SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
pocotrader
To: FJB who wrote (1189846)1/2/2020 10:18:37 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation   of 1576956
 
BOMBSHELL: THE TRUMP COVER-UP UNFOLDING BEFORE OUR EYES

Last week, we got a small but tantalizing glimpse of the explosive cache of documents that the White House has tried to keep hidden from public view. They detailed the Trump administration's withholding of foreign aid to compel Ukraine to investigate one of the President's political rivals. It was a stark reminder that the administration is keeping vital information away from Congress and the public by stifling key witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of President Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine.

Indeed, this is a cover-up, unfolding right before us.

The New York Times reported this week that, in late August, Trump met in the Oval Office with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, then-national security adviser John Bolton and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper. The purpose of the meeting, according to the Times: to convince Trump that releasing the held-back foreign aid to Ukraine was "in the best national interests of the United States." Pompeo, Bolton and Esper reportedly "tried but failed" in their mission.
Here are a few things about this August meeting that cannot be reasonably contested, regardless of political ideology. The meeting was important to the overall Ukraine timeline. At that meeting, Trump discussed with his key advisers whether to release the foreign aid to Ukraine. The team of advisers urged Trump to do so, but he refused.

Whatever was said at that meeting is crucial evidence of Trump's plan and intent regarding Ukraine, for better or for worse. Pompeo, Bolton and Esper all know what happened during that meeting. And all of them have, in one form or another, honored Trump's blanket instruction to executive branch officials not to testify.

It is precisely because of the crucial missing evidence that we need a real trial in the Senate. If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell succeeds in his plan to conduct a hasty impeachment trial devoid of actual evidence or substance -- and, remember, McConnell has admitted that he is acting in " total coordination" with the White House -- then, make no mistake, justice will not and cannot be served.
Maybe the suppressed documents and testimony truly exonerate Trump, or -- perhaps more plausibly -- cast doubt on the central allegations of abuse of power contained in the articles of impeachment. But unless Trump agrees to release the missing information, we will never know. Common sense, and my own prosecutorial experience, tell us that Trump is likely hiding evidence for the most common reason that anyone hides evidence in any case: because he knows it is devastating to his cause.

Now your questions
Karl (Arkansas): If McConnell refuses to allow witnesses to testify at the impeachment trial, do Democrats have any legal recourse?
If McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer cannot reach a negotiated agreement, then Senate Democrats have limited options to compel witness testimony against the will of the Republican majority.
Senate Democrats could file a lawsuit challenging a determination by McConnell not to call any witnesses. But such a lawsuit almost certainly would fail. Courts are reluctant to intervene in what they call " political questions," and a Senate impeachment trial is a classic example. It is very unlikely that a court can or would dictate terms of an impeachment trial, given that the Constitution grants the Senate the "sole power to try all impeachments."
Senate Democrats also could request subpoenas from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who will preside over the impeachment trial. But even if the chief justice granted a request for witnesses, he could be overridden by (or would defer to) a majority vote of the Senate, as even Schumer has acknowledged.

Given that Republicans hold a 53-47 Senate majority, Democrats would need to flip four Republican senators to vote with them to call witnesses or introduce other evidence. No Republican senator has committed to vote with the Democrats on those issues, though Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has said she is "disturbed" by McConnell's open coordination with the White House on the impeachment trial -- perhaps signaling some willingness to join Democrats in favor of more fulsome trial procedures.
cnn.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext