usatoday--2020-01-30--California's polarizing housing bill SB 50 has died in the state Senate

California ’ s controversial housing bill , which would have required cities and counties to change local zoning laws to allow for new , denser housing near job centers and public transportation , died in the state Senate Thursday morning , four votes shy of the support needed to advance the legislation to the Assembly .
The measure has deeply divided stakeholders for more than a year , and lively debate on the Senate floor before an initial vote was taken on Wednesday stretched to two hours .
The bill was narrowly defeated 18-15 on Wednesday afternoon , with six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader Shannon Grove , R-Bakersfield , who was in Washington , D.C .
It was re-introduced Thursday morning in a final effort to get the bill through before the Jan. 31 deadline , but still failed .
In California ?
: All the news on all things Golden State delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here Introduced in December 2018 , the bill has failed to pass in the Senate in the past two legislative sessions despite lengthy discussion .
It aimed to address California ’ s severe housing shortage that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creating a financial crunch for many residents and contributing to urban sprawl that clogs freeways with commuters who live far from their workplaces , according to Sen. Scott Wiener , D-San Francisco , who authored the bill .
He argues that local zoning laws are undermining the state ’ s efforts to address the issue .
More : In California : Residents are fleeing the Golden State as cost of living continues to climb Weiner blamed misinformation campaigns for some of the pushback on the bill .
He acknowledged , however , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and asked his fellow lawmakers to approve it so the Assembly could continue that work .
“ When it comes to housing in California we can no longer afford our broken status quo , ” he said on the Senate floor on Wednesday .
“ We have done some amazing work in this body , and I applaud that ” he added , “ but our work is not done.
” California ’ s housing crisis has deepened in recent years , despite efforts at all levels of government to combat rising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third of Californians devote more than 50 % of their paychecks to housing and the state is short roughly 3.4 million affordable units according to a report from the California Housing Consortium .
The crunch is also a major contributor to homelessness across the state .
California has nearly a quarter of the nation ’ s homeless and the numbers are increasing .
An estimate of homelessness across the country showed a 2.7 % increase last year , a rise that Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson blamed on California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unhoused go up more than 16 % in 2019 .
California Gov .
Gavin Newsom set a goal to build 3.5 million new homes by 2025 , and analysts say roughly half a million new units will need to be built per year to reach that goal .
Last year , 111,000 new building permits were approved by local governments , 6,000 less than in 2018 .
Newsom had not endorsed the bill but told reporters he was working with lawmakers to get it through .
“ We are not giving up , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aggressively to address production in this state , ” he said on Wednesday before the vote .
The legislation took aim at restrictive zoning and would have required counties with more than 600,000 residents to approve permits for more construction of multi-story housing and streamline the approval process for apartment buildings in neighborhoods near public transportation .
It would have required local governments to approve four-story buildings within half-mile of transit and five-story buildings within a quarter-mile .
SB 50 also would give the state more power to curb local parking requirements in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more building in high-income areas .
Smaller cities , with less than 50,000 people , would have to add up to 15 extra feet of height to their permits , essentially adding an extra floor of housing , in areas within half-mile from transit .
The bill was endorsed by a diverse group of advocates , including pro-housing organization California YIMBY , the California Labor Federation , and the California Chamber of Commerce .
The bill also garnered support from environmental organizations , including Natural Resources Defense Council and California PIRG , because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pollution that comes from long driving commutes .
Critics of the bill were equally diverse as advocates and just as vociferous .
Some raised concerns over the loss of local control for the city and county planners , who they say know the needs of their communities best .
Boards of Supervisors across the state were against the measure , along with dozens of city governments and the League of California Cities , an association of city officials .
Suburban dwellers , who argued for their right to preserve single-family homes , were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislation , who fiercely opposed the bill over fears that it would only lead to more gentrification .
More : How would California 's proposal to rezone single-family homes affect the Inland Empire ?
The California Senate Appropriations Committee Chair , Sen. Anthony Portantino , D-La Cañada Flintridge , who opposed the bill , was pivotal to blocking its advancement last year , holding it in his committee .
It was given new life when Sen.Toni Atkins , D-San Diego , pulled it into the rules committee in January , so it could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the deadline at the end of the month .
“ While many communities still have clear concerns about SB 50 , our affordable housing crisis demands we make every attempt to reach agreement on potential solutions , ” she said in a statement released on Jan. 17 , emphasizing that she wanted the conversations to continue .
“ I hope the additional time afforded by this action contributes to the ongoing efforts being made by Senator Wiener , housing advocates , and community leaders.
” Wiener embarked on an outreach effort over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to attempt to assuage their fears .
