Senate Republicans close ranks on rules for Trump impeachment trial

[webfact]

Senate Republicans close ranks on rules for Trump impeachment trial

By Richard Cowan, Susan Cornwell and David Morgan

 

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) faces reporters with fellow Senate Republicans following their weekly policy lunch on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., January 7, 2020. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on Tuesday he had enough support from his fellow Republicans to set the rules for President Donald Trump's impeachment trial, dealing a blow to Democrats' efforts to call new witnesses against the president.

 

Democrats responded by saying they still want more details on the trial process before any further action is taken although they have little leverage if Republicans, who control the Senate, remain united.

 

The Senate trial should hear testimony from at least three White House officials and Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton about the president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival, Democrats say.

 

McConnell has resisted the idea, instead seeking a fast trial based on evidence collected in the House of Representatives before it voted last month to impeach Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

 

While Republicans are still divided over whether the Senate should eventually hear more testimony, the vast majority of them have agreed to leave the decision until after the trial has started, McConnell told a news conference.

 

"Obviously that is the most contentious part of these proceedings and that will be addressed at that time and not before the trial begins," he said.

 

Senator Lindsey Graham said at least 51 of the 53 Republicans in the Senate were backing that plan, which he said was similar to an arrangement made during the 1999 impeachment trial of then-President Bill Clinton after Republicans and Democrats were similarly deadlocked over the question of witness testimony.

 

The House has charged Trump with abusing his power for personal gain by asking Ukraine to announce a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in November's presidential election.

 

It also charged the president with obstructing Congress by directing administration officials and agencies not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry.

 

Trump says he did nothing wrong and has dismissed his impeachment as a partisan bid to undo his 2016 election win.

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, has declined to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate, effectively delaying any trial in the hope that Senate Democrats could win support for the introduction of new witnesses and documents that could bolster their case for removing Trump from office.

 

After meeting with Pelosi on Tuesday evening, Democratic lawmakers said the question of when to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate would depend on the details of McConnell's plan.

 

"McConnell says he has the votes. Well, produce what you have the votes to do and that I think will assist the speaker in deciding how to properly staff the prosecution," said Representative David Cicilline, a junior member of the House leadership.

 

Thanks to the united front among Republican senators, McConnell has emerged as the clear winner of the standoff with Pelosi, Republican strategist Alex Conant said.

 

"Pelosi started down this pathway without a clear exit ramp, and McConnell just took control of the car,” said Conant, who added that the Senate Republican leader was in a position to control the process unless Democrats co-opted four Republicans.

 

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy said Democrats needed to decide on their best strategy. "At this point our best leverage is probably inside that trial," he said.

 

The trial is expected to lead to Trump's acquittal before the 2020 presidential election campaign heats up, as no Republicans have voiced support for ousting him from office. A two-thirds majority of the Senate is needed to vote to do that.

 

'THEY CAN'T HIDE'

Democrats have argued that Bolton and the other new witnesses must be heard for the trial to be fair.

 

They had focused their efforts on persuading several moderate Republicans to settle the witness battle before the start of the trial, but had seen "no traction," according to one Senate Democratic aide.

 

They are now focusing their attention on winning over Republican Senators Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski as potential allies during the trial, with the hope that capturing them could spur other Republicans to abandon Trump.

 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats would force votes during the proceedings to have the witnesses testify and for new evidence to be submitted.

 

"Make no mistake, on the question of witnesses and documents, Republicans may run, but they can't hide," Schumer said on the Senate floor.

 

Bolton, who was fired by Trump in September, said on Monday he was willing to testify, although the White House could object.

 

Other witnesses during the House impeachment investigation testified that Bolton strongly objected to an effort by Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to pressure Ukraine's government outside of regular diplomatic channels, with one saying Bolton referred to the arrangement as a "drug deal."

 

Congressional investigators believe Bolton objected to Trump's decision to delay $390 million in military aid to Ukraine and could elaborate on that, a Senate aide told Reuters this week.

 

Bolton refused to participate in the House impeachment inquiry while the Trump administration and Congress battled in court for access to witnesses and documentary evidence.

 

When asked on Tuesday if he would be okay if Bolton testified, Trump told reporters at the White House: "That's going to be up to the lawyers. It'll be up to the Senate, and we'll see how they feel."

 

(Reporting by Richard Cowan, Susan Cornwell and David Morgan; Additional reporting by Susan Heavey and Steve Holland; Writing by Paul Simao and Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Alistair Bell and Cynthia Osterman)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-01-08

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[mogandave]

Shocking. 
 

I would have thought at least “mittens” would have been turned...

 

[spidermike007]

Let us hope the voters see through this partisan effort to block any testimony or present any evidence and hand over the senate to the dems come November. I do believe the GOP is in for a rude awakening. 

[Baerboxer]

21 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Let us hope the voters see through this partisan effort to block any testimony or present any evidence and hand over the senate to the dems come November. I do believe the GOP is in for a rude awakening. 

 

Interestingly many Americans seem to think its the Dems who are in for a rude awakening!

 

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[Emdog]

Innocent people don't need to suppress evidence. The Republican party has lost all semblance to the one my parents were members of. 

Hopefully the voter suppression and gerrymandering won't be enough to keep them from being voted out.

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Let us hope the voters see through this partisan effort to block any testimony or present any evidence and hand over the senate to the dems come November. I do believe the GOP is in for a rude awakening. 

Most of them saw through the partisan effort to impeach him. I assume the same people will see it the trial as partisan as well. 
 

I here we might get two more Supreme Court Justices between now and November...

[candide]

3 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Most of them saw through the partisan effort to impeach him. I assume the same people will see it the trial as partisan as well. 
 

I here we might get two more Supreme Court Justices between now and November...

I don't know where you get that impression from. Most polls show that more people support removing Trump from office than the opposite. For example this poll aggregator (similar figures in the conservative aggregator): 50.3% support, 46.3% don't support.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

[OneMoreFarang]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

The Senate trial should hear testimony from at least three White House officials and Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton about the president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival, Democrats say.

How long would it take to hear four witnesses? Maybe four days?

Are the GOP senators really so desperate to avoid listening to facts that they don't even want to invest four days, not even a week, to hear the truth about their own president, the most powerful person in the world?

That's scary!

 

For all the Trump supporters please keep in mind: This is only about listening to people who work or worked in the White House and have or had personal contact with POTUS all the time. They should know the truth. Do you want to know the truth? Because if you don't want to listen to them for a few days that clearly shows that you don't want to know the truth. I don't wonder why.

[IAMHERE]

I think the public in general don't care that he wanted something for the aid money. People in America just expect that; the surprise is that the USA gets something at all from foreign aid.

[Eric Loh]

3 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

I think the public in general don't care that he wanted something for the aid money. People in America just expect that; the surprise is that the USA gets something at all from foreign aid.

You sure about the general public don’t care? Apparently you don’t read the polls. Here is one among many showing more than 50% want to know by having a proper trial.
https://morningconsult.com/2019/12/20/most-voters-want-senate-to-call-more-witnesses-for-trumps-impeachment-trial/

 

[earlinclaifornia]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Interestingly many Americans seem to think its the Dems who are in for a rude awakening!

 

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

These days the only rebuttal of the Republicans is to deny the upcoming losses. Good try when things are so bleak

[earlinclaifornia]

1 hour ago, candide said:

I don't know where you get that impression from. Most polls show that more people support removing Trump from office than the opposite. For example this poll aggregator (similar figures in the conservative aggregator): 50.3% support, 46.3% don't support.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

Republicans don't like it at all when facts cloud their talking points.

[earlinclaifornia]

25 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

I think the public in general don't care that he wanted something for the aid money. People in America just expect that; the surprise is that the USA gets something at all from foreign aid.

Where is any proof that may even have the slightest evidence of truth? General public you said! Pray tell?

[JHolmesJr]

Good on Mitch! I would not mess with this guys authority...he didnt title his book The Long Game

for nothin'.

 

Dems need a good slap down for their over reach....schumer thinks he's the senate majority leader...so does

Pelosi. 

 

[Thingamabob]

A waste of time and money because of which the Dems have handed the election to Trump on a plate. Really stupid. 

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Are the GOP senators really so desperate to avoid listening to facts

Sadly...yes. 

[mogandave]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

How long would it take to hear four witnesses? Maybe four days?

Are the GOP senators really so desperate to avoid listening to facts that they don't even want to invest four days, not even a week, to hear the truth about their own president, the most powerful person in the world?

That's scary!

 

For all the Trump supporters please keep in mind: This is only about listening to people who work or worked in the White House and have or had personal contact with POTUS all the time. They should know the truth. Do you want to know the truth? Because if you don't want to listen to them for a few days that clearly shows that you don't want to know the truth. I don't wonder why.

 

Why did the house not have time to hear the witnesses?

[JHolmesJr]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Are the GOP senators really so desperate to avoid listening to facts....

 

Of the two articles (not yet submitted, so impeachment has not occurred), one is absolute garbage.

Obstruction of congress...no need witness for that.

 

The first one....hmmm.....many people think that Biden should be investigated.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-impeachment-hearings-biden-investigation-democrats-ukraine-inquiry-a9204631.html

 

As this is political theatre and nt a criminal trial, it doesnt follow the usual precepts...the investigation is complete,

now comes the ruling by the jury.

