No Pettifogging: Roberts Admonishes Both Legal Teams After Late Night Outburst

Near midnight, the House managers and White House legal team erupted into name calling and recriminations. The confrontation led to Chief Justice John Roberts to admonish both sides and remind them that this is supposed to be the “world’s most deliberative body” and that “those addressing the Senate should remember where they are.” He also repeated a ruling from the 1905 trial of Judge Charles Swayne that there should be no accusations of “pettifogging.” With those words, the pettifog (bickering over trifles and petty disputes) dissipated from the chambers.

The kerfuffle over pettifogging began with statements by House Judiciary Committee manager Rep. Jerry Nadler (D, N.Y.) called the refusal to call witnesses at this stage a “treacherous vote” and a “cover-up” for Republicans:

“It’s embarrassing. The president is on trial in the Senate, but the Senate is on trial in the eyes of the American people. Will you vote to allow all the relevant evidence to be presented here? Or will you betray your pledge to be an impartial juror? … Will you bring Ambassador Bolton here? Will you permit us to present you with the entire record of the president’s misconduct? Or will you instead choose to be complicit in the president’s coverup? So far I’m sad to say I see a lot of senators voting for a coverup, voting to deny witnesses, an absolutely indefensible vote, obviously a treacherous vote.”

In reality, it was the Democrats who first tried to block all witnesses in the Clinton trial and then pushed for this very rule to delay any decision on witnesses. However, the response from the White House team was equally heated. White House counsel Pat Cipollone stated

“We’ve been respectful of the Senate. We’ve made our arguments to you. And you don’t deserve, and we don’t deserve, what just happened. Mr. Nadler came up here and made false allegations against our team. He made false allegations against all of you; he accused you of a cover-up. He’s been making false allegations against the president. The only one who should be embarrassed, Mr. Nadler is you, for the way you’ve addressed the United States Senate. This is the United States Senate. You’re not in charge here. … It’s about time we bring this power trip in for a landing.”

Trump counsel Jay Sekulow also chimed in:

“At about 12:10 a.m., January 22, the chairman of the [House] Judiciary Committee, in this body, on the floor of this Senate, said ‘executive privilege and other nonsense.’ Now think about that for a moment. ‘Executive privilege and other nonsense.’ Mr. Nadler, it is not ‘nonsense.’ These are privileges recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States. And to shred the Constitution, on the floor of the Senate. To serve what purpose? The Senate is not on trial. The Constitution doesn’t allow what just took place. Look what we’ve dealt with for the last, now 13 hours. And we hopefully are closing the proceedings, but not on a very high note.”

Sekulow correctly objected to the claim that withholding evidence is proof of guilt. He noted that President Barack Obama did the same thing in the Fast and Furious investigation: “So, I guess when President Obama instructed his attorney general to not give information, he was guilty of a crime? That’s the way it works, Mr. Nadler? Is that the way you view the United States Constitution? Because that’s not the way it was written, that is not the way it’s interpreted, and that’s not the way the American people should have to live.”

Roberts had heard enough:

“It is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and the president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body,” Roberts said. “One reason it has earned that title is because its members avoid speaking in a manner, and using language, that is not conducive to civil discourse. “

“In the 1905 [Judge Charles] Swayne trial, a senator objected when one of the managers used the word ‘pettifogging’ — and the presiding officer said the word ought not to have been used. I don’t think we need to aspire to that high a standard, but I do think those addressing the Senate should remember where they are.”

Both sides can be chastised for allowing the rhetoric to outstrip the realities of the record and the law.

I simply welcome the return to 18th century standards and lexicon. Notably, pettifogging (which concerns petty disputes) or brabbling is less of a problem as excogigating about ways to avoid the issues at trial.

Roberts was not trying to quockerwodger counsel or leave the defense little more than sluberdegullion. However, there is little need to be beef-witted in the well of the Senate.

It is all enough to leave you feeling crapulous about the whole process.

