csmonitor--2020-01-22--Sanders gains strength – and mainstream Democrats worry

“ The ironic similarity between Bernie and Trump is that they both have clear messages , ” says Iowa-based Democratic strategist Jeff Link .
“ [ Bernie ] is incredibly clear and consistent and authentic … and that is powerful in a time when people are cynical about politicians.
” “ I do believe that Senator Sanders is too liberal to defeat an incumbent Republican president , especially an incumbent president with a good economy and a huge bankroll , ” says Marshall Matz , a registered Democrat who worked on the failed 1972 campaign of George McGovern .
Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within certain quarters of the Democratic Party not unlike the reaction many Republicans had in 2016 to another party outsider : Donald Trump .
The worry : A “ far-left ” nominee could backfire for Democrats .
With just 12 days until the Iowa caucuses and a dominant front-runner yet to emerge , what once struck many as an unlikely outcome – “ Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders ” – is suddenly looking like more of a possibility .
Marshall Matz knows what a losing campaign looks like .
An adviser to Sen. George @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mr. Matz had a front-row seat to one of the biggest losses in presidential history .
Senator McGovern , a liberal who opposed the war in Vietnam , drew large and enthusiastic crowds on the campaign trail but went on to lose every state save Massachusetts and the District of Columbia to an unpopular incumbent .
Today , Mr. Matz finds himself watching the campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders with a growing sense of alarm that history may repeat itself .
“ I do believe that Senator Sanders is too liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially an incumbent president with a good economy and a huge bankroll , ” says Mr. Matz , a registered Democrat who still admires the late Senator McGovern and considered him a close friend .
“ I ’ m trying to sound the alarm and say ‘ heads up ’ here , ” he says .
With just 12 days until the Iowa caucuses and a dominant front-runner yet to emerge , what once struck many as an unlikely outcome – “ Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders ” – is suddenly looking like more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heart attack threatened to derail his campaign last fall , Senator Sanders raised $ 34.5 million over the final months of 2019 , more than any of his rivals .
One recent Iowa poll showed him in the lead there for the first time this cycle , and a new national CNN poll has him leading the pack .
At the final debate in Des Moines last week , Mr. Sanders was given one of the center-stage spots reserved for front-runners .
He ’ s benefitted in part from the struggles of fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appears to have fallen off in recent weeks – and with whom he had a public spat last week over whether or not he once told her he believed a woman could not win the White House .
Mr. Sanders ’ strength is eliciting a kind of anxiety within certain quarters of the Democratic Party not unlike the reaction many Republicans had four years ago to another party outsider who few initially believed could win : Donald Trump .
Like President Trump , Mr. Sanders ’ unconventional style and promise to upend Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who can ’ t be neatly categorized – and could wind up scrambling the usual “ rules ” of politics .
“ The ironic similarity between Bernie and Trump is that they both have clear messages , ” says Iowa-based Democratic strategist Jeff Link .
“ [ Bernie ] is incredibly clear and consistent and authentic … and that is powerful in a time when people are cynical about politicians.
” A lot can change in the weeks leading up to Iowa – and frequently does .
Four years ago , Mr. Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three weeks before the Iowa caucuses .
Today , polls show that 60 % of the state ’ s caucusgoers are still undecided .
But if Mr. Sanders actually wins Iowa ( which he very nearly did in 2016 ) , and then goes on to win New Hampshire ( as he did in 2016 ) , it is not hard to envision his momentum carrying him on to win in Nevada and beyond .
The latest poll out of California , which will vote on Super Tuesday , has Mr. Sanders in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that his campaign is viable enough to win multiple early states , and with the funding there as well , has awoken many to the possibility that he could win the nomination , ” says Scott Mulhauser , a longtime Democratic operative who was Vice President Joe Biden ’ s deputy chief of staff during the 2012 Obama-Biden reelection campaign .
“ There is a steadiness to his campaign that has endured despite seemingly everything.
” Lately , the drumbeat from establishment Democrats warning against a Sanders nomination has grown noticeably louder .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ out against her 2016 primary rival .
“ Nobody likes him , nobody wants to work with him , he got nothing done , ” she says in a forthcoming documentary – an assessment she repeated in an interview in The Hollywood Reporter .
When asked if she would support Mr. Sanders were he to win the nomination , she replied , “ I ’ m not going to go there yet.
” ( She later clarified that she would “ do whatever I can to support our nominee.
” ) In some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many of Mr. Sanders ’ supporters seem to relish .
To beat Mr. Trump in November , they say , the Democratic nominee will need to excite new voters and get them to the polls – voters who , like many of Mr. Trump ’ s supporters , have been disappointed by the party and are unhappy with the status quo .
Some hypothetical general election matchups do show Mr. Sanders , along with Mr. Biden , faring best against Mr. Trump .
One poll published last week by Marquette University Law School @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beat Mr. Trump in the crucial swing state of Wisconsin .
But while Mr. Sanders ’ supporters see the passion he inspires as a strength , other Democrats see it as a threat .
Many blame Mr. Sanders for Mrs. Clinton ’ s general election loss in 2016 , and fear that if he fails to win the nomination again in 2020 , his supporters will stay home on Nov. 3 instead of rallying around the party ’ s nominee .
“ Sanders concerns Democrats by getting the nomination – and by not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Goldford , a political scientist at Drake University in Des Moines , Iowa .
“ Democrats are scared down to their toes that Sanders could tank the whole ticket.
” Of course , not everyone is convinced that Mr. Sanders has a real shot at clinching the nomination .
Most Democratic voters simply would never vote for someone who calls himself a democratic socialist , says Professor Goldford .
“ I think people forgot that he has a solid floor , ” he says , in response to the recent flurry of Sanders-induced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last time around , he seemed to have a solid ceiling .
And he would be underestimated only if he breaks that solid ceiling this time around.
” Some activists on the ground in Iowa express skepticism about Mr. Sanders ’ strength .
In northern Iowa , a conservative region represented by far-right GOP Rep. Steve King in Congress , several local Democratic leaders say chatter about Mr. Sanders ’ rise is overblown .
“ I just don ’ t see it , ” says Logan Welch , a member of the Hamilton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City .
“ If you just went around Webster City and asked all the Democrats who they are going for , I don ’ t think Bernie would be in the top three.
” He sees more local support for former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg , Senator Warren , and Mr. Biden in Webster City , a town of less than 8,000 people an hour ’ s drive north of Des Moines .
True , Mr. Sanders surprised everyone with his near-win against Mrs. Clinton in 2016 , says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shocking for him to rise to the top again this year with such a “ thick bench ” of Democratic candidates .
Julie Geopfert , chair of the neighboring Webster County Democrats , says Mr. Sanders ’ supporters don ’ t seem as “ fanatical ” this time around .
In fact , she says she has seen a lot of Sanders backers from 2016 switch over to other candidates this cycle .
But the bigger field could actually be helpful to Mr. Sanders .
Like Mr. Trump , he may benefit from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which those opposed to him wind up splitting their support among various other candidates , and the percentage any one candidate needs to win is lower .
In a January 2016 Des Moines Register poll , 43 % of likely caucusgoers said they would describe themselves as “ socialist , ” which ended up being a good proxy for Mr. Sanders ’ eventual support in the caucus that year .
In this year ’ s poll , only 28 % of likely caucusgoers described themselves that way .
At first glance , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders .
But that also might be all he needs to win .
“ The campaign has thought all along that if they can maintain their base and there is a credible challenger to Biden in the establishment lane , then they would be in good shape , ” says Mr. Link .
The way the Iowa caucuses work could benefit Mr. Sanders even more .
If candidates are deemed “ nonviable ” on caucus night ( meaning they have the support of less than 15 % of those in the room ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” with a different candidate .
Kelcey Brackett , chair of the Muscatine County Democrats , speculates that two candidates who may wind up as nonviable are Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and entrepreneur Andrew Yang .
And he expects a high percentage of their supporters – many of whom identify as independents – will join the Sanders camp .
Indeed , Mr. Brackett says Mr. Sanders is looking quite strong in the southeastern corner of the state , where he did particularly well in 2016 .
His campaign is large and active in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and seems to be knocking on more doors and making more calls than other campaigns .
“ We ’ ve probably been underestimating [ his support ] , ” agrees Judy Downs , executive director of the Polk County Democrats , Iowa ’ s most populous county and home to the state capital of Des Moines .
The Sanders campaign empowers volunteers by giving them a lot of autonomy , says Ms. Downs – but this also means it ’ s more difficult to fully estimate the strength of his campaign .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Feb. 4 , ” she predicts .
Since publicly speaking out against Mr. Sanders earlier this month , Mr. Matz says several of his colleagues from the McGovern years have reached out to say they agree .
“ We need to be more pragmatic than idealistic , ” says Mr. Matz .
“ Who has the best chance of winning ?
I ’ m not sure who that is yet – but I ’ m pretty sure who it ’ s not .
”

“The ironic similarity between Bernie and Trump is that they both have clear messages,” says Iowa-based Democratic strategist Jeff Link. “[Bernie] is incredibly clear and consistent and authentic … and that is powerful in a time when people are cynical about politicians.”
“I do believe that Senator Sanders is too liberal to defeat an incumbent Republican president, especially an incumbent president with a good economy and a huge bankroll,” says Marshall Matz, a registered Democrat who worked on the failed 1972 campaign of George McGovern.
Judging by his policies, Bernie Sanders is anything but a “Trump of the left.” But as a longtime outsider on the rise, he’s stirring the same kind of worry among his party’s establishment that Republicans saw in 2016.
Mr. Sanders’ polling strength is eliciting anxiety within certain quarters of the Democratic Party not unlike the reaction many Republicans had in 2016 to another party outsider: Donald Trump. The worry: A “far-left” nominee could backfire for Democrats.
With just 12 days until the Iowa caucuses and a dominant front-runner yet to emerge, what once struck many as an unlikely outcome – “Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders” – is suddenly looking like more of a possibility.
Marshall Matz knows what a losing campaign looks like.
An adviser to Sen. George McGovern’s 1972 White House bid, Mr. Matz had a front-row seat to one of the biggest losses in presidential history. Senator McGovern, a liberal who opposed the war in Vietnam, drew large and enthusiastic crowds on the campaign trail but went on to lose every state save Massachusetts and the District of Columbia to an unpopular incumbent.
Today, Mr. Matz finds himself watching the campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders with a growing sense of alarm that history may repeat itself.
Why We Wrote This Judging by his policies, Bernie Sanders is anything but a “Trump of the left.” But as a longtime outsider on the rise, he’s stirring the same kind of worry among his party’s establishment that Republicans saw in 2016.
“I do believe that Senator Sanders is too liberal to defeat an incumbent Republican president, especially an incumbent president with a good economy and a huge bankroll,” says Mr. Matz, a registered Democrat who still admires the late Senator McGovern and considered him a close friend.
“I’m trying to sound the alarm and say ‘heads up’ here,” he says.
With just 12 days until the Iowa caucuses and a dominant front-runner yet to emerge, what once struck many as an unlikely outcome – “Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders” – is suddenly looking like more of a possibility.
Even though a heart attack threatened to derail his campaign last fall, Senator Sanders raised $34.5 million over the final months of 2019, more than any of his rivals. One recent Iowa poll showed him in the lead there for the first time this cycle, and a new national CNN poll has him leading the pack. At the final debate in Des Moines last week, Mr. Sanders was given one of the center-stage spots reserved for front-runners.
He’s benefitted in part from the struggles of fellow progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren, whose support appears to have fallen off in recent weeks – and with whom he had a public spat last week over whether or not he once told her he believed a woman could not win the White House.
Mr. Sanders’ strength is eliciting a kind of anxiety within certain quarters of the Democratic Party not unlike the reaction many Republicans had four years ago to another party outsider who few initially believed could win: Donald Trump. Like President Trump, Mr. Sanders’ unconventional style and promise to upend Washington has attracted a passionate group of followers who can’t be neatly categorized – and could wind up scrambling the usual “rules” of politics.
“The ironic similarity between Bernie and Trump is that they both have clear messages,” says Iowa-based Democratic strategist Jeff Link. “[Bernie] is incredibly clear and consistent and authentic … and that is powerful in a time when people are cynical about politicians.”
“Viable enough to win”
A lot can change in the weeks leading up to Iowa – and frequently does. Four years ago, Mr. Sanders closed a 12-point gap in the final three weeks before the Iowa caucuses. Today, polls show that 60% of the state’s caucusgoers are still undecided.
But if Mr. Sanders actually wins Iowa (which he very nearly did in 2016), and then goes on to win New Hampshire (as he did in 2016), it is not hard to envision his momentum carrying him on to win in Nevada and beyond. The latest poll out of California, which will vote on Super Tuesday, has Mr. Sanders in the lead there.
“The realization that his campaign is viable enough to win multiple early states, and with the funding there as well, has awoken many to the possibility that he could win the nomination,” says Scott Mulhauser, a longtime Democratic operative who was Vice President Joe Biden’s deputy chief of staff during the 2012 Obama-Biden reelection campaign. “There is a steadiness to his campaign that has endured despite seemingly everything.”
Shannon Stapleton/Reuters View caption Hide caption A supporter of Democratic 2020 presidential candidate Bernie Sanders stands during a campaign event in Des Moines, Iowa, on Jan. 20, 2020. Many Iowa voters remain undecided, heading into the state's Feb. 3 caucuses.
Lately, the drumbeat from establishment Democrats warning against a Sanders nomination has grown noticeably louder.
Hillary Clinton made headlines Tuesday for speaking out against her 2016 primary rival. “Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done,” she says in a forthcoming documentary – an assessment she repeated in an interview in The Hollywood Reporter. When asked if she would support Mr. Sanders were he to win the nomination, she replied, “I’m not going to go there yet.” (She later clarified that she would “do whatever I can to support our nominee.”)
In some ways, that’s a fight many of Mr. Sanders’ supporters seem to relish. To beat Mr. Trump in November, they say, the Democratic nominee will need to excite new voters and get them to the polls – voters who, like many of Mr. Trump’s supporters, have been disappointed by the party and are unhappy with the status quo. Some hypothetical general election matchups do show Mr. Sanders, along with Mr. Biden, faring best against Mr. Trump. One poll published last week by Marquette University Law School found they were the only two to beat Mr. Trump in the crucial swing state of Wisconsin.
But while Mr. Sanders’ supporters see the passion he inspires as a strength, other Democrats see it as a threat. Many blame Mr. Sanders for Mrs. Clinton’s general election loss in 2016, and fear that if he fails to win the nomination again in 2020, his supporters will stay home on Nov. 3 instead of rallying around the party’s nominee.
“Sanders concerns Democrats by getting the nomination – and by not getting the nomination,” says Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. “Democrats are scared down to their toes that Sanders could tank the whole ticket.”
A “solid ceiling” on Sanders’ support?
Of course, not everyone is convinced that Mr. Sanders has a real shot at clinching the nomination. Most Democratic voters simply would never vote for someone who calls himself a democratic socialist, says Professor Goldford.
“I think people forgot that he has a solid floor,” he says, in response to the recent flurry of Sanders-induced panic. “But, at least last time around, he seemed to have a solid ceiling. And he would be underestimated only if he breaks that solid ceiling this time around.”
Some activists on the ground in Iowa express skepticism about Mr. Sanders’ strength. In northern Iowa, a conservative region represented by far-right GOP Rep. Steve King in Congress, several local Democratic leaders say chatter about Mr. Sanders’ rise is overblown.
“I just don’t see it,” says Logan Welch, a member of the Hamilton County Democrats and local councilman for Webster City. “If you just went around Webster City and asked all the Democrats who they are going for, I don’t think Bernie would be in the top three.”
He sees more local support for former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Senator Warren, and Mr. Biden in Webster City, a town of less than 8,000 people an hour’s drive north of Des Moines. True, Mr. Sanders surprised everyone with his near-win against Mrs. Clinton in 2016, says Mr. Welch – but it would be shocking for him to rise to the top again this year with such a “thick bench” of Democratic candidates.
Julie Geopfert, chair of the neighboring Webster County Democrats, says Mr. Sanders’ supporters don’t seem as “fanatical” this time around. In fact, she says she has seen a lot of Sanders backers from 2016 switch over to other candidates this cycle.
How caucus system could benefit Sanders
But the bigger field could actually be helpful to Mr. Sanders. Like Mr. Trump, he may benefit from a large and fractured primary, in which those opposed to him wind up splitting their support among various other candidates, and the percentage any one candidate needs to win is lower.
In a January 2016 Des Moines Register poll, 43% of likely caucusgoers said they would describe themselves as “socialist,” which ended up being a good proxy for Mr. Sanders’ eventual support in the caucus that year. In this year’s poll, only 28% of likely caucusgoers described themselves that way. At first glance, that may seem like disappointing news for Mr. Sanders. But that also might be all he needs to win.
“The campaign has thought all along that if they can maintain their base and there is a credible challenger to Biden in the establishment lane, then they would be in good shape,” says Mr. Link.
The way the Iowa caucuses work could benefit Mr. Sanders even more. If candidates are deemed “nonviable” on caucus night (meaning they have the support of less than 15% of those in the room), then their supporters can “realign” with a different candidate.
Kelcey Brackett, chair of the Muscatine County Democrats, speculates that two candidates who may wind up as nonviable are Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and entrepreneur Andrew Yang. And he expects a high percentage of their supporters – many of whom identify as independents – will join the Sanders camp.
Indeed, Mr. Brackett says Mr. Sanders is looking quite strong in the southeastern corner of the state, where he did particularly well in 2016. His campaign is large and active in Muscatine County, says Mr. Brackett, and seems to be knocking on more doors and making more calls than other campaigns.
“We’ve probably been underestimating [his support],” agrees Judy Downs, executive director of the Polk County Democrats, Iowa’s most populous county and home to the state capital of Des Moines. The Sanders campaign empowers volunteers by giving them a lot of autonomy, says Ms. Downs – but this also means it’s more difficult to fully estimate the strength of his campaign.
“I think Sanders will be very happy on Feb. 4,” she predicts.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Since publicly speaking out against Mr. Sanders earlier this month, Mr. Matz says several of his colleagues from the McGovern years have reached out to say they agree.
“We need to be more pragmatic than idealistic,” says Mr. Matz. “Who has the best chance of winning? I’m not sure who that is yet – but I’m pretty sure who it’s not.”


