theguardian--2020-01-21--Trump impeachment: Senate prepares to hear opening arguments in trial

As Donald Trump prepared on Tuesday to address the billionaires in Davos , the US Senate prepared to hear opening arguments in an impeachment trial that could remove Trump from the presidency , if not from his seemingly unassailable perch in the public eye .
For only the third time in history , prosecutors sent by the House of Representatives will rise on the Senate floor to charge the president with “ high crimes and misdemeanors ” and declare that he must be turned out of the White House .
Trump “ is the framers ’ worst nightmare come to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the intelligence committee and the lead impeachment prosecutor , wrote in a brief filed Monday , referring to the authors of the US constitution .
Trump was impeached in a party-line vote on two articles , or charges , in the House last month , for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , relating to accusations that he threatened US national security with his conduct towards Ukraine .
But as his Senate trial got under way in earnest , Trump received a powerful boost of support from the majority leader , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unveiled a resolution designed to move the trial forward with unanticipated speed .
The schedule laid out by McConnell would consign key proceedings to late , potentially post-midnight hours and left in doubt whether the Senate would admit evidence gathered in the House – much less call any witnesses to testify about Trump ’ s conduct .
Chuck Schumer , the top Democrat in the Senate , called the resolution “ a national disgrace ” .
It is “ clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial through ” , Schumer said .
Cocooned by the fidelity of a Republican party intolerant of the least criticism of their leader , even as the trial begins Trump appeared to be safe in his post .
A two-thirds majority of members present in the Republican-controlled Senate would be required to remove him .
But the Senate trial may hold hidden pitfalls for Trump , including some that could be beyond the power of his sworn allies in the Senate leadership to prevent .
To make their case , Democrats will seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way the public perceives Trump ’ s alleged scheme to wield the unique powers of his office for his own political advantage .
But under the McConnell rules , potential witnesses would need to be deposed before testifying at the trial , and individual Senate votes would be required to call the witnesses .
It appeared that McConnell had enough votes from his caucus to push the rules package through as soon as the trial convenes on Tuesday afternoon .
Republicans have vowed to prevent witnesses from appearing in order to testify , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that party line would give Democrats the narrow majority required to force witnesses through or obtain new documents .
Presiding at the trial will be John Roberts , chief justice of the US supreme court , who is expected to rule with a light touch but who will have the power to admit evidence or testimony that Trump might prefer omitted .
On the eve of the trial , a dozen lawyers for the president revealed the full scope of their legal strategy , which will follow Trump ’ s lead in taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
In a 110-page legal brief filed with the Senate on Monday , the lawyers called the impeachment “ an affront to the constitution and to our democratic institutions ” and “ a brazenly political act by House Democrats that must be rejected ” .
The document attacked the Democrats ’ case on constitutional grounds , arguing that the impeachment was invalid because Trump had not been accused of violating a particular law .
But that interpretation of the constitution was unrecognizable to constitutional law experts , many of whom expressed public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ language of the document .
“ Their argument is wrong , particularly when they contend that ‘ high crimes and misdemeanors ’ requires proof of an indictable crime , ” Frank O Bowman III , a professor at the University of Missouri school of law and an impeachment expert , told the Guardian in an email .
He continued : “ Not true .
Never has been , either in England or the US .
To argue otherwise , they cherry-pick their sources and ignore the massive body of contrary evidence.
” While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alleged conduct – all but ignoring the role in the Ukraine scheme of Trump ’ s main emissary , Rudy Giuliani , and ignoring evidence showing Trump ’ s role in withholding military aid to Ukraine – the legal document staked out a narrow band of conduct by Trump and advanced familiar defenses of that conduct .
In a July 2019 phone call in which Trump reminded the Ukrainian president , Volodymyr Zelenskiy , that “ the United States has been very , very good to Ukraine ” and then asked for “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a desire to stamp out internal Ukrainian corruption , the document argued .
“ It ’ s like Presidential tweets reformatted to look like a legal document , ” tweeted Orin Kerr , a prominent scholar of constitutional law and law professor at the University of California-Berkeley .
One of the most flagrant assertions in the Trump legal brief , according to scholars , was an attack on subpoenas issued by the House during the impeachment proceedings as “ defective ” .
The White House relied on that reasoning to deny witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which prompted the obstruction of Congress charge .
“ This is the argument of a monarch , ” wrote Schiff , “ with no basis in the constitution.
” But as he prepared to depart for Switzerland , Trump got well out ahead of his lawyers on Twitter , in a pattern that could repeat itself during the trial , which is expected to last at least two weeks and could run for much longer .
“ They didn ’ t want John Bolton and others in the House , ” Trump tweeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adviser , who could recount direct conversations with the president about Ukraine , in testimony that could be damaging .
In fact , the intelligence committee requested in October that Bolton appear to testify , but he declined , threatening the committee with a lawsuit if they attempted to subpoena him .
“ No , Mr. President , we did ask John Bolton to testify , ” Schiff replied on Twitter .
“ You ordered him not to , and blocked others , like [ acting chief of staff ] Mick Mulvaney .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] a fair trial includes documents and witnesses .

As Donald Trump prepared on Tuesday to address the billionaires gathered in Davos, the US Senate prepared to hear opening arguments in an impeachment trial that could remove Trump from the presidency, if not from his seemingly unassailable perch in the public eye.
For only the third time in history, prosecutors sent by the House of Representatives will rise on the Senate floor to charge the president with “high crimes and misdemeanors” and declare that he must be turned out of the White House.
Trump “is the framers’ worst nightmare come to life”, Adam Schiff, chair of the intelligence committee and the lead impeachment prosecutor, wrote in a brief filed Monday, referring to the authors of the US constitution.
Trump was impeached in a party-line vote on two articles, or charges, in the House last month, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, relating to accusations that he threatened US national security with his conduct towards Ukraine.
But as his Senate trial got under way in earnest, Trump received a powerful boost of support from the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who on Monday night unveiled a resolution designed to move the trial forward with unanticipated speed.
The schedule laid out by McConnell would consign key proceedings to late, potentially post-midnight hours and left in doubt whether the Senate would admit evidence gathered in the House – much less call any witnesses to testify about Trump’s conduct.
Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, called the resolution “a national disgrace”.
It is “clear Senator McConnell is hell-bent on making it much more difficult to get witnesses and documents and intent on rushing the trial through”, Schumer said.
Cocooned by the fidelity of a Republican party intolerant of the least criticism of their leader, even as the trial begins Trump appeared to be safe in his post. A two-thirds majority of members present in the Republican-controlled Senate would be required to remove him.
But the Senate trial may hold hidden pitfalls for Trump, including some that could be beyond the power of his sworn allies in the Senate leadership to prevent.
To make their case, Democrats will seek to call witnesses who might change the way the public perceives Trump’s alleged scheme to wield the unique powers of his office for his own political advantage.
But under the McConnell rules, potential witnesses would need to be deposed before testifying at the trial, and individual Senate votes would be required to call the witnesses. It appeared that McConnell had enough votes from his caucus to push the rules package through as soon as the trial convenes on Tuesday afternoon.
Republicans have vowed to prevent witnesses from appearing in order to testify, but just a few temporary defections from that party line would give Democrats the narrow majority required to force witnesses through or obtain new documents.
Presiding at the trial will be John Roberts, chief justice of the US supreme court, who is expected to rule with a light touch but who will have the power to admit evidence or testimony that Trump might prefer omitted.
On the eve of the trial, a dozen lawyers for the president revealed the full scope of their legal strategy, which will follow Trump’s lead in taking a scorched-earth approach to the allegations against him.
In a 110-page legal brief filed with the Senate on Monday, the lawyers called the impeachment “an affront to the constitution and to our democratic institutions” and “a brazenly political act by House Democrats that must be rejected”.
The document attacked the Democrats’ case on constitutional grounds, arguing that the impeachment was invalid because Trump had not been accused of violating a particular law.
But that interpretation of the constitution was unrecognizable to constitutional law experts, many of whom expressed public dismay at what they called the reckless language of the document.
“Their argument is wrong, particularly when they contend that ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ requires proof of an indictable crime,” Frank O Bowman III, a professor at the University of Missouri school of law and an impeachment expert, told the Guardian in an email.
He continued: “Not true. Never has been, either in England or the US. To argue otherwise, they cherry-pick their sources and ignore the massive body of contrary evidence.”
While skipping past most of Trump’s alleged conduct – all but ignoring the role in the Ukraine scheme of Trump’s main emissary, Rudy Giuliani, and ignoring evidence showing Trump’s role in withholding military aid to Ukraine – the legal document staked out a narrow band of conduct by Trump and advanced familiar defenses of that conduct.
In a July 2019 phone call in which Trump reminded the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, that “the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine” and then asked for “a favor”, Trump was motivated by a desire to stamp out internal Ukrainian corruption, the document argued.
“It’s like Presidential tweets reformatted to look like a legal document,” tweeted Orin Kerr, a prominent scholar of constitutional law and law professor at the University of California-Berkeley.
One of the most flagrant assertions in the Trump legal brief, according to scholars, was an attack on subpoenas issued by the House during the impeachment proceedings as “defective”. The White House relied on that reasoning to deny witnesses and testimony to the House inquiry, which prompted the obstruction of Congress charge.
“This is the argument of a monarch,” wrote Schiff, “with no basis in the constitution.”
But as he prepared to depart for Switzerland, Trump got well out ahead of his lawyers on Twitter, in a pattern that could repeat itself during the trial, which is expected to last at least two weeks and could run for much longer.
“They didn’t want John Bolton and others in the House,” Trump tweeted, referring to his former national security adviser, who could recount direct conversations with the president about Ukraine, in testimony that could be damaging.
In fact, the intelligence committee requested in October that Bolton appear to testify, but he declined, threatening the committee with a lawsuit if they attempted to subpoena him.
“No, Mr. President, we did ask John Bolton to testify,” Schiff replied on Twitter. “You ordered him not to, and blocked others, like [acting chief of staff] Mick Mulvaney.
“All Americans know what [sic] a fair trial includes documents and witnesses.
“What are you hiding?”


theguardian--2020-01-21--Lindsey Graham: senator who became Trump’s loudest impeachment bulldog

To mount his defense at his Senate impeachment trial , Donald Trump will dispatch a bespoke legal team .
But the president will also rely on some help from inside the room .
The majority leader , Mitch McConnell , who has promised a thumb on the scale for Trump , would seem to be the best friend any allegedly criminal president could ask for .
But the senator who has emerged as Trump ’ s impeachment bulldog by protesting the president ’ s innocence most loudly is South Carolina ’ s Lindsey Graham .
“ This thing will come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ die quickly , and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly , ” Graham said last month .
“ I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind .
I ’ m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here.
” Much has been made of how Trump brought the Republican party to heel .
But in no single member of Congress has the transformation from Trump skeptic to true believer been so remarkable as in Graham .
About 20 Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Senate and remove him from office .
No one is predicting that will happen , but Trump could still sustain political damage if the trial features new witness testimony or other evidence about his alleged wrongdoings .
Graham has placed himself at the front of the coalition of Trump defenders to ensure that will not happen .
It ’ s a long way from where he used to stand .
The senator was once an open enemy of the president , decrying Trump ’ s attacks on his friend John McCain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeting in May 2016 : “ If we nominate Trump , we will get destroyed ... ... .and we will deserve it.
” Graham did not vote for Trump that year , instead casting his ballot for the independent candidate Evan McMullin .
But the political gravity of Trump ’ s victory soon bent Graham in his direction .
As the pair became golfing buddies , the emotional temperature of Graham ’ s tweets about the president rose .
Then came the moment that wholly redeemed Graham in the eyes of the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh , who stood accused of sexual assault , Graham broke with the subdued tone of Republican colleagues to angrily attack Democrats .
“ What you want to do is destroy this guy ’ s life , hold this seat open , and hope you win in 2020 , ” Graham told Democrats .
By the time impeachment rolled around , there was seemingly nothing Trump could say that Graham would not enthusiastically amplify .
When Trump called the impeachment inquiry a “ lynching ” , Graham said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every sense .
This is un-American.
” Graham ’ s transformation has fed a cottage industry of think pieces .
But the short version notes that Graham , 64 , who has served in Congress for nearly three decades , is up for re-election this year in a state Trump won by 14 points and where the president remains very popular .
Had Graham lost the faith – and endorsement – of Trump this fall , he could have been vulnerable to a Republican challenger in a Senate primary contest .
And having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hurt Graham in the general election , when he will face a former head of the Democratic national committee .
If there is a line Graham will not cross in his cultivation of Trump ’ s favor , no one else can see it .
In November , Graham requested documents for a judiciary committee inquiry into the activities in Ukraine of Hunter Biden , former vice-president Joe Biden ’ s son .
Republicans have sought to deflect criticism of Trump by pursuing conspiracy theories about the Bidens advanced by the president .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ former Senate colleague of Graham but a beloved friend .
In an on-camera interview a teary-eyed Graham once called Biden “ as good a man as God ever created ” .
Asked in November about Graham ’ s now impugning his son , Biden chalked it up to politics .
“ They have him under their thumb right now , ” he said of the Trump administration ’ s hold on Graham ’ s political future .
“ I am disappointed , and quite frankly I ’ m angered by the fact – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ He knows my son .
He knows there ’ s nothing to this.
” In the House , Trump had a clamorous kennel of bulldog defenders , representatives like Jim Jordan and Devin Nunes , who could turn any discussion of alleged extortion by Trump into an outraged harangue about the sins of Hunter Biden .
The Senate dynamic will be different .
Instead of making speeches , the senators must sit and listen and may only submit questions in writing .
The deliberation that would precede a final vote has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of the public eye .
Graham is uniquely experienced for the task at hand , having served as an impeachment manager when he was in the House and Bill Clinton was in the congressional crosshairs .
At the time , he argued that hearing from witnesses and taking evidence were essential to a fair hearing .
As recently as October , Graham seemed like a potential member of the group of moderate Republican senators who might entertain the idea that Trump had acted improperly .
Asked by Capitol Hill reporters whether anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said : “ Sure .
Show me something that is a crime .
If you could show me that Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo , outside the phone call , that would be very disturbing.
” Graham now says the Senate should call no witnesses and move to dismiss the impeachment trial as quickly as possible .
“ Lindsey is about to go down in a way that I think he ’ s going to regret his whole life , ” Biden said .
“ I say Lindsey , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re doing .
For you .
I mean , my Lord .
”

