rollcall--2020-01-22--When it comes to Trump’s future, ‘the people�� would rather decide it themselves

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats should be concerned by polls that show more Americans support letting voters decide the president ’ s fate and not a one-sided impeachment process , Winston writes .
( Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call file photo ) OPINION — Abraham Lincoln closed the Gettysburg Address on a hopeful note , promising a “ new birth of freedom ” so that “ government of the people , by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth.
” Today , as the Democrats push their partisan impeachment forward in the Senate chamber , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beleaguered president in the midst of the Civil War are worth remembering .
It ’ s worth remembering that a government of the people must , by definition , be formed by the people .
Impeachment , as the framers saw it , was a constitutional necessity to protect the country from presidential corruption , but it was also meant to be a rare avenue for Congress to embark on and in only the most dire of circumstances because impeachment is , de facto , the overturning of a national election .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an alternative to impeachment , and it ’ s called an election .
Thomas Jefferson said , “ Should things go wrong at any time , the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights.
” It ’ s a truth Democrats have decided to ignore in their loathing of this president and rush to placate their angry base .
Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to excuse the Democrats ’ decision to move forward without the bipartisan support she had insisted was essential to a successful impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open the debate on impeachment , she said , “ Today we are here to defend democracy for the people.
” A month after the vote , Pelosi said in a statement that the House “ upheld its Constitutional duty to defend democracy For The People.
” When naming the House impeachment managers , she claimed Democrats were defending the Constitution as they sought “ the truth for the American people.
” “ As we make that history , we will be making progress for the American people , ” Pelosi said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” tone of earlier statements .
But is the Democrats ’ one-sided impeachment really driven by their concern “ for the people ” when the people see them literally celebrating impeachment with gold signing pens on silver trays and partisan parades through the Capitol halls ?
The harsh and personal tone of their complaints against President Donald Trump belies their claims of seriousness and reluctance .
At the core , do Democrats even understand what people really want ?
Over the past two months , there has been plenty of polling on whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and want him removed from office .
The numbers have moved modestly up and down , pro and con , depending on the week , the sample and how the question was asked .
Despite months of impeachment efforts in the House , polls now show Democrats have failed spectacularly to persuade half the country of the rightness and necessity of this impeachment .
The latest RealClearPolitics polling average on the question put support for impeachment and Trump ’ s removal at 47.3 percent , with 47.5 percent taking the opposite position .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ highest number for removal has been 51 percent , and the highest for not removing was also 51 percent .
Having failed to convince a significant majority of voters on the validity of their impeachment effort , Democrats begin Senate proceedings this week in a difficult position , if their goal is to find the two-thirds majority needed to convict the president .
But the problem Democrats face may be worse than the standard polling questions seem to suggest .
The Oct. 31-Nov.2 Winning the Issues survey looked into the issue of impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most polls , people are given only two options : favor or oppose impeachment , with some surveys including “ removal from office.
” Winning the Issues gave them an option that we hoped would give us some insight into how people value their right to vote and what impact impeachment would have on that vote .
We asked people which statement came closest to their views : “ Voters — not Congress — should decide whether President Trump should be removed or reelected in next year ’ s election.
” “ Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from office.
” Our findings in early November didn ’ t represent good news for Democrats — by a 49 percent to 39 percent margin , respondents supported letting the voters decide .
But our latest Dec. 28-30 survey ought to give Democrats serious pause .
By a larger margin than we saw last fall , voters believed the election should decide Trump ’ s future — 55 percent to 35 percent .
Despite high viewership of the House impeachment hearings and Democrats ’ almost total control of the political narrative , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe they should be the ones to decide , not partisan politicians .
This inherent belief in the validity of the ballot over a political impeachment process crossed many key voter groups .
Most important , the survey found independents , the “ majority makers , ” favored letting voters decide by a huge 23-point margin , 53 percent to 30 percent .
Here ’ s how a few other groups broke down .
• Voters with less than a 4-year college degree : 58 percent to 31 percent Suburban women , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fall , favored letting voters decide 51 percent to 35 percent , something that should concern Democratic leaders .
People who had an unfavorable view of both parties , about 20 percent of the country , were the most disposed to letting voters decide , 60 percent to 28 percent .
These numbers don ’ t mean the electorate ’ s concerns over the impeachment allegations have disappeared .
But with the election just over nine months away , Democrats ’ argument for it is steadily losing standing with voters at exactly the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort will only be successful if they win the argument that continuing the Trump presidency is so detrimental to the country that people are willing to give up their vote .
During Watergate , “ the people ” eventually came to that conclusion .
In the Clinton impeachment , they did not .
Nancy Pelosi and her impeachment caucus have spent months wrapping themselves in the Constitution and portraying themselves as protectors of democracy always “ for the people.
” Unless something dramatic happens during the Senate trial to change their minds , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left the decision to them .

OPINION — Abraham Lincoln closed the Gettysburg Address on a hopeful note, promising a “new birth of freedom” so that “government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth.”
Today, as the Democrats push their partisan impeachment forward in the Senate chamber, the sentiments expressed so eloquently by a beleaguered president in the midst of the Civil War are worth remembering. It’s worth remembering that a government of the people must, by definition, be formed by the people.
Impeachment, as the framers saw it, was a constitutional necessity to protect the country from presidential corruption, but it was also meant to be a rare avenue for Congress to embark on and in only the most dire of circumstances because impeachment is, de facto, the overturning of a national election.
These same Founding Fathers also understood that there is an alternative to impeachment, and it’s called an election. Thomas Jefferson said, “Should things go wrong at any time, the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights.” It’s a truth Democrats have decided to ignore in their loathing of this president and rush to placate their angry base.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to excuse the Democrats’ decision to move forward without the bipartisan support she had insisted was essential to a successful impeachment.


rollcall--2020-01-25--View from the gallery: Hardly enough time to fidget

Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander arrives at the Capitol on Saturday for the continuation of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
( Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call ) It ’ s a Saturday , but nearly all the senators were in their workday suits and ties .
The Kentucky delegation was one exception , with both Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul wearing khakis and blazers .
This was the fifth straight day in the Senate chamber of the third presidential impeachment trial in U.S. history , and the 100 senators appeared for just two hours during a brief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s team started its opening presentation .
A minute before the court of impeachment was scheduled to resume at 10 a.m. , several Democratic senators were lingering in the Cloakroom , drinking coffee and eating breakfast .
Michigan ’ s Gary Peters and Virginia ’ s Mark Warner walked into the chamber still chewing their last bites .
Republican senators also lingered in their Cloakroom , but none were spotted enjoying a late breakfast .
Few senators were at their desks at 10:01 a.m. , when McConnell had to call for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exception was North Carolina Republican Richard M. Burr , who was holding his fidget spinner and talking to a colleague .
More than 20 desks were still empty when the clerk called “ All rise ” for the opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance .
The public galleries were sparsely populated at the beginning of the session .
Among those in the press gallery behind the presiding officer , Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. , there were good-natured murmurs among the journalists to make sure no one was leaning over the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Florida Republican Marco Rubio appeared immediately uncomfortable with the temperature of the chamber and grabbed a black folder and started fanning himself with it .
He paused the fanning briefly to put a stack of documents in his desk , then resumed .
A few moments later , Rubio paused the fanning again , this time to grab a white handkerchief from his suit jacket and use it to wipe his brow .
After putting the handkerchief back in his pocket , he grabbed the folder again to resume the fanning .
Later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of water .
About 35 minutes into the proceedings , cool air started blowing through the chamber .
Rubio ’ s desk neighbor , West Virginia Republican Shelley Moore Capito , draped a shawl over her legs .
On the Democratic side , Illinois ’ Tammy Duckworth spent several minutes readjusting a small pink scarf over her shoulders and arms in an effort to get warm .
When White House counsel Pat Cipollone began the arguments , many Democratic senators were scribbling furiously on notepads .
New York Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand also flagged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of the chamber .
About 15 minutes later , another page brought her a bundle of colored pens , which she began to use to take notes .
But less than an hour into the arguments , many of the note takers had laid down their pens as White House deputy counsel Mike Purpura played video clips of witnesses giving the House Intelligence Committee statements supportive of the president , including a montage of former European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland repeatedly saying it was only his speculation or presumption that Trump had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
House Intelligence Chairman Adam B. Schiff showed little reaction as Purpura opened his arguments about flaws in the Democrats ’ presentation by showing a statement Schiff made at the opening of a November committee hearing .
Schiff , seated to Purpura ’ s right and about six feet behind him , turned his head to look at a video screen on the Republican side of the chamber .
He then looked for a few more minutes at Purpura as he condemned Schiff ’ s remarks , which the California Democrat has said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conversation with the president of Ukraine .
Schiff then returned his attention to the half-filled page on the notepad in front of him and resumed writing .
Democratic senators facing Schiff either looked at the monitor on their side of the room or at their notepads .
None appeared to look at Schiff while the statement , which Trump and Republican allies have repeatedly condemned , was playing .
House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York was not in his seat next to Schiff at the House managers ’ table on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by not testifying himself during the impeachment inquiry , had not shown respect to Nadler ’ s committee .
Several Republican senators tried to hold back laughter out when White House deputy counsel Patrick Philbin played a video montage of Schiff talking about wanting to hear from the intelligence community whistleblower .
The senators reacting with chuckles included John Barrasso of Wyoming , Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Kevin Cramer of North Dakota .
About 45 minutes into the presentation from Trump ’ s lawyers , Sen. Richard C. Shelby grabbed a page @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Alabama Republican then grabbed his cellphone from the inner pocket of his suit jacket and handed it to her , instructing her to take it back to the Cloakroom .
Senators aren ’ t supposed to bring their cellphones on the floor ; it ’ s unclear what made Shelby realize he still had his .
Five minutes later a staffer brought Cotton a sealed brown envelope .
The Arkansas Republican tore it open , each finger swipe causing a rip to echo through the chamber before he pulled a manila @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his desk .
A minute later he opened it and removed a stapled packet of pages with a Senate seal on the cover page .
As he flipped through the document , he tapped his fingers .
Earlier , a page brought Sen. Jack Reed four pens , which the Rhode Island Democrat grabbed with his left hand since his right was holding the one he was using .
Reed then examined each pen before stashing them in his desk .
Reed didn ’ t seem to need the pens for taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been Friday night , he scribbled notes in the margins of a spiral-bound book containing small printed , centered text passages .
Perhaps it was legislative text , but from afar , the the passages looked like poems .
Herb Jackson , Jason Dick and Niels Lesniewski contributed to this report .