[Jingthing]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Interestingly many Americans seem to think its the Dems who are in for a rude awakening!

 

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

"Many" meaning the percentage of Americans following the cult of personality presidency (a minority). 

[Jingthing]

31 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

A waste of time and money because of which the Dems have handed the election to Trump on a plate. Really stupid. 

Vapid groundless hubris. 

[Tug]

35 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Why did the house not have time to hear the witnesses?

Ahhh maybe because Donald will obstruct dragging it out till after the 2020 election allowing him to (rigg)the election.imo I see the gop desperate to avoid people hearing facts and truth the 2 biggest enemies of trump and trump so desperate to risk a war just another warning that trump is unsuited for the job imo

[Tug]

33 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Of the two articles (not yet submitted, so impeachment has not occurred), one is absolute garbage.

Obstruction of congress...no need witness for that.

 

The first one....hmmm.....many people think that Biden should be investigated.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-impeachment-hearings-biden-investigation-democrats-ukraine-inquiry-a9204631.html

 

As this is political theatre and nt a criminal trial, it doesnt follow the usual precepts...the investigation is complete,

now comes the ruling by the jury.

The house impeaches he is impeached that is fact the senate tries that hasent happened yet that is fact

[mogandave]

15 minutes ago, Tug said:

The house impeaches he is impeached that is fact the senate tries that hasent happened yet that is fact

The “facts” have been explained any number of times yet you continue pretending. 
 

That he is impeached is certainly arguable, but to claim it as fact just puts it with all the other stuff the left claims as “fact” that just aren’t.

[mogandave]

21 minutes ago, Tug said:

Ahhh maybe because Donald will obstruct dragging it out till after the 2020 election allowing him to (rigg)the election.imo I see the gop desperate to avoid people hearing facts and truth the 2 biggest enemies of trump and trump so desperate to risk a war just another warning that trump is unsuited for the job imo

The House could have taken him to court to compel the witnesses to testify, but instead they have (apparently) put it before the Senate where they have no power to take him to court or demand anything. 
 

How does that stop him from “rigging” the election? 
 

 

 

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

Why did the house not have time to hear the witnesses?

Are you joking?

Did you pay attention?

Trump told those possible witnesses not to testify in congress. Guess why?

[mogandave]

Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

Are you joking?

Did you pay attention?

Trump told those possible witnesses not to testify in congress. Guess why?

No

yes

I know why. 
 

I answered three of your questions, now why don’t you answer mine? 
 

Why did the House not go through the process of compelling the witnesses to testify? 

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Of the two articles (not yet submitted, so impeachment has not occurred), one is absolute garbage.

Obstruction of congress...no need witness for that.

 

The first one....hmmm.....many people think that Biden should be investigated.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-impeachment-hearings-biden-investigation-democrats-ukraine-inquiry-a9204631.html

 

As this is political theatre and nt a criminal trial, it doesnt follow the usual precepts...the investigation is complete,

now comes the ruling by the jury.

Trumps asking for a favor was never about corruption or no corruption. It was about having dirt on Biden. For that an announcement of an investigation was what Trump wanted - not the actual investigation.

 

And for the impeachment it does not matter if anybody in the Biden family is corrupt or not. That is for judges to decide, not for the senate. What the senators should judge is if Trump asked a foreign leader for help in an American election. Do you think that matters? Or do you think it would be perfectly fine if American politicians would ask foreigners to help them win? Think about it, it's not really that difficult.

[JHolmesJr]

7 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Are you joking?

Did you pay attention?

Trump told those possible witnesses not to testify in congress. Guess why?

The head of the executive branch claimed executive...so?

Let the courts decide...unless you're in a hurry, in which case.....oh wait, they couldn't.....he's a danger to the country ????

[JHolmesJr]

1 minute ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Trumps asking for a favor was never about corruption or no corruption.

 

in your inconsequential opinion.

 

many Americans know Joe B is dirty as hell...they want to see what's up with the guy.

 

Simply entering the race as a candidate for your party's nomination does not grant immunity

or scrub past potential crimes clean. Get educated.

[OneMoreFarang]

6 minutes ago, mogandave said:

No

yes

I know why. 
 

I answered three of your questions, now why don’t you answer mine? 
 

Why did the House not go through the process of compelling the witnesses to testify? 

Here are your detailed answers. I could quote from that and from many articles. But below are clear answers with lots of details. Those answers are a lot better and anything I could write. And they are counterchecked and approved by many people.

 

Is there any reason Congress hasn't enforced their subpoena power over witnesses?

https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/48965/is-there-any-reason-congress-hasnt-enforced-their-subpoena-power-over-witnesses