“A
bipartisan majority of Americans want to see new witnesses testify in
the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.”
– Reuters/Ipsos
polling released January 22, 2020.
Despite Trump blocking the
Democrats' requests for documents related to the administration's
activities in Ukraine last year and urging officials like former
national security adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo not to participate, a poll shows that both Republicans and
Democrats want to see these officials tell the Senate what they know
about the administration's policies in Ukraine.
About 72% agreed that
the trial "should allow witnesses with firsthand knowledge of
the impeachment charges to testify," including 84% of Democrats
and 69% of Republicans. And 70% of the public, including 80% of
Democrats and 73% of Republicans, said senators should "act as
impartial jurors" during the trial.
The evidence presented in
the House was not all the evidence available, and at least one
witness, John Bolton, has indicated his willingness to appear before
the Senate. According to Bolton, former White House national security
adviser and potentially crucial witness …
"Accordingly,
since my testimony is once again at issue, I have had to resolve the
serious competing issues as best I could, based on careful
consideration and study. I have concluded that, if the Senate issues
a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify."
Meanwhile as the trial
begins, doubt about the leadership of the majority party continues.
About 40% of Americans said they have a favorable view of Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, while 60% said they have an
unfavorable view of him.
It seems Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell has a problem with the facts. He is taking the
position that the evidence presented in the House impeachment inquiry
is all the Senate needs to decide whether Trump should be removed
from office, and that further testimony from witnesses in the Senate
impeachment trial is unnecessary.
McConnell has other
credibility problems. Early in December 2019, long before the
impeachment trial, McConnell boldly announced to Fox News …
"Everything I do
during this I'm coordinating with the White House counsel. There will
be no difference between the president's position and our position as
to how to handle this.”
McConnell added that he'll
be in "total coordination with the White House counsel's office
and the people who are representing the president in the well of the
Senate."
McConnell also told
reporters in December that he will not act as an "impartial
juror" in the likely event of a Senate trial, stating: "This
is a political process."
With his
lockstep-with-Trump announcement, McConnell denies impartiality –
negating an affirmation he took upon assuming the office. Senators
must take the following oath before being sworn in for an impeachment
trial:
"I solemnly swear
(or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to
the trial of the impeachment of [name of person being impeached], now
pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution
and laws: so help me God."
As for witnesses, Mieke
Eoyang, former professional staff member of the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence, and Anisha Hindocha, former law
clerk for the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs say …
“The Constitution is clear: The Senate has “the
sole Power to try” – not review – 'all Impeachments.' Unlike an
appeals court, the Senate’s powers are not limited to review and
remand; instead, it alone has the power to determine whether an
impeached president should be punished by removal from office and
disqualification from “any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under
the United States.” These are powers reserved for trial, not
appellate, courts.
“What’s more, the two times in history that a
presidential impeachment has reached the Senate, the chamber has
treated it as a trial. The Senate proceedings in Andrew Johnson’s
case included the testimony of 25 witnesses for the prosecution and
16 for the defense.
“During the
impeachment of Bill Clinton, the Senate deposed three witnesses—even
after the extended independent counsel investigation that preceded
the Senate trial. In fact, the Senate has obtained testimony from
witnesses in every impeachment trial held in the past 50 years.”
(Mieke
Eoyang and Anisha Hindocha. “The Senate Impeachment Trial: Call the
Witnesses or Concede the Facts.” Lawfare. January 14, 2020.)
Moderate Republicans
including Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Mitt Romney
(Utah), Cory Gardner (Colo.) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) previously
said they would be open to hearing from the likes of Bolton, but
later in the trial, after opening arguments, per the McConnell rules,
which follow the pattern of the rules used in the 1999 Bill Clinton
impeachment trial.
“A trial without all the
facts is a farce,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. The
public would be denied the opportunity to fully judge the president's
actions without hearing from the people closest to him, Democrats
have argued.
Still, in defiance,
McConnell and many Republicans say they’re under no obligation to
call witnesses, given that the Senate trial will almost certainly end
in an acquittal that allows Trump to remain in office. In other
words, partisanship is enough evidence for their important votes.
Perhaps, impartiality is more than fleeting. It is long gone.
Witnesses in a
controversial trial – the need is compelling. Without witnesses,
the senate trial would be a sham. Besides, wouldn't a trial with
witnesses be both fair to Trump, whose lawyers should be able to
cross-examine them, and in the national interest? And who knows?
Maybe the witnesses would best serve the president's interest
(getting off the hook) … I doubt it, but after Trump won the
election, I can truly say I have been surprised before.
“A
standard requiring proof of corrupt motive beyond a reasonable doubt
is unworkable without witnesses. Testimony of witnesses who spoke
directly with the president can raise or dispel doubts about motive
and should be given the chance to perform that essential function.”
– Evan
A. Davis, The Hill
No comments:
Post a Comment