It’s a Saturday, but nearly all the senators were in their workday suits and ties. The Kentucky delegation was one exception, with both Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul wearing khakis and blazers.
This was the fifth straight day in the Senate chamber of the third presidential impeachment trial in U.S. history, and the 100 senators appeared for just two hours during a brief and rare weekend session when President Donald Trump’s team started its opening presentation.
A minute before the court of impeachment was scheduled to resume at 10 a.m., several Democratic senators were lingering in the Cloakroom, drinking coffee and eating breakfast. Michigan’s Gary Peters and Virginia’s Mark Warner walked into the chamber still chewing their last bites.
Republican senators also lingered in their Cloakroom, but none were spotted enjoying a late breakfast.
Few senators were at their desks at 10:01 a.m., when McConnell had to call for them to take their seats. One exception was North Carolina Republican Richard M. Burr, who was holding his fidget spinner and talking to a colleague. More than 20 desks were still empty when the clerk called “All rise” for the opening prayer and pledge of allegiance.


rollcall--2020-01-25--Impeachment trial’s Saturday session is a short one

White House counsel Pat Cipollone , left , and lawyer Jordan Sekulow arrive at the Capitol on Saturday before the continuation of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
( Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call ) President Donald Trump ’ s lawyers briefly laid out his defense Saturday at the Senate impeachment trial , focusing their attacks on what they called a lack of evidence , the actions of lead House manager Adam B. Schiff and a flawed House investigation .
Trump ’ s legal team did not make arguments about former Vice President Joe Biden or his son Hunter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have focused on that issue for the president ’ s defense that his Ukraine dealings were meant to uncover corruption , not ask the country ’ s president to influence the 2020 presidential elections in exchange for releasing military aid .
But there will be plenty of time for that on Monday and Tuesday , when Trump ’ s team will begin the defense in earnest .
The team used just two hours of their allotted 24 to make an opening presentation .
There ’ s some expectation that , unlike the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not go that long .
After they are done , the senators will be able to ask questions of the House managers and Trump ’ s team .
And after that , the Senate could start deliberations if they vote against issuing subpoenas for more witnesses or documents that the White House has blocked from House investigators .
Trump ’ s team made it clear that time was a major consideration on the rare Saturday session .
“ We ’ re going to be very respectful of your time , ” White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day .
The president ’ s legal team started his defense by arguing that the House managers had “ no evidence ” and that senators “ will find that the president did absolutely nothing wrong.
” Cipollone told senators the House managers had failed to make their case over the past three days that Trump should be removed .
“ We don ’ t believe that they have come anywhere close to meeting their burden for what they ’ re asking you to do , ” he said .
And Cipollone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do something “ dangerous ” and “ tear up all of the ballots across this country on your own initiative.
” Cipollone said he would present evidence the House had but did not use at the trial .
And he said that impeaching a president , a process laid out in the Constitution , would be unconstitutional .
“ For all their talk about election interference … they ’ re here to perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American history , ” he said .
The president ’ s team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it cast as the most important piece of evidence : a rough transcript of the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy .
The first thing Mike Purpura , the deputy counsel to the president , did for his portion of the presentation was to play a video clip of Schiff ’ s opening remarks at a House Intelligence hearing in November .
Trump has repeatedly asserted that Schiff made up the president ’ s words in those remarks , while Schiff has said it was an obvious parody or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California Democrat says at the end of the clip .
On the clip Trump ’ s team played Saturday , Schiff says the Ukraine call transcript “ reads like a classic organized crime shakedown , ” describes it , and then says , “ This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate.
” Purpura then told the senators : “ That ’ s fake .
That ’ s not the real call .
That ’ s not the evidence here .
That ’ s not the transcript that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can shrug it off and say we were making light or a joke , but that was in a hearing in the United States House of Representatives , discussing the removal of the president of the United States from office , ” Purpura said .
“ There are few things , if any , that can be as grave and as serious.
” Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso said the presentation from Trump ’ s team “ truly undermined the case of the Democrats and the credibility of Adam Schiff.
” Barrasso , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said he watched the lead House manager as the president ’ s counsel played the video of him ad-libbing Trump ’ s phone call with Zelenskiy .
“ The blood drained from Adam Schiff ’ s face as they played that video and his made-up words , ” he said .
For his part , Schiff said after the session that the Trump team was just using a common defense tactic in going after him .
“ As a prosecutor I ’ ve seen it time and time again : When your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is dead to rights , you don ’ t want to talk about your client ’ s guilt .
You want to attack the prosecution .
It is a fairly elemental strategy , and I think that ’ s all you ’ re seeing here is that effort to distract.
” Virginia Sen. Mark Warner , who as the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee is a fellow member of the “ gang of eight ” that includes Schiff , was not surprised that the Democrat from California was a target of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the president himself has voiced his problems with Adam Schiff on a regular basis , ” Warner told CQ Roll Call , before pointing out there was “ still no explanation why a dozen Trump appointees or career civil servants put their career in jeopardy because they felt something was amiss in the call .
I really am going to question whether the president ’ s lawyers are going to present their sense that the call was ‘ perfect ’ as the president described.
” Warner said he was curious why officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not providing testimony to support the defense .
“ If they can come in and swear to tell the truth on evidence that clears the president or reinforces the president ’ s case why aren ’ t they testifying , ” Warner asked .
Illinois Democrat Tammy Duckworth said Republicans ’ opposition to witnesses hurts their case .
“ I would think that the president ’ s counsel and the president ’ s team would want to call the witnesses in order to exonerate him , that they would want to show us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
Lindsey McPherson , Niels Lesniewski and Herb Jackson contributed to this report .

President Donald Trump’s lawyers briefly laid out his defense Saturday at the Senate impeachment trial, focusing their attacks on what they called a lack of evidence, the actions of lead House manager Adam B. Schiff and a flawed House investigation.
Trump’s legal team did not make arguments about former Vice President Joe Biden or his son Hunter Biden. Trump and some Republican senators have focused on that issue for the president’s defense that his Ukraine dealings were meant to uncover corruption, not ask the country’s president to influence the 2020 presidential elections in exchange for releasing military aid.
But there will be plenty of time for that on Monday and Tuesday, when Trump’s team will begin the defense in earnest.
The team used just two hours of their allotted 24 to make an opening presentation.
There’s some expectation that, unlike the House Democratic managers, the defense team will not go that long. After they are done, the senators will be able to ask questions of the House managers and Trump’s team. And after that, the Senate could start deliberations if they vote against issuing subpoenas for more witnesses or documents that the White House has blocked from House investigators.


rollcall--2020-01-25--Impeachment news roundup: Jan. 25

Impeachment news roundup: Jan. 25

House impeachment managers Adam B. Schiff , right , Jerrold Nadler , left , and aides are seen in the Capitol Rotunda on Saturday walking evidence to the Senate floor before the continuation of the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
( Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call ) The Senate convened for a rare Saturday session as a court of impeachment today , and it was President Donald Trump ’ s legal team ’ s turn to begin laying out its case .
The Senate was in session until about noon Saturday , both because lawmakers were eager to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the House Democratic impeachment managers and because the president himself is well-aware that TV ratings are particularly low on Saturdays .
“ Thank you for your time and attention , ” White House counsel Pat Cipollone said in opening remarks .
“ I want to start out giving you a short plan for today .
We ’ re going to be very respectful of your time.
” A day earlier , Jay Sekulow , the president ’ s personal lawyer , had previewed what Saturday ’ s defense presentation would look like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it a trailer — coming attractions would be the best way to say it , but obviously we have three hours to put it out .
So we ’ ll take whatever time is appropriate during that three hours , kind of lay out what the case would look like , ” he said .
“ It ’ s the Senate decision , we respect the Senate ’ s process , ” Sekulow said of the truncated Saturday session .
If all goes according to plan , the Trump team would have about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the course of Monday and Tuesday , though there ’ s some expectation that , unlike the House Democratic managers , the defense team will not go that long .
11:08 a.m. | But the transcript … : The president ’ s team focused in the first hour on what it cast as the most important piece of evidence : a rough transcript of the July 25 call between Trump and the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy .
The first thing Mike Purpura , the deputy counsel to the president , did for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a video of House impeachment team leader Adam B. Schiff ’ s opening remarks at a House Intelligence hearing in November .
Trump has repeatedly asserted that Schiff made up the president ’ s words in those remarks , while Schiff has said it was an obvious parody or paraphrase of the call , which the California Democrat says at the end of the clip .
On the clip Trump ’ s team played Saturday , Schiff says that the call transcript “ reads like a classic organized crime shakedown , ” describes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate.
” Purpura then told the senators : “ That ’ s fake .
That ’ s not the real call .
That ’ s not the evidence here .
That ’ s not the transcript that Mr. Cipollone just referenced ” “ And we can shrug it off and say we were making light or a joke , but that was in a hearing in the United States House of Representatives , discussing the removal of the president of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ There are few things , if any , that can be as grave and as serious.
” 10:30 a.m. | “ Nothing wrong ” : The president ’ s legal team started his defense in the impeachment trial Saturday by arguing that the House managers had “ no evidence ” and that senators “ will find that the president did absolutely nothing wrong.
” Cipollone told the senators that Trump ’ s team plans to spend two to three hours Saturday going through “ the facts , ” including the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past three days .
“ We don ’ t believe that they have come anywhere close to meeting their burden for what they ’ re asking you to do , ” he said .
And Cipollone told the senators that the House managers had asked them to do something “ dangerous ” and “ tear up all of the ballots across this country on your own initiative.
” “ They ’ re asking you not only to overturn the results of the last election , but as I ’ ve said before , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump from the ballot in an election that ’ s occurring in approximately nine months , ” he said .
Cipollone said he would present evidence the House had but did not use at the trial .
“ For all their talk about election interference … they ’ re here to perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American history , ” he said .
8:30 a.m. | Another day , another procession : Saturday ’ s formal activities begin with another procession from the House side of the Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what a Democratic official working on the trial said would be a 28,578 page trial record .
That record does not include documents or testimony blocked by the White House .
Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone .

File updated 12:12 p.m.
The Senate convened for a rare Saturday session as a court of impeachment today, and it was the turn of President Donald Trump’s legal team turn to begin laying out its case.
The Senate was in session until about noon Saturday, both because lawmakers were eager to get home after long nights hearing the presentations of the House Democratic impeachment managers and because the president himself is well-aware that TV ratings are particularly low on Saturdays.
“Thank you for your time and attention,” White House counsel Pat Cipollone said in opening remarks. “I want to start out giving you a short plan for today. We’re going to be very respectful of your time.”
A day earlier, Jay Sekulow, the president’s personal lawyer, had previewed what Saturday’s defense presentation would look like.


rollcall--2020-01-27--Rainy days ahead: States boost reserves, anticipating slowdown

Massachusetts Gov .
Charlie Baker signs the state 's fiscal 2020 budget in his ceremonial office in the State House .
( Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via Getty Images ) As the longest economic expansion in American history continued last year , state governments increased salaries for teachers and other public employees , authorized new construction projects and — recognizing good times won ’ t last forever — added to reserve funds .
Cash reserves could become more important this year , as experts project the economy to slow down in 2020 .
Though a full-scale recession seems less likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a slower rate of growth still appears likely .
Fitch Ratings , a credit ratings agency , projects a 1.7 percent expansion in 2020 , which would be the lowest level since 2011 .
Understanding that growth — which has lasted since the Great Recession officially ended in June 2009 — can ’ t last forever , most states have tried to budget conservatively and set money aside , according to Eric Kim , senior director of public finance at Fitch .
The median state rainy day fund grew to 7.6 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a record and a significant increase from 1.6 percent in fiscal 2011 , according to a study by the National Association of State Budget Officers .
Still , a significant slowdown would mean changes to state budgets .
“ The decade-long nationwide economic growth has been really beneficial for states , ” Kim said .
“ When that starts to turn a bit … that ’ s going to mean some adjustments.
” A slowdown will also lead states to cut spending and possibly boost revenue , said Brian Sigritz , director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I think states have probably done as good a job as could be expected as far as building up rainy day funds and reserves and trying to prepare themselves , ” Sigritz said .
“ But whenever the next recession comes , rainy day funds and reserves are just going to be one of the tools states will use.
” Straight tax hikes are generally a last resort for state officials , Sigritz said .
But states could look to raise revenues through legalizing recreational marijuana or sports betting , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center , a nonpartisan think tank backed by the center-left Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute .
The possibility of a downturn in fiscal 2021 , which in most states runs from July 2020 to June 2021 , may be greater than in fiscal 2020 .
But even this fiscal year , growth in spending is already down slightly .
From fiscal 2018 to 2019 , state general fund spending grew 5.8 percent , the largest gain since the Great Recession .
NASBO forecasts an increase of 4.8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could require budget adjustments in the middle of the fiscal year , which states have largely avoided over the last two strong years , according to the NASBO report .
An economic slowdown wouldn ’ t necessarily need to be on the scale of the Great Recession for states to trim budgets , Sigritz said .
“ Any kind of drop in revenue for a state is a challenge , ” he said .
“ You will start to see some different cutbacks.
” In recent good times , lawmakers have added funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sigritz said is a good strategy to deal with potential future shortfalls because it gives states something to cut during downturns .
“ When the national economy does well , most state economies do well , ” Kim said .
“ And then states are able to restore fiscal flexibility.
” Some of the issues states have prioritized in recent budgets , though , like education , workforce development and opioid treatment , are likely to remain priorities , Sigritz said .
Governors and other state leaders have invested their political capital in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the credit of 47 states as AA or better , meaning investments are “ not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events , ” which includes economic downturns .
In other words , the credit rating agency thinks most states will be able to weather a recession .
Several governors in state of the state addresses this year boasted about the money they ’ d put into rainy day funds , asked the legislature to put in more , or both .
“ Instead of going on a sugar high and spending through our surplus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a record-breaking $ 1 billion , ” Florida Gov .
Ron DeSantis , a Republican , said .
Some states , led by Utah , have also begun “ stress testing ” their fiscal health , a tool banks have used to project how they would react under different economic conditions .
Such modeling can be helpful because recessions don ’ t necessarily affect all industries , or the states to which they ’ re important , equally .
A recession that hits the oil and gas industry , for example , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ North Dakota more than others .
In addition to when it comes , there ’ s also the question of how strong the next recession will be .
“ More states probably are better prepared this time around than they were during the Great Recession in the sense that they have more surpluses available , ” Dadayan said .
“ At the same time it always comes down to the reliance on different sectors of the economy and also the structure of the taxes .
“ It ’ s hard to predict if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s hard to predict how severe the next recession will be , ” she added .
“ But they ’ re better prepared than last time around , for sure .
”

As the longest economic expansion in American history continued last year, state governments increased salaries for teachers and other public employees, authorized new construction projects and — recognizing good times won’t last forever — added to reserve funds.
Cash reserves could become more important this year, as experts project the economy to slow down in 2020. Though a full-scale recession seems less likely than it did at points last year, a slower rate of growth still appears likely. Fitch Ratings, a credit ratings agency, projects a 1.7 percent expansion in 2020, which would be the lowest level since 2011.
Understanding that growth — which has lasted since the Great Recession officially ended in June 2009 — can’t last forever, most states have tried to budget conservatively and set money aside, according to Eric Kim, senior director of public finance at Fitch.
The median state rainy day fund grew to 7.6 percent of general fund expenses in fiscal 2020, a record and a significant increase from 1.6 percent in fiscal 2011, according to a study by the National Association of State Budget Officers.
Still, a significant slowdown would mean changes to state budgets.


