McConnell says Senate Republicans have not ruled out witnesses in Trump impeachment trial

[webfact]

McConnell says Senate Republicans have not ruled out witnesses in Trump impeachment trial

By Doina Chiacu

 

FILE PHOTO: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) speaks to the media after the weekly policy luncheons on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., December 3, 2019. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on Monday that Republicans had not ruled out hearing witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, one of the main sticking points in drafting rules for the proceedings.

 

However, McConnell made clear he would not accede to a Democratic request for the U.S. Senate to agree ahead of time to take testimony during the trial.

 

The Republican leader instead repeated his position in an interview with Fox News Channel that any decision on witnesses be made after opening arguments in the case from both Democrats and representatives for Trump.

 

Allowing witness testimony, particularly from current and former administration officials, was likely to prolong the trial and could bring up new evidence damaging to Trump.

 

Republicans have a 53-seat majority in the Senate, where 51 votes are needed to pass a set of rules for the Trump trial.

 

The Republican president was impeached last week by the Democratic-led House of Representatives on two charges over his pressuring Ukraine to announce an investigation of former vice president Joe Biden and Biden's son. Biden is a potential Democratic candidate to run against Republican Trump in the November 2020 election. Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company.

 

Trump was charged with abuse of power and obstructing Congress' investigation. He has said he did nothing wrong.

 

There is little chance Trump will be convicted and removed from office through a trial in the Republican-led Senate, but the impeachment proceedings could resonate at the ballot box in November.

 

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has requested to have four witnesses subpoenaed for the Senate trial expected to begin early next year.

 

The White House blocked all four, including acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton, from testifying during impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives in December.

 

In an interview on Fox & Friends, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Monday said that Republicans had not ruled out hearing witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, one of the main sticking points in drafting rules for the proceedings. Colette Luke has more.

 

"We haven't ruled out witnesses," McConnell said in an interview with "Fox & Friends." "We've said, 'Let's handle this case just like we did with President Clinton.' Fair is fair."

 

In that 1999 trial, he said, senators went through opening arguments, had a written question period and then decided what witnesses to call based on that.

 

McConnell and Schumer failed to reach an agreement on Thursday on rules for the trial, which McConnell said would be the Senate's first order of business in the new year.

 

"We remain at an impasse on these logistics," McConnell said on Thursday.

 

He used the word "impasse" again on Monday in saying senators could not take any action until House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally transmits the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Pelosi has withheld them in a bid to pressure Senate Republicans to reach an accord with Schumer on trial rules.

 

Schumer and other Democrats have criticized McConnell for working closely with the White House on trial strategy, saying he was not acting like an impartial juror.

 

Senators are expected to be administered an oath promising to do "impartial justice according to the Constitution" at the start of any impeachment trial.

 

McConnell dismissed the criticism in the Fox interview, asking if any Democratic leaders were impartial.

 

"Let's quit the charade," McConnell said. "This is a political exercise. A political exercise."

 

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Additional reporting by Richard Cowan; Editing by Tim Ahmann and Grant McCool)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-12-24

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[stevenl]

So he might do it, and will decide once proceedings have started. In other words: no new witnesses, unless I think it will benefit me to trump Trump.

[bannork]

Surely Mr Trump would like witnesses to testify to prove his undoubted innocence.

[TopDeadSenter]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

but the impeachment proceedings could resonate at the ballot box in November.

You bet they will!! This will be the MAGA landslide of all landslides. And let's hope for an end to all these ridiculous hoaxes from the democrats in the next term.

[Chomper Higgot]

Yet another iteration of McConnell’s senseless and ever changing responses to the Trump’s Impeachment.

[kamahele]

1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said:

You bet they will!! This will be the MAGA landslide of all landslides. And let's hope for an end to all these ridiculous hoaxes from the democrats in the next term.

Please feel free to list the hoaxes you are talking about and the facts that prove that they are hoaxes. Thank you in advance....

[Eric Loh]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Let's quit the charade," McConnell said.

The jurors consulting with the defense counsels and the defendant before the trial is a charade and must say it’s also criminal. He should be called loathsome Mitch.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

but the impeachment proceedings could resonate at the ballot box in November.

Quite right. They will make it MORE probable for Trump's re election, IMO..

Nothing to fear.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The jurors consulting with the defense counsels and the defendant before the trial is a charade and must say it’s also criminal. He should be called loathsome Mitch.

Don't you get it yet? It's not a criminal trial. They can do basically anything the majority wants, within reason.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, bannork said:

Surely Mr Trump would like witnesses to testify to prove his undoubted innocence.

Why? If he is going to acquitted anyway, why bother?

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

He used the word "impasse" again on Monday in saying senators could not take any action until House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally transmits the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Pelosi has withheld them in a bid to pressure Senate Republicans to reach an accord with Schumer on trial rules.

You go Nancy, you go girl. Out of options and facing a Democrat humiliation, withholding is all she's got, IMO.