To mount his defense at his Senate impeachment trial, Donald Trump will dispatch a bespoke legal team. But the president will also rely on some help from inside the room.
The majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who has promised a thumb on the scale for Trump, would seem to be the best friend any allegedly criminal president could ask for.
But the senator who has emerged as Trump’s impeachment bulldog by protesting the president’s innocence most loudly is South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham.
“This thing will come to the Senate, and it will die quickly, and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly,” Graham said last month. “I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind. I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here.”
Much has been made of how Trump brought the Republican party to heel. But in no single member of Congress has the transformation from Trump skeptic to true believer been so remarkable as in Graham.
About 20 Republican defections would be required to convict Trump in the Senate and remove him from office. No one is predicting that will happen, but Trump could still sustain political damage if the trial features new witness testimony or other evidence about his alleged wrongdoings.
Graham has placed himself at the front of the coalition of Trump defenders to ensure that will not happen. It’s a long way from where he used to stand.
The senator was once an open enemy of the president, decrying Trump’s attacks on his friend John McCain, the late Arizona senator, and tweeting in May 2016: “If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it.” Graham did not vote for Trump that year, instead casting his ballot for the independent candidate Evan McMullin.
But the political gravity of Trump’s victory soon bent Graham in his direction. As the pair became golfing buddies, the emotional temperature of Graham’s tweets about the president rose. Then came the moment that wholly redeemed Graham in the eyes of the White House.
In public confirmation hearings for the supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who stood accused of sexual assault, Graham broke with the subdued tone of Republican colleagues to angrily attack Democrats.
“What you want to do is destroy this guy’s life, hold this seat open, and hope you win in 2020,” Graham told Democrats.
By the time impeachment rolled around, there was seemingly nothing Trump could say that Graham would not enthusiastically amplify. When Trump called the impeachment inquiry a “lynching”, Graham said: “This is a lynching in every sense. This is un-American.”
Graham’s transformation has fed a cottage industry of think pieces. But the short version notes that Graham, 64, who has served in Congress for nearly three decades, is up for re-election this year in a state Trump won by 14 points and where the president remains very popular.
Had Graham lost the faith – and endorsement – of Trump this fall, he could have been vulnerable to a Republican challenger in a Senate primary contest. And having Trump on his side won’t hurt Graham in the general election, when he will face a former head of the Democratic National Committee.
If there is a line Graham will not cross in his cultivation of Trump’s favor, no one else can see it. In November, Graham requested documents for a judiciary committee inquiry into the activities in Ukraine of Hunter Biden, former vice-president Joe Biden’s son. Republicans have sought to deflect criticism of Trump by pursuing conspiracy theories about the Bidens advanced by the president.
The elder Biden is not only a former Senate colleague of Graham but a beloved friend. In an on-camera interview a teary-eyed Graham once called Biden “as good a man as God ever created”.
Asked in November about Graham’s now impugning his son, Biden chalked it up to politics.
“They have him under their thumb right now,” he said of the Trump administration’s hold on Graham’s political future.
“I am disappointed, and quite frankly I’m angered by the fact – he knows me,” Biden said. “He knows my son. He knows there’s nothing to this.”
In the House, Trump had a clamorous kennel of bulldog defenders, representatives like Jim Jordan and Devin Nunes, who could turn any discussion of alleged extortion by Trump into an outraged harangue about the sins of Hunter Biden.
The Senate dynamic will be different. Instead of making speeches, the senators must sit and listen and may only submit questions in writing. The deliberation that would precede a final vote has by precedent unfolded behind closed doors and out of the public eye.
Graham is uniquely experienced for the task at hand, having served as an impeachment manager when he was in the House and Bill Clinton was in the congressional crosshairs. At the time, he argued that hearing from witnesses and taking evidence were essential to a fair hearing.
As recently as October, Graham seemed like a potential member of the group of moderate Republican senators who might entertain the idea that Trump had acted improperly.
Asked by Capitol Hill reporters whether anything could sway him on impeachment, Graham said: “Sure. Show me something that is a crime. If you could show me that Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo, outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing.”
Graham now says the Senate should call no witnesses and move to dismiss the impeachment trial as quickly as possible.
“Lindsey is about to go down in a way that I think he’s going to regret his whole life,” Biden said. “I say Lindsey, I’m just embarrassed by what you’re doing. For you. I mean, my Lord.”


theguardian--2020-01-21--Mitch McConnell: ruthless operator determined to triumph for Trump

For all the hidden pitfalls that a Senate impeachment trial might hold for Donald Trump , he has so far enjoyed the steady support of elected Republicans , and in particular the chamber ’ s most powerful Republican , Mitch McConnell .
But the majority leader ’ s backing for Trump represents more than just one more vote in the “ acquit ” column .
As one of the most capable – and ruthless – tacticians in the history of the US Senate , McConnell , the political infighter who became legendary for frustrating the agenda of Barack Obama and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the ideal figure for Trump to have in charge at this most tenuous moment .
After weeks of vexed attempts by the two parties to settle on ground rules for the Senate impeachment trial , McConnell was expected to muscle through a resolution to open the proceedings early Tuesday afternoon..
It seemed no accident , for those familiar with McConnell ’ s track record , that the ground rules represented what he has said he wanted all along .
Repeatedly over his 13-year tenure as the Senate Republican leader , McConnell has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over tax cuts or the debt ceiling or campaign finance reform – and emerged the victor .
He blocked dozens of federal judges nominated by Obama and then changed Senate rules to accelerate the confirmation of 185 federal judges nominated by Trump … and counting .
Where no path to outright victory was apparent , McConnell has brandished procedural rules with unprecedented relish , escalating what once were seen as fraternal political arguments into winner-take-all clashes and , critics say , crippling the institution in the process .
Unlike most senators , McConnell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a future presidential run ; instead , his well-known lifelong dream was one day to become Senate majority leader , a dream that came true in early 2015 .
“ He has always been a creature of the Senate , ” his wife , Elaine Chao , the labor secretary , has said .
“ He has incredible respect and understanding of the Senate.
” But the job McConnell faces in Trump ’ s impeachment trial is unusual .
The matter at hand is a trial of sorts , not a piece of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sketchier , leaving open the possibility of Republican defections .
The national focus is expected to be unusually intense , perhaps increasing the temptation among some Republicans to take a turn in the national spotlight by stepping ever so slightly out of line .
While the US constitution and Senate lay out broad rules for an impeachment trial , rules that govern standards of evidence and the admission of witnesses are left for the Senate to decide , creating a political showdown even before the trial proper gets under way .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McConnell to … operate .
During the trial , McConnell could have the power to guide the process toward a swift close , or to put an end to Democratic calls for additional witnesses and testimony .
Significantly , Trump and McConnell seem to be closely aligned , with McConnell saying he would coordinate with Trump ’ s lawyers and Trump praising the legislator ’ s leadership .
“ I ’ m not an impartial juror , ” McConnell said flatly in December .
“ This is a political process .
There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a political decision.
” That kind of pugnacious , sometimes bordering on troll-worthy , speech , is a McConnell trademark .
In a widely quoted declaration in 2010 , he said : “ The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.
” While he shocked Democrats and some Republicans by refusing to take up Obama ’ s nomination of Merrick Garland to the supreme court in March 2016 , months before either party had even nominated a candidate to replace Obama , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the campaign trail .
“ One of my proudest moments was when I looked at Barack Obama in the eye and I said , ‘ Mr President , you will not fill the supreme court vacancy , ’ ” he told a crowd in Kentucky that year , to enthusiastic cheers .
McConnell later casually reversed himself on the underlying debate , saying he would install a Trump-nominated justice in the run-up to 2020 , given the opportunity .
For all his political talents , McConnell ’ s performance as majority leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliver the repeal of Obama ’ s healthcare law , once the keystone Republican party promise to its base .
And he couldn ’ t prevent Trump from initiating a damaging government shutdown over border wall funding in late 2018 .
McConnell consistently rates as one of the least popular senators in the country , with a 49 % home-state disapproval rating .
But ever since winning his first Senate race in 1984 , McConnell has gained more power , and held it more closely .
The only child of a chemicals executive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Kentucky , McConnell overcame a bout with polio and little natural retail political talent to chart his career .
He began as a moderate , supporting collective bargaining for public employees and even some abortion rights , before hitching his fate to the increasingly conservative right wing of the party .
He arrived on Capitol Hill as a Senate aide in 1969 and won his first race , for a county executive seat in Kentucky , in 1976 .
In his 2014 book on McConnell , The Cynic , the journalist Alec @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man who was conspicuously uninformed about the mechanics of politics grew into a steely influence broker , proud of his growing sway on Capitol Hill ” .
“ It is he who symbolizes better than anyone else in politics today , ” wrote MacGillis , “ the transformation of the Republican party from a broad , nationwide coalition spanning conservatives , moderates , and even some liberals into an ideologically monolithic , demographically constrained unit that political scientists judge without modern historical precedency .
”