rollcall--2020-01-27--John Bolton shows that in Washington, irony never dies

The emergence of John Bolton as a potentially critical witness in Democrats ’ case for ousting President Donald Trump from office is deeply ironic .
For years , Democrats almost to a person have depicted the former national security adviser and arch-conservative as practically unhinged .
Now , by contrast , Democrats consider him a solid and stable foundation upon which to rest their case for the president ’ s conviction in his ongoing impeachment trial .
Republicans have flipped , too , on Bolton — and might flip in greater numbers in the coming days .
Bolton has long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virtual apotheosis of clear-eyed , credible conservatism on foreign policy , the voice of a worldview grounded in a strong sense of right and wrong and a detail-oriented approach that was supposed to bring discipline to the National Security Council .
Then came Sunday ’ s revelation that Bolton will say in a forthcoming book that the president himself had acknowledged hinging military aid to Ukraine in 2019 on Kyiv ’ s announcement of unfounded investigations that could cast certain Democrats in a bad light .
Since then , the few Republicans who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump himself , are questioning his reliability and , increasingly , his motives .
“ I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats , including the Bidens , ” Trump tweeted Monday , just after midnight .
“ In fact , he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination .
If John Bolton said this , it was only to sell a book.
” The parties ’ gyrations on Bolton represent a peak level of 180-degree turnarounds in an impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ utter the exact opposite talking points they made during President Bill Clinton ’ s impeachment trial in 1999 .
Monday ’ s arguments by Trump ’ s team even included Kenneth Starr , the independent counsel who led the probe of Clinton that resulted in the president ’ s impeachment , bemoaning “ the age of impeachment.
” The trial has arguably intensified a capital constant : the ability to advocate directly opposite positions , depending on what is politically expedient .
No role reversal , it turns out , is too extreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton is a major player not just in hawkish policy but also in Republican politics , a fact that only complicates matters in any role he may play in the impeachment trial .
Bolton ’ s political operation includes a traditional political action committee and a super PAC , which have supported traditionally like-minded Senate Republicans through direct contributions and outside support , respectively .
All told , the super PAC has spent more than $ 6 million since the 2014 cycle on independent expenditures supporting Republican House and Senate candidates or opposing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ side of the ledger , more than half of the current members of the Senate Republican Conference have received campaign funds from Bolton ’ s PAC operation for their most recent campaigns , dating back to the 2014 cycle , according to a CQ Roll Call review of data maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics .
That includes contributions in the 2020 cycle to Republican Sens .
Tom Cotton of Arkansas , Cory Gardner of Colorado and Thom Tillis of North Carolina .
Gardner and Tillis are the most notable of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races .
Asked about concerns about conflicts from getting money from Bolton ’ s PAC , especially if the former national security adviser gets book royalty income from criticizing Trump , a Gardner campaign spokesman highlighted the breadth of Gardner ’ s support .
“ There ’ s a broad coalition of people supporting Sen. Gardner ’ s reelection , including President Trump , and the Bolton PAC supports Sen. Gardner because of his commitment to a strong foreign policy , ” said Gardner campaign communications director Jerrod Dobkin .
“ All of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s at stake in this election and are standing with him in his fight to defeat the far-left , radical proposals his opponents are campaigning on.
” Andrew Romeo , the communications director for Tillis , went further .
“ The fact that Senator Tillis disagrees with Mr. Bolton when it comes to the necessity of his testimony during the Senate trial actually furthers the point that there is no conflict of interest whatsoever , ” he said in a statement .
When Trump appointed Bolton national security adviser in March 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were virtually apoplectic .
Bolton had been an outspoken advocate of direct military action against North Korea and Iran .
He was a vocal supporter of the Iraq War when he was a State Department official in 2002 , and he has continued to defend the war since .
House Intelligence Chairman Adam B. Schiff of California , the House ’ s lead manager of the impeachment prosecution in the Senate trial , said at the time that Bolton ’ s arrival signaled the departure of serious and sober thinking in Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s hard to escape the disquieting conclusion that the mass exodus of the ‘ adults ’ from this Administration is putting our nation ’ s security at risk , ” Schiff tweeted .
“ Ambassador Bolton ’ s hawkish and conspiratorial thinking will only make matters dangerously worse.
” On Monday , by contrast , Democrats were eager to place their faith in the man they had long feared and loathed .
Schiff tweeted “ Bolton must testify , ” and he was not alone .
Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Monday news conference , called Democrats out on this disconnect .
Democrats have , “ for 25 years , undermined the credibility of John Bolton on item after item and not trusting his judgment , his temperament , ” Barrasso said .
Schiff was asked just before the trial got underway Monday about Democrats trusting the word of Bolton .
“ It ’ s not a question of whether I trust John Bolton or the Republican senators trust John Bolton or the Democratic senators .
He should be placed under oath , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is why we think the testimony should be public .
It should be live .
Let the American people , along with the senators , evaluate John Bolton ’ s credibility when he testifies and make their own judgment.
” Republicans have generally held their views tight since the bolt of Bolton news broke Sunday in The New York Times .
But the Republican congressional opinions that have come out contrast with previous GOP praise for Bolton .
When Trump picked Bolton as his national security adviser almost two years ago , GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Rep. Lee Zeldin , R-N.Y. , said then that Bolton is “ extraordinarily talented ” and “ ridiculously knowledgeable.
” He depicted Bolton as a steady and reliable hand .
“ The leaks coming out of the National Security Council will end , Obama administration holdovers will be gone , and the team , chemistry and work product will all be improved , ” Zeldin predicted .
Likewise , Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , said then that Bolton ’ s appointment was “ good news for America ’ s allies and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” When Bolton was fired ( he says he quit ) in September , Trump tweeted tartly that Bolton ’ s services “ were no longer needed.
” Trump added he “ disagreed strongly with many of ” Bolton ’ s suggestions .
At the time , Senate Armed Services Chairman James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma called Bolton “ one of my closest friends ” and “ one of the most knowledgeable ” experts on national security .
On Monday , however , Inhofe seemed to suggest that Bolton ’ s reported willingness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case may be due to Bolton ’ s sour grapes over the circumstances of his departure from the White House .
“ But you ’ ve got ta keep in mind , for the first time in his life , he was fired , ” Inhofe told reporters .
“ That does have an effect on people.
” Georgia Republican Kelly Loeffler , the most junior senator , seemed to allude to Bolton in a tweet blasting fellow Republican Mitt Romney of Utah , who has said the Bolton news could sway him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton testify .
“ Sadly , my colleague @ SenatorRomney wants to appease the left by calling witnesses who will slander the @ realDonaldTrump during their 15 minutes of fame .
The circus is over .
It ’ s time to move on !
” she tweeted .
It remains to be seen how many other Republicans will characterize Bolton ’ s potentially critical testimony as the product of a disgruntled ex-employee or a man out to sell books .
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul , who might be one among the few consistent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very case in comments to the Washington Examiner , saying , “ I think he ’ s doing this for mercantile reasons.
” “ I think you can make a strong argument that he ’ s ginning up his book .
That ’ s his right , but he ’ s ginning up his book with the hopes of bringing it in for testimony , ” Paul said .

The emergence of John Bolton as a potentially critical witness in Democrats’ case for ousting President Donald Trump from office is deeply ironic.
For years, Democrats almost to a person have depicted the former national security adviser and arch-conservative as practically unhinged. Now, by contrast, Democrats consider him a solid and stable foundation upon which to rest their case for the president’s conviction in his ongoing impeachment trial.
Republicans have flipped, too, on Bolton — and might flip in greater numbers in the coming days. Bolton has long been hailed in GOP circles as the virtual apotheosis of clear-eyed, credible conservatism on foreign policy, the voice of a worldview grounded in a strong sense of right and wrong and a detail-oriented approach that was supposed to bring discipline to the National Security Council.
Then came Sunday’s revelation that Bolton will say in a forthcoming book that the president himself had acknowledged hinging military aid to Ukraine in 2019 on Kyiv’s announcement of unfounded investigations that could cast certain Democrats in a bad light.


rollcall--2020-01-27--House Democrats are making McConnell — not Trump — their new boogeyman

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is increasingly being cast as a villain blocking Democratic legislation , especially by lawmakers running in districts won by President Donald Trump in 2016 .
( Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call file photo ) While Democrats in Washington are attacking Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ’ s management of the impeachment trial , it ’ s his role in blocking House-passed legislation that is getting the most campaign airtime so far this year .
The latest example , and a likely preview of what is to come , is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ online ad campaign focused on the Senate bottling up a bill intended to lower prescription drug prices .
That House Democrats are using McConnell as their foil , and not the Republican leader of their own chamber or President Donald Trump , speaks to the legislative and political realities confronting Democrats this cycle .
After winning a historic majority in 2018 , House Democrats passed bills on key priorities they had campaigned on , including a campaign finance and ethics overhaul , legislation to expand background checks for gun purchases and a health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanding Medicare to cover hearing aids , eyeglasses and dental care .
Those measures were all dead on arrival in the Senate , however .
For Democratic incumbents looking to talk about what they ’ ve done — but why it hasn ’ t become law — McConnell gets the blame .
That ’ s especially true for Democrats in the 30 districts Trump won in 2016 because they won ’ t have to attack a president their constituents may have supported .
Not all Democrats agree this is an effective or even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election year , when Trump will be at the top of the ticket , whether candidates talk about him or not .
At this point , however , Democrats love to talk about how unpopular McConnell is , just as Republicans have long talked about how voters dislike Speaker Nancy Pelosi .
In the DCCC ’ s mid-January survey of 1,835 likely voters across battleground districts , 23 percent viewed McConnell favorably , while 50 percent rated him unfavorably .
End Citizens United , a Democratic PAC , conducted similar polling in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more effective than talking about Trump when trying to move voters on a generic congressional ballot question .
“ Even in districts where Trump is more popular than he is nationwide , McConnell just isn ’ t , ” a national Democratic operative said .
While the utility of polling that isn ’ t focused on a specific district may be limited , Democrats who have embraced this narrative think they ’ ve found a credible villain who can work in a wide variety of districts .
“ It works everywhere as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t bring about changes they campaigned on , ” said Ian Russell , a veteran Democratic strategist and former DCCC political director .
The DCCC ads , which are running on CNN , MSNBC and Univision , tout the Democrats ’ prescription drug bill and accuse Republicans of being corrupted by “ special interest ” money .
“ It ’ s time for Mitch McConnell and the Republicans to start working for us , ” the narrator says .
It ’ s a new message for a new political reality .
In 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans who wouldn ’ t stand up to Trump .
That will not work now that Democrats are in control of the House .
“ He ’ s an important foil because he fits into the story , especially for House Democrats who ran on health care and government corruption , ” Russell said .
McConnell may also provide a good political contrast because tying Republicans to Trump could backfire in districts where the president did well in 2016 .
“ If I ’ m in a Trump district , and I say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just following Trump ’ — well , he won that district and probably will win it again — so they ’ ll vote for her , ” said a Democratic strategist who ’ s worked on House races .
It may be easier to reach Trump voters by talking about Republicans being beholden to McConnell .
“ Trump has his own unique identity and own supporters , ” the strategist added .
McConnell , however , is easier to paint as a creature of Washington .
He ’ s served six terms in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Cabinet secretary .
The majority of Democrats running in competitive districts are not eager to talk about impeachment on the campaign trail , even if they voted for it .
They prefer kitchen table issues , especially to win over Trump supporters .
But for those Democrats who do talk about impeachment , they see a role for the “ McConnell as foil ” message .
“ Impeachment is just another proof point , ” Russell said .
“ It shows that he ’ s an unrelenting partisan.
” Republicans — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on McConnell will be effective in 2020 .
For starters , building up a boogeyman takes time .
Pelosi became speaker after the 2006 election , but it took two cycles and passage of a sweeping health insurance overhaul with only Democratic votes for the GOP ’ s call for voters to “ fire Pelosi ” to flip control in 2010 .
It ’ s also unclear how well-known legislative leaders are in specific districts .
“ McConnell is more universally despised , but not universally known , ” said the Democratic strategist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Question is : Can you make him a known enough boogeyman in these districts ?
” The same Democrat expressed skepticism about using the message in a presidential election year .
“ The truth of the matter is , no matter how hard you try , the top of the ticket will be what matters at the end of the day , ” the strategist said .
On that point , at least , Republicans agree .
“ Trump is the biggest thing in town — good or bad — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that .
Like Obama was , ” a GOP operative said .
“ Those things work when there ’ s not somebody else to fill the void.
” McConnell ’ s defenders argue that the boogeyman argument becomes even harder when Democrats are drawing attention to Trump by impeaching him .
“ Say what you want about [ McConnell ] , you ’ re impeaching the president , ” said Josh Holmes , the Kentucky Republican ’ s former chief of staff and campaign manager .
“ In presidential elections , pick a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign against it because none of it ’ s going to matter.
” Another Democratic strategist questioned why Democrats would even bother telling voters that their legislation has not become law .
“ Rather than explaining , ‘ I got HR 1 done but McConnell won ’ t sign it , ’ just say you passed it , ” the strategist said .
The same Democrat feared that bringing up McConnell — who ’ s associated with the GOP defense of the president — would only remind voters about impeachment , which Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicize .
“ The last thing these guys and women want to do , especially in districts that Trump carried , is get people running to their corners , ” the strategist said .
“ And going after the guy who people are going to view , first and foremost , as the guy who got Donald Trump off , I ’ m not sure is the right thing to do right now.
” But regardless of whether it works , the boogeyman strategy isn ’ t likely to go away anytime soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi to casting “ the squad ” and liberal presidential candidates as villains .
In other words , both sides do it .