Nothing to fear.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Schumer and other Democrats have criticized McConnell for working closely with the White House on trial strategy, saying he was not acting like an impartial juror.

saying he was not acting like an impartial juror.

Pots, kettles and black spring to mind.

Nothing to fear.

[bannork]

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why? If he is going to acquitted anyway, why bother?

Much better to have people, witnesses, confirm that he is innocent, surely?

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

Much better to have people, witnesses, confirm that he is innocent, surely?

No. It's just a waste of time and money. Doesn't matter what witnesses say, when the vote will be on political grounds. Unless something spectacular happens, Trump is going to be around for another 5 years. If there is a smoking gun, the Dems should have used it in the house.

All this uproar about procedure is because the Dems know they are going to lose, IMO, and are just trying to delay the inevitable, IMO.

[mogandave]

5 minutes ago, bannork said:

Much better to have people, witnesses, confirm that he is innocent, surely?

No one could say anything that would confirm he is innocent. Anyone that said anything that supported Trump would be called a liar and held up to ridicule. 
 

If/when he’s acquitted, the acquittal will be called a farce and we’ll move to the next impeachment. 
 

Is that not clear to everyone? 

[mogandave]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No. It's just a waste of time and money. Doesn't matter what witnesses say, when the vote will be on political grounds. Unless something spectacular happens, Trump is going to be around for another 5 years. If there is a smoking gun, the Dems should have used it in the house.

All this uproar about procedure is because the Dems know they are going to lose, IMO, and are just trying to delay the inevitable, IMO.

It just lets them blame the evil Republicans. 

[Eric Loh]

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Don't you get it yet? It's not a criminal trial. They can do basically anything the majority wants, within reason.

Well the majority of the people want a trial and to call relevant witnesses. Mitch is backed up against the wall. Damn if he submit to a trial and witnesses which may possibly include Trump and risk Unfavorable discoveries or have a short trial without witnesses and risk the uncertainty mood of Trump’s base going into the election. Really a lost lost situation for Trump. He is done. 

[Sujo]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No. It's just a waste of time and money. Doesn't matter what witnesses say, when the vote will be on political grounds. Unless something spectacular happens, Trump is going to be around for another 5 years. If there is a smoking gun, the Dems should have used it in the house.

All this uproar about procedure is because the Dems know they are going to lose, IMO, and are just trying to delay the inevitable, IMO.

Its never a waste of time and money for the public to know the truth what the president has done, and whether the senate is corrupt.

 

the public should know the person they are voting for.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Its never a waste of time and money for the public to know the truth what the president has done, and whether the senate is corrupt.

 

the public should know the person they are voting for.

Did you not pay attention the last election campaign? The voters know exactly who and what he is. IF the Dems had a candidate worth voting for, Trump would be just a page in history. IF the GOP had a candidate worth voting for, Trump wouldn't even make the short list of candidates.

If Americans want to know why it has come to this, they need only look in the mirror.

 

The "truth"- thou jest, assuredly. The one thing missing from this charade all along has been truth, IMO. It's become the worst sort of politics, IMO.

Whether or not one supports Trump, he was right when he described Washington as a swamp, IMO. They need a voter tsunami to wash away the entire city and start again with all independents, IMO. Short of that, they need The Christ to come down to Earth and cast the lot of them, politicians and bureaucrats, out on their ears.

I thought our lot of politicians were bad, but they are babes in the wood in comparison to American politicians in Washington, IMO.

[mogandave]

4 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Its never a waste of time and money for the public to know the truth what the president has done, and whether the senate is corrupt.

 

the public should know the person they are voting for.

 

Don’t you already know the truth?

 

Why do you assume people don’t know who they’re voting for? 
 

A lot of people don’t like Biden and support Trump asking for the investigation. 
 

The same people that want him run out of office for this wanted him run out of office about the Stormy Daniels issue, yes? 
 

To be honest,  when I found out he was a rich guy with a TV show that liked banging porn stars and didn’t want his wife to find out that was it for me. 

[Eric Loh]

24 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you not pay attention the last election campaign? The voters know exactly who and what he is. IF the Dems had a candidate worth voting for, Trump would be just a page in history. IF the GOP had a candidate worth voting for, Trump wouldn't even make the short list of candidates.

In my opinion, most found the idea of voting for Trump repugnant. Voting for Hillary was equally nauseating after continuous revelations and conspiracy theories took a heavy toll. One of which was her ties to a pedophilia ring and her foundation ties to Saudis and Qatari government. Then the Comey bombshell which resulted in an avalanche of late deciding voters for Trump. IMO that 2020 voters are now better informed and foreign interferences will be heavily watched and stoped (I hope) resulting in a fairer and level playing field. Trump will be tested. Rest depend who the Dems will field. 

[johnnybangkok]

31 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you not pay attention the last election campaign? The voters know exactly who and what he is. IF the Dems had a candidate worth voting for, Trump would be just a page in history. IF the GOP had a candidate worth voting for, Trump wouldn't even make the short list of candidates.

