took to the streets in opposition to Navalny’s continued detainment. Navalny’s wife, Yulia, was among those arrested. She was later released and fined 20,000 rubles ($263).

During the week leading up to Sunday’s protest, the Russian government placed several Navalny supporters under house arrest, claiming that their calls for protests which would violate COVID-19 restrictions are a threat.

Navalny has made his name as an anti-corruption crusader and adversary of President Vladimir Putin. He was arrested on January 17 for failing to meet with probation officials while recovering abroad from an August poisoning linked to the Russian government.

Demonstrators in Moscow had originally planned to rally in front of the offices of Russia’s Federal Security Service, the agency Navalny claims was responsible for poisoning him, but a heavy police presence forced them from the area.

In a press conference on Monday, the Kremlin called the demonstrations illegal and accused protesters of antagonizing police.

“There can be no conversation with hooligans and provocateurs,” said Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s press secretary. “The law should be applied with the utmost severity.” 

Russia’s crackdown on demonstrators has sparked condemnation from international leaders.

“The U.S. condemns the persistent use of harsh tactics against peaceful protesters and journalists by Russian authorities,” tweeted U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “We renew our call for Russia to release those detained for exercising their human rights, including Aleksey Navalny.”

Navalny appeared in court today for violating the terms of his probation for a 2014 embezzlement conviction that critics say was orchestrated to keep Navalny from running for office. If convicted, he faces up to 3 1/2 years in prison.

When asked why he had not provided documentation to prison service officials as to his whereabouts, Navalny responded angrily, CNN reported.

“Why are you sitting here and telling the court you didn’t know where I was?” he said. “I fell into a coma, then I was in the ICU, then in rehabilitation. I contacted my lawyer to send you a notice. You had the address, my contact details. What else could I have done to inform you?”

Navalny cited Putin’s announcement that the president personally allowed him to be flown out of the country for treatment: “The president of our country said live on air he let me go to get treatment in Germany and you didn’t know that, too?”

Prior to the proceedings, police blocked pedestrian traffic in the area with barricades and detained dozens of protesters. Navalny supporters have called for further demonstrations this weekend.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2MKBG7w
via IFTTT

Hunter Biden Hires Criminal Defense Lawyer – Whose Colleague Just Landed Top Spot In Biden DOJ

Hunter Biden Hires Criminal Defense Lawyer – Whose Colleague Just Landed Top Spot In Biden DOJ

Approximately one month before Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th President of the United States, Hunter Biden hired a new attorney to assist with his federal criminal defense.

On Inauguration day, one of that lawyer’s colleagues was appointed as the acting head of the Biden Justice Department’s criminal division, according to Axios – and first reported on Friday by Fox NewsTucker Carlson.

In December, the younger Biden hired former federal prosecutor Chris Clark, a partner at Latham & Watkins, to defend him against alleged tax and money laundering activities, as well as potential counterintelligence concerns. Clark worked at Latham with Nicholas McQuaid on multiple cases involving white-collar defense.

Of note, the Biden investigation is being run by the US Attorney in Delaware – not the main Justice Department, according to Axios‘ Lachlan Markay – who notes that it “shows the need for stict ethics enforcement right off the bat.”

More via Axios:

  • The two were jointly representing at least one Latham client when McQuaid was tapped for his new Justice Department job on Jan. 20.
  • Clark is based out of Latham’s New York office, according to the firm’s website. In December, Hunter Biden was reportedly exploring additional legal representation in Delaware.
  • Clark did not respond to inquiries. There’s also no indication McQuaid did any work on the Hunter Biden case.

McQuaid, a former federal prosecutor, was tapped in January to serve as principal deputy assistant attorney general in the criminal division. Additionally, he was installed as the acting assistant attorney general to replace a Trump appointee, making McQuaid one of a handful of acting AAGs appointed on Biden’s first day in office.

According to the report, federal ethics laws and DOJ regulations would typically bar McQuaid from working on the Biden investigation without a sign-off from Justice ethics officials.

“Potential conflicts between lawyers entering government and their former clients or firms are quite common,” said Kedric Payne, senior director for ethics at the Campaign Legal Center – who apparently sees nothing untoward about McQuaid’s appointment.