While Democrats in Washington are attacking Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s management of the impeachment trial, it’s his role in blocking House-passed legislation that is getting the most campaign airtime so far this year.
The latest example, and a likely preview of what is to come, is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s announcement Monday of a seven-figure cable and online ad campaign focused on the Senate bottling up a bill intended to lower prescription drug prices.
That House Democrats are using McConnell as their foil, and not the Republican leader of their own chamber or President Donald Trump, speaks to the legislative and political realities confronting Democrats this cycle.
After winning a historic majority in 2018, House Democrats passed bills on key priorities they had campaigned on, including a campaign finance and ethics overhaul, legislation to expand background checks for gun purchases and a health insurance measure that targeted prescription drugs and expanding Medicare to cover hearing aids, eyeglasses and dental care.
Those measures were all dead on arrival in the Senate, however. For Democratic incumbents looking to talk about what they’ve done — but why it hasn’t become law — McConnell gets the blame.


rollcall--2020-01-27--Impeachment continues. But first, a Kobe Bryant prayer

As the Senate geared up for another day of arguments in Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial , quiet descended @ @ @ @ @ opening prayer — and the chaplain used the moment to remember a basketball titan .
@ @ @ @ @ ’ s brevity , uncertainty and legacy , ” Chaplain Barry Black said as he @ @ @ @ @ daughter , who died in a helicopter crash on Sunday .
But that was n't @ @ @ @ @ Bryant as an inspiration , the chaplain said .
“ As this impeachment process unfolds @ @ @ @ @ desire to make the most of their time on Earth , ” he said .
@ @ @ @ @ path of honesty .
”

As the Senate geared up for another day of arguments in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, quiet descended on the chamber for the opening prayer — and the chaplain used the moment to remember a basketball titan. “We think about life’s brevity, uncertainty and legacy,” Chaplain Barry Black said as he mourned Kobe Bryant and his daughter, who died in a helicopter crash on Sunday.
But that wasn’t all. Senators should use Bryant as an inspiration, the chaplain said. “As this impeachment process unfolds, give our senators the desire to make the most of their time on Earth,” he said. “Lead them along the path of honesty.”


rollcall--2020-01-27--Trump campaign to deploy Cabinet secretaries, lawmakers, allies to Iowa

Ben Carson , secretary of Housing and Urban Development , is going to Iowa to campaign for President Donald Trump .
( CQ Roll Call file photo ) The Trump campaign says it will dispatch high-level government appointees to stump in Iowa ahead of the state ’ s Monday caucuses , setting up potential pitfalls for Cabinet secretaries and other officials bound by ethics restrictions on their politicking .
“ This goes above and beyond anything I ’ ve ever seen when it comes to the White House deploying its resources on the campaign trail , ” said Democratic consultant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev. “ On the one hand , it ’ s not surprising because this White House really hasn ’ t been following the ethics rules , ” he added , “ but it ’ s so brazen and outrageous that there ’ s got to be some accountability.
” Though Trump administration officials previously have flouted ethics requirements and the Hatch Act , which puts limits on the campaign activities of nearly all federal employees , the Trump campaign ’ s announcement of the upcoming political tour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
The campaign did not use the official titles of Cabinet secretaries Wilbur Ross , who leads the Commerce Department ; Health and Human Services ’ Alex Azar ; Ben Carson of Housing and Urban Development ; Betsy DeVos of the Education Department ; Interior ’ s David Bernhardt ; and Robert Wilkie of Veterans Affairs .
Instead , the campaign simply used the word `` honorable '' in front of each name .
“ Look , I can ’ t say anything about the events , but they have managed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have by not including these folks ’ official titles in the announcement , ” said Donald Sherman , deputy director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington .
“ Separate and apart from that , it is clear that this administration has routinely failed to enforce the Hatch Act.
” [ In bashing Biden , did Kellyanne Conway break the law again ? ]
Because of that , Sherman said it is “ reasonable ” to monitor how the Trump campaign deploys Trump administration officials in 2020 electioneering events .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resources to promote partisan politics .
The Cabinet secretaries , for example , would need to pay for their own travel to Iowa , or the Trump campaign or the Republican National Committee could foot the bill , ethics and campaign finance lawyers said .
Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney , and Jovita Carranza , who runs the Small Business Administration , also will head to Iowa , the Trump campaign said .
Ditto for numerous members of Congress including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California and GOP Reps. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Davis of Illinois and numerous federal and state Iowa lawmakers .
“ Our Caucus Day operation is just a preview of what is to come , ” Brad Parscale , Trump 2020 campaign manager , said in a news release Monday .
“ This will be the strongest , best funded , and most organized presidential campaign in history .
We are putting the Democrats on notice — good luck trying to keep up with this formidable re-election machine.
” President Donald Trump faces no serious competition for his party ’ s nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high-profile effort for the Iowa caucuses is more about not ceding all the attention to Democrats , as their party begins the official process of picking a nominee to face the president .
Members of Congress are not subject to the Hatch Act , but need to pay for their campaign efforts from campaign funds , not taxpayer money , said Republican campaign finance attorney Cleta Mitchell , a partner at Foley & Lardner .
She also noted that when Trump travels to his political rallies , his campaign or the party committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Air Force One .
“ They have to draw a line and can ’ t blur those lines , ” Mitchell said .
Cabinet secretaries and other top federal officials will need to make clear distinctions between any of their official duties and their campaign activities if they are to avoid potential problems .
Azar ’ s travel is being paid directly by Trump ’ s campaign , according to a Health and Human Services spokesperson .
Perhaps the best-known recent concerns about the Hatch Act are from Kellyanne Conway , counselor to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Special Counsel has determined violated it on multiple occasions .
Sherman ’ s group CREW has filed complaints against Conway in the past and sued the federal government in December in an effort to take action against her over the violations .
Sherman said Conway offers a “ textbook case ” of what federal officials should not do , such as standing in front of the White House and promoting , or disparaging , political candidates .
Members of both parties have raised electioneering problems over the years .
Kathleen Sebelius , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Obama administration , violated the Hatch Act during an event in North Carolina in 2012 , according to the Office of Special Counsel , requiring her agency to seek reimbursement for her travel costs .

The Trump campaign says it will dispatch high-level government appointees to stump in Iowa ahead of the state’s Monday caucuses, setting up potential pitfalls for Cabinet secretaries and other officials bound by ethics restrictions on their politicking.
“This goes above and beyond anything I’ve ever seen when it comes to the White House deploying its resources on the campaign trail,” said Democratic consultant Jim Manley, once an aide to then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
“On the one hand, it’s not surprising because this White House really hasn’t been following the ethics rules,” he added, “but it’s so brazen and outrageous that there’s got to be some accountability.”
Though Trump administration officials previously have flouted ethics requirements and the Hatch Act, which puts limits on the campaign activities of nearly all federal employees, the Trump campaign’s announcement of the upcoming political tour avoided a common mistake, ethics experts said.
The campaign did not use the official titles of Cabinet secretaries Wilbur Ross, who leads the Commerce Department; Health and Human Services’ Alex Azar; Ben Carson of Housing and Urban Development; Betsy DeVos of the Education Department; Interior’s David Bernhardt; and Robert Wilkie of Veterans Affairs. Instead, the campaign simply used the word “honorable” in front of each name.


rollcall--2020-01-27--Supreme Court allows Trump's ‘public charge’ rule to proceed