As a result , new amendments were introduced at the beginning of this year , allowing more time for communities to make the changes and an offer that cities and counties could propose alternative plans as long as those plans would boost density to the same level as SB 50 .
It also allowed for a five-year delay for “ sensitive communities ” considered most at-risk of gentrification .
“ It is an additive bill — it is not about replacing existing communities , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hyperbolic .
He contended that it has the strongest tenant and anti-demolition protections under state law .
The legislation , he said , still allows for local design standards , defers to local height limits , and has an affordability provision to encourage low-income housing development .
“ We are not all the way there yet on this bill , but we will get there , ” he said .
“ Voters want us to act .
They want us to take bold action .
They want us to stop the pain.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be scrapped to give lawmakers more time to iron out remaining issues .
“ There are compelling reasons why we need to address this deep and urgent crisis , ” said Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg , D-Van Nuys , adding that “ getting it right is just as urgent.
” He urged a no vote .
Sen. Henry Stern , D-Calabasas , echoed Hertzberg ’ s arguments saying that there was a “ fair amount of unity on that we are in a crisis.
” But , he added , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to meet the challenge of those crises that we have to create new ones.
” Stern ’ s home was lost during the Woolsey Fire that tore through Los Angeles and Ventura counties in 2018 , and he said the bill would lead to more homes being built in fire-prone areas .
Others opposed the bill , saying that more work was needed .
“ Housing policy is not neat or clean , ” said Sen. Holly Mitchell , D-Los Angeles , referring to historic racism and class issues baked into policies .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ core fear , ” she said , adding that she was heeding her constituents ' wishes .
For all the senators that rose against the bill , they were met in nearly equal numbers by those speaking in favor of it during debate on the Senate floor .
Sen. Brian Dahle , R-Bieber , spoke about his experience as a farmer and how rural areas are being affected by the sprawl spilling out of cities .
“ I think there are better places to build than on our fertile soils and where we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
“ This bill I think makes sense , ” he added .
“ Get this bill out of this house and into the other house and let ’ s build some homes.
” While the bill still died despite a hail-Mary attempt to call a follow-up vote on Thursday morning , senators promised that the work is n't finished .
Calling SB 50 the `` highest-profile legislation '' she could remember in a long time , Atkins called for all to come to the table with a compromise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ forward right now , but the status quo can not stand , '' she said vowing that a housing bill will happen this year .
`` This is not the end of this story . ''
Gabrielle Canon is a California Reporter based in Sacramento .
You can email her at gcanon @ gannett.com or follower on Twitter @ GabrielleCanon .

California's polarizing housing bill SB 50 has died in the state Senate
Show Caption Hide Caption Highest rents in the U.S. Nine of the ten highest-rent cities in the U.S. are in California. USA TODAY
California’s controversial housing bill, which would have required cities and counties to change local zoning laws to allow for new, denser housing near job centers and public transportation, died in the state Senate Thursday morning, four votes shy of the support needed to advance the legislation to the Assembly.
The measure has deeply divided stakeholders for more than a year, and lively debate on the Senate floor before an initial vote was taken on Wednesday stretched to two hours. The bill was narrowly defeated 18-15 on Wednesday afternoon, with six senators declining to vote, including Republican leader Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, who was in Washington, D.C. It was re-introduced Thursday morning in a final effort to get the bill through before the Jan. 31 deadline, but still failed.
In California?: All the news on all things Golden State delivered to your inbox. Sign up here
Introduced in December 2018, the bill has failed to pass in the Senate in the past two legislative sessions despite lengthy discussion. It aimed to address California’s severe housing shortage that is driving increases in homelessness in the state, creating a financial crunch for many residents and contributing to urban sprawl that clogs freeways with commuters who live far from their workplaces, according to Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, who authored the bill. He argues that local zoning laws are undermining the state’s efforts to address the issue.
More: In California: Residents are fleeing the Golden State as cost of living continues to climb
Weiner blamed misinformation campaigns for some of the pushback on the bill. He acknowledged, however, that more work is needed on SB 50, and asked his fellow lawmakers to approve it so the Assembly could continue that work.
“When it comes to housing in California we can no longer afford our broken status quo,” he said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “We have done some amazing work in this body, and I applaud that” he added, “but our work is not done.”
Solutions needed to address the housing crisis
California’s housing crisis has deepened in recent years, despite efforts at all levels of government to combat rising rents and statewide shortages. Nearly a third of Californians devote more than 50% of their paychecks to housing and the state is short roughly 3.4 million affordable units according to a report from the California Housing Consortium.