For all the hidden pitfalls that a Senate impeachment trial might hold for Donald Trump, he has so far enjoyed the steady support of elected Republicans, and in particular the chamber’s most powerful Republican, Mitch McConnell.
But the majority leader’s backing for Trump represents more than just one more vote in the “acquit” column.
As one of the most capable – and ruthless – tacticians in the history of the US Senate, McConnell, the political infighter who became legendary for frustrating the agenda of Barack Obama and monkey-wrenching a supreme court nomination, looks like the ideal figure for Trump to have in charge at this most tenuous moment.
After weeks of vexed attempts by the two parties to settle on ground rules for the Senate impeachment trial, McConnell was expected to muscle through a resolution to open the proceedings early Tuesday afternoon..
It seemed no accident, for those familiar with McConnell’s track record, that the ground rules represented what he has said he wanted all along.
Repeatedly over his 13-year tenure as the Senate Republican leader, McConnell has engaged the opposition in slippery combat – over tax cuts or the debt ceiling or campaign finance reform – and emerged the victor. He blocked dozens of federal judges nominated by Obama and then changed Senate rules to accelerate the confirmation of 185 federal judges nominated by Trump … and counting.
Where no path to outright victory was apparent, McConnell has brandished procedural rules with unprecedented relish, escalating what once were seen as fraternal political arguments into winner-take-all clashes and, critics say, crippling the institution in the process.
Unlike most senators, McConnell has never been known to muse about a future presidential run; instead, his well-known lifelong dream was one day to become Senate majority leader, a dream that came true in early 2015. “He has always been a creature of the Senate,” his wife, Elaine Chao, the labor secretary, has said. “He has incredible respect and understanding of the Senate.”
But the job McConnell faces in Trump’s impeachment trial is unusual. The matter at hand is a trial of sorts, not a piece of legislation. The procedures are different, and sketchier, leaving open the possibility of Republican defections. The national focus is expected to be unusually intense, perhaps increasing the temptation among some Republicans to take a turn in the national spotlight by stepping ever so slightly out of line.
While the US constitution and Senate lay out broad rules for an impeachment trial, rules that govern standards of evidence and the admission of witnesses are left for the Senate to decide, creating a political showdown even before the trial proper gets under way.
Mitch McConnell on Capitol Hill. Significantly, Trump and McConnell seem to be closely aligned. Photograph: Shawn Thew/EPA
The uncertainty also creates room for operators like McConnell to … operate. During the trial, McConnell could have the power to guide the process toward a swift close, or to put an end to Democratic calls for additional witnesses and testimony.
Significantly, Trump and McConnell seem to be closely aligned, with McConnell saying he would coordinate with Trump’s lawyers and Trump praising the legislator’s leadership.
“I’m not an impartial juror,” McConnell said flatly in December. “This is a political process. There is not anything judicial about it. Impeachment is a political decision.”
That kind of pugnacious, sometimes bordering on troll-worthy, speech, is a McConnell trademark. In a widely quoted declaration in 2010, he said: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”
While he shocked Democrats and some Republicans by refusing to take up Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the supreme court in March 2016, months before either party had even nominated a candidate to replace Obama, he made it a point for boasting on the campaign trail.
“One of my proudest moments was when I looked at Barack Obama in the eye and I said, ‘Mr President, you will not fill the supreme court vacancy,’” he told a crowd in Kentucky that year, to enthusiastic cheers. McConnell later casually reversed himself on the underlying debate, saying he would install a Trump-nominated justice in the run-up to 2020, given the opportunity.
For all his political talents, McConnell’s performance as majority leader has been imperfect. He failed to deliver the repeal of Obama’s healthcare law, once the keystone Republican party promise to its base. And he couldn’t prevent Trump from initiating a damaging government shutdown over border wall funding in late 2018. McConnell consistently rates as one of the least popular senators in the country, with a 49% home-state disapproval rating.
But ever since winning his first Senate race in 1984, McConnell has gained more power, and held it more closely. The only child of a chemicals executive and a homemaker growing up in Georgia and Kentucky, McConnell overcame a bout with polio and little natural retail political talent to chart his career.
He began as a moderate, supporting collective bargaining for public employees and even some abortion rights, before hitching his fate to the increasingly conservative right wing of the party. He arrived on Capitol Hill as a Senate aide in 1969 and won his first race, for a county executive seat in Kentucky, in 1976.
In his 2014 book on McConnell, The Cynic, the journalist Alec MacGillis describes how “a guileless young man who was conspicuously uninformed about the mechanics of politics grew into a steely influence broker, proud of his growing sway on Capitol Hill”.
“It is he who symbolizes better than anyone else in politics today,” wrote MacGillis, “the transformation of the Republican party from a broad, nationwide coalition spanning conservatives, moderates, and even some liberals into an ideologically monolithic, demographically constrained unit that political scientists judge without modern historical precedency.”


theguardian--2020-01-21--Trump impeachment trial: the key senators who could cross party lines

The Senate majority leader , Mitch McConnell , has pledged “ total coordination ” with the White House in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump .
But the 47-member Democratic caucus in the Senate could take control of key parts of the process , enabling them to call witnesses or merely to prevent a quick dismissal of the case , by recruiting four Republicans to make a 51-seat majority .
A two-thirds majority of 67 senators would be needed to convict and remove Trump from office , a seemingly unreachable number for Democrats .
But the Democrats might be able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority to steer the process as it unfolds .
Here ’ s a look at Republican senators who might join the Democrats on procedural measures during the trial – and two Democrats who could vote the other way .
Since his arrival in the Senate last year , the 72-year-old Utah senator has been a critic of Donald Trump from within the Republican party .
The pair have history dating back to Romney ’ s 2012 presidential campaign – which Trump supported until he lost to Obama – and in 2016 Romney claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ fraud ” .
Despite this , the president considered Romney for secretary of state and endorsed his Senate campaign .
More recently , Romney has condemned Trump ’ s efforts to get other countries to investigate former vice-president Joe Biden and his decision to pull out of Syria .
In response , he has attracted the Twitter ire of the president , who has called him a “ pompous ass ” and employed the hashtag # IMPEACHMITTROMNEY .
When it comes to the impeachment trial , Romney , who is popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president any assurances .
In December he told CNN he was “ keeping an open mind ” and would make a decision once he had heard the evidence and “ arguments from both sides ” .
The Alaska Republican , who is in her fourth term as senator , has form voting against party leadership and opposed the controversial supreme court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh .
In December , Murkowski , 62 , said she was “ disturbed ” by McConnell ’ s talk of “ total coordination ” and that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Senate on the trial .
She said it “ remains to be seen ” how witnesses would be dealt with but asserted that she was still undecided on how she will vote .
“ For me to prejudge and say there ’ s nothing there or on the other hand , he should be impeached yesterday , that ’ s wrong , in my view , that ’ s wrong , ” she told television station KTUU .
The Maine Republican has also criticised her fellow senators for seeming to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment trial .
Singling out the Democratic presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren and Republican McConnell , she said : “ There are senators on both sides of the aisle , who , to me , are not giving the appearance of and the reality of judging that ’ s in an impartial way.
” Collins , 67 , who was in the Senate for the Bill Clinton impeachment , has said she is open to calling witnesses in the Trump trial but that it is “ premature ” to decide on who .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ she compiled a notebook of documents and that she has told colleagues that the approach to the 1999 trial worked well .
But her position in the Senate isn ’ t safe .
In December , on the same day the House voted to impeach Trump , she announced she was running for a fifth term this year .
In a deeply divided state , she faces a tough road to re-election in November , and is considered one of the country ’ s most vulnerable Republican senators .
As a vulnerable senator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president is not popular , the Republican has avoided speaking on the issue .
But this week he criticised Nancy Pelosi ’ s handling of the impeachment process .
In a statement to the Denver Post , he branded the impeachment inquiry a “ total circus that has only served to divide this country ” .
It stated that Gardner , 45 , will be a juror in the trial and “ is confident the process in the Senate will be bipartisan and fair ” .
Appointed to Senator John Kyi ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lossto the Democrat Kyrsten Sinema in a closely fought 2018 race , the Republican Arizona senator is up for re-election in the potential swing state in November and is vulnerable .
The air force veteran and former Arizona representative criticised partisanship and warned that impeachment is “ a serious matter ” .
“ People want us to take a serious look at this and not have it be just partisan bickering going on , ” McSally , 53 , told 12 News KPNX .
The Republican from Tennessee has branded the president ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has said that impeachment would be a “ mistake ” .
However , with his impending retirement – after three terms , he will not be seeking re-election in November – the 79-year-old former governor could be more open to voting against Trump than some of his Republican Senate colleagues .
As the first Democrat elected to the Senate from Alabama in a quarter of a century and in danger of losing his re-election bid this year , Doug Jones is considered the most likely of his party to back the president .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 65 , who beat Roy Moore in a special election in 2017 in the pro-Trump state , said it was vital to hold a “ full , fair and complete trial with all relevant evidence regarding the president ’ s conduct ” .
But , he claimed , Trump has “ blocked ” access to witnesses and documents .
The moderate West Virginia Democrat has revealed he is “ very much torn ” about whether to vote to convict the president – fuelling the suggestion he could vote against removing Trump from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CNN : “ We have a divided country .
On the other hand , we have equal branch of governments , responsibilities in the constitution .
There are a lot of things at stake here .
”