The `` public charge '' rule was originally issued last August by the U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services under Ken Cuccinelli , the agency 's acting director .
( Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call ) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Trump administration can implement its divisive “ public charge ” rule , which seeks to withhold citizenship from immigrants the government deems likely to rely on public benefits like Medicaid and Section 8 housing .
In the 5-4 vote , conservative-leaning justices voted to grant the administration its request to stay a lower court injunction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case continue to be debated in the lower courts .
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Elena Kagan , Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen G. Breyer voted against the stay .
The order is the latest in which the high court has intervened in hard-line immigration cases that have been halted by lower courts and issued rulings allowing them to move forward .
In his concurring opinion , Justice Neil M. Gorsuch , a Trump appointee , railed against nationwide injunctions .
`` The rise of nationwide injunctions may just be a sign of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But good judicial decisions are usually tempered by older virtues.
” Advocates quickly called out the justice ’ s reasoning as hypocritical .
“ The minute a Democratic president starts issuing regulations that the conservative members of the Supreme Court disagree with , watch them suddenly drop all opposition to nationwide injunctions , ” Aaron Reichlin-Melnick , a policy analyst at the American Immigration Council , said on Twitter .
Under the public charge rule proposed last August by the U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services , the Trump administration expanded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ public charges ” if , by their metric , these people were considered likely to use a wide range of benefits such as food stamps , Medicaid and housing assistance in the future .
The rule traces back to 19th century language that state and local governments used in cases of emancipated slaves or to bar poor or infirm immigrants .
Dozens of advocacy groups and immigration experts have denounced the rule , which garnered more than 200,000 public comments on its Federal Register notice .
Democrat Rep. Judy Chu of California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislation ( HR 3222 ) to prevent any federal funds from being used to implement the rule , which she said would “ increase xenophobia and bigotry.
” Numerous federal judges ultimately intervened and blocked the rule from going into effect as scheduled on Oct. 16 .
A pair of appellate judges later lifted injunctions by two of the federal judges , but a third temporary injunction that was upheld in early January by the 2nd U.S .
Circuit Court continued to remain in effect across the country .
The Justice Department filed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court to lift that injunction .
Experts have pointed out that not only will the rule disqualify poor immigrants in the United States from becoming citizens , it also would scare away immigrants eligible for public benefits from claiming them for themselves or their U.S.-born children .
According to the Migration Policy Institute , an estimated 27 million citizens and noncitizens could be spooked away from enrolling in benefits when this rule goes into effect .
In addition to immigrant advocates , the rule also drew widespread criticism from the tech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter , Microsoft and LinkedIn filed an amicus brief on Jan. 16 , saying that Trump ’ s public charge rule “ creates substantial , unprecedented , and unnecessary obstacles for individuals seeking to come to the United States or , once here , to adjust their immigration status.
” The companies argued the rule would negatively impact the U.S. economy and cause drops in the enrollment of health services including the Children ’ s Health Insurance Program .
“ Immigrants will receive fewer public benefits under the Rule , they will cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , depressing demand throughout the economy , ” the group wrote in its brief .
“ The so-called 'public charge ' rule is nothing more than a repackaging of demonstrably false and harmful stereotypes about migrants , ” said Charanya Krishnaswami , the organization 's Americas advocacy director .
“ By allowing it to proceed , SCOTUS is allowing the administration to weaponize xenophobia .
”

“The minute a Democratic president starts issuing regulations that the conservative members of the Supreme Court disagree with, watch them suddenly drop all opposition to nationwide injunctions,” Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a policy analyst at the American Immigration Council, said on Twitter.
Under the public charge rule proposed last August by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Trump administration expanded the criteria deeming green card-seeking immigrants as “public charges” if, by their metric, these people were considered likely to use a wide range of benefits such as food stamps, Medicaid and housing assistance in the future. The rule traces back to 19th century language that state and local governments used in cases of emancipated slaves or to bar poor or infirm immigrants.
Dozens of advocacy groups and immigration experts have denounced the rule, which garnered more than 200,000 public comments on its Federal Register notice. Democrat Rep. Judy Chu of California also took up the issue by introducing legislation (HR 3222) to prevent any federal funds from being used to implement the rule, which she said would “increase xenophobia and bigotry.”
Numerous federal judges ultimately intervened and blocked the rule from going into effect as scheduled on Oct. 16. A pair of appellate judges later lifted injunctions by two of the federal judges, but a third temporary injunction that was upheld in early January by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court continued to remain in effect across the country. The Justice Department filed an emergency appeal earlier this month asking the Supreme Court to lift that injunction.
Experts have pointed out that not only will the rule disqualify poor immigrants in the United States from becoming citizens, it also would scare away immigrants eligible for public benefits from claiming them for themselves or their U.S.-born children. According to the Migration Policy Institute, an estimated 27 million citizens and noncitizens could be spooked away from enrolling in benefits when this rule goes into effect.


rollcall--2020-01-27--Lowey to discuss earmarks with freshman, at-risk Democrats

Rep. Nita Lowey , D-N.Y. , is set to meet Tuesday with a group of freshman House Democrats and others considered vulnerable in 2020 elections .
( Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call file photo ) House Democratic leaders are moving ahead with their sales pitch for the return of earmarks — which an aide dubbed “ community project funding.
” House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey , D-N.Y. , is set to meet Tuesday with a group of freshman House Democrats and others considered vulnerable in the 2020 elections to talk about a possible return of local projects in the spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 .
The meeting is a first step of sorts in determining whether House Democrats opt to bring back the somewhat-taboo line items , which were banned by then-majority Republicans in 2011 and have n't yet returned under Democratic control .
The more formal name for the special projects in recent years has been “ congressionally directed spending , ” but “ community project funding ” implies a more personal connection to lawmakers ’ districts .
“ There is considerable interest in allowing members of Congress to direct funding for important projects in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in a statement Friday .
Should a large number of House Democrats , particularly those in swing districts , object to the idea it ’ s unlikely that the Appropriations Committee would proceed with soliciting project requests for the fiscal 2021 spending bills .
And even if Democrats are broadly supportive , having limited earmarks in the House could create headaches for conferencing the bills with the GOP-controlled Senate , where the practice is still banned .
Key voices in Tuesday ’ s meeting will come from “ frontline ” Democrats , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee believes are at risk losing their seats during the November elections .
The list includes a number of freshmen who flipped districts President Donald Trump won in 2016 , like Iowa Democrats Cindy Axne and Abby Finkenauer , and California freshman who won in Orange County districts that Republicans had dominated for decades , including Gil Cisneros , Katie Porter , Harley Rouda and Mike Levin .
Jason Crow , a freshman from Colorado who ’ s now serving as one of Speaker Nancy Pelosi ’ s seven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as are veteran lawmakers from Trump districts such as Tom O ’ Halleran , D-Ariz. , and Matt Cartwright , D-Pa. — himself an Appropriations Committee member and prospective Commerce-Justice-Science subcommittee chairman .
It wasn ’ t clear which members would be attending Tuesday ’ s meeting on the subject .
This is not the first time the Appropriations Committee has debated whether to bring back earmarks in some form .
Republicans and Democrats have batted around the idea ever since then-Speaker John Boehner , R-Ohio , led the movement to oust @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , House Democrats expect they would be far more transparent and limited than the type of earmarks that existed before the ban went into effect under GOP Conference rules .
Lowey and House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer , D-Md.
, each entertained the idea of bringing back earmarks in scaled-back form last year .
But Senate Republicans have thus far shown no inclination to bringing back the special home-state projects , voting 28-12 within their conference last year to permanently ban them .

House Democratic leaders are moving ahead with their sales pitch for the return of earmarks — which an aide dubbed “community project funding.”
House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey, D-N.Y., is set to meet Tuesday with a group of freshman House Democrats and others considered vulnerable in the 2020 elections to talk about a possible return of local projects in the spending bills for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.
The meeting is a first step of sorts in determining whether House Democrats opt to bring back the somewhat-taboo line items, which were banned by then-majority Republicans in 2011 and haven’t yet returned under Democratic control. The more formal name for the special projects in recent years has been “congressionally directed spending,” but “community project funding” implies a more personal connection to lawmakers’ districts.
“There is considerable interest in allowing members of Congress to direct funding for important projects in their communities,” a Democratic aide, who asked not to be named in order to speak candidly, said in a statement Friday.
[House members considering ending ban on earmarks]


rollcall--2020-01-27--Personal stories on display on anniversary of ‘Muslim travel ban’

Sen. Richard Durbin , D-Ill. , departs from a news conference Tuesday .
On Monday Durbin and other Democrats held @ @ @ @ @ for the NO BAN Act .
( Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call ) On the third @ @ @ @ @ ’ s “ Muslim travel ban , ” Democrats brought advocates to speak in support @ @ @ @ @ limit his ability to restrict travel from some Muslim countries .
The legislation introduced in @ @ @ @ @ NO BAN Act and is supported by senators including Democratic Sens .
Richard J. Durbin @ @ @ @ @ Blumenthal , of Connecticut .
Monday ’ s event gave individuals affected by the travel @ @ @ @ @ their stories and how it impacts their communities .
Get breaking news alerts and more @ @ @ @ @ iPhone .

On the third anniversary of President Donald Trump’s “Muslim travel ban,” Democrats brought advocates to speak in support of a bill that would limit his ability to restrict travel from some Muslim countries.
The legislation introduced in the House is called the NO BAN Act and is supported by senators including Democratic Sens. Richard J. Durbin, of Illinois and Richard Blumenthal, of Connecticut. Monday’s event gave individuals affected by the travel ban an opportunity to share their stories and how it impacts their communities.


rollcall--2020-01-27--House members considering ending ban on earmarks

House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey , D-N.Y. , briefly considered allowing earmarks last year , until announcing in March that they would not be allowed in fiscal 2020 spending bills .
( Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call file photo ) House appropriators are considering lifting a nearly 10-year ban on congressionally directed spending , known as earmarks .
While no decisions have been made , a House Democratic aide said lawmakers are in the “ early stages ” of considering allowing earmarks in spending bills for the coming fiscal year .
“ There is considerable interest in allowing members of Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their communities , ” the source said .
Earmarks have been banned in the House since 2011 , when a Republican majority ended the practice of inserting special projects in spending bills because of concerns about corruption .
But in recent years , lawmakers have cautiously expressed growing interest in lifting the ban with new safeguards .
Supporters of a policy change say earmarks can help build broader political support for a spending bill and could smooth the appropriations process .
Critics worry that earmarks would again allow for special favors and corruption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community project funding in the fiscal year 2021 appropriations process are in their early stages , and feedback from all members of the Democratic Caucus is important in deciding how to proceed , ” the aide said in an emailed statement .
The aide said no rules or guidelines for earmarks have been finalized yet , but a system is being discussed that would allow lawmakers to request funding for a limited number of projects from a limited number of appropriations accounts .
The aide added that there would be strict limits on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that the quality of the requests — for community projects , for example — would be assessed before the projects are included in bills .
House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey , D-N.Y. , briefly considered allowing earmarks last year , until announcing in March that they would not be allowed in fiscal 2020 spending bills .
Senate Republicans last year opted to make their temporary earmark ban permanent .
The vote in the Senate Republican Conference last year was 28-12 to ban them permanently .
The effort to bring back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year if Republicans and possibly President Donald Trump use it as a cudgel to smack Democrats , evoking images of a rural Alaska project that became a symbol of government excess dubbed the `` bridge to nowhere . ''

House appropriators are considering lifting a nearly 10-year ban on congressionally directed spending, known as earmarks.
While no decisions have been made, a House Democratic aide said lawmakers are in the “early stages” of considering allowing earmarks in spending bills for the coming fiscal year. “There is considerable interest in allowing members of Congress to direct funding for important projects in their communities,” the source said.
[The dead earmarks society]
Earmarks have been banned in the House since 2011, when a Republican majority ended the practice of inserting special projects in spending bills because of concerns about corruption. But in recent years, lawmakers have cautiously expressed growing interest in lifting the ban with new safeguards.
Supporters of a policy change say earmarks can help build broader political support for a spending bill and could smooth the appropriations process. Critics worry that earmarks would again allow for special favors and corruption.