The crunch is also a major contributor to homelessness across the state. California has nearly a quarter of the nation’s homeless and the numbers are increasing. An estimate of homelessness across the country showed a 2.7% increase last year, a rise that Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson blamed on California. The state saw its numbers of unhoused go up more than 16% in 2019.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom set a goal to build 3.5 million new homes by 2025, and analysts say roughly half a million new units will need to be built per year to reach that goal. Last year, 111,000 new building permits were approved by local governments, 6,000 less than in 2018.
Newsom had not endorsed the bill but told reporters he was working with lawmakers to get it through.
“We are not giving up, we are going to continue to work aggressively to address production in this state,” he said on Wednesday before the vote.
The legislation took aim at restrictive zoning and would have required counties with more than 600,000 residents to approve permits for more construction of multi-story housing and streamline the approval process for apartment buildings in neighborhoods near public transportation.
It would have required local governments to approve four-story buildings within half-mile of transit and five-story buildings within a quarter-mile. SB 50 also would give the state more power to curb local parking requirements in favor of more housing, and enable more building in high-income areas. Smaller cities, with less than 50,000 people, would have to add up to 15 extra feet of height to their permits, essentially adding an extra floor of housing, in areas within half-mile from transit.
The bill was endorsed by a diverse group of advocates, including pro-housing organization California YIMBY, the California Labor Federation, and the California Chamber of Commerce. The bill also garnered support from environmental organizations, including Natural Resources Defense Council and California PIRG, because of its potential to reduce the carbon pollution that comes from long driving commutes.
Critics of the bill were equally diverse as advocates and just as vociferous. Some raised concerns over the loss of local control for the city and county planners, who they say know the needs of their communities best. Boards of Supervisors across the state were against the measure, along with dozens of city governments and the League of California Cities, an association of city officials. Suburban dwellers, who argued for their right to preserve single-family homes, were aligned with tenant protection organizations against the legislation, who fiercely opposed the bill over fears that it would only lead to more gentrification.
More: How would California's proposal to rezone single-family homes affect the Inland Empire?
The California Senate Appropriations Committee Chair, Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge, who opposed the bill, was pivotal to blocking its advancement last year, holding it in his committee. It was given new life when Sen.Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, pulled it into the rules committee in January, so it could reach the Senate floor for a vote before the deadline at the end of the month.
“While many communities still have clear concerns about SB 50, our affordable housing crisis demands we make every attempt to reach agreement on potential solutions,” she said in a statement released on Jan. 17, emphasizing that she wanted the conversations to continue. “I hope the additional time afforded by this action contributes to the ongoing efforts being made by Senator Wiener, housing advocates, and community leaders.”
Amendments failed to appease critics concerns
Wiener embarked on an outreach effort over the last year to meet with opponents to attempt to assuage their fears. As a result, new amendments were introduced at the beginning of this year, allowing more time for communities to make the changes and an offer that cities and counties could propose alternative plans as long as those plans would boost density to the same level as SB 50. It also allowed for a five-year delay for “sensitive communities” considered most at-risk of gentrification.
“It is an additive bill — it is not about replacing existing communities,” he said, arguing against claims he called hyperbolic. He contended that it has the strongest tenant and anti-demolition protections under state law. The legislation, he said, still allows for local design standards, defers to local height limits, and has an affordability provision to encourage low-income housing development.
“We are not all the way there yet on this bill, but we will get there,” he said. “Voters want us to act. They want us to take bold action. They want us to stop the pain.”
Still, senators argued that the bill should be scrapped to give lawmakers more time to iron out remaining issues.
“There are compelling reasons why we need to address this deep and urgent crisis,” said Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, adding that “getting it right is just as urgent.” He urged a no vote.
Sen. Henry Stern, D-Calabasas, echoed Hertzberg’s arguments saying that there was a “fair amount of unity on that we are in a crisis.” But, he added, “I do not believe that in order to meet the challenge of those crises that we have to create new ones.” Stern’s home was lost during the Woolsey Fire that tore through Los Angeles and Ventura counties in 2018, and he said the bill would lead to more homes being built in fire-prone areas.
Others opposed the bill, saying that more work was needed.
“Housing policy is not neat or clean,” said Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, referring to historic racism and class issues baked into policies. “The issue of gentrification is a core fear,” she said, adding that she was heeding her constituents' wishes.
For all the senators that rose against the bill, they were met in nearly equal numbers by those speaking in favor of it during debate on the Senate floor. Sen. Brian Dahle, R-Bieber, spoke about his experience as a farmer and how rural areas are being affected by the sprawl spilling out of cities.
“I think there are better places to build than on our fertile soils and where we have water to grow our crops,” he said. “This bill I think makes sense,” he added. “Get this bill out of this house and into the other house and let’s build some homes.”