The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, has pledged “total coordination” with the White House in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. But the 47-member Democratic caucus in the Senate could take control of key parts of the process, enabling them to call witnesses or merely to prevent a quick dismissal of the case, by recruiting four Republicans to make a 51-seat majority.
A two-thirds majority of 67 senators would be needed to convict and remove Trump from office, a seemingly unreachable number for Democrats.
But the Democrats might be able to put together a temporary, simple majority to steer the process as it unfolds. Here’s a look at Republican senators who might join the Democrats on procedural measures during the trial – and two Democrats who could vote the other way.
Photograph: Erik S Lesser/EPA
Mitt Romney
Since his arrival in the Senate last year, the 72-year-old Utah senator has been a critic of Donald Trump from within the Republican party. The pair have history dating back to Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign – which Trump supported until he lost to Obama – and in 2016 Romney claimed Trump was a “phoney” and a “fraud”.
Despite this, the president considered Romney for secretary of state and endorsed his Senate campaign. More recently, Romney has condemned Trump’s efforts to get other countries to investigate former vice-president Joe Biden and his decision to pull out of Syria. In response, he has attracted the Twitter ire of the president, who has called him a “pompous ass” and employed the hashtag #IMPEACHMITTROMNEY.
When it comes to the impeachment trial, Romney, who is popular in Utah, has not publicly offered the president any assurances. In December he told CNN he was “keeping an open mind” and would make a decision once he had heard the evidence and “arguments from both sides”.
Photograph: Patrick Semansky/AP
Lisa Murkowski
The Alaska Republican, who is in her fourth term as senator, has form voting against party leadership and opposed the controversial supreme court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. In December, Murkowski, 62, said she was “disturbed” by McConnell’s talk of “total coordination” and that there should be distance between the White House and the Senate on the trial. She said it “remains to be seen” how witnesses would be dealt with but asserted that she was still undecided on how she will vote. “For me to prejudge and say there’s nothing there or on the other hand, he should be impeached yesterday, that’s wrong, in my view, that’s wrong,” she told television station KTUU.
Photograph: Joshua Roberts/Reuters
Susan Collins
The Maine Republican has also criticised her fellow senators for seeming to “prejudge the evidence” ahead of an impeachment trial. Singling out the Democratic presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren and Republican McConnell, she said: “There are senators on both sides of the aisle, who, to me, are not giving the appearance of and the reality of judging that’s in an impartial way.”
Collins, 67, who was in the Senate for the Bill Clinton impeachment, has said she is open to calling witnesses in the Trump trial but that it is “premature” to decide on who. During the Clinton trial, she said she compiled a notebook of documents and that she has told colleagues that the approach to the 1999 trial worked well.
But her position in the Senate isn’t safe. In December, on the same day the House voted to impeach Trump, she announced she was running for a fifth term this year. In a deeply divided state, she faces a tough road to re-election in November, and is considered one of the country’s most vulnerable Republican senators.
Photograph: Tom Brenner/Reuters
Cory Gardner
As a vulnerable senator facing re-election in Colorado, where the president is not popular, the Republican has avoided speaking on the issue. But this week he criticised Nancy Pelosi’s handling of the impeachment process. In a statement to the Denver Post, he branded the impeachment inquiry a “total circus that has only served to divide this country”. It stated that Gardner, 45, will be a juror in the trial and “is confident the process in the Senate will be bipartisan and fair”.
Photograph: Rex/Shutterstock
Martha McSally
Appointed to Senator John Kyi’s seat after his resignation, following her lossto the Democrat Kyrsten Sinema in a closely fought 2018 race, the Republican Arizona senator is up for re-election in the potential swing state in November and is vulnerable. The air force veteran and former Arizona representative criticised partisanship and warned that impeachment is “a serious matter”. “People want us to take a serious look at this and not have it be just partisan bickering going on,” McSally, 53, told 12 News KPNX.
Photograph: Susan Walsh/AP
Lamar Alexander
The Republican from Tennessee has branded the president’s behaviour “inappropriate”, but has said that impeachment would be a “mistake”. However, with his impending retirement – after three terms, he will not be seeking re-election in November – the 79-year-old former governor could be more open to voting against Trump than some of his Republican Senate colleagues.
Photograph: Andrew Harnik/AP
Doug Jones
As the first Democrat elected to the Senate from Alabama in a quarter of a century and in danger of losing his re-election bid this year, Doug Jones is considered the most likely of his party to back the president. Writing in the Washington Post, Jones, 65, who beat Roy Moore in a special election in 2017 in the pro-Trump state, said it was vital to hold a “full, fair and complete trial with all relevant evidence regarding the president’s conduct”. But, he claimed, Trump has “blocked” access to witnesses and documents.
Photograph: Rex/Shutterstock
Joe Manchin
The moderate West Virginia Democrat has revealed he is “very much torn” about whether to vote to convict the president – fuelling the suggestion he could vote against removing Trump from office. Speaking in December he told CNN: “We have a divided country. On the other hand, we have equal branch of governments, responsibilities in the constitution. There are a lot of things at stake here.”


theguardian--2020-01-21--Trump impeachment trial: senators vote against subpoena for state department – live

Both parties have two hours to debate this amendment , and then , Senate leader Mitch McConnell indicated he ’ @ @ @ @ @ .
After a vote , the lawmakers will get a 30-minute break — which , @ @ @ @ @ in the chamber is much needed .
Senator James Risch of Idaho appeared to nod @ @ @ @ @ .
I am not saying Sen. Risch fell asleep during the proceedings , but his @ @ @ @ @ , his were eyes shut and his body was motionless for several minutes , until @ @ @ @ @ him to sit up Senator Kirsten Gillibrand seemed to rest her eyes for a bit @ @ @ @ @ Martha McSally had a blanket on her lap .

Maanvi Singh in San Francisco (now), and Joan E Greve in  Washington (earlier)

22 Jan 2020 07.26 GMT Day one summary Over the course of nearly 13 hours, House i mpeachment managers clashed with White House lawyers as they debated the rules that will govern the impeachment trial.
clashed with White House lawyers as they debated the rules that will govern the impeachment trial. Republican senators voted to kill 11 amendments to the trial rules brought forth by the Democrats, thwarting multiple attempts to subpoena documents and witnesses, including former national security adviser John Bolton .
. House Judiciary chair Jerrold Nadler, who is one of the impeachment managers, accused Republicans of “voting for a coverup” by rejecting attempts to acquire more evidence.
Voting along party lines, Republicans pushed through the rules as proposed by Senate leader Mitch McConnell , unamended.
, unamended. McConnell did change the rules a bit since he first revealed them, allowing for each side to take three days, rather than two, to present their cases. He also allowed the House’s impeachment evidence to be admitted into the Senate record.
Throughout, Chief Justice John Roberts played a procedural role — piping up just once to admonish both sides for a lack of civil discourse. “I do think that those addressing the Senate should remember where they are,” he said.
played a procedural role — piping up just once to admonish both sides for a lack of civil discourse. “I do think that those addressing the Senate should remember where they are,” he said. As the hours wore on, lawmakers looked visibly worn out — a couple of senators appeared to nod off.
The trial is adjourned until Wednesday at 1pm ET, when House managers will present their case. Guardian reporters will be back tomorrow with more live updates from the impeachment trial. In the meantime, catch up on our coverage so far: Review the case against Trump.
Meet the Republican senators who could cross party lines.
Relive the drama that was, and wasn’t. Trump impeachment trial: Democrats' bids for new evidence dashed in marathon first day Read more
Updated at 07.33 GMT
22 Jan 2020 06.54 GMT Senate Republicans pass the trial rules, without amendments After 13 hours of debate, Republican senators pushed through the organizing resolution for the impeachment proposed by Mitch McConnell, without any of the 11 amendments proposed by Democrats. The trial is now adjourned until 1pm ET on Wednesday.
Updated at 06.57 GMT
22 Jan 2020 06.41 GMT Senators kill 11th and last Democratic amendment The final amendment proposed by minority leader Chuck Schumer would allow Chief Justice John Roberts — as a neutral party — to decide whether to allow motions to subpoena witnesses or documents. Finally, the senators are voting on the organizing resolution for the impeachment trial, as proposed by Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell. Before the vote, McConnell addressed Chief Justice John Roberts: “We want to thank you for your patience,” he said. “Comes with the job,” Roberts responded.
Updated at 06.45 GMT
22 Jan 2020 06.36 GMT The Office of Management and Budget responded to a FOIA request by releasing a trove of documents on military aid to Ukraine. BREAKING: Two minutes before midnight, OMB released 192 pages of Ukraine-related records to American Oversight, including emails that have not been previously released. https://t.co/yJ1IGn3nf7 pic.twitter.com/LZ8KRJoy1M — American Oversight (@weareoversight) January 22, 2020 The watchdog organization made “request for directives and communications that may relate to any effort to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate one of President Trump’s political opponents as part of an effort to give the president an electoral advantage,” it said.
22 Jan 2020 06.26 GMT Senators kill the 10th Democratic amendment to allow for additional time to file responses to motions. The rules provide each side two hours. Schumer’s amendment asked for 24. The debate on this one was very short — things are speeding up.
Updated at 06.46 GMT
22 Jan 2020 06.15 GMT As expected, Democrats’ eighth amendment, like all the others, was voted down, along party lines. Republicans blocked the Democratic push to subpoena John Bolton. The former national security advisor could still testify if a majority of senators vote to subpoena his testimony later. 52-48: Senate rejects Schumer's 10th amdt to allow for additional time to file responses to motions on near party line vote. pic.twitter.com/lu7VoRE7Wx — Craig Caplan (@CraigCaplan) January 22, 2020 They also killed a ninth amendment, which would force a Senate vote on any motion to subpoena witnesses and documents. The current rules require a procedural vote that must pass before a vote on subpoenas. In this vote, there was one Republican defector: Senator Susan Collins.
Updated at 06.40 GMT
22 Jan 2020 05.58 GMT Chief Justice Roberts admonishing... pic.twitter.com/6pjioKTiRb — Jeremy Art (@cspanJeremy) January 22, 2020 John Roberts took an opportunity to rebuke both House managers and the White House counsel “in equal terms” for their language and personal attacks. He asked everyone to “avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse”. Dad’s still awake, and he’s getting angry. https://t.co/QmMPwGYMKt — Anthony Zurcher (@awzurcher) January 22, 2020 Roberts also offered a fun fact. In 1905, a Senator objected to a manager using the word “pettifogging” and the presiding officer found that the world “ought not to be used”, he said. “I don’t think we need to aspire to that high a standard, but I do think those addressing the senate should remember where they are,” Roberts added.
Updated at 06.48 GMT
22 Jan 2020 05.53 GMT In response, White House lawyer Jay Sekulow raised his voice and banged the podium for emphasis. He accused Nadler of trying to “shred Constitution on the floor of the floor of the Senate” by questioning Donald Trump’s executive privilege claim. Pat Cipollone called the impeachment a “farce”. “Mister Nadler, you owe an apology to the President of the United States and his family, you owe an apology to the Senate, but most of all you owe an apology to the American people,” he said.