csmonitor--2020-01-22--Impeachment rules approved, but not witness testimony

The United States Senate plunged into President Donald Trump 's impeachment trial with Republicans abruptly abandoning plans to cram opening arguments into two days but solidly rejecting Democratic demands for more witnesses to expose what they deem Mr. Trump 's `` trifecta '' of offenses .
The daylong session started Tuesday with the setback for Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell and the president 's legal team , but it ended near 2 a.m. Wednesday , with Republicans easily approving the rest of the trial rules largely on their terms .
The result is Mr. Trump 's historic trial , unfolding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
`` We have a great case , '' Mr. Trump said as he began his second day at a global economic forum in Davos , Switzerland .
He said he thought his legal team was doing a `` very good job . ''
The trial is now on a fast-track with almost no signs of Republican resistance to the actions that led to his impeachment .
`` It 's about time we bring this power trip in for a landing , '' said White House counsel Pat Cipollone , the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the House Democrats prosecuting the case .
`` It 's a farce , '' he said about the impeachment proceeding , `` and it should end . ''
Chief Justice John Roberts gaveled open the session , with House prosecutors on one side , Mr. Trump 's team on the other , in the well of the Senate , as senators sat silently at their desks , under oath to do `` impartial justice . ''
No cellphones or other electronics were allowed .
As the day stretched deep into the night , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political ones .
Tempers flared and senators paced the chamber .
Democrats pursued what may be their only chance to force senators to vote on hearing new testimony .
After one particularly bitter post-midnight exchange , Chief Justice Roberts intervened , taking the rare step of admonishing both the Democratic House managers prosecuting the case and the White House counsel to `` remember where they are . ''
`` I think it is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and the president 's counsel in equal terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world 's greatest deliberative body , '' the usually reserved Chief Justice Roberts said .
He told them that description of the Senate stemmed from a 1905 trial when a senator objected to the word `` pettifogging , '' because members should `` avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse . ''
Over and over , Republicans turned back Democratic amendments to subpoena documents from the White House , State Department , Defense Department , and budget office .
By the same 53-47 party-line , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Mr. Trump 's actions including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton , the former national security adviser critical of the Ukraine policy .
Only on one amendment , to allow more time to file motions , did a single Republican , Sen. Susan Collins of Maine , join Democrats .
But it , too , was rejected , 52-48 .
`` It 's not our job to make it easy for you , '' Rep. Adam Schiff , the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee leading the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our job is to make it hard to deprive the American people of a fair trial . ''
As the visitors ' gallery filled earlier with guests , actress-and-activist Alyssa Milano among them , and Mr. Trump 's most ardent House allies lining the back rows , the day that began as a debate over rules quickly took on the cadence of a trial proceeding over whether the president 's actions toward Ukraine warranted removal from office .
Mr. Cipollone led the prosecution , scoffing that the House charges against Mr. Trump were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` has done absolutely nothing wrong . ''
The White House legal team did not dispute Mr. Trump 's actions , when he called Ukraine and asked for a `` favor , '' which was to investigate Democrat Joe Biden as the United States was withholding military aid the ally desperately needed as it faced off with hostile Russia on its border .
But the lawyers insisted the president did nothing wrong .
`` Absolutely no case , '' Mr. Cipollone said .
Representative Schiff , the California Democrat , said America 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Constitution with `` precisely this type of conduct in mind – conduct that abuses the power of office for a personal benefit , that undermines our national security , and that invites foreign interference in the democratic process of an election . ''
Representative Schiff said : `` It is the trifecta of constitutional misconduct justifying impeachment . ''
The other lead lawyer on Mr. Trump 's team , Jay Sekulow , retorted , `` I 'll give you a trifecta , '' outlining complaints over the House Democrats ' impeachment inquiry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether Mr. Trump 's actions toward Ukraine warrant removal as voters are forming their own verdict on his White House .
All four senators who are presidential candidates were off the campaign trail , seated as jurors .
`` My focus is going to be on impeachment , '' Sen. Bernie Sanders , the Vermont independent , told reporters .
Senator McConnell stunned senators and delayed the start of proceedings with his decision to back off some of his proposed rules .
He made the adjustment after encountering resistance from Republicans during a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the political optics of `` dark of night '' sessions that could come from cramming the 24 hours of opening arguments from each side into just two days .
Senator Collins and Senator Lisa Murkowksi of Alaska , who often buck party leadership , along with a substantial number of other Republicans , wanted to make the changes , according to people familiar with the situation .
It was only when the clerk started reading the dry language of the resolution that the hand-written changes to extend debate to three days became apparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record to be included in the Senate .
The turnaround was a swift lesson as White House wishes run into the reality of the Senate .
The White House wanted a session kept to a shorter period to both expedite the trial and shift more of the proceedings into late night , according to a person familiar with the matter but unauthorized to discuss it in public .
`` READ THE TRANSCRIPTS ! ''
the president tweeted from Davos .
That 's the transcript of his phone call in which he asked new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor . ''
The Democrats cite that transcript as solid evidence against Mr. Trump , though he repeatedly describes it as `` perfect . ''
The House impeached Mr. Trump last month on a charge of abuse of power for pushing Ukraine to investigate Democratic rival Mr. Biden and his son Hunter Biden as the White House was withholding military aid from Ukraine .
Mr. Trump was also impeached on a second charge , of obstruction of Congress , in the House probe .
Mr. Trump 's legal team , absent its TV-showcase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were not in the chamber , argued that in seeking new evidence the House was bringing a half-baked case .
But Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California , one of the House managers and the first woman to argue for the prosecution in a presidential impeachment trial , said the House was n't asking the Senate to do the job for them .
`` The House is asking the Senate to do its job , to have a trial , '' she said .
`` Have you ever heard of a trial without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instructed officials not to testify in the House inquiry , and refused to turn over witnesses or documents , citing what it says is precedence in defiance of congressional subpoenas .
The ambassadors and national security officials who appeared before the House delivered striking testimonies , highlights of which were displayed on television screens during the Senate proceeding .
Democratic Representative Schiff displayed video of Mr. Trump himself suggesting there should be more witnesses testifying .
One by one , the House managers made the case , drawing on their own life experiences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a former police chief , said she never saw anyone take `` such extreme steps to hide evidence . ''
Rep. Jason Crow , a former Army Ranger who served in Iraq and Afghanistan , seemed to capture senators ' attention when he told them he knew the hour was late , but it was morning in Ukraine where soldiers were waking up to fight Russia , depending on U.S. aid .
No president has ever been removed from office .
With its 53-47 Republican majority , the Senate is not expected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .

The United States Senate plunged into President Donald Trump's impeachment trial with Republicans abruptly abandoning plans to cram opening arguments into two days but solidly rejecting Democratic demands for more witnesses to expose what they deem Mr. Trump's "trifecta" of offenses.
The daylong session started Tuesday with the setback for Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell and the president's legal team, but it ended near 2 a.m. Wednesday, with Republicans easily approving the rest of the trial rules largely on their terms. The result is Mr. Trump's historic trial, unfolding amid a watchful public in an election year.
"We have a great case," Mr. Trump said as he began his second day at a global economic forum in Davos, Switzerland. He said he thought his legal team was doing a "very good job."
The trial is now on a fast-track with almost no signs of Republican resistance to the actions that led to his impeachment.
"It's about time we bring this power trip in for a landing," said White House counsel Pat Cipollone, the president's lead lawyer, lashing out at the House Democrats prosecuting the case.
"It's a farce," he said about the impeachment proceeding, "and it should end."
Chief Justice John Roberts gaveled open the session, with House prosecutors on one side, Mr. Trump's team on the other, in the well of the Senate, as senators sat silently at their desks, under oath to do "impartial justice." No cellphones or other electronics were allowed.
As the day stretched deep into the night, lawyerly arguments gave way to more pointedly political ones. Tempers flared and senators paced the chamber. Democrats pursued what may be their only chance to force senators to vote on hearing new testimony.
After one particularly bitter post-midnight exchange, Chief Justice Roberts intervened, taking the rare step of admonishing both the Democratic House managers prosecuting the case and the White House counsel to "remember where they are."
"I think it is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and the president's counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world's greatest deliberative body," the usually reserved Chief Justice Roberts said. He told them that description of the Senate stemmed from a 1905 trial when a senator objected to the word "pettifogging," because members should "avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse."
Over and over, Republicans turned back Democratic amendments to subpoena documents from the White House, State Department, Defense Department, and budget office. By the same 53-47 party-line, they turned away witnesses with front-row seats to Mr. Trump's actions including acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton, the former national security adviser critical of the Ukraine policy.
Only on one amendment, to allow more time to file motions, did a single Republican, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, join Democrats. But it, too, was rejected, 52-48.
"It's not our job to make it easy for you," Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee leading the prosecution, told the Senate. "Our job is to make it hard to deprive the American people of a fair trial."
As the visitors' gallery filled earlier with guests, actress-and-activist Alyssa Milano among them, and Mr. Trump's most ardent House allies lining the back rows, the day that began as a debate over rules quickly took on the cadence of a trial proceeding over whether the president's actions toward Ukraine warranted removal from office.
Mr. Cipollone led the prosecution, scoffing that the House charges against Mr. Trump were "ridiculous," insisting the president "has done absolutely nothing wrong."
The White House legal team did not dispute Mr. Trump's actions, when he called Ukraine and asked for a "favor," which was to investigate Democrat Joe Biden as the United States was withholding military aid the ally desperately needed as it faced off with hostile Russia on its border. But the lawyers insisted the president did nothing wrong. "Absolutely no case," Mr. Cipollone said.
Representative Schiff, the California Democrat, said America's Founders added the remedy of impeachment in the Constitution with "precisely this type of conduct in mind – conduct that abuses the power of office for a personal benefit, that undermines our national security, and that invites foreign interference in the democratic process of an election."
Representative Schiff said: "It is the trifecta of constitutional misconduct justifying impeachment.''
The other lead lawyer on Mr. Trump's team, Jay Sekulow, retorted, "I'll give you a trifecta," outlining complaints over the House Democrats' impeachment inquiry process.
The impeachment trial is testing whether Mr. Trump's actions toward Ukraine warrant removal as voters are forming their own verdict on his White House.
All four senators who are presidential candidates were off the campaign trail, seated as jurors. "My focus is going to be on impeachment," Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent, told reporters.
Senator McConnell stunned senators and delayed the start of proceedings with his decision to back off some of his proposed rules. He made the adjustment after encountering resistance from Republicans during a closed-door lunch meeting. Senators worried about the political optics of "dark of night" sessions that could come from cramming the 24 hours of opening arguments from each side into just two days.
Senator Collins and Senator Lisa Murkowksi of Alaska, who often buck party leadership, along with a substantial number of other Republicans, wanted to make the changes, according to people familiar with the situation.
It was only when the clerk started reading the dry language of the resolution that the hand-written changes to extend debate to three days became apparent. It also allowed the House impeachment record to be included in the Senate.
The turnaround was a swift lesson as White House wishes run into the reality of the Senate. The White House wanted a session kept to a shorter period to both expedite the trial and shift more of the proceedings into late night, according to a person familiar with the matter but unauthorized to discuss it in public.
"READ THE TRANSCRIPTS!" the president tweeted from Davos.
That's the transcript of his phone call in which he asked new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy for "a favor." The Democrats cite that transcript as solid evidence against Mr. Trump, though he repeatedly describes it as "perfect."
The House impeached Mr. Trump last month on a charge of abuse of power for pushing Ukraine to investigate Democratic rival Mr. Biden and his son Hunter Biden as the White House was withholding military aid from Ukraine. Mr. Trump was also impeached on a second charge, of obstruction of Congress, in the House probe.
Mr. Trump's legal team, absent its TV-showcase attorneys, Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr who were not in the chamber, argued that in seeking new evidence the House was bringing a half-baked case.
But Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, one of the House managers and the first woman to argue for the prosecution in a presidential impeachment trial, said the House wasn't asking the Senate to do the job for them. "The House is asking the Senate to do its job, to have a trial," she said. "Have you ever heard of a trial without evidence?''
The White House had instructed officials not to testify in the House inquiry, and refused to turn over witnesses or documents, citing what it says is precedence in defiance of congressional subpoenas.
The ambassadors and national security officials who appeared before the House delivered striking testimonies, highlights of which were displayed on television screens during the Senate proceeding.
Democratic Representative Schiff displayed video of Mr. Trump himself suggesting there should be more witnesses testifying.
One by one, the House managers made the case, drawing on their own life experiences.
Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla., a former police chief, said she never saw anyone take "such extreme steps to hide evidence.'' Rep. Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, seemed to capture senators' attention when he told them he knew the hour was late, but it was morning in Ukraine where soldiers were waking up to fight Russia, depending on U.S. aid.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
No president has ever been removed from office. With its 53-47 Republican majority, the Senate is not expected to mount the two-thirds vote needed for conviction.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.


csmonitor--2020-01-23--Covering impeachment: Senate rules test press duty to inform

“ I don ’ t want this to sound just like reporters whining , ” says Sarah Wire , chair of the Standing Committee of Correspondents on the Hill .
“ We have a responsibility to the American people , to our readers and to viewers , and that ’ s my concern.
” But these individual takes are only each lawmaker ’ s opinion .
They don ’ t give Americans the full picture of this historic trial , however partisan it may be .
Which is why journalists have objected so strenuously to the restrictions imposed on them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the impeachment process , and the behind-the-scenes video strategy fits with today ’ s reality TV ethos .
Many Democratic senators have been sharing their views of the day ’ s events in conversational videos that they post to Twitter , speaking directly to constituents .
“ Yesterday was bananas , ” says Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris of California , in a Twitter video .
In a brief interview later , she explains the videos are meant to “ keep people engaged.
” The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communications .
No cellphones , no talking allowed for senators in the chamber .
Media were confined in roped-off pens at the Senate exits .
The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump started off with a straitjacket of rules , particularly on communications .
No cellphones , no talking allowed for senators in the chamber .
For reporters , no “ walk and talk ” interviews with senators in the hallways .
Instead , the media were to be confined to roped-off pens at the Senate exits .
But like water flowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop lawmakers and media from finding each other , or senators from getting their message out .
“ Any political figure that has something to say will find a way to say it .
If they want the press to find them , they will be found , ” says Mo Elleithee , former communications director for the Democratic National Committee , and now at Georgetown University .
During an afternoon break on Wednesday , at least seven senators stopped to talk with reporters penned behind ropes and stanchions near a Senate exit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minnesota advised her Republican colleagues to “ start acting like a juror ” and allow witnesses in the trial .
Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas declared “ nothing new ” after more than two hours of opening arguments .
The arguments were a “ tour de force !
” responded Minority Leader Charles Schumer , waiting for Senator Cornyn to finish so he could have his say .
The New Yorker made sure to repeat his message in front of television cameras and other media at a stakeout near the Senate basement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ informally with reporters in these locations and elsewhere , as well as holding press conferences and doing television interviews .
Most notably , many are filing daily updates on Twitter , including sharing tips on how they are enduring hours on end of presentations .
Food and drink other than water ( plain or fizzy ) or milk ( originally for health reasons ) are forbidden in the chamber .
Sen. Chris Murphy , a Democrat from Connecticut , joked on Twitter that “ milk is the big news today , ” as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Massachusetts , went for the white stuff .
He also shared an impeachment survival trick : “ During the short breaks , unwrap a few hard candies and put them in your desk drawer .
That way you avoid the noise of unwrapping them when you sneak one mid-trial.
” Many Democrats have been sharing their views of the day ’ s events in brief , conversational videos that they post to Twitter , speaking directly to constituents .
“ It was a long , long day and night last night , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the most endangered Democrat in the Senate , on Wednesday .
“ Yesterday was bananas , ” said Sen. Kamala Harris of California , a Democratic presidential candidate , in another Twitter video .
In a brief interview later , she explains that the videos are meant to “ keep people engaged , and to remind them that they are part of this process ... and what it ’ s really like.
” The video strategy fits with today ’ s reality TV ethos , says Mr. Elleithee , where people want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Senate chamber .
Democrats want voters to be invested in the impeachment process , and they are hoping to speak to a broader electorate that includes independents .
Fewer Republicans have been doing speak-to-camera videos .
But they ’ re still finding ways to get their messages out .
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida has been tweeting out a daily diary of sorts .
“ House began presenting their case over course of 8 hours , ” he wrote Wednesday on Twitter .
“ Offered detailed timeline of the events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testimony of witnesses , supplemented by transcripts & evidence gathered from press & social media .
Will continue tomorrow.
” These individual takes , of course , are only each lawmaker ’ s opinion .
They aren ’ t reported pieces with comments from both sides and relevant context .
They don ’ t give Americans the full picture of this historic trial , however partisan it may be .
Which is why journalists have objected so strenuously to the restrictions imposed on them by the Senate Republican leadership and the sergeant-at-arms .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most accessible reporting spot on government in Washington .
A hard congressional pass allows reporters to roam freely in the corridors of the Capitol and its office buildings .
During the trial , senators can visit a pen – if they choose .
But reporters aren ’ t able to find other viewpoints when they ’ re locked into a few square feet for 30 minutes or an hour during a break .
Lawmakers can jump over the media , but “ what we say has more credibility , I would hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporter Carl Hulse .
“ We ’ re serving a real purpose here , trying to sort out a pretty confusing mess that a lot of people don ’ t understand.
” The restrictions have forced news organizations to adjust , taking more time to try to reach senators by phone and adding reporters to be in more places to try to catch them .
That ’ s doable for a news giant like The New York Times , but it ’ s harder for smaller outlets .
Take the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Daniel Moore .
“ The restrictions make it really difficult , ” he says , preventing him from getting “ anything meaningful ” from either of the senators he covers from the swing state of Pennsylvania – Republican Pat Toomey and Democrat Bob Casey .
As of Day 3 of the trial , Mr. Moore had not been able to reach either senator during a break or on the phone .
Normally , he ’ s got great access , he says , but in this case he has had to rely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senator Toomey , who won his last race by a close margin , has offered up very little .
When swarmed by reporters as he entered the Capitol ’ s internal subway , the senator commented only that the candy in the Senate cloakroom was running low .
Mr. Moore had better success on Thursday , speaking with Senator Casey on a phone press conference for Pennsylvania reporters , and gleaning some insight on Senator Toomey ’ s views from a television interview .
“ I don ’ t want this to sound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sarah Wire , who is chair of the Standing Committee of Correspondents on the Hill .
“ We have a responsibility to the American people , to our readers and to viewers , and that ’ s my concern.
” Still , since the trial started , things have loosened up a bit – both on the Senate floor and with journalists .
Senators are no longer glued to their seats , but are disappearing for a moment ( or quite a bit longer ) .
They ’ re standing or stretching their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They can be seen munching on candy bars and chewing gum .
Some even say they welcome being untethered from their cellphones .
Reporters are seeing fewer instances of Capitol police interrupting interviews mid-conversation , according to Ms. Wire , who writes for the Los Angeles Times .
They ’ re also discovering other places to intercept senators .
“ That ’ s what we do for a living , ” she says .
During the Clinton impeachment , reporters were not allowed on the same floor as the Senate chamber , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the subway cars got started , she explains .
And indeed , during that five-week trial , restrictions on journalists eased .
“ That trial went on for a very long time , ” says Mr. Hulse .
“ It ’ s very hard to sustain that level of red alert .
”

“I don’t want this to sound just like reporters whining,” says Sarah Wire, chair of the Standing Committee of Correspondents on the Hill. “We have a responsibility to the American people, to our readers and to viewers, and that’s my concern.”
But these individual takes are only each lawmaker’s opinion. They don’t give Americans the full picture of this historic trial, however partisan it may be. Which is why journalists have objected so strenuously to the restrictions imposed on them.
Democrats want voters to be invested in the impeachment process, and the behind-the-scenes video strategy fits with today’s reality TV ethos.
The stringent crackdown on reporters covering the impeachment trial is a marked departure from the usual open nature of Capitol Hill. Reporters and politicians are persevering, but how do those limits affect Americans’ understanding of a historical event?
Many Democratic senators have been sharing their views of the day’s events in conversational videos that they post to Twitter, speaking directly to constituents. “Yesterday was bananas,” says Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris of California, in a Twitter video . In a brief interview later, she explains the videos are meant to “keep people engaged.”
The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump started off with a straitjacket of rules on communications. No cellphones, no talking allowed for senators in the chamber. Media were confined in roped-off pens at the Senate exits.
The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump started off with a straitjacket of rules, particularly on communications. No cellphones, no talking allowed for senators in the chamber. For reporters, no “walk and talk” interviews with senators in the hallways. Instead, the media were to be confined to roped-off pens at the Senate exits.
But like water flowing downhill, it’s hard to stop lawmakers and media from finding each other, or senators from getting their message out.
“Any political figure that has something to say will find a way to say it. If they want the press to find them, they will be found,” says Mo Elleithee, former communications director for the Democratic National Committee, and now at Georgetown University.
Why We Wrote This The stringent crackdown on reporters covering the impeachment trial is a marked departure from the usual open nature of Capitol Hill. Reporters and politicians are persevering, but how do those limits affect Americans’ understanding of a historical event?
During an afternoon break on Wednesday, at least seven senators stopped to talk with reporters penned behind ropes and stanchions near a Senate exit. Democratic presidential hopeful Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota advised her Republican colleagues to “start acting like a juror” and allow witnesses in the trial. Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas declared “nothing new” after more than two hours of opening arguments.
The arguments were a “tour de force!” responded Minority Leader Charles Schumer, waiting for Senator Cornyn to finish so he could have his say. The New Yorker made sure to repeat his message in front of television cameras and other media at a stakeout near the Senate basement.
Senators from both sides are talking informally with reporters in these locations and elsewhere, as well as holding press conferences and doing television interviews. Most notably, many are filing daily updates on Twitter, including sharing tips on how they are enduring hours on end of presentations.
Food and drink other than water (plain or fizzy) or milk (originally for health reasons) are forbidden in the chamber. Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, joked on Twitter that “milk is the big news today,” as his seatmate, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, went for the white stuff. He also shared an impeachment survival trick: “During the short breaks, unwrap a few hard candies and put them in your desk drawer. That way you avoid the noise of unwrapping them when you sneak one mid-trial.”
Many Democrats have been sharing their views of the day’s events in brief, conversational videos that they post to Twitter, speaking directly to constituents. “It was a long, long day and night last night,” started out Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama, the most endangered Democrat in the Senate, on Wednesday.
“Yesterday was bananas,” said Sen. Kamala Harris of California, a Democratic presidential candidate, in another Twitter video. In a brief interview later, she explains that the videos are meant to “keep people engaged, and to remind them that they are part of this process ... and what it’s really like.”
The video strategy fits with today’s reality TV ethos, says Mr. Elleithee, where people want to see more than fixed cameras focused on the Senate chamber. Democrats want voters to be invested in the impeachment process, and they are hoping to speak to a broader electorate that includes independents.
Fewer Republicans have been doing speak-to-camera videos. But they’re still finding ways to get their messages out.
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida has been tweeting out a daily diary of sorts. “House began presenting their case over course of 8 hours,” he wrote Wednesday on Twitter. “Offered detailed timeline of the events underpinning their case. We heard recorded testimony of witnesses, supplemented by transcripts & evidence gathered from press & social media. Will continue tomorrow.”
These individual takes, of course, are only each lawmaker’s opinion. They aren’t reported pieces with comments from both sides and relevant context. They don’t give Americans the full picture of this historic trial, however partisan it may be.
Which is why journalists have objected so strenuously to the restrictions imposed on them by the Senate Republican leadership and the sergeant-at-arms.
Under normal circumstances, the Hill is the most accessible reporting spot on government in Washington. A hard congressional pass allows reporters to roam freely in the corridors of the Capitol and its office buildings. During the trial, senators can visit a pen – if they choose. But reporters aren’t able to find other viewpoints when they’re locked into a few square feet for 30 minutes or an hour during a break.
Lawmakers can jump over the media, but “what we say has more credibility, I would hope,” says veteran New York Times reporter Carl Hulse. “We’re serving a real purpose here, trying to sort out a pretty confusing mess that a lot of people don’t understand.”
The restrictions have forced news organizations to adjust, taking more time to try to reach senators by phone and adding reporters to be in more places to try to catch them. That’s doable for a news giant like The New York Times, but it’s harder for smaller outlets.
Take the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. It has one reporter on the Hill, Daniel Moore. “The restrictions make it really difficult,” he says, preventing him from getting “anything meaningful” from either of the senators he covers from the swing state of Pennsylvania – Republican Pat Toomey and Democrat Bob Casey.
As of Day 3 of the trial, Mr. Moore had not been able to reach either senator during a break or on the phone. Normally, he’s got great access, he says, but in this case he has had to rely on the senators’ public comments.
Senator Toomey, who won his last race by a close margin, has offered up very little. When swarmed by reporters as he entered the Capitol’s internal subway, the senator commented only that the candy in the Senate cloakroom was running low.
Mr. Moore had better success on Thursday, speaking with Senator Casey on a phone press conference for Pennsylvania reporters, and gleaning some insight on Senator Toomey’s views from a television interview.
“I don’t want this to sound just like reporters whining,” says Sarah Wire, who is chair of the Standing Committee of Correspondents on the Hill. “We have a responsibility to the American people, to our readers and to viewers, and that’s my concern.”
Still, since the trial started, things have loosened up a bit – both on the Senate floor and with journalists. Senators are no longer glued to their seats, but are disappearing for a moment (or quite a bit longer). They’re standing or stretching their legs at the back of the chamber. They can be seen munching on candy bars and chewing gum. Some even say they welcome being untethered from their cellphones.
Reporters are seeing fewer instances of Capitol police interrupting interviews mid-conversation, according to Ms. Wire, who writes for the Los Angeles Times. They’re also discovering other places to intercept senators.
“That’s what we do for a living,” she says. During the Clinton impeachment, reporters were not allowed on the same floor as the Senate chamber, which is how the underground stakeout by the subway cars got started, she explains. And indeed, during that five-week trial, restrictions on journalists eased.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“That trial went on for a very long time,” says Mr. Hulse. “It’s very hard to sustain that level of red alert.”
Staff writer Timmy Broderick contributed to this story.