rollcall--2020-01-27--Impeachment news roundup: Jan. 27

Impeachment news roundup: Jan. 27

Vice President Mike Pence leaves the Old Senate Chamber after conducting the ceremonial swear-in of senators in January 2019 .
( Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call ) At least two Republican senators indicated Monday that they and others are inclined to call for the testimony of former national security adviser John Bolton after reports that he says in his upcoming book that President Donald Trump told him to withhold aid to Ukraine absent an investigation into political rivals .
The GOP senator comments were encouraging for some Democrats , who have been pushing to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like something ’ s afoot , ” Sen. Amy Klobuchar , a Minnesota Democrat and presidential candidate , told CQ Roll Call .
Utah Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said Monday of Bolton testifying , “ It ’ s just relevant to the discussion and that ’ s why I think it ’ s important to hear it.
” He also suggested that some of his GOP colleagues feel the same way .
“ I ’ ve always said that I was likely to vote to call witnesses , just as I did in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Susan Collins said in a statement .
“ The reports about John Bolton ’ s book strengthen the case for witnesses and have prompted a number of conversations among my colleagues.
” Sen. Ted Cruz said Monday night he did not believe calling witnesses like Bolton would be necessary , arguing that he has not seen the House managers meet their burden of proof .
“ They have not demonstrated any law was violated , ” the Texas Republican said .
The New York Times reported Sunday that it had obtained an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House memoir “ The Room Where it Happened ” in which Bolton claims that Trump told him to hold up military aid to Ukraine until the country took up investigations of his political rivals .
House Republicans played down the impact of The New York Times report in a series of tense exchanges with reporters Monday .
Rep. Jim Jordan , R-Ohio , said the facts of the impeachment trial remained the same and accused the House of botching the impeachment process .
“ The facts , as we ’ ve said so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not changed will never change .
Regardless of what The New York Times may report about some anonymous source telling them what to draft manuscript and Mr. Bolton ’ s book supposedly says , ” he said .
House Democrats had sought Bolton ’ s testimony in its impeachment inquiry but the White House blocked administration officials from cooperating in the investigation .
After the House voted to impeach Trump in December , Bolton offered to testify if subpoenaed .
The Senate will debate later this week whether to call more witnesses .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ defense this afternoon and Tuesday , and senators then have 16 hours to ask questions of both sides .
A handful of Republican senators , enough to tip the balance in a majority vote , have indicated they would consider voting to hear more testimony before the Bolton report emerged .
Trump refuted the reports of Bolton ’ s claim , tweeting that his former national security adviser , who he fired in September , is just trying to sell his book .
“ …he never complained about this at the time of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton said this , it was only to sell a book ” Trump tweeted early this morning .
Marc Short , chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence , said in a statement Monday that in every conversation Pence and Trump had in preparation for the vice president ’ s trip to Poland , where he met with Zelenskiy , “ the president consistently expressed his frustration that the United States was bearing the lion ’ s share of responsibility for aide to Ukraine and that European nations weren ’ t doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns about corruption in Ukraine.
” “ At no time did I hear him tie aid to Ukraine to investigations into the Biden family or Burisma , ” Short said .
“ As White House Counsel presented today , based upon testimony provided by Democrat witnesses in the House hearings , these were the only issues that the vice president discussed with Ukrainian officials — because that ’ s what the president asked him to raise.
” Here is the latest on impeachment : 5 p.m. | Minor player : Trump attorney Jane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floor , calling him a “ just a minor player , ” and telling senators that he is “ that shiny object designed to distract you.
” Raskin ’ s characterization of Giuliani ’ s role is in direct contrast to testimony from U.S. ambassador to the E.U .
Gordon Sondland , who told House investigators that Trump told him and others to “ talk to Rudy ” on Ukraine .
“ Until Rudy was satisfied , the president wasn ’ t going to change his mind , ” Sondland said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president directed us to do so , ” Sondland said under oath .
Raskin said that Giuliani defended Trump “ vigorously , relentlessly and publicly.
” She went on to say House managers may not like his style , but “ one might argue that he is everything … a defense lawyer must be : outrageous , irreverent , blasphemous , rogue , a renegade.
” 4 p.m. | Not “ caught ” : Deputy White House counsel Mike Purpura argued that the military aid released to Ukraine Sept. 11 and Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in New York pointed to the president ’ s concerns being “ addressed in the ordinary course.
” He pushed back on the House impeachment managers ’ narrative that the aid was released because Trump was “ caught ” by the House .
The meeting between Trump and Zelenskiy in New York at the United Nations General Assembly took place Sept. 25 , following the announcement from Speaker Nancy Pelosi that she was supporting an impeachment inquiry .
Trump ’ s defense team has argued that the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was born out of a concern about corruption , not a desire to undermine a potential 2020 rival .
“ The managers are wrong ” about the timeline , Purpura said , claiming Democrats have “ moved the goal posts.
” 3:30 p.m. | Starr Scoff : Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand scoffed at Ken Starr ’ s comment that Democrats have perpetuated the “ age of impeachment ” with their case against Trump .
“ It was an absurd argument and quite rich coming from him , ” the New York Democrat said of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counsel that conducted the investigation that led to former President Bill Clinton ’ s impeachment .
Gillibrand also said it would be “ shocking ” to her , at this point , if Republicans do not have an interest in hearing from Bolton .
“ The defense ’ s argument has been there ’ s no witness with direct knowledge .
He is a witness with direct knowledge of what President Trump thought at the time and whether or not there was a quid pro quo , ” she said .
3:25 p.m. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charles E. Schumer said during a break that the arguments in defense of Trump are bolstering the Democrats ’ case to call witnesses and subpoena documents .
“ The President ’ s lawyers keep making the case for witnesses and documents , ” Schumer told reporters .
He referenced Trump personal attorney Jay Sekulow ’ s complaints that the witnesses heard in the House investigation did not have direct contact with Trump .
“ We want Bolton .
We want Mulvaney .
We can solve Mr. Sekulow ’ s problem of not having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Schumer said .
He compared the current situation to that of the Watergate scandal , in which new facts came to light over a long period .
“ Every week new evidence comes out that is further condemning of the president , ” Schumer said .
3:15 p.m. | Ukraine ’ s “ best friend ” : Sekulow argued Monday that Trump is “ the best friend and support of Ukraine , certainly in our recent history.
” “ These are the facts .
That is what is before you , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has repeatedly referred to the Trump administration providing Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine , drawing a comparison to the Obama administration , which did not .
The comparison is a frequent talking point of Republicans against the impeachment .
2:53 p.m. | “ The age of impeachment ” : Starr , said in his turn to deliver floor arguments that at this particular juncture “ the Senate is being called to sit as the high court of impeachment all too frequently.
” Although Trump ’ s impeachment trial is the first since President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Starr went as far as to call today the “ age of impeachment.
” Starr argued that the precedent Democrats are setting with Trump ’ s impeachment is that it won ’ t just be a one administration act but an every administration act .
“ Democrats will regret it when Republicans are handing out the pens — the pens of the signing ceremony , ” he said .
Pelosi used multiple pens to sign the articles of impeachment that the House sent to the Senate .
Starr said “ an appropriate or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this case is whether the House has proven Trump committed crimes or violated established law .
“ The Constitution is speaking to us in terms of crimes , ” he said .
Later , Sekulow showed video footage of Pelosi handing out pens used for the signing ceremony of the articles of impeachment .
“ A celebratory moment — think about that , ” Sekulow said as the video of Pelosi ’ s engrossment ceremony played on the screens .
1:21 p.m. | No comment : Republican senators were uncharacteristically quiet on Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roast beef provided by Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso .
Only three GOP senators stopped to talk to reporters for more than 30 seconds : Sens .
Mike Braun of Indiana , Kevin Cramer of North Dakota and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin .
Even the usually chatty Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy declined to remark on impeachment trial developments .
1:17 p.m. | Stay the course : Trump ’ s counsel does not seem to have altered its defense strategy after the reporting on Bolton ’ s manuscript .
“ He had deep policy concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is really about , ” Sekulow said of Bolton in opening remarks on the floor .
12:57 p.m. | Don ’ t wait for the book : Lead House manager Rep. Adam B. Schiff argued that senators should not wait until March 17 when Bolton ’ s book comes out , “ they should demand this information , while it would still be pertinent to their decision.
” “ The uncontradicted evidence is as simple as two plus two equals four .
Nevertheless , the president ’ s lawyers sought to contest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead of the start of the trial .
“ And now that they have , they can not dispute the relevance and the importance of John Bolton ’ s testimony.
” “ When the president ’ s counsel says , as they did on the Senate floor , that there ’ s no direct evidence the president ever told someone he was conditioning the aid on these investigations , that ’ s just not correct , ” Schiff said .
Schiff said Ambassador Gordon Sondland , in a Sept. 7 call , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president needed to announce investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son , Hunter Biden .
And Schiff said the president ’ s own acting chief of staff , Mick Mulvaney , has already admitted at a news conference that he discussed with Trump that the reason for withholding the military aid to Ukraine was for political investigations .
He also pointed to what he called other circumstantial evidence , such as there was no legitimate reason for holding the aid , “ and the fact that all of the national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other secretaries were urging that it ’ d be released.
” 12:56 p.m. | Timing : Republican Sen. John Thune estimated that the Senate would take a vote on whether to call witnesses on Friday or by Saturday “ at the latest.
” He did not say predict whether Republicans had the votes to quash those efforts .
“ I ’ m never confident until we cast them .
We ’ ll see , ” Thune said .
12:50 p.m. | Still curious : “ I read it .
I said before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might have to say , ” said Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski when asked about the Bolton reports .
“ I 'm still curious.
” Murkowski is among those Republican senators who said they were considering whether to hear from more witnesses in the Senate trial .
12:44 p.m. | No regrets : Schiff said he does not regret not subpoenaing Bolton , but said Bolton “ should answer that question ” of why he was unwilling to testify in the House .
Schiff said the new Bolton revelations make it “ all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a trial without witnesses and you certainly can ’ t have one without John Bolton.
” He also said it was “ positive ” to hear that Republican senators are considering calling for witnesses in the trial .
12:27 p.m. | Take your meds : Speaking to whether Bolton or Lev Parnas , an associate of Trump ’ s attorney Rudy Giuliani who also implicated Trump in the Ukraine scheme , are telling the truth , Republican Sen. John Kennedy cast doubt on that notion .
“ If you ’ re asking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guess my response would be I wouldn ’ t bet my house on it , ” Kennedy said .
“ And if I were betting your house on it , it would only be a maybe.
” “ We ’ re about halfway through the trial .
I think everybody ought to pop a Zoloft , take their meds .
And let ’ s wait and finish up , ” Kennedy said .
12:25 p.m. | All I know ... : Republican Sen. Ron Johnson , who was personally involved in Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not say Monday whether he now believes the president lied to him when he told him over the phone in August that the Ukrainian aid freeze was not tied to investigations into the Bidens .
The reports of Bolton ’ s book manuscript directly refutes that claim .
“ All I ’ ve ever reported is what he told me , ” Johnson , a Wisconsin Republican , said .
“ My evaluations just on a human level , based on his reaction — I felt guilty even asking the question.
” 12:10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sens .
Ted Cruz and Roy Blunt indicated Monday that the reports on Bolton ’ s book do not move the needle for them to subpoena new witnesses and documents .
“ At the end of the day nothing I ’ ve seen in the reporting changes the underlying fact that a president has the full constitutional authority and indeed the responsibility to investigate serious evidence of corruption , ” Cruz said .
Blunt repeated the well-worn GOP line that it is not the Senate ’ s job to call new witnesses , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial of President Bill Clinton .
“ It ’ s the House ’ s job to put a case together .
It ’ s then our job to deal with that in a prompt manner , ” Blunt said .
“ One thing I know for sure is John Bolton doesn ’ t know a single thing today he didn ’ t know before Christmas.
” Idaho GOP Sen. Mike Crapo said the Bolton news does not change his mind on witnesses : “ Right now I 'm going to listen to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the New York Times report , the Idaho Republican said he wasn ’ t familiar with it .
Tennessee Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander , who has said he would consider whether witnesses are needed after hearing from both sides said , “ I have said that I will wait until after the arguments are made .
Wait until after all the questions are asked and then I will decide whether I think we need more evidence or not.
” 11:58 a.m. | Wait and see : Moderate Republican senators who are on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are “ keeping their powder dry , ” Thune said He added that it is “ the right thing to do ” for them to keep their internal deliberations close to their chests .
11:55 a.m. | Nothing said : Expanding on his tweets from the night before , Trump denied the allegations made in the draft of Bolton ’ s book .
“ I haven ’ t seen the manuscript , but I can tell you nothing was ever said to John Bolton , ” the president told reporters .
10:50 a.m. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blumenthal said the Bolton report is a game-changer .
“ It is a bombshell that really has seismic reverberations for any Republican who cares about their place in history , ” Blumenthal said .
If the Bolton revelation is not enough to sway Republican senators to call Bolton to testify , Blumenthal said it would be an intentional effort by the GOP to avoid the truth .
“ If my Republican colleagues put blinders on , they can ’ t complain about not seeing .
They can deny the truth if they put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only because they lack the moral courage , ” Blumenthal said .
Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin said the Bolton news reinforces the need to hear from witnesses .
“ Just underscores the importance for additional witnesses .
The president said that Mr. Bolton is not telling the truth .
Put him under oath .
That ’ s the only way we can tell.
” 10:10 a.m. | Scuttled : The Senate press gallery was notified Monday morning that a scheduled news conference with Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham and several other GOP senators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Changing minds ?
: Sunday night ’ s revelations about Bolton ’ s book might ultimately change the calculus on witnesses for Republican senators , but Sen. Joni Ernst , R-Iowa , showed no indication of that Monday morning .
“ Whether the book is out there or not , they could have asked these same questions .
So that would be my argument , is that they had the opportunity to bring him in , they chose not to do it , ” Ernst said on High Hewitt ’ s radio show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to do it ?
They will have to explain that.
” “ But again , I will reserve my judgment until after I ’ ve heard from , of course , the White House counsel .
I want to hear what they have to say on this issue .
And then , as a body , we ’ re going to have to vote and make that decision , ” she said .
7:45 a.m. | More witnesses : Pelosi led a cadre of Democratic leaders who said the Bolton news bolstered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House officials like acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to testify .
Pelosi said the Bolton report makes it “ indefensible ” to not consider more evidence .
“ Amb .
Bolton reportedly heard directly from Trump that aid for Ukraine was tied to political investigations , ” Pelosi tweeted .
“ The refusal of the Senate to call for him , other relevant witnesses , and documents is now even more indefensible.
” Schumer tweeted “ John Bolton has the evidence .
It ’ s up to four Senate Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mulvaney , and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump ’ s actions testify in the Senate trial.
” The seven House impeachment managers , led by Schiff , also pushed for Bolton to be called to testify .
“ The president knows how devastating his testimony would be , and , according to the report , the White House has had a draft of his manuscript for review , ” they said in a statement .
“ President Trump ’ s cover-up must come to an end.
” Schumer said Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top Trump Admin officials knew the facts and deliberately misled Congress and the American people.
” 7:10 a.m. | Trump responds : In addition to retweeting critical coverage of the Bolton report early Monday , Trump responded to the increasing calls for more witnesses , repeating his position that Democrats had their chance to question Bolton during their inquiry and it wasn ’ t the Senate ’ s responsibility to complete the House ’ s investigation .
A Democratic aide working on the Senate impeachment trial told reporters that Trump ’ s tweet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment inquiry requested for him to sit for a deposition but he didn ’ t show .
The House didn ’ t subpoena Bolton , however , because his lawyers had said they would fight it in court and the House found that to be a delaying tactic they didn ’ t want to engage in .
“ There is no executive privilege defense to not providing this information , ” the aide added .
“ Executive privilege does not apply when there ’ s been wrongdoing , as is the case here.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal attorney who was his point man in negotiations with Ukraine that House witnesses said Bolton referred to as a “ drug deal , ” responded to the reports of the Bolton manuscript , besmirching the former national security adviser .
“ He [ Bolton ] never once expressed concern to me .
If he had confronted me , I could have explained it to him ...
..He [ Bolton ] wasn ’ t man enough to just ask and instead makes false and irresponsible barges to write a book about his failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a text .
7 a.m. | Trump ’ s defense : After a shortened Saturday session in which they attacked the Democrats ’ “ witch hunt ” against the president , Trump ’ s lawyers will resume their defense this afternoon .
Trump ’ s team Saturday focused its attacks on what they called a lack of evidence , the actions of Schiff and a flawed House investigation .
The Senate continues its trial at 1 p.m. Trump ’ s attorneys have indicated they likely will not use the full 24 hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Senators then have 16 hours to ask questions of the House managers and Trump ’ s layers then will argue for four hours over considering more witnesses and evidence .
If the effort for more witnesses fails , the Senate could then vote on its verdict .

File updated 7:50 p.m.
At least two Republican senators indicated Monday that they and others are inclined to call for the testimony of former national security adviser John Bolton after reports that he says in his upcoming book that President Donald Trump told him to withhold aid to Ukraine absent an investigation into political rivals.
The GOP senators’ comments were encouraging for some Democrats, who have been pushing to hear from Bolton in the Senate trial.
“I do think it feels like something’s afoot,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat and presidential candidate, told CQ Roll Call.
Utah Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said Monday of Bolton testifying, “It’s just relevant to the discussion and that’s why I think it’s important to hear it.”