Trump impeachment inquiry awaits key witnesses, but some will be no-shows

By Patricia Zengerle, Karen Freifeld and Matt Spetalnick

 

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington upon his return from New York, U.S., November 3, 2019. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

 

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers leading an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump have scheduled another crucial round of testimony this week, but several key White House witnesses plan to defy them and some other administration officials could follow suit.

 

Refusals by Trump loyalists to appear before Democratic-led committees could set the stage for a battle between the White House and lawmakers over their power to conduct the investigations. Some Democrats say Trump, who has ordered administration officials not to cooperate, should face an obstruction of justice charge among the impeachment counts they plan to consider against him.

 

Three White House budget officials, including the acting budget director, are already refusing to show up, a senior Trump administration official said, citing the White House's opposition to the inquiry. Their testimony is considered critical to helping determine whether Trump used foreign aid as leverage to secure a political favour.

 

Another important witness slated for Monday is John Eisenberg, the top lawyer for the White House National Security Council. Lawmakers are especially interested in questioning him about a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate Trump's political rival Joe Biden, a former vice president.

 

Eisenberg was involved in a decision to take the unusual step of moving a transcript of the call into the White House’s most classified computer system, according to a person familiar with last week’s testimony by Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman.

 

Eisenberg also told Vindman, who listened in on the call, not to discuss the matter when the White House aide and several other National Security Council officials reported to him their concerns about the conversation, said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

 

Vindman testified that he found it improper to demand a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen and was so worried about the implications that he took the matter to Eisenberg.

 

TRUMP: DEMOCRATS TRYING TO 'FIX' PROCESS

The impeachment inquiry in the Democratic-led House of Representatives focuses on Trump's request in the July phone call for Zelenskiy to investigate the Bidens. Trump made his request after withholding $391 million in security aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine fight Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

 

The House investigation is probing whether Trump misused the power of his office and, if so, whether that amounted to "high crimes and misdemeanours" that merit impeachment and removal from office under the Constitution.

 

Trump, who has denied any wrongdoing, accused the Democrats on Twitter on Sunday of "working overtime to FIX the Impeachment 'Process' in order to hurt the Republican Party and me."

 

Democrats are expected to wrap up the closed-door testimony in coming weeks and begin public hearings.

 

A parade of current and former U.S. officials have testified the White House went outside normal diplomatic channels to pressure Zelenskiy. Some appeared in defiance of Trump’s orders, while others have resisted testifying, which critics have called an attempt to stonewall the proceedings.

It was unclear whether Eisenberg - as well as his deputy, Michael Ellis - would show up on Monday.

 

There were also questions whether Robert Blair, senior adviser to Trump’s acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, would appear on Monday. Media reports have said he would not testify. His lawyer did not respond to a request for comment.

 

The White House declined to comment on whether Eisenberg and Blair would appear.

 

However, three other officials - the White House Office of Management and Budget acting director Russ Vought and two of his deputies, Michael Duffey and Brian McCormack - will not appear for questioning scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, the administration official said on condition of anonymity.

 

Democratic committee members have also asked former national security adviser John Bolton, who Trump fired in September, to appear on Thursday.

Others have testified that Bolton was alarmed by the effort to pressure Zelenskiy. Bolton's lawyer has said he is not willing to testify unless a subpoena is issued.

 

Asked whether Bolton should testify, Trump told reporters on Sunday: "That's up to him and up to the lawyers ... I like John Bolton, I always got along with him."

 

(Additional reporting by Steve Holland and Jan Wolfe in Washington, writing by Matt Spetalnick, editing by Lincoln Feast.)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-04

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

Remember all those people who ignored subpoenas during Benghazi? Of course you don't cuz they all appeared. Guilty people obstruct.

If they have been subpoenaed and don't appear, the committee chairmen should immediately charge them with "inherent contempt" and impose a daily fine for each day they fail to appear, say $20,0000/day.  It's their right to do that and would be upheld by the courts.  If they did it once, then the others scheduled to be deposed might just appear rather than be held in contempt and fined.  Or maybe they think that POTUS will pay the daily fine, think again while the bus is driving over them.!

25 minutes ago, wayned said:

If they have been subpoenaed and don't appear, the committee chairmen should immediately charge them with "inherent contempt" and impose a daily fine for each day they fail to appear, say $20,0000/day.  It's their right to do that and would be upheld by the courts.  If they did it once, then the others scheduled to be deposed might just appear rather than be held in contempt and fined.  Or maybe they think that POTUS will pay the daily fine, think again while the bus is driving over them.!