csmonitor--2020-01-23--Democrats face challenges in President Trump's impeachment trial

The challenge is becoming increasingly clear for House Democrats prosecuting President Donald Trump 's impeachment case as the Senate convenes for a second day of arguments in the landmark trial .
No matter how overwhelming the evidence confronting Mr. Trump , it becomes less compelling when presented again and again , day after day , as Democrats try to convince not just fidgety senators but an American public deeply divided over the Republican president in an election year .
The team led by Rep. Adam Schiff , the chairman of House Intelligence Committee , constructed a gripping account of Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to cover up the `` corrupt scheme '' central to the charges .
But the limits are apparent .
Prosecutors must rely on the same loops of videotaped testimony – ambassadors , national security officials , and even the president himself – after Mr. Trump 's GOP Senate allies blocked new witnesses .
Democrats were once reluctant to take on impeachment during an election year but are now marching toward a decision by the Senate that the American public will also judge .
`` We 're trying this case to two juries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' Representative Schiff acknowledged Wednesday ahead of opening arguments .
`` The American people are watching .
The American people are listening .
And they do have an open mind . ''
Mr. Trump denounced the proceedings in a Thursday morning tweet , declaring them the `` most unfair & corrupt hearing in Congressional history ! ''
House Democrats impeached Mr. Trump last month , arguing he abused his office by asking Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden while withholding crucial military aid .
They also charged him with obstructing Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow officials to testify in the House probe .
Republicans have defended Mr. Trump 's actions as appropriate and cast the process as a politically motivated effort to weaken the president in the midst of his reelection campaign .
Campaigning in Iowa , Mr. Biden stood by the effort to remove Mr. Trump from office .
`` People ask the question , 'Is n't the president going to be stronger and harder to beat if he survives this ? '
Yes , probably .
But Congress has no choice , '' he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` live with that in history . ''
Each side has 24 hours over three days to present their case .
After the House prosecutors finish Friday , the president 's lawyers will follow .
They are expected to take only Sunday off and push into next week .
Then there will be 16 hours for senators , who must sit quietly at their desks , no speeches or cellphones , to ask written question , and another four hours for deliberations .
`` There 's a lot of things I 'd like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's lawyer , Jay Sekulow , at the Capitol , `` and we will rebut . ''
On the first day of opening arguments , Representative Schiff appealed to senators not to be `` cynical '' about politics , but to draw on the intent of the nation 's Founding Fathers in providing the remedy of impeachment and removal .
He spoke directly to Republicans to join them in voting to oust Mr. Trump from office to `` protect our democracy . ''
Holding the room proved difficult .
Most senators sat at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stipulate , though some stretched their legs , standing behind the desks or against the back wall of the chamber , passing the time .
Sometimes they outwardly yawned .
Republicans quietly smirked at the presentation from Representative Schiff and the lesser-known House Democrats prosecuting the case .
Nearing nine long hours of arguments , the empty seats became glaringly apparent .
Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-Calif. , was under the weather and left early .
Some lawmakers dashed down the hall to appear on television .
Visitors thinned from the galleries , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Capitol police .
The impeachment trial is set against the backdrop of the 2020 election .
All four senators who are Democratic presidential candidates are off the campaign trail , seated as jurors .
Several GOP senators said Wednesday they 'd seen no evidence to support the allegations against Mr. Trump even though , just 24 hours earlier , they had rejected subpoenas for additional witnesses as well as documents .
Democrats , meanwhile , described the evidence against the president as overwhelming but said senators had a duty to gather more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research showed the public slightly more likely to say the Senate should convict and remove Trump from office than to say it should not , 45 % to 40 % .
But a sizable percentage , 14 % , said they did n't know enough to have an opinion .
One issue with wide agreement : Mr. Trump should allow top aides to appear as witnesses at the trial .
About 7 in 10 said so , including majorities of Republicans and Democrats , according to the poll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though , seemed all but settled .
Republicans rejected Democratic efforts to get Mr. Trump 's aides including former national security adviser John Bolton , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo , and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney , to testify in back-to-back votes earlier this week .
Senators were likely to repeat that rejection next week , shutting out any chance of new testimony .
A long-shot idea to pair one of Mr. Trump 's preferred witnesses – Biden 's son Hunter Biden – with Mr. Bolton or another that Democrats want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the table , '' Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer told reporters .
Mr. Biden also rejected having his son testify or even appearing himself .
`` I want no part of that , '' he told voters in Iowa .
Some Republicans expressed disdain for it all .
Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa spoke sarcastically about how excited she was to hear the `` overwhelming evidence '' the House Democrats promised against Mr. Trump .
`` And once we 've heard that overwhelming evidence , '' she said , raising her voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we 'll need to see additional witnesses , but let 's hear about that overwhelming evidence . ''
Senator Schumer bemoaned the limits on witnesses , saying Wednesday the impeachment trial `` begins with a cloud hanging over it , a cloud of unfairness . ''
Republicans remained eager for a swift trial .
Yet Mr. Trump 's legal team passed on an opportunity to file a motion to dismiss the case on Wednesday , an acknowledgment that there were not enough Republican votes to support it .
The White House legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presentations , has not disputed Mr. Trump 's actions .
But the lawyers insist the president did nothing wrong .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .

Lisa Mascaro, Eric Tucker, and Zeke Miller

The challenge is becoming increasingly clear for House Democrats prosecuting President Donald Trump's impeachment case as the Senate convenes for a second day of arguments in the landmark trial.
No matter how overwhelming the evidence confronting Mr. Trump, it becomes less compelling when presented again and again, day after day, as Democrats try to convince not just fidgety senators but an American public deeply divided over the Republican president in an election year.
The team led by Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of House Intelligence Committee, constructed a gripping account of Mr. Trump's political pressure on Ukraine and attempt to cover up the "corrupt scheme" central to the charges. But the limits are apparent.
Prosecutors must rely on the same loops of videotaped testimony – ambassadors, national security officials, and even the president himself – after Mr. Trump's GOP Senate allies blocked new witnesses.
Democrats were once reluctant to take on impeachment during an election year but are now marching toward a decision by the Senate that the American public will also judge.
"We're trying this case to two juries – the Senate and the American people," Representative Schiff acknowledged Wednesday ahead of opening arguments. "The American people are watching. The American people are listening. And they do have an open mind."
Mr. Trump denounced the proceedings in a Thursday morning tweet, declaring them the "most unfair & corrupt hearing in Congressional history!"
House Democrats impeached Mr. Trump last month, arguing he abused his office by asking Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden while withholding crucial military aid. They also charged him with obstructing Congress by refusing to turn over documents or allow officials to testify in the House probe. Republicans have defended Mr. Trump's actions as appropriate and cast the process as a politically motivated effort to weaken the president in the midst of his reelection campaign.
Campaigning in Iowa, Mr. Biden stood by the effort to remove Mr. Trump from office.
"People ask the question, 'Isn't the president going to be stronger and harder to beat if he survives this?' Yes, probably. But Congress has no choice," he said. Senators must cast their votes and "live with that in history."
Each side has 24 hours over three days to present their case. After the House prosecutors finish Friday, the president's lawyers will follow. They are expected to take only Sunday off and push into next week.
Then there will be 16 hours for senators, who must sit quietly at their desks, no speeches or cellphones, to ask written question, and another four hours for deliberations.
"There's a lot of things I'd like to rebut," said Mr. Trump's lawyer, Jay Sekulow, at the Capitol, "and we will rebut."
On the first day of opening arguments, Representative Schiff appealed to senators not to be "cynical" about politics, but to draw on the intent of the nation's Founding Fathers in providing the remedy of impeachment and removal. He spoke directly to Republicans to join them in voting to oust Mr. Trump from office to "protect our democracy."
Holding the room proved difficult. Most senators sat at their desks throughout, as the rules stipulate, though some stretched their legs, standing behind the desks or against the back wall of the chamber, passing the time. Sometimes they outwardly yawned.
Republicans quietly smirked at the presentation from Representative Schiff and the lesser-known House Democrats prosecuting the case.
Nearing nine long hours of arguments, the empty seats became glaringly apparent. Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-Calif., was under the weather and left early. Some lawmakers dashed down the hall to appear on television. Visitors thinned from the galleries, one briefly interrupting in protest and being removed by Capitol police.
The impeachment trial is set against the backdrop of the 2020 election. All four senators who are Democratic presidential candidates are off the campaign trail, seated as jurors.
Several GOP senators said Wednesday they'd seen no evidence to support the allegations against Mr. Trump even though, just 24 hours earlier, they had rejected subpoenas for additional witnesses as well as documents. Democrats, meanwhile, described the evidence against the president as overwhelming but said senators had a duty to gather more.
A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research showed the public slightly more likely to say the Senate should convict and remove Trump from office than to say it should not, 45% to 40%. But a sizable percentage, 14%, said they didn't know enough to have an opinion.
One issue with wide agreement: Mr. Trump should allow top aides to appear as witnesses at the trial. About 7 in 10 said so, including majorities of Republicans and Democrats, according to the poll.
The strategy of more witnesses, though, seemed all but settled. Republicans rejected Democratic efforts to get Mr. Trump's aides including former national security adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, to testify in back-to-back votes earlier this week.
Senators were likely to repeat that rejection next week, shutting out any chance of new testimony.
A long-shot idea to pair one of Mr. Trump's preferred witnesses – Biden's son Hunter Biden – with Mr. Bolton or another that Democrats want was swiftly rejected. "That's off the table," Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer told reporters.
Mr. Biden also rejected having his son testify or even appearing himself. "I want no part of that," he told voters in Iowa.
Some Republicans expressed disdain for it all. Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa spoke sarcastically about how excited she was to hear the "overwhelming evidence" the House Democrats promised against Mr. Trump.
"And once we've heard that overwhelming evidence," she said, raising her voice mockingly, "I don't know that we'll need to see additional witnesses, but let's hear about that overwhelming evidence."
Senator Schumer bemoaned the limits on witnesses, saying Wednesday the impeachment trial "begins with a cloud hanging over it, a cloud of unfairness."
Republicans remained eager for a swift trial. Yet Mr. Trump's legal team passed on an opportunity to file a motion to dismiss the case on Wednesday, an acknowledgment that there were not enough Republican votes to support it.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The White House legal team, in its court filings and presentations, has not disputed Mr. Trump's actions. But the lawyers insist the president did nothing wrong.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.


csmonitor--2020-01-24--Trump makes a 'big deal' move joining anti-abortion rally

President Donald Trump called it his “ profound honor '' on Friday to be the first president to attend the annual anti-abortion gathering in Washington called the March for Life .
He used his speech to attack Democrats as embracing “ radical and extreme positions '' on abortion and praised those attending the event , saying they were motivated by “ pure , unselfish love . ''
He also recited actions he 's taken as president that were sought by social conservatives , including the confirmation of 187 federal judges .
“ Unborn children have never had a stronger defender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declared .
Trump once declared in a 1999 interview that “ I am pro-choice in every respect . ''
Now , as he heads into the 2020 election , Trump continues to reach out to the white evangelical voters who have proven to be among his most loyal backers .
“ Every life brings love into this world .
Every child brings joy to a family .
Every person is worth protecting , '' Mr. Trump said , prompting loud cheers from the many thousands attending the march .
Mr. Trump is counting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative activists to help bring him across the finish line .
`` I think it 's a brilliant move , '' said Ralph Reed , chair of the Faith and Freedom Coalition and one of Mr. Trump 's most prominent evangelical supporters .
Mr. Reed said the president 's appearance would `` energize and remind pro-life voters what a great friend this president and administration [ have ] been . ''
It also shows how much the times have changed .
Past presidents who opposed abortion , including Ronald Reagan and George W. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the march to avoid being too closely associated with demonstrators eager to outlaw the procedure .
They sent remarks for others to deliver , spoke via telephone hookup , or invited organizers to visit the White House .
Over the last 10 years , however , the Republican Party has undergone a `` revolution , '' displaying a new willingness to `` embrace the issue as not only being morally right but politically smart , '' said Mallory Quigley , a spokeswoman for the Susan B. Anthony List and Women Speak Out PAC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 52 million this cycle to help elect candidates opposed to abortion rights .
Its president , Marjorie Dannenfelser , will serve as national co-chair of a new campaign coalition , `` Pro-life Voices for Trump . ''
According to Pew Research Center polling in 2019 , roughly 6 in 10 Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases .
Over time , though , both the Republican and Democratic parties have taken harder-line positions for and against abortion rights .
`` There used to be a middle in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alienate the middle , '' said Ari Fleischer , who served as White House press secretary under President George W. Bush .
`` And it just seems that that is over and that both parties play to their bases to get maximum turnout from their base . ''
In addition , Mr. Flesicher said , Mr. Trump is far less tethered to tradition than past presidents and `` happy to go where his predecessors have n't . ''
During his first three years in office , Mr. Trump has embraced socially conservative policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He 's appointing judges who oppose abortion , cutting taxpayer funding for abortion services , and painting Democrats who support abortion rights as extreme in their views .
`` President Trump has done more for the pro-life community than any other president , so it is fitting that he would be the first president in history to attend the March for Life on the National Mall , '' said White House spokesman Judd Deere .
This is not the first time Mr. Trump has given serious consideration to an appearance .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came close to attending , according to a person familiar with the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning .
But the trip never came together because of concerns about security so Mr. Trump joined the event via video satellite from the White House Rose Garden instead .
Mr. Trump 's thinking on the matter was simple : If he supported the cause , `` why would n't he show up to their big event ? ''
said Matt Schlapp , chair of the American Conservative Union and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He said the appearance would be deeply significant for those in participants .
`` I 've had people be moved to tears over the fact that he 's going , '' said Mr. Schlapp .
`` It 's a big deal . ''
While Mr. Schlapp said he did n't think Mr. Trump 's decision to attend was driven by election-year politics , he said it was nonetheless a `` smart move politically '' as well as `` the right move morally . ''
`` It will cement even tighter the relationship that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , '' Mr. Schlapp said .
During his video address last year , Mr. Trump sent a clear message to the thousands of people braving the cold on the National Mall .
`` As president , I will always defend the first right in our Declaration of Independence , the right to life , '' he said .
The rhetoric underscored Mr. Trump 's dramatic evolution on the issue from his days as a freewheeling New York deal-maker , when he described himself as `` very pro-choice '' in a 1999 interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
During his 2016 campaign for the Republican nomination , Mr. Trump said his views had changed and that he was now opposed to abortion , but for three exceptions : In the case of rape , incest , and when the life of the mother is at risk .
Yet Mr. Trump 's unfamiliarity with the language of abortion activism was clear , including when he offered a bungled response during a televised town hall and was forced to clarify his position on abortion three times in a single day .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ if abortion were outlawed , Mr. Trump said there would have to `` be some form of punishment '' for women who have them , prompting a backlash that managed to unite abortion rights activists and opponents , including organizers of the March for Life .
Asked to clarify his position , Mr. Trump 's campaign initially issued a statement saying he believed the issue should rest with state governments .
He later issued a second statement that said doctors , not women , should be punished for illegal abortions .
Since that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – to the shock of many – become a darling of the anti-abortion movement .
`` These voters who are pro-life love Donald Trump and they will crawl across broken glass to get him re-elected , '' said Mr. Reed , who expressed amazement at the transformation .
`` Whatever you think of this president , there is no question that both at a policy level and politically , he has masterfully capitalized on his pro-life position in a way I think no one could have envisioned four years ago , '' Critics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump of using the march to try to distract from his impeachment trial in the Senate .
Ilyse Hogue , president of NARAL Pro-Choice America , called it `` an act of desperation , plain and simple , '' and accused Mr. Trump of taking `` refuge in his ability to whip up a radical anti-choice base , spewing falsehoods when he feels threatened . ''
Alexis McGill Johnson , acting president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund , accused the president of carrying out `` a full-out assault on our health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stands with the small number of Americans who want politicians to interfere with their personal health decisions , we 'll be standing with the nearly 80 percent of Americans who support abortion access , '' she said .
Views of abortion have remained relatively stable over two decades of polling , and it 's a minority of Americans who hold extreme opinions – that abortion should be legal or illegal in all cases .
But polling does suggest a widening partisan gap on the question of support for abortion rights in all or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on both sides of the aisle further into their extreme positions .
The first march took place on the west steps of the Capitol in January 1974 , the year after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade , the landmark ruling that established a woman 's legal right to abortion .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP writer , Hannah Fingerhut , contributed to this report from Washington .