If Americans want to know why it has come to this, they need only look in the mirror.

 

The "truth"- thou jest, assuredly. The one thing missing from this charade all along has been truth, IMO. It's become the worst sort of politics, IMO.

Whether or not one supports Trump, he was right when he described Washington as a swamp, IMO. They need a voter tsunami to wash away the entire city and start again with all independents, IMO. Short of that, they need The Christ to come down to Earth and cast the lot of them, politicians and bureaucrats, out on their ears.

I thought our lot of politicians were bad, but they are babes in the wood in comparison to American politicians in Washington, IMO.

You are allowed your own opinion; however you are not allowed your own facts.

You talk about the 'truth' and 'this charade' without focusing on the fact that Trump tried to strong arm a foreign power to investigate a political opponent...and then tried to cover it up. The impeachment committe issued 71 subpoenas and requests for information regarding the accusation. In response the Trump administration produced nothing...not a single piece of paper and stopped key witnesses from appearing at the hearings. A recently revealed email from Michael Duffy (sent roughly 90 minutes after the teleohone call) clearly shows this cover up with the words 'Based on guidance I have received and in light of the Administrations plan to review assistance to Ukraine...please hold off on any additional DoD obligations of these funds". he then goes on to say "Given the sensitive nature of the request, I appreciate you keeping that informnation closely held'.

The only 'charade' being seen is an administration openly defying congress with obstruction after obstruction and a GOP dominated Senate openly saying they will not do the job they have been hired to do and will aquit Trump NO MATTER WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS.

This should all be indefensible so I find it incredible that so many on this forum obfuscate so much with 'The voters know exactly who and what he is' as if this gives him carte blanche to trample all over the constitution and commit soooooooo many morally, ethically and illegally dubious acts.

A line needs to be drawn before that line becomes so faint it becomes invisible.  

 

[Boon Mee]

The Democrats shot their wad when the facts came out that Hillary et. al. bought and paid for the fake dossier. 

MAGA 

[Peter Denis]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you not pay attention the last election campaign? The voters know exactly who and what he is. IF the Dems had a candidate worth voting for, Trump would be just a page in history. IF the GOP had a candidate worth voting for, Trump wouldn't even make the short list of candidates.

It would be an incredibly sad state of affairs when neither the Democrats nor the GOP nor any other party, can bring up a candidate 'worth voting for'.

I would say ANYBODY is worth voting for more than the pile of toxic waste called Trump.

 

You probably mean 'has a chance of winning from Trump'.

That would also be a sad state of affairs, but I do not agree with that at all.

Trump did 'win' against a very unpopular Democratic candidate in 2016, but lost the popular vote by a landslide.

The results of the 2018 elections showed that many of those that were tricked by this con-man realized their mistake. 

You can fool some of the people, some of the time.  But you cannot fool all the people, all of the time.

Trump is a goner!

[FritsSikkink]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

You bet they will!! This will be the MAGA landslide of all landslides. And let's hope for an end to all these ridiculous hoaxes from the democrats in the next term.

What are you trying to say? You do know that Trumps campaign leader and personal lawyer are in jail. 

You sound really silly with your hoax.

[jany123]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Senators are expected to be administered an oath promising to do "impartial justice according to the Constitution" at the start of any impeachment trial.

Once again.... the senate is on trial... America’s already flawed democracy is on trial. America’s international reputation is dropping like an anchor and will likely act just like that anchor, dragging the ship of state down, as allies and enemies alike, turn to other more reliable partners.

[Eric Loh]

11 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

The Democrats shot their wad when the facts came out that Hillary et. al. bought and paid for the fake dossier. 

MAGA 

Wrong. The dossier was research funded first by Republicans who paid Fusion GPS to compile opposition research on candidate Trump. The Reps cut off funds to Fusion GPS as the primary winded down. The DNC subsequently continue funding until October 2016. Facts matter, 

[johnnybangkok]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

You bet they will!! This will be the MAGA landslide of all landslides. And let's hope for an end to all these ridiculous hoaxes from the democrats in the next term.

I find it quite amazing how many Trump supporters can predict the future with such certainty. Are you all from the future?

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

It would be an incredibly sad state of affairs when neither the Democrats nor the GOP nor any other party, can bring up a candidate 'worth voting for'.

I would say ANYBODY is worth voting for more than the pile of toxic waste called Trump.

 

You probably mean 'has a chance of winning from Trump'.

That would also be a sad state of affairs, but I do not agree with that at all.

Trump did 'win' against a very unpopular Democratic candidate in 2016, but lost the popular vote by a landslide.

The results of the 2018 elections showed that many of those that were tricked by this con-man realized their mistake. 

You can fool some of the people, some of the time.  But you cannot fool all the people, all of the time.

Trump is a goner!

I support ANYBODY but trump and that includes Republicans.

[Chomper Higgot]

With two Evangelical publications coming out in favor of the Senate getting rid of Trump, McConnell will have an eye on what is best for McConnell.