theguardian--2020-01-21--Democrats denounce Trump trial rules as Republican 'cover-up'

Democrats prosecuting the case against Donald Trump warned on Tuesday that Republicans were attempting a “ cover-up ” of the president ’ s misdeeds by blocking testimony and rushing proceedings in the president ’ s Senate trial on two articles of impeachment .
The trial opened with lawyers on both sides arguing over what the terms for proceedings should be .
Adam Schiff , the lead House “ manager ” or prosecutor , urged senators to defy Trump ’ s wish for a speedy process .
“ The American people want a fair trial , ” Schiff said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t believe that will happen .
Let ’ s prove them wrong.
” Trump ’ s defense team struck a combative posture , expressing outrage at what they said was unfair treatment of the president and accusing the House of an attack on democracy .
“ They ’ re not here to steal one election , they ’ re here to steal two elections , ” said Pat Cipollone , the White House counsel .
“ They won ’ t tell you that , they don ’ t have the guts to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly what they ’ re here to do.
” After debate over the rules for the trial , the sides were expected to present their cases starting on Wednesday afternoon and running into the weekend .
A long shot two-thirds majority of senators present would be required to remove Trump from office .
Chief Justice John Roberts gaveled the trial to order shortly after 1pm .
“ The Senate will convene as a court of impeachment , ” Roberts said , proceeding to swear in one senator , James Inhofe of Oklahoma , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The chamber first faced the procedural hurdle of a vote on the rules , which became unexpectedly contentious after the majority leader , Mitch McConnell , advanced a resolution on Monday night that would have packed opening arguments into just two days and not automatically admitted evidence collected by the House .
After the Democratic leader , Chuck Schumer , called the resolution a “ national disgrace ” , and moderate Republicans registered their complaints , the resolution was changed to allot an added day for arguments and to introduce House evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to participate in the House impeachment proceedings , and Trump ordered aides not to comply .
While agencies such as the state department and Office of Management and Budget defied subpoenas for documents , multiple Trump appointees appeared to testify despite the ban .
But Republican aversion to using the power of the Senate to gather new evidence , including potentially crucial testimony , was affirmed in the first vote of the trial , in which a Democratic proposal to subpoena documents from the White House was defeated in a party-line vote .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate .
The opposing legal teams , seated in a cramped arrangement at tables stacked with paper at the base of the Senate rostrum , struck an immediate contrast in style and substance .
While Trump ’ s team attacked their counterparts , the Democrats appealed to the 100 senators before them .
Schiff presented video from last month of Trump saying he wanted multiple top advisers to testify .
“ The president has changed his tune , ” Schiff said .
“ The bluster of wanting these witnesses to testify is over.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a personal lawyer for Trump and talk-radio host , blazed through a series of conservative talking points and conspiracy theories ranging in focus from special counsel Robert Mueller to former attorney general Eric Holder .
“ This isn ’ t a legal defense , ” tweeted Kate Brannen , editorial director of the Just Security website .
“ It ’ s the equivalent of impeachment jazz hands.
” After Cipollone delivered a terse statement declaring that “ the president has done absolutely nothing wrong ” , Schiff took the lectern to reprise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misconduct and to underscore the gravity of the moment .
“ You have all now sworn an oath , ” Schiff told the senators .
“ To do impartial justice .
That oath binds you .
That oath supersedes all else .
Nothing matters now but the oath to do impartial justices .
And that oath requires a fair trial.
” Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , in connection with his attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals .
In the hours before the trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lambasting what they called a “ cover-up ” and a “ rigged process ” designed to push key moments of the trial into the “ dark of night ” .
McConnell ’ s proposal would push the critical question of whether to admit new witnesses and evidence until after House impeachment managers and Trump ’ s lawyers make their case and senators have an opportunity to submit questions .
Schumer vowed to challenge the rules .
McConnell has said he has the 51 votes needed to make his proposal binding .
Democrats said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a series of votes that could delay its passage until late on Tuesday evening .
Schumer said he planned to offer amendments to fix the proposal ’ s “ many flaws ” .
His first amendment would allow the Senate to subpoena the White House for documents related to charges against the president .
“ There is no guarantee Leader McConnell will allow these votes to take place later in the trial , so now before any resolution passes , we must do it , ” he said at a press conference on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secure additional witnesses , they will need at least four Republicans to back them .
A handful of moderates , including Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah , have indicated that they could support an effort to call witnesses – but only on the timeline outlined in McConnell ’ s proposal .
On Tuesday both indicated that they would vote against Schumer ’ s amendment .
With the trial under way , Democrats continued to press Republicans to refuse McConnell ’ s terms and work with them to reach a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be asked to operate on McConnell ’ s absurdly compressed schedule , ” said Nancy Pelosi , the House speaker .
“ It is obvious that no senator who votes for it is intending to truly weigh the damning evidence of the president ’ s attacks on our constitution.
” In their legal brief submitted to the Senate on Sunday , the House managers outlined their case , alleging Trump corruptly sought foreign interference in the 2020 election by pressuring Ukraine to launch investigations into his political opponents while withholding nearly $ 400m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House meeting with Ukraine ’ s president , Volodymr Zelenskiy .
Trump ’ s defense team dismissed both articles of impeachment but did not contest the basic facts of the case , arguing the articles were invalid because they do not allege Trump committed a specific crime , an interpretation of the powers of impeachment widely disputed by constitutional scholars .

