Shameless <sigh>, nauseating ...
Rather than have Bolton appear as a witness in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, Republicans would instead have a chance to look at the manuscript of Bolton’s upcoming book, which claims that Bolton has knowledge as a firsthand witness to Trump’s alleged actions, in secret, and then determine how to proceed.
On Tuesday, Lindsey Graham signed on to this scheme, calling for the manuscript to be made available in ”a classified setting.” Not only is this an obvious ploy to prevent Bolton from ever answering questions in front of Mitch McConnell’s personally controlled camera; it also means that Republicans, after a trial in which they have constantly accused Democrats of changing the rules to gather evidence in “secret,” are genuinely looking to change the rules … so they can examine evidence. In secret.
Apparently the presiding judge (here, Chief Justice John Roberts) has the power to subpoena witnesses and documents both on his own initiative and if asked by the House managers presenting the case. Republicans don't have the two-thirds supermajority necessary to overrule him.
John Roberts Can Call Witnesses to Trump’s Trial. Will He? (NYTimes)
"Democratic House managers should ask the chief justice to issue subpoenas for John Bolton and others."
If there were any doubt, recall the language of the Constitution, which orders that, in an impeachment trial of the president, “the Chief Justice shall preside.” To “preside” is not a merely symbolic role; it can mean, just as it meant during President Andrew Johnson’s impeachment trial, to be asked to make a range of actual rulings, including ones on which the chief justice is not merely the first word but also the last.
There’s a reason that, to our knowledge, no chief justice presiding over a president’s impeachment trial has had to confront precisely this issue before: No president has tried to hide all of the facts from Congress before. To be sure, previous presidents facing the prospect of impeachment — like Presidents Nixon and Clinton — have been accused of failing to share all of the information sought from them. But none ever vowed, as Mr. Trump has, to continue “fighting all the subpoenas” regardless of their particular validity. Ultimately, some accommodation was reached in previous impeachment inquiries as to the scope of information provided — including, for Mr. Clinton’s impeachment trial, an eventual agreement on witness testimony. If Chief Justice Roberts is being asked to answer difficult questions, it is a direct result of President Trump’s scorched-earth approach to congressional oversight.
I'm not a John Bolton fan but his book comes along at a right time. Let the Repubs examine it and they will see more on what's going on. It is possible that some of them will start doing what they were elected for because they are coming up again for re-election. If not, we will continue to have a fair trial without witnesses.
"a fair trial without witnesses" Is that like a round square?
Trials and due process are for the others. You know, the less important ones, our constituents. We spin facts to justify our objectives. We are not cheap but we can be bought. Individual before party. Party before country.
Additional witnesses will only add to the stain. Our president has supporters of two stripes. The first are members of Trump's cult. There is no act so shocking, so heinous, so reprehensible that it will cause his cultists to abjure their commitment. Next are the selfish supporters who believe Trump has created wealth for them and will continue to do so. Our failure to impeach Trump or call witnesses will not alienate the former and by extension our own reelection. On the other hand it is possible that we may lose some of the latter's support in failing to impeach if additional corroboration and or
other capers are uncovered. The selfish supporters lacking n integrity themselves will not penalize us in lacking integrity (failing to hear from witnesses without which the appearance of fairness is impossible )
Very truly told,
anonymous republican senator
You mean the selfish supporters who are happy to see themselves as temporarily inconvenienced billionaires (if only it weren't for Big Gummint and all those evil regulations slowing down the actual oligarchs' pursuit of more billions!)?
And Ruth, you're right! A "fair trial without witnesses" is like a round square, or a four-sided triangle.
Or a married bachelor...
Disgusting for sure. Visualize the 3 monkeys "hearing, seeing, and speaking no evil". With all the mounting evidence, think also of: "If it walks, talks, and looks like a duck.....". Republicans must be seeing a platypus--duck billed, of course. This is all beyond my comprehension.
Yes, my attorney has fixed everything for me. In my up and coming rape trial he has arranged that no witnesses can be called and we do this to guarantee a fair trial and get it all over with ASAP.
I pulled the above words out of thin air to illustrate just how insane this situation really is with Trump but it falls on deaf ears. His supporters continually claim there is no evidence and do everything they can to block evidence. Some even say that "the Democrats should have fought harder" for rules and inclusion of evidence. Somehow I thought that the presented evidence from the git go was enough. Maybe Trump really could get away with shooting someone on 5th Avenue. In my area the ones that support Trump continue to do so because none of this is currently affecting them directly. People are starting to believe that everyone who came before Trump was a crook and Trumpy is now "draining the swamp."
Make no mistake. This is the result of a collusion between the Executive and Legislative branches of our government, more specifically between Donald Trump and "Moscow" Mitch McConnell. Because McConnell won't do his job and has indeed been co-opted by Trump to do his bidding, there was never any chance of anything remotely approaching a "fair" trial in the Senate. Indeed, even as Trump publicly asked China to investigate Joe Biden and in so doing incriminate himself, so Mitch stated just as publicly that he was NOT an impartial juror and blatantly greased the wheels, being the good monkey-boy that he is. What I genuinely don't get is why, having heard that, that Chief Justice Roberts didn't demand that McConnell recuse himself from the entire process, which MIGHT have brought some degree of control back.
And because of all that, we are in deep sneakers, people. As a result of the actions of those two men, the structure of our democracy is in seriously fragile condition, and further meddling would leave us in a status I shudder to contemplate. The only curative action remaining to us is the ballot box, and that must be pressed into service as vigorously as possible, meaning a landslide victory in both the popular vote and Electoral College AGAINST Donald Trump. Sure, all of us know that, but it doesn't hurt to restate it:
Both of them – Trump and McConnell – need to be EJECTED from our government.
R'amen! Saying it again, loudly, for those in the back:
Both of them -- Trump and McConnell -- need to be EJECTED from our government.