President Donald Trump called it his “profound honor" on Friday to be the first president to attend the annual anti-abortion gathering in Washington called the March for Life.
He used his speech to attack Democrats as embracing “radical and extreme positions" on abortion and praised those attending the event, saying they were motivated by “pure, unselfish love." He also recited actions he's taken as president that were sought by social conservatives, including the confirmation of 187 federal judges.
“Unborn children have never had a stronger defender in the White House," he declared.
Trump once declared in a 1999 interview that “I am pro-choice in every respect." Now, as he heads into the 2020 election, Trump continues to reach out to the white evangelical voters who have proven to be among his most loyal backers.
“Every life brings love into this world. Every child brings joy to a family. Every person is worth protecting," Mr. Trump said, prompting loud cheers from the many thousands attending the march.
Mr. Trump is counting on the support of his base of conservative activists to help bring him across the finish line.
"I think it's a brilliant move," said Ralph Reed, chair of the Faith and Freedom Coalition and one of Mr. Trump's most prominent evangelical supporters. Mr. Reed said the president's appearance would "energize and remind pro-life voters what a great friend this president and administration [have] been."
It also shows how much the times have changed.
Past presidents who opposed abortion, including Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, steered clear of personally attending the march to avoid being too closely associated with demonstrators eager to outlaw the procedure. They sent remarks for others to deliver, spoke via telephone hookup, or invited organizers to visit the White House.
Over the last 10 years, however, the Republican Party has undergone a "revolution," displaying a new willingness to "embrace the issue as not only being morally right but politically smart," said Mallory Quigley, a spokeswoman for the Susan B. Anthony List and Women Speak Out PAC. The group is planning to spend $52 million this cycle to help elect candidates opposed to abortion rights. Its president, Marjorie Dannenfelser, will serve as national co-chair of a new campaign coalition, "Pro-life Voices for Trump."
According to Pew Research Center polling in 2019, roughly 6 in 10 Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
Over time, though, both the Republican and Democratic parties have taken harder-line positions for and against abortion rights.
"There used to be a middle in this country and candidates would not want to alienate the middle," said Ari Fleischer, who served as White House press secretary under President George W. Bush. "And it just seems that that is over and that both parties play to their bases to get maximum turnout from their base."
In addition, Mr. Flesicher said, Mr. Trump is far less tethered to tradition than past presidents and "happy to go where his predecessors haven't."
During his first three years in office, Mr. Trump has embraced socially conservative policies, particularly on the issue of abortion. He's appointing judges who oppose abortion, cutting taxpayer funding for abortion services, and painting Democrats who support abortion rights as extreme in their views.
"President Trump has done more for the pro-life community than any other president, so it is fitting that he would be the first president in history to attend the March for Life on the National Mall," said White House spokesman Judd Deere.
This is not the first time Mr. Trump has given serious consideration to an appearance. Last year, he wanted to go and came close to attending, according to a person familiar with the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning. But the trip never came together because of concerns about security so Mr. Trump joined the event via video satellite from the White House Rose Garden instead.
Mr. Trump's thinking on the matter was simple: If he supported the cause, "why wouldn't he show up to their big event?" said Matt Schlapp, chair of the American Conservative Union and a close ally of the White House. He said the appearance would be deeply significant for those in participants.
"I've had people be moved to tears over the fact that he's going," said Mr. Schlapp. "It's a big deal."
While Mr. Schlapp said he didn't think Mr. Trump's decision to attend was driven by election-year politics, he said it was nonetheless a "smart move politically" as well as "the right move morally."
"It will cement even tighter the relationship that he has with conservative activists across the country," Mr. Schlapp said.
During his video address last year, Mr. Trump sent a clear message to the thousands of people braving the cold on the National Mall. "As president, I will always defend the first right in our Declaration of Independence, the right to life," he said.
The rhetoric underscored Mr. Trump's dramatic evolution on the issue from his days as a freewheeling New York deal-maker, when he described himself as "very pro-choice" in a 1999 interview on NBC's "Meet the Press."
During his 2016 campaign for the Republican nomination, Mr. Trump said his views had changed and that he was now opposed to abortion, but for three exceptions: In the case of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is at risk.
Yet Mr. Trump's unfamiliarity with the language of abortion activism was clear, including when he offered a bungled response during a televised town hall and was forced to clarify his position on abortion three times in a single day.
Asked, hypothetically, what would happen if abortion were outlawed, Mr. Trump said there would have to "be some form of punishment" for women who have them, prompting a backlash that managed to unite abortion rights activists and opponents, including organizers of the March for Life.
Asked to clarify his position, Mr. Trump's campaign initially issued a statement saying he believed the issue should rest with state governments. He later issued a second statement that said doctors, not women, should be punished for illegal abortions.
Since that time, however, Mr. Trump has – to the shock of many – become a darling of the anti-abortion movement.
"These voters who are pro-life love Donald Trump and they will crawl across broken glass to get him re-elected," said Mr. Reed, who expressed amazement at the transformation. "Whatever you think of this president, there is no question that both at a policy level and politically, he has masterfully capitalized on his pro-life position in a way I think no one could have envisioned four years ago,"
Critics, for their part, accuse Mr. Trump of using the march to try to distract from his impeachment trial in the Senate.
Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, called it "an act of desperation, plain and simple," and accused Mr. Trump of taking "refuge in his ability to whip up a radical anti-choice base, spewing falsehoods when he feels threatened."
Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, accused the president of carrying out "a full-out assault on our health and our rights."
"While Trump stands with the small number of Americans who want politicians to interfere with their personal health decisions, we'll be standing with the nearly 80 percent of Americans who support abortion access," she said.
Views of abortion have remained relatively stable over two decades of polling, and it's a minority of Americans who hold extreme opinions – that abortion should be legal or illegal in all cases. But polling does suggest a widening partisan gap on the question of support for abortion rights in all or most cases, along with some movement on both sides of the aisle further into their extreme positions.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The first march took place on the west steps of the Capitol in January 1974, the year after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that established a woman's legal right to abortion.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writer, Hannah Fingerhut, contributed to this report from Washington.