The Republican argument was that, since the impeachment inquiry wasn't "official," they could ignore the subpoenas. Now that they ARE official, what you recommend here is most likely to happen. I seem to recall Barr putting Chelsea Manning in jail for ignoring a subpoena. I believe the same is about to happen to anyone ignoring subpoenas from the instant the hearings go public. I ALSO expect the number of people in favor of impeachment AND removal will start to climb. The same happened when Nixon was impeached. The Republicans fought it, tooth and nail, until the evidence was presented publicly. History will repeat itself.

they could always show up and  take the 5th.

35 minutes ago, malibukid said:

they could always show up and  take the 5th.

I would prefer it if they turned up and told the truth.

Lock him up.

2 hours ago, J Town said:

The Republican argument was that, since the impeachment inquiry wasn't "official," they could ignore the subpoenas. Now that they ARE official, what you recommend here is most likely to happen. I seem to recall Barr putting Chelsea Manning in jail for ignoring a subpoena. I believe the same is about to happen to anyone ignoring subpoenas from the instant the hearings go public. I ALSO expect the number of people in favor of impeachment AND removal will start to climb. The same happened when Nixon was impeached. The Republicans fought it, tooth and nail, until the evidence was presented publicly. History will repeat itself.

 

Why do you think that?  The Trump supporters I have spoken with would not change their opinion even if all the worst rumors are confirmed. They are happy he put the screws to the Ukraine in order to get them to do what is right and investigate corruption. They consider anything he did to be a good thing, even if it was a technical infraction.

 

I'm just curious exactly what part of this investigation you feel is going to change anyone's opinion? Every single person I have ever spoken to about this already has his/her mind made up. Nothing in the known universe is going to change it. Unless you have a video of Trump pulling babies out of incubators and stepping on them, the numbers are likely going to stay exactly where they are today with little variance.

 

This is a genuine question, not a wind up. I completely agree you can hope the numbers might change, just like I hope to win the lottery, but expect?  I think you are setting yourself up for a massive disappointment.

 

Nixon was a different time. The Clinton impeachment was highly partisan and changed public perception about what impeachment is. Just like filibustering in the Senate used to be unthinkable, and is now a common tactic. Impeachments are going to be commonplace in the future. This is just the start.

This is a total waste of time and money.

They don't have the numbers in the Senate. It's a kangaroo court deep within a locked building with no public scrutiny at all.  When Muller was around (remember him?)  the Dems were whining daily "transparency" "democracy" "we want to see it all unredacted". People, generally, don't like hypocrites. 

51 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

They don't have the numbers in the Senate. It's a kangaroo court deep within a locked building with no public scrutiny at all.  When Muller was around (remember him?)  the Dems were whining daily "transparency" "democracy" "we want to see it all unredacted". People, generally, don't like hypocrites. 

You seem to have missed the FACT that the impeachment has now moved from the behind closed door investigations attended by Democrat AND Republican members of the Congressional committees, to public hearings.

 

The ‘numbers in the Senate’ will change with public opinion which will in turn change a public hearings are broadcast to the nation.

 

I do wish the dems had a way to make thease people do their civic duty it’s discgracefull just makes Donald look more guilty and the trump supporters more anti american

5 hours ago, J Town said:

Remember all those people who ignored subpoenas during Benghazi? Of course you don't cuz they all appeared. Guilty people obstruct.

Remember Eric “Race Card” Holder’s contempt of Congress? 
 

Five Americans died at Bengazi, and the State Department lied to the public about it. 
 

A little bigger deal than the President asking a foreign leader to help investigate possible corruption. 
 

 

2 hours ago, malibukid said:

they could always show up and  take the 5th.

Taking the 5th Amendment is only good for defense against self-incrimination not giving witness as to the actions that The Donald has taken (or spoken). The committee calling the witness can also extend immunity knocking down that defense.

8 minutes ago, Tug said:

I do wish the dems had a way to make thease people do their civic duty it’s discgracefull just makes Donald look more guilty and the trump supporters more anti american

Why did the left not impeach him three years ago? 
 

You lefties keep telling us about all the laws he has broken yet here we are, three years in and the left doing nothing but putting on a show. 
 

The house votes to impeach a month before the election. 
 

The senate votes to dismiss the charges.

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

They don't have the numbers in the Senate. It's a kangaroo court deep within a locked building with no public scrutiny at all.  When Muller was around (remember him?)  the Dems were whining daily "transparency" "democracy" "we want to see it all unredacted". People, generally, don't like hypocrites. 

Did you miss school when they taught American Civics? Or are you excused as not being an American? All Congressional Committees in the House and Senate are made up of members of both parties with the majority elected members making up the majority on the committees.

6 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

Did you miss school when they taught American Civics? Or are you excused as not being an American? All Congressional Committees in the House and Senate are made up of members of both parties with the majority elected members making up the majority on the committees.

Can both parties subpoena witnesses? 
 