“This situation is one of the many initial tests of Biden’s ethics pledge, which looks great on paper, but time will tell if it is effective in practice,” he added. “Enforcement is essential.”

One can only imagine how the press would cover this if it was Don Jr.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 11:29

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3oL1Cgq Tyler Durden

Dave Portnoy Loses ‘700K-ish’ After Selling ‘Meme Stocks’

Dave Portnoy Loses ‘700K-ish’ After Selling ‘Meme Stocks’

Tuesday morning carnage in the heavily-shorted r/WallStreetBets squeeze-trades has resulted in Barstool’s Dave Portnoy losing around $700k.

Portnoy tweeted around 1000 ET, “I have officially sold all my meme stocks. I lost 700k ish. Vlad and company stole it from me and should be in jail.” 

GameStop (GME) is crashing back to double-digit price levels…

The most-shorted basket is rapidly erasing all its gains…

Led by KOSS, GME, and AMC…

Before the cash session opened, Portnoy recorded a video that outlined how “the meme stocks are getting very expensive.” He said he has three r/WallStreetBets stocks. The first is NAKD, where is down 30% from where he bought it (-$63k today). The second is NOK, where he’s down -29% (-$12k from where he bought it), and AMC, where he’s down $100k from where he bought it. Today alone, Portnoy said he down $-172k in these three stocks. Portnoy added that he never owned GME. 

“So I sold AMC when it was down 37%. All time low. At some point, all my other stocks are doing well – I’m not just gonna sit here and take a dick in the face,” he said. 

Around the 17 minute mark of the video, Portnoy blames the whole trading debacle on Robinhood’s CEO Vlad Tenev and the hedge funds they sell order flow. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 10:52

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3j8bccd Tyler Durden

China Slams British “Brazen Thieves” As Hong Kongers Made Eligible For UK Citizenship

China Slams British “Brazen Thieves” As Hong Kongers Made Eligible For UK Citizenship

Britain has started accepting applications for its program to hand out British Overseas Visas to eligible Hong Kongers, and as the first of what could become millions apply, Beijing is less than pleased, and is once again lashing out. The CCP was so enraged by the UK’s challenge to China’s geopolitical power that it barred visitors holding UK passports last week, and on Sunday they slammed London’s decision as “the logic of a brazen bandit.”

The CCP accused London of breaking promises made during the handover to Hong Kong, which is ironic considering China was supposed to allow Hong Kong to enjoy its Democratic freedoms under the “One Country, Two Systems” doctrine, which is in effect, legally speaking, until 2047.

London’s offer of a path to citizenship for some 5.2MM Hong Kongers follows Beijing’s imposition of a National Security law that outlawed any talk “secessionist” or “foreign-influenced” activity. Demands for western style Democracy seemed to be at the top of the new list of forbidden topics. The NatSec law followed months of unrest in Hong Kong, which had finally started to die down before COVID-19 rocked the world after escaping from Wuhan.

In a statement released shorty after the UK opened up the applications, a cabinet-level Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office issued a “strong condemnation” of the move, accusing London of trying to turn millions of Hong kongers into “second-class citizens (kind of like China is doing with the Uyghers?). /p>

Essentially, Beijing repeated Beijing’s own accusations and insults right back at it.

The office said the policy amounted to a breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, a treaty signed by both countries in 1984 which set out the ground rules for Hong Kong’s development after its return to China in 1997. “The British side did not keep its promise…and even brazenly claim it was out of its respect for its historical relationship and friendship with Hong Kong to beautify its history of invasion and colonisation,” it said.“This is the logic of a brazen bandit. This is an open affront to the sovereignty of China. We sternly oppose that.” Beijing’s liaison office in Hong Kong also accused Britain of violating China’s sovereignty and international law.

Britain first announced the plan back in July. At the time, many educated and wealthier workers said they fully intended to leave HK and possibly never come back. It’s not clear so far how many have signed up. Many Hong Kongers told the SCMP they would wait until Feb. 23 when the British government has said it would build a smartphone app.

Some families told the SCMP they were torn between wanting to leave, but lackling a plan for how to make money and survive once they arrive.