Lauren Gambino in Washington and Tom McCarthy in New York

Democratic hopes that a moderate bloc of Senate Republicans would join their demand for witnesses and testimony at Donald Trump’s impeachment trial were temporarily disappointed, if not dashed, as arguments on the first proper day of the trial extended past midnight into Wednesday morning.
In seven consecutive votes split precisely along party lines, the Senate voted down Democratic proposals to subpoena testimony from four potential witnesses and documents from multiple government agencies. Four additional votes defeated proposals to ease the admission of documents and testimony and to relax related time restrictions.
“I know it’s late, but it doesn’t have to be late,” Adam Schiff, the lead impeachment “manager”, or prosecutor in the case, said as the proceedings entered their 12th hour.
“We don’t control the schedule. There is a reason why we are still here at five minutes till midnight, and that’s because they don’t want the American people to see what’s going on here.”
Democrats fruitlessly called for testimony and documents from the former national security adviser John Bolton; the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney; Mulvaney’s aide Robert Blair; the budget official Michael Duffey; the White House; the state department; the defense department; and the budget office relevant to an alleged scheme by Trump to twist the powers of the presidency to extract personal political favors from Ukraine.
Each of the proposed subpoenas was defeated by a 53-47 vote. Only one procedural amendment garnered a single Republican vote, from Susan Collins of Maine. The 13-hour session came to an end just before 2am local time, with yet another straight party-line vote to approve guidelines for the trial unveiled by the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, just a day earlier.
Democrats accused Republicans of failing to commit to a fair impeachment trial and of engaging in a “cover-up” of misconduct by the president.
“The president is engaged in this cover-up because he is guilty, and he knows it,” said Representative Val Demings of Florida, one of the impeachment managers.
A further opportunity for the senators to demand documents or witnesses was anticipated in the weeks ahead. But Schiff urged the senators to issue subpoenas before an allotted period for senators to question the legal teams.
“You should want to see these documents,” said Schiff. “You should want to know what these private emails and text messages have to say.
“The American people want a fair trial,” Schiff said. “But a great many Americans don’t believe that will happen. Let’s prove them wrong.”
Trump’s defense team struck a combative posture, expressing outrage at what they said was unfair treatment of the president and accusing the House of an attack on democracy.
“They’re not here to steal one election, they’re here to steal two elections,” said Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel. “They won’t tell you that. They don’t have the guts to say it directly. But that’s exactly what they’re here to do.”
John Roberts, the chief justice of the US supreme court, presides during opening arguments. Photograph: Reuters
The trial was scheduled to continue with late-night sessions starting on Wednesday afternoon and running into the weekend. A long-shot two-thirds majority of senators present would be required to remove Trump from office.
The supreme court’s chief justice, John Roberts, gaveled the trial to order shortly after 1pm.
“The Senate will convene as a court of impeachment,” Roberts said, proceeding to swear in one senator, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who missed the group swearing-in last week.
Over the next 12 hours, Roberts stepped out of a strictly procedural role only once, after the manager Jerry Nadler accused any senator who voted against hearing from Bolton of casting a “treacherous vote” and Cipollone demanded that Nadler apologize to Trump and his family.
Admonishing both sides, Roberts noted that Senate rules and tradition required civil discourse. “I do think that those addressing the Senate should remember where they are,” he said.
The opposing legal teams, seated in a cramped arrangement at tables stacked with paper at the base of the Senate rostrum, struck an immediate contrast in style and substance.
While Trump’s team attacked the conduct of the impeachment process in the House and resuscitated a call for more information about the whistleblower whose complaint launched the process, the Democrats appealed to the 100 senators before them.
“They talk about how bad the House is – I don’t agree with that at all,” the minority leader, Chuck Schumer, told reporters during a break in the trial, referring to Trump’s defense team. “They don’t make a single argument why there shouldn’t be witnesses or documents.”
As the hours wore on, certain rhythms and incongruities in the trial emerged. While the House managers used almost all of their allotted debate time, liberally deploying video clips drawn from public hearings last month, Trump’s defense team used only a fraction of its time, repeating a blanket defense of the president’s conduct and rarely referring to previous testimony in the case.
To debate various proposed subpoenas, Schiff deployed one of the other seven managers to make a scripted case and then, after Trump’s team had spoken, rose to deliver impromptu rebuttals.
After the deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin said the Democratic request for new witnesses amounted to an admission that they were unprepared for trial, Schiff pounced, calling on Trump’s former national security adviser and current acting chief of staff to appear.
Donald Trump’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow speaks during the trial. Photograph: AP
“We’re ready,” Schiff said. “The House calls John Bolton. The House calls Mick Mulvaney. Let’s get this trial started, shall we.
“We are ready to present our case. We are ready to call witnesses. The question is, will you let us?”
Pounding the lectern, Jay Sekulow, a personal lawyer for Trump and talk-radio host, blazed through a series of conservative talking points and conspiracy theories ranging in focus from the special counsel Robert Mueller to the former attorney general Eric Holder.
“This isn’t a legal defense,” tweeted Kate Brannen, editorial director of the Just Security website. “It’s the equivalent of impeachment jazz hands.”
After Cipollone delivered a terse statement declaring: “The president has done absolutely nothing wrong,” Schiff took the lectern to reprise his description of Trump’s alleged misconduct and to underscore the gravity of the moment.
“You have all now sworn an oath,” Schiff told the senators. “To do impartial justice. That oath binds you. That oath supersedes all else. Nothing matters now but the oath to do impartial justice. And that oath requires a fair trial.”
Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, in connection with his attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals.
In the hours before the trial began, Democrats escalated their criticism, lambasting what they called a “cover-up” and a “rigged process” designed to push key moments of the trial into the “dark of night”.
If Democrats are to secure additional witnesses, they will need at least four Republicans to back them. A handful of moderates, including Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah, have indicated that they could support an effort to call witnesses – but only on the timeline outlined in a proposal advanced by McConnell.
With the trial under way, Democrats continued to press Republicans to refuse McConnell’s terms and work with them to reach a bipartisan solution.
“No jury would be asked to operate on McConnell’s absurdly compressed schedule,” said Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker. “It is obvious that no senator who votes for it is intending to truly weigh the damning evidence of the president’s attacks on our constitution.”
In their legal brief submitted to the Senate on Sunday, the House managers outlined their case, alleging Trump corruptly sought foreign interference in the 2020 election by pressuring Ukraine to launch investigations into his political opponents while withholding nearly $400m in military aid and dangling a coveted White House meeting with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy.


theguardian--2020-01-21--Hillary Clinton says ‘nobody likes’ Bernie Sanders and won't commit to backing him

Hillary Clinton has criticized Bernie Sanders , insisting “ nobody likes ” and “ nobody wants to work with ” him .
Clinton , the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee , also refused to commit to endorsing Sanders should he win the primary this year .
The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday published the comments , which Clinton made in a four-part Hulu documentary , Hillary , which will premiere at the Sundance film festival in March .
Clinton beat Sanders in a bitter 2016 primary , before losing the presidential election to Donald Trump .
“ He was in Congress for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support him , ” Clinton said , going on to call Sanders “ a career politician ” and to dismiss his claim to represent the everyday American worker as “ just baloney ” .
“ I feel so bad that people got sucked into it , ” Clinton said .
She also pointed to a “ culture around ” Sanders that she said perpetuated sexism , racism and misogyny within the senator ’ s campaign staff .
“ It ’ s his leadership team , ” she said .
“ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his online Bernie bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors , particularly the women.
” Over the weekend , in response to a Guardian editorial by the Fordham law professor Zephyr Teachout , groups of Sanders supporters successfully promoted the hashtag # BidenIsCorrupt .
Sanders apologized , telling CBS News it is “ absolutely not [ his ] view that Joe is corrupt in any way ” .
“ I ’ m sorry that that op-ed appeared , ” he said .
Biden accepted the apology , tweeting : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this primary .
Let ’ s all keep our focus on making Donald Trump a one-term president.
” On Tuesday , Sanders issued a statement in response to Clinton ’ s comments .
He did not address them head-on .
“ My focus today is on a monumental moment in American history : the impeachment trial of Donald Trump , ” he said .
“ Together , we are going to go forward and defeat the most dangerous president in American history.
” Sanders has attracted attacks as he has risen in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two weeks away , he is racking up high-profile endorsements and leading in some polls of likely Iowa voters .
Earlier in January , Elizabeth Warren , a competitor for the Democratic nomination , accused Sanders of telling her in a private meeting in 2018 a woman could not beat Trump at the polls .
Sanders has strongly denied making the comment .
Both held their ground when asked to clarify their remarks on the debate stage , leading to a confrontation after the debate had ended .
CNN published audio , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ a liar on national TV ” .