While the bill still died despite a hail-Mary attempt to call a follow-up vote on Thursday morning, senators promised that the work isn't finished.
Calling SB 50 the "highest-profile legislation" she could remember in a long time, Atkins called for all to come to the table with a compromise.
"SB 50 might not be coming forward right now, but the status quo cannot stand," she said vowing that a housing bill will happen this year. "This is not the end of this story."
Gabrielle Canon is a California Reporter based in Sacramento. You can email her at gcanon@gannett.com or follower on Twitter @GabrielleCanon.


usatoday--2020-01-30--Grand jury hearing evidence in potential serial killer case at West Virginia VA hospital

Federal prosecutors have convened a grand jury to hear evidence in the case of a potential serial killer at a Veterans Affairs hospital in Clarksburg , West Virginia , according to an individual briefed on the case .
Investigators believe someone improperly injected 10 elderly veterans with fatal doses of insulin in 2017 and 2018 .
All were patients in the same ward and suffered severely low blood sugar before they died .
A hospital employee was fired , but no one has been charged .
The individual briefed on the case spoke on condition of anonymity because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The convening of a grand jury , first reported by The Washington Post , signals the investigation is ratcheting up after 18 months .
The case drew the interest of U.S. Attorney General William Barr in August , when it became public that two of the deaths had been ruled homicides .
“ Attorney General Barr reached out to my office a few months ago for an update on this matter , ” said Bill Powell , the chief federal prosecutor in northern West Virginia , in a written statement .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the VA 's inspector general .
Barr “ offered all the resources necessary for the investigation and I am grateful for his support , '' Powell said .
A person familiar with the matter who is not authorized to comment publicly said Barr was drawn by the scope of the investigation and its “ horrific ” nature .
Investigators have told family members they believe the assailant targeted elderly veterans .
Suspicious deaths : What we know about veterans who died at the Clarksburg VA A lawyer for several families of the victims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are “ very pleased ” that a grand jury has been convened .
“ It has been a long time coming , ” he said .
His clients include the daughter of Felix Kirk McDermott , 82 , one of three veterans who died in April 2018 after suffering unexplained severe low blood sugar .
McDermott and a veteran who died the next day , George Nelson Shaw , 81 , were not diabetic .
Insulin is used by diabetics to keep blood sugar levels in check , but it can be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : 'This could take months' William “ Bill ” Ihlenfeld , who preceded Powell as U.S. attorney , said a special grand jury probably had been convened , given the number of victims and volume of evidence to be gathered .
Federal grand juries in the district typically meet one day every two months for a year to consider cases of virtually every stripe , said Ihlenfeld , now a West Virginia state senator .
Special panels often meet more frequently , even several times a week , to focus exclusively on one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a grand jury that will meet on Tuesday , followed by the announcement of an indictment on Thursday , ” Ihlenfeld said .
“ This could take months .
“ More than likely , you ’ ll have staff from the hospital , FBI agents and voluminous medical records to review for each and every victim .
This could be classified as a death penalty case , so they ( prosecutors ) will need to get it right .
This will take time.
” Ihlenfeld said Barr ’ s interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years as U.S. attorney in the Obama administration , he said , he was never asked to brief the attorney general on a case .
But he acknowledged the case is unusual , too , and it 's in one the smallest federal districts in the country .
“ This is happening to veterans , who have always represented a special class of people , and it has brought political pressure from Sen. ( Joe ) Manchin , ” Ihlenfeld said .
Manchin , D-W.Va. , introduced legislation in December that requires the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken to improve patient safety at its hospitals and prevent similar deaths in the future .
The bill passed the Senate and is pending in the House .
“ I ’ ve been calling on DOJ and VA OIG to complete this investigation because the victim ’ s family members and veterans across West Virginia deserve answers , ” Manchin said in a statement .
“ I ’ m encouraged to see some forward momentum.
” 'National tragedy ' : Surveillance , staffing under review after deaths at VA hospital Lawyer for families @ @ @ @ @ @ @ O'Dell , the lawyer for several of the families , said that while he welcomes the developments in the case , his clients want more information from the VA about what happened .
“ Unfortunately , the VA has not provided any answers or evidence of accountability for those within the VA that allowed this nightmare to go on for as long as it did , ” O ’ Dell said .
“ It is long overdue.
” USA TODAY reported in October that hospital staff missed opportunities to figure out what was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' lives and limited evidence in the probe.The hospital did n't adequately track insulin , and there were no surveillance cameras on the ward , according to employees .
By the time hospital officials notified authorities in June