Thought not. 

6 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

Can both parties subpoena witnesses? 
 

Thought not. 

Ahhh I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think the accused calls witnesses during the discovery process that would happen during the trial in the senate 

28 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

Why did the left not impeach him three years ago? 
 

You lefties keep telling us about all the laws he has broken yet here we are, three years in and the left doing nothing but putting on a show. 
 

The house votes to impeach a month before the election. 
 

The senate votes to dismiss the charges.

I can give you a clue. When did the Dems take control of the House?

18 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

Can both parties subpoena witnesses? 
 

Thought not. 

No, only the investigative party can do that, the suspect cannot.

Well done, it seems you're sloooooowly getting. I'm proud of ya!!!

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN ( still is folks ) , this is the first President that has stood up FOR the American people since the JFK got snuffed by the ruling elite thanks to the deep state.  Life long Democrat here and after 2016 I have realized 98% Dems need to go and 95% Republicans need to go , most hopefully to GITMO for Treason on the American people. It's a freaking Republic not a Democracy ( mob rule ).

1 minute ago, nervona81732 said:

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN ( still is folks ) , this is the first President that has stood up FOR the American people since the JFK got snuffed by the ruling elite thanks to the deep state.  Life long Democrat here and after 2016 I have realized 98% Dems need to go and 95% Republicans need to go , most hopefully to GITMO for Treason on the American people. It's a freaking Republic not a Democracy ( mob rule ).

The people? More like himself, his family, his cronies and real billionaires (unlike him). Remember he promised universal health care, better and cheaper and he has delivered the exact opposite. He could have actually been a great president for all the people. He total blew it.

38 minutes ago, nervona81732 said:

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN ( still is folks ) , this is the first President that has stood up FOR the American people since the JFK got snuffed by the ruling elite thanks to the deep state.  Life long Democrat here and after 2016 I have realized 98% Dems need to go and 95% Republicans need to go , most hopefully to GITMO for Treason on the American people. It's a freaking Republic not a Democracy ( mob rule ).

Wow, such a learned post. I'm humbled!

4 hours ago, Monomial said:

This is a genuine question, not a wind up. I completely agree you can hope the numbers might change, just like I hope to win the lottery, but expect?  I think you are setting yourself up for a massive disappointment.

I was looking at the graph presentation showing the trump to be the worst ever president, and noted that better men had graphs showing ups and downs, whilst the trumps approval rating seemed extremely consistent, so I’m thinking you may have the right of it... which is really scary.

 

at least this time it’s not the jews who need to be as worried.

Three years ago the numbers in the house were different,suggest thats why they did nothing.Things will change in the senate when the truth is told and shown publicly.Better still if Trump gets up ad talks at the hearing and shows everone including his supporters that he is mentally ill (and needs help) and cannot remember what he has said 5 minutes before.

32 minutes ago, Paul Henry said:

Three years ago the numbers in the house were different,suggest thats why they did nothing.Things will change in the senate when the truth is told and shown publicly.Better still if Trump gets up ad talks at the hearing and shows everone including his supporters that he is mentally ill (and needs help) and cannot remember what he has said 5 minutes before.

Unfortunately many trump supporters don’t care that Donald is a mentally ill idiot and or straight up tool for putin as long as they think they’re getting one over on the dems sad 

35 minutes ago, Tug said:

Unfortunately many trump supporters don’t care that Donald is a mentally ill idiot and or straight up tool for putin as long as they think they’re getting one over on the dems sad 

As one TV member previously posted, he didn't care if Trump took away lunches from poor school children as long as his business continued to do well. Judas couldn't have said it better himself. 30 pieces of silver is 30 pieces of silver.

 

When was the last time you heard ANY credible news source report "Gee, this looks like Trump might be innocent?" Even Trump is now starting to say there is nothing wrong with a quid pro quo.

Sondland, Trump's best friend, now admits there was a quid pro quo. No wonder Trump's fans keep silent.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/05/sondland-reverses-himself-on-ukraine-quid-pro-quo-000318

47 minutes ago, candide said:

Sondland, Trump's best friend, now admits there was a quid pro quo. No wonder Trump's fans keep silent.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/05/sondland-reverses-himself-on-ukraine-quid-pro-quo-000318

Most likely reminded by his attorney that lying to congress was a federal offense and had to chose between Trump and a possible stay at the cross bar hotel. IMHO he made the right choice.  People are saying that even if it was quid pro quo it was not an impeachable offense, but bribery and extortion are definitely crimes and are impeachable offenses.

1 hour ago, wayned said:

Most likely reminded by his attorney that lying to congress was a federal offense and had to chose between Trump and a possible stay at the cross bar hotel.

Expect to see much more of this rising through the swamp water.