Hillary Clinton has criticized Bernie Sanders, insisting “nobody likes” and “nobody wants to work with” him.
The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday published the comments, which Clinton made in a four-part Hulu documentary, Hillary, to premiere at the Sundance film festival in March.
Clinton beat Sanders in a bitter 2016 primary, before losing the presidential election to Donald Trump.
“He was in Congress for years [and] had one senator support him,” Clinton said, going on to call Sanders “a career politician” and to dismiss his claim to represent the everyday American worker as “just baloney”.
“I feel so bad that people got sucked into it,” Clinton said.
She also pointed to a “culture around” Sanders that she said perpetuated sexism, racism and misogyny within the senator’s campaign staff.
“It’s his leadership team,” she said. “It’s his prominent supporters. It’s his online Bernie bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.”
Asked by the Hollywood Reporter if she would endorse Sanders should he win the primary this year, Clinton refused to commit, saying: “I’m not going to go there yet.” But in a tweet on Tuesday evening, she appeared to clarify her position.
“I thought everyone wanted my authentic, unvarnished views!” she wrote. “But to be serious, the number one priority for our country and world is retiring Trump, and, as I always have, I will do whatever I can to support our nominee.”
Over the weekend, in response to a Guardian editorial by the Fordham law professor Zephyr Teachout, groups of Sanders supporters successfully promoted the hashtag #BidenIsCorrupt.
Sanders apologized, telling CBS News it is “absolutely not [his] view that Joe is corrupt in any way”.
“I’m sorry that that op-ed appeared,” he said.
Biden accepted the apology, tweeting: “These kinds of attacks have no place in this primary. Let’s all keep our focus on making Donald Trump a one-term president.”
On Tuesday, Sanders issued a statement in response to Clinton’s comments. He did not address them head-on.
“My focus today is on a monumental moment in American history: the impeachment trial of Donald Trump,” he said. “Together, we are going to go forward and defeat the most dangerous president in American history.”
Sanders has attracted attacks as he has risen in the polls. With the Iowa caucuses two weeks away, he is racking up high-profile endorsements and leading in some polls of likely Iowa voters.
Earlier in January, Elizabeth Warren, a competitor for the Democratic nomination, accused Sanders of telling her in a private meeting in 2018 a woman could not beat Trump at the polls.
Sanders has strongly denied making the comment. Both held their ground when asked to clarify their remarks on the debate stage, leading to a confrontation after the debate had ended. CNN published audio, in which Warren accused Sanders of calling her “a liar on national TV”.


theguardian--2020-01-21--Which other US presidents have been impeached?

Donald Trump is on the precipice of becoming the third president in US history to be impeached .
It ’ s an exclusive club that no one wants to join – but who else is in it , and why ?
Here ’ s a look back at the two prior impeachments and a third near-miss case .
The assassination of Abraham Lincoln in April 1865 unexpectedly elevated his vice-president , Johnson , an outspoken white supremacist but strong anti-secessionist , to the White House .
With the aftershocks of the civil war manifesting in bloody voter suppression and racially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s presidency was immediately thrown into tumult by demands that the new president take steps to cement the war ’ s promise of racial equality .
But Johnson vetoed civil rights legislation , unilaterally pardoned hundreds of former Confederate leaders and called for the murder of his political enemies .
Johnson was in essence impeached for undermining the cause of racial equality , the historian Brenda Wineapple wrote in her book The Impeachers .
But the bulk of the impeachment clauses against him were predicated on a relatively narrow charge of violating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law ( repealed soon thereafter ) by removing his secretary of war , Edwin Stanton , who was instrumental in opposing racist attacks on suffrage for former slaves .
Johnson remained in office after being acquitted in the Senate by one vote – a bribed victory , historians have speculated .
While the Clinton impeachment is linked in popular memory to his relationship with the White House intern Monica Lewinsky , he was impeached for lying to a grand jury in a separate case , brought by a former Arkansas state employee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Jones , Clinton denied in a sworn deposition and a later video interview that he had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky .
That assertion was contradicted by a report submitted to Congress by independent counsel Kenneth Starr , who documented Clinton ’ s relationship with Lewinsky in lurid detail .
Impeachment proceedings against Clinton were opened in October 1998 , and the House of Representatives approved two articles of impeachment against him , for perjury and obstruction of justice , in December .
Two other proposed articles – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second time – were voted down .
The Republican-led Senate – stronger than today ’ s , with a 55-seat majority at the time – acquitted Clinton easily on both counts , with the closer case drawing only 50 votes out of 67 needed .
In November 1972 , Nixon won re-election by what was then the largest margin of victory in the history of US presidential elections .
But five months earlier , a burglary at Democratic offices in the Watergate hotel complex had set in motion a chain of events that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigation of the burglaries , special prosecutor Archibald Cox uncovered a dirty campaign to attack Nixon ’ s political opponents , financed by a secret slush fund and directed by Nixon himself .
For months , Nixon publicly denied all involvement .
But an impeachment inquiry was opened in October 1973 , after Nixon fired the top two officials in the justice department for their refusal to fire Cox .
A fight over evidence ensued , including tapes of Nixon ’ s Oval Office conversations .
In late July 1974 , a third @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committee joined Democrats to approve three articles of impeachment , for obstruction of justice , abuse of power and contempt of Congress .
The release of a “ smoking gun ” tape a week later , fixing Nixon at the center of the conspiracy , sealed the president ’ s fate .
Under pressure from fellow Republicans , Nixon resigned on 9 August 1974 , before the full House could vote on impeachment .

Donald Trump is on the precipice of becoming the third president in US history to be impeached. It’s an exclusive club that no one wants to join – but who else is in it, and why?
Here’s a look back at the two prior impeachments and a third near-miss case.
Impeachment #1: Andrew Johnson (1868)
The assassination of Abraham Lincoln in April 1865 unexpectedly elevated his vice-president, Johnson, an outspoken white supremacist but strong anti-secessionist, to the White House. With the aftershocks of the civil war manifesting in bloody voter suppression and racially motivated terrorism across the South, Johnson’s presidency was immediately thrown into tumult by demands that the new president take steps to cement the war’s promise of racial equality. But Johnson vetoed civil rights legislation, unilaterally pardoned hundreds of former Confederate leaders and called for the murder of his political enemies.
Johnson was in essence impeached for undermining the cause of racial equality, the historian Brenda Wineapple wrote in her book The Impeachers.
But the bulk of the impeachment clauses against him were predicated on a relatively narrow charge of violating a contemporary “tenure of office” law (repealed soon thereafter) by removing his secretary of war, Edwin Stanton, who was instrumental in opposing racist attacks on suffrage for former slaves.
00:50 Trump: I take zero responsibility for impeachment - video
Johnson remained in office after being acquitted in the Senate by one vote – a bribed victory, historians have speculated.
Impeachment #2: Bill Clinton (1998)
While the Clinton impeachment is linked in popular memory to his relationship with the White House intern Monica Lewinsky, he was impeached for lying to a grand jury in a separate case, brought by a former Arkansas state employee, Paula Jones.
In response to a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Jones, Clinton denied in a sworn deposition and a later video interview that he had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky. That assertion was contradicted by a report submitted to Congress by independent counsel Kenneth Starr, who documented Clinton’s relationship with Lewinsky in lurid detail.
Impeachment proceedings against Clinton were opened in October 1998, and the House of Representatives approved two articles of impeachment against him, for perjury and obstruction of justice, in December. Two other proposed articles – for abuse of power and perjury a second time – were voted down.
The Republican-led Senate – stronger than today’s, with a 55-seat majority at the time – acquitted Clinton easily on both counts, with the closer case drawing only 50 votes out of 67 needed.
Near-miss: Richard Nixon (1974)
In November 1972, Nixon won re-election by what was then the largest margin of victory in the history of US presidential elections. But five months earlier, a burglary at Democratic offices in the Watergate hotel complex had set in motion a chain of events that would end his presidency.
In his investigation of the burglaries, special prosecutor Archibald Cox uncovered a dirty campaign to attack Nixon’s political opponents, financed by a secret slush fund and directed by Nixon himself. For months, Nixon publicly denied all involvement.
But an impeachment inquiry was opened in October 1973, after Nixon fired the top two officials in the justice department for their refusal to fire Cox. A fight over evidence ensued, including tapes of Nixon’s Oval Office conversations.
In late July 1974, a third of elected Republicans on the House judiciary committee joined Democrats to approve three articles of impeachment, for obstruction of justice, abuse of power and contempt of Congress. The release of a “smoking gun” tape a week later, fixing Nixon at the center of the conspiracy, sealed the president’s fate.
Under pressure from fellow Republicans, Nixon resigned on 9 August 1974, before the full House could vote on impeachment.