Image result for epstein and starr  

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough strongly criticized the defense team for President Donald Trump, arguing that it was "associated with a pedophile," referring to deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Scarborough, a former Republican congressman who now identifies as an independent, made the remark during his MSNBC show Morning Joe on Monday. The host's criticism arose due to Trump's legal team members Ken Starr, who led the independent counsel investigation into former President Bill Clinton, and Alan Dershowitz, a retired Harvard law professor, both previously having worked for Epstein.

"Let's talk about the selection of a legal team, and talk about a president who has such trouble finding legal representation that he actually got the legal team that helped put together the plea deal, and helped represent Jeffrey Epstein," Scarborough, who regularly criticizes Trump and his administration, said on Monday.

"I can't imagine another president at any time having to select a team that would be associated with a pedophile, who according to recent reports trafficked in young girls as young as 11-years-old," he said.

Epstein died in prison last year after being indicted on charges of sex trafficking. Although he died before being convicted of the alleged crimes leading to the most recent charges, the prominent businessman had previously in 2008 managed to get a plea deal from prosecutors in Florida for related charges, which Dershowitz and Starr helped him secure. Starr has since defended the lenient prosecution his former client Epstein received in Florida.

Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a victim of Epstein's, has also accused Dershowitz directly of abusing her. But the lawyer has denied the allegation and filed a lawsuit against her.

Dershowitz told The New York Times in 2015 that he regretted representing Epstein. "I think I do regret having taken the case in light of everything that has happened since," he said. "If I could give back the money I made in this case and have this episode of my life erased, I'd do it."

Epstein and D<p><strong>Read more:</strong> <a class=

Mitch McConnell Proposes Quick Impeachment Trial With No Guaranteed Witnesses

Image result for mitch mcconnell

Senators will be able to call for witnesses, but making them actually testify will require Republican support.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has begun circulating proposed rules for President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial that would give each side just 24 hours over two days to present their arguments and wouldn’t guarantee any witness testimonies.

The resolution, which McConnell’s office sent to HuffPost on Monday, will be up for debate and a vote in the Senate on Tuesday and is expected to pass. 

Senators will be able to call for witnesses in Trump’s impeachment trial but ensuring they actually testify will require at least 51 votes.

The rules, which Republicans authored on their own, mean that Democrats will need to convince at least four GOP senators to vote with them to subpoena their desired witnesses and other evidence ― a tough but not impossible task.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) blasted McConnell for breaking from President Bill Clinton’s impeachment arguments, which were spread out over several days for each side. 

“Senator McConnell repeatedly promised Senators, the public and the press that his rules for the trial would be the same as the rules for President Clinton’s trial,” he said in a statement. “After reading his resolution, it’s clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses and documents and intent on rushing the trial through. On something as important as impeachment, Senator McConnell’s resolution is nothing short of a national disgrace.”

While most Republicans maintain they’ve seen enough, several moderate GOP senators have expressed openness to new witness testimony in the trial after the presentation of evidence by both the House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team.

“While I need to hear the case argued and the questions answered, I tend to believe having additional information would be helpful. It is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses at that point in the trial just as I did in 1999,&r

Read more:

Ahead Of Arguments Trump’s Legal Team Asserts He Did ‘Absolutely Nothing Wrong’

Image result for trump

The filing says the two articles of impeachment brought against the president don’t amount to impeachment offenses.

President Donald Trump’s legal team asserted Monday that he did “absolutely nothing wrong,” calling the impeachment case against him flimsy and a “dangerous perversion of the Constitution.”

The brief from Trump’s lawyers, filed ahead of arguments expected later this week in the Senate impeachment trial, offered the most detailed glimpse of the lines of defense they intend to use against Democratic efforts to convict the president and oust him from office over his dealings with Ukraine. It is meant as a counter to a brief filed two days ago by House Democrats that summarized weeks of testimony from more than a dozen witnesses in laying out the impeachment case.

The 110-page filing from the White House shifted the tone toward a more legal response but still hinged on Trump’s assertion he did nothing wrong and did not commit a crime — even though impeachment does not depend on a material violation of law but rather on the more vague definition of “other high crimes and misdemeanors” as established in the Constitution.

It says the two articles of impeachment brought against the president — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — don’t amount to impeachment offenses. It asserts that the impeachment inquiry centered on Trump’s request that Ukraine’s president open an investigation into Democratic rival Joe Biden was never about finding the truth.

“Instead, House Democrats were determined from the outset to find some way — any way — to corrupt the extraordinary power of impeachment for use as a political tool to overturn the result of the 2016 election and to interfere in the 2020 election,” Trump’s legal team wrote. “All of that is a dangerous perversion of the Constitution that the Senate should swiftly and roundly condemn.”

The prosecution team of House managers was expected to spend another day on Capitol Hill preparing for the trial, which will be under heavy security. Ahead of the filing, House prosecutors arrived on Capitol Hill to tour the Senate chamber. Opening argume

Read more:

Are we really listening to what MLK had to say

Image result for mlk

In 2020, the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday falls in a national election year, one that reminds us of the importance of voting rights, citizenship and political activism to the health of our democracy. King imagined America as a "beloved community" capable of defeating what he characterized as the triple threats of racism, militarism and materialism.

The passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act, alongside the 1954 Brown Supreme Court decision, represents the crown jewels of the civil rights movement's heroic period. Yet King quickly realized that policy transformations alone, including the right to vote, would be insufficient in realizing his goal of institutionalizing radical black citizenship toward the creation of the "beloved community." King argued that justice was what love looked like in public. 2020 also marks the 55th anniversary of the passage of the Voting Rights Act, legislation that proved transformative for black citizenship, at least until the 2013 Shelby v. Holder Supreme Court decision that has helped enable the increase of voter suppression nationally. The most powerful way Americans can honor King now is through the pursuit of new national voting rights legislation that ends voter suppression and ID laws, allows prisoners to vote and automatically registers every 18-year-old citizen to vote. Contemporary voting rights protection in America represents a failure of imagination and a threat to democracy. Grassroots movements, such as Moral Mondays in North Carolina, have worked to show how state legislatures have utilized the post-Shelby landscape to ensure anti-democratic majorities at the expense of genuine democracy and active voter participation. Proposed legislation, such as the the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019, seeks to restore the power of voting rights enforcement and other protections by establishing new rules that cover all states and allow for federal intervention in places with histories of active suppression over the previous 25 years.   Additionally, the VRAA bill would offer increased protection for indigenous voting populations such as Native Americans and Native Alaskan populations. Democrats in the House of Representatives successfully passed the VRAA (H.R.4.) in December, although the bill has virtually

Read more:

Page 1 of 3

National Weather

 Click on map for forecast