Others told the SCMP they were worried about being snitched out to the CCP and Beijing for expressing interest in leaving.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 10:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3j8KTCy Tyler Durden

Eurozone Economy Contracts In Final Quarter Of 2020

Eurozone Economy Contracts In Final Quarter Of 2020

By Maartje Wijffelaars, Economist at Rabobank

Summary

  • The Eurozone economy contracted with 0.7% q/q in the final quarter of last year

  • This means the economy shrank 6.8% in 2020, which is less than expected after the gigantic losses in the first half of the year

  • Going forward, the apparent resilience of the economy, very much reinforced by government support measures, bodes some comfort

  • That said, the third wave and accompanying containment measures likely lead to another GDP contraction in Q1

  • Moreover, new mutations, a slow vaccination trajectory and resurfacing supply chain issues could hamper the recovery for some time longer

Economy contracts in Q4

This morning’s GDP figure for the Eurozone shows the economy contracted in the final quarter of last year with 0.7% q/q (figure 1) and 6.8% in 2020 as a whole – compared to 3.7% in 2009 (figure 2). Hence the second COVID wave that started end-summer delayed the recovery, as expected, but the overall economic drag of the virus upsurge was smaller than the consensus only a few weeks ago. This story that holds for most member states, as we also explained in a note last Friday. Spain outperformed the group with small growth of 0.4% q/q, while Austria was the weakest link, contracting by 4.2% q/q.

A breakdown into expenditure components or sectors for the Eurozone is not yet available. But based on member states’ data, we know that the service sector took a small hit, while manufacturing sector activity increased. Both activity in the service sector and the manufacturing sector seem to have performed better than expected. There are several reasons, yet an important one is that in general the economy seems to be better able to cope with restrictions than expected based on experience in Q2: more restaurants do take-away, more shops sell online – more people buy online -, and working from home facilities have improved.

This resilience gives some comfort going forward, but it is unlikely to prevent another contraction in Q1. With Eurozone governments fighting the third wave in the pandemic, including more contagious mutations, containment measures have been extended well into the first quarter and even intensified in some countries (figure 3). Furthermore, delays in the administration of vaccines could delay the gradual opening of the economy even further. Moreover, current experience in Israel – with over 30% of its population having been inoculated – shows that it could still require tough containment measures for some time even if a substantial share of the population has been vaccinated. Another risk to the outlook is that the resurgence of supply chain issues, could hamper manufacturing production, investment and consumption over the coming months.

Supply chain issues on the horizon

According to January’s manufacturing PMIs, supplier delivery times reached their highest degree since April due to disruptions in supplies coming from Asia. Paradoxically this pushes up the overall PMI figure as in ‘normal’ times longer delivery times are an indication of rapidly increasing demand. Hence the still upbeat manufacturing PMI figure should be viewed with a pinch of salt (figure 4). Especially producers of consumer goods are said to be struggling. The lack of new supplies has already led to destocking at manufacturing companies to levels last seen 2.5 years ago, although not yet to last decade lows – according to ECFIN business surveys.

To add some more colour, recently, the spot prices for containers from China have skyrocketed on the back of a container shortage caused by the crisis (figure 5 and 6). Containers still reside unoffloaded in ports in the US and Europe. Additionally, some large shipping companies have withdrawn a part of their fleet during the first wave of infections in April. Combined with increased demand during Q3 and Q4 of 2020, prices have been pushed upwards from two directions.

Not every company is equally vulnerable to higher transport prices however. First, larger companies often have long-term service contracts, whilst smaller companies often have to deal with subcontractors that update their prices more frequently. Second, some companies are more dependent on intermediate goods from China and Eastern Asia than others. Companies in the computer, electronics & electrical equipment sector for example, are very dependent on Chinese intermediate goods (figure 7), whilst virtually every agricultural intermediate product comes from within Europe. Third, retailers dealing in seasonally dependent products, such as fashion, are potentially at a greater disadvantage, since goods might arrive only once the season has passed.

Uncertainty continues to cloud the outlook

All in all, with the lockdown measures known at this point and carry-over effects, we stand by our forecast for a further drop in Eurozone GDP in the first quarter of 2021, in the order of -0.5 to -1.5% q/q and some recovery in the second quarter. Clearly this forecast is surrounded with quite some uncertainty, not least due to the large dependence on how the virus and vaccination strategy evolve and the uncertainty in estimating timing and exact impact of current supply chain bottlenecks.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 10:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/36zBSxq Tyler Durden

Double-Mask, Double Flip-Flop – Are You F**king Kid Us All Fauci?

Double-Mask, Double Flip-Flop – Are You F**king Kid Us All Fauci?

Update (1015ET): Prepare yourself for more obfuscation and confusion dressed up as ‘science’ by President Biden’s chief medical adviser.

At 48 minutes into the WaPo discussion below, Fauci was asked about double-masking. His response, given his recent flip-flopping may surprise you.

Having said that double-masking “didn’t make a difference”, he appears to flip-flop back saying that the CDC is investigating “whether two masks may be better than one” and added that “it makes common sense” … and added that the reason they have not recommended it until now is that “they are a science-based organization.”

he then added, unscientifically, “if one masks serves as a physical barrier, it makes common sense, and certainly can’t hurt and might help to wear two masks.”

What the f**k Fauci? (forward to 48mins for the discussion on masks):

Does anyone wear two condoms?

*  *  *

As Summit News’ Steve Watson detailked earlier, less than one week after advising Americans that wearing two or even three masks would be ‘more effective’ against the spread of coronavirus, Dr Fauci has done a complete 180 (again) and admitted that there is no data to suggest it will make any difference.

After Fauci made the comments last week, the media began to push the idea that two masks wasn’t enough, and that people need to wear three, or even four masks.

However, during an interview at the weekend, Fauci completely contradicted his own comments from the previous week.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise, given that Fauci has flip-flopped continuously on masks, having originally said that “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask,” and that they are little more than symbolic.

Later, Fauci fully embraced the masks and stated that they ‘need to stay on’ until everyone is vaccinated.

As we previously highlighted, it went from wearing a mask to now wearing two masks being the best way virtue signal.

Why concern yourself with trivial matters such as breathing when the wearing of multiple face coverings is so effective in delivering social media clout?

Don’t let the fact that there is no evidence masks do anything get in the way of that dopamine hit.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 10:19

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3pI4Z9o Tyler Durden

San Francisco Schools Renamed the Arts Department Because Acronyms Are a Symptom of White Supremacy

xnaphotos217267

The San Francisco United School District isn’t quite finished with its renaming binge: The district’s arts department, previously titled VAPA (Visual and Performing Arts), will now be known as the SFUSD Arts Department.

This change has been made in accordance with “antiracist arts instruction,” according to ABC-7 News.

“It is a very simple step we can take to just be referred to as the SFUSD Arts Department for families to better understand who we are,” Sam Bass, director of the SFUSD Arts Department, explained in a memo obtained by the local news network.

Bass did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and the memo isn’t widely available. But ABC-7 reported that the decision was made to eliminate VAPA because the department realized acronyms are a symptom of “white supremacy culture.”

The New York Post reported that the memo cites a 1999 paper by Tema Okun. That paper does not specifically say that acronyms are racist, though it does label “worship of the written word” as an aspect of white supremacy. Other purported characteristics of white supremacy are “perfectionism,” a “sense of urgency,” “individualism,” and “objectivity.” (If this list sounds familiar, it’s because the National Museum of African American Arts and Culture got in trouble last year for promoting similar nonsense.) While some acronyms may be confusing to non-native English speakers, it’s quite a stretch to describe them as a function of white supremacy.

Ironically, Okun’s paper lists memos as characteristic of white supremacy, so the department should probably fire Bass for racism. And at risk of stating the obvious, the new name—SFUSD Arts Department—contains an acronym just as surely as the old one did. White supremacy is just that insidious; even an arts department dedicated to antiracism can’t seem to rid itself of the stain.

This development follows the controversial decision by San Francisco’s school board to formally rename 44 schools that currently honor George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and even Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D–Calif.). As Reason‘s Elizabeth Nolan Brown noted earlier this week, the decision to prioritize this effort at a time when schools aren’t even open strikes many people as embarrassing. “[It’s] a caricature of what people think liberals in San Francisco do,” one parent, a self-described Elizabeth Warren Democrat, told The New York Times. 

San Francisco school officials sure seem to enjoy humiliation. When asked about the significant learning losses among students of color who have now been kept at home for nearly a year, School Board President Gabriela Lopez essentially shrugged.

“They’re just having different learning experiences than the ones we currently measure, and the loss is a comparison to a time when we were in a different space,” she told the San Francisco Chronicle.

The arts department’s badly explained name change isn’t nearly as consequential, but it’s still emblematic of a school district caught in the throes of far-left orthodoxy. If VAPA was a confusing name, then the district was perfectly justified in changing it. There’s no need to cloak this mundane and reasonable decision in social justice gobbledygook.

In any case, San Francisco students won’t be doing any art—antiracist or otherwise—until officials bow to the scientific consensus and actually reopen the schools.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/36Czc25
via IFTTT

Trump Lawyer: Impeachment Is “Political Weaponization” Of A Constitutional Process

Trump Lawyer: Impeachment Is “Political Weaponization” Of A Constitutional Process

Authored by Janita Kan via The Epoch Times,

David Schoen, one of former President Donald Trump’s newly appointed impeachment defense attorneys, said he believes that Democrats are using the impeachment process as a “weapon” to go after Trump in an attempt to bar him from running for office again.

“This is the political weaponization of the impeachment process,” Schoen told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Monday.

“I think it’s also the most ill-advised legislative action that I’ve seen in my lifetime. It is tearing the country apart at a time when we don’t need anything like that.”

Democrat lawmakers have been calling for Trump’s impeachment since the beginning of his term, Schoen said, and the upcoming trial is their latest attempt to target him, as well as to carry out their agenda of preventing him from ever running for president again.

“That’s about as undemocratic as you can get,” Schoen said.

“Can you imagine the slap in the face that is to the 75 million or more voters?”

“Fair-minded people don’t support using the impeachment process to then try to bar someone from running for office again,” he added.

The Democrat-controlled House on Jan. 13 voted 232–197 to impeach Trump on a single article of impeachment, alleging that the president incited an “insurrection” that caused the U.S. Capitol breach on Jan. 6.

The impeachment, which was completed in a single seven-hour session, has been criticized by Republicans for its expediency and lack of due process. Meanwhile, the question of whether the Senate trial, which will begin on the week of Feb. 8, is constitutional has prompted a heated public debate among legal scholars and lawmakers.

Scholars who are arguing that the trial is unconstitutional are relying on an interpretation of Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, which states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

According to their reading of the text, these scholars say impeachment is for current officeholders, and since Trump had already left office, the Senate’s jurisdiction—or authority—to hold an impeachment trial expired on Jan. 20, when his term came to a close.

On the other hand, scholars who are arguing that the upcoming trial is constitutional say that the impeachment power and the Senate’s jurisdiction needs to be read in conjunction with Article I, Section 3, which states, “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

These scholars also contend that the argument for impeachment is supported by historical precedents.

Schoen also signaled that he and attorney Bruce Castor Jr. will also argue that Trump’s speech at the rally on Jan. 6 is protected by the First Amendment.

“This is a very, very dangerous road to take with respect to the First Amendment, putting at risk any passionate political speaker,” Schoen said.

The media, lawmakers, former officials, and other critics have put the blame on Trump for the Jan. 6 Capitol breach and have been calling for his impeachment. Hours earlier, the president addressed a crowd in Washington D.C. where he reiterated allegations about election irregularities and potential fraud, and his dissatisfaction with the media and several lawmakers. Before calling on his supporters to “fight like hell” to be well-represented in Congress, Trump urged supporters to protest “peacefully and patriotically” at the U.S. Capitol.

The breach at the U.S. Capitol began before Trump had finished his speech at the rally, according to a timeline compiled by The Epoch Times. As the incident escalated, Trump continued his urge for peace and respect for law enforcement throughout the afternoon.

Following the incident, Trump condemned the “violence, lawlessness, and mayhem,” saying that those who “infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy.”

The Justice Department and FBI have also announced that they have charged protesters who had conspired to breach the U.S. Capitol days before the incident, a detail that challenges the argument put forward by the media that Trump’s speech on Jan. 6 was the impetus for the violence.

“President Trump has condemned the violence at all times. Read the words of his speech. [He] calls for peacefulness. This has nothing to do with President Trump,” Schoen said.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 02/02/2021 – 10:01

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2MjD7dj Tyler Durden