Today’s episode is a timely impeachment-themed deep dive into the testimony of George Washington University law professor — and legitimate legal scholar — Jonathan Turley before the House Judiciary Committee. How should you evaluate his arguments? We walk you through them, of course!
We begin, however, with a new segment: the Wingnut Lightning Round(TM), in which we evaluate — or rather, make fun of — two preposterous new lawsuits filed this week by two complete idiots.
After that, it’s time for an #AndrewWasWrong about Ronald Burris, the interim Senator nominated by Rod Blagojevich to fill Barack Obama’s unexpired Senate seat. Find out the twists and turns to this rather fascinating story as a side bonus to Andrew’s well-deserved comeuppance.
Then, it’s time for the main segment: the news that the House is going to draft articles of impeachment against President Trump despite the testimony of Jonathan Turley. How do the lone Republican-called witness’s arguments stack up? (Hint: they’re not good.) Surely the Republicans wouldn’t have called someone who’s on the record saying the exact opposite of what he’s presently saying 20 years ago, right? (Guess.)
After all that, it’s time for a fiendishly hard #T3BE about a trial, a videotape, and a jogging plaintiff. You won’t want to miss it — and you’ll want to play along!
Thomas was just the main guest on Episode 498 of the Cognitive Dissonance podcast, and Thomas and Andrew make additional appearances to roast and be roasted for Vulgarity for Charity. If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at email@example.com.
Show Notes & Links
- Oh man, you just have to read batshit-crazy Rep. Devin Nunes’s eleventy million trillion dollar lawsuit against CNN.
- For more of the Roland Burris story, check out Wikipedia.
- Click here to read Turley’s testimony for yourself.
-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
-And finally, remember that you can email us at firstname.lastname@example.org!