71 thoughts on “No Pettifogging: Roberts Admonishes Both Legal Teams After Late Night Outburst”

  1. Justice Roberts was at the bench. There is a clock on the wall behind him and over his head. He is looking at his pocket watch and knocking it around on the bench in front of him. It has apparently stopped. Schiff is at the podium and not paying attention to Roberts distraction. Roberts looks down Schiff and asks: What time is it? Schiff looks up at the clock behind Robetson the wall and replies: Five to ten. Roberts is still shuffling his gold pocket watch and smacks it on the bench. “Thats exactly what you get!” he says. Schiff thinks he is speaking to him and not the watch and has been sentenced to five to ten years. Schiff starts crying. Robets looks up and wonders what is going on. “Mister bailiff: please escort this crying person to a seat.”

  2. This is what judges/justices like Roberts do. Their sense of decorum is such that even if they are only appalled by one side’s behavior, they will make the admonition to both sides. Here, it is clear Nadler was the target, at least to me.

    1. Roberts and JT are apparently too dense to realize that Cipilone should be disbarred for stating an obvious lie before Congress. GOP members of the committee’s had the same access to witnesses testifying in private before the House as did Democratic members. It is impossible that he did not know that.

  3. I am apparently totally ignorant. I would have liked to see a trial. The prosecutors present their accumulated witness testimony. Any Senator (or defense lawyer) may choose to cross examine any witness. The prosecution may call any witnesses to refute any cross examination.
    Then the defense might call witnesses to refute any prosecution witness. The Chief Justice has the right to enforces common judicial rules (e.g. “asked and answered, change subject” without formal objection.). Then arguments: first prosecution, then defense. Then a vote. All out in the open. No procedural issues. Just a trial. It won’t happen. Oh, well.

  4. Roberts can’t be trusted. He caved on Obamacare — he couldn’t distinguish between a state and a country. It was BS. It’s like the Dem’s have something on him.

    1. J.Tyme,
      I think that Roberts may turn out to be another Justice Kennedy, who will often side with the liberal faction of the court.
      But it was his clamping down on “pettifogging” that really irked me😃.
      He took away what little incentive I had to watch Senate part of this soap opera play out.

  5. With all due respect, Sir, one could argue you are using your notoriety to be a “shadow” justice during the impeachment of our President Donald John Trump whom many in this land support.

    1. Is Roberts afraid to chastise only the democrats, who are the ones who are guilty of unacceptable speech and behavior in the Senate? The Republican have, by far, been more respectful and circumspect in their speech than democrats, who are acting for all the world like high school bullies. They should be treated as such and if Roberts can’t tolerate, let him hold his tongue.

  6. “This makes the TSP the largest defined contribution plan in the world.”

    – Thrift Savings Plan
    ________________

    U.S. Government Incorporated, LLC, is now so gargantuan, gluttonous, indulgent, obese and unconstitutional that the “employee” “defined contribution plan” assets are $632,620,000,000.

    The irrational broadening, dilution and degradation of the vote through deleterious, antithetical state law and the illegitimate, improperly ratified and “injurious” “amendments,” beyond the Founders’ Bill of Rights, have resulted in hysteria, incoherence, chaos, anarchy, rebellion, pettifogging and a huge, parasitic and ineffective government that exists solely for the purpose of redistribution of wealth.

    As “original intent,” the American Founders generally restricted the vote to: Male, European, Age 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres. Before it is too late and when they next control both houses and the presidency, Conservatives must “grab the bull by the horns” as the communists (liberals, progressives, socialist, democrats) are doing now and repeal America back to its “original intent” because America is not functioning as designed and engineered but is descending, deteriorating and being subsumed by global communism under the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
    _________________________

    Thrift Savings Planner

    January 2020
    Happy New Year!

    As you prepare your finances for 2020, we want to remind you that we now include your 4th quarter (October – December) TSP account information on your annual statement. Your annual statement will be available the first week of February.

    Unless you opted out in My Account, you’ll receive your annual statement by mail, and you’ll receive an email when annual statements become available online.
    2019 in review

    As more people discover how easy it is to save with the TSP, our Plan continues to grow.

    You’re one of
    5,869,805

    participants.

    Our invested assets grew to
    $632,620,000,000

    (six hundred thirty-two billion, six hundred twenty million)

    This makes the TSP the largest defined contribution plan in the world.

    – Wiki

Leave a Reply