House Judiciary committee hearings: The joke wasn’t about Barron, it was a pun about autocracy

So many stunts, and so little GOP improvement in discourse aside from bullying, and disinformation regarding process. But yet it was informative about how little some representatives prepare for such hearings. And there were distortions and lies. Four legal scholars were witnesses, and the argument for impeachment because much clearer atop the recent House Intelligence committee report.

The key elements remain: Trump is impeachable for Abuse of Power, Bribery, Obstruction of Congress, and Obstruction of Justice.

The GOP PR apparatus seized on a faux slight to Barron Trump even as the actual legal discourse was informative and insightful. There was a bit of bad faith arguing relative to repeating arguments and objections from the House Intelligence committee.

Here’s a few highlights, although the transcripts could be more illuminating.

Unfortunately, for some the lingering message beyond the process complaints might be a minor turn of phrase. Accordingly, the troll-bots have amplified their fake outrage.

“While the President can name his son Barron he can’t make him a baron.”

Those who want the details may want to consult some of the legal blogs, but all of the law professors did well: Noah Feldman, Pamela Karlan, Michael Gerhardt, and Jonathan Turley, actually agreed that impeachment could be argued, although Turley dissented by opposing impeachment primarily on the lack of time, which made it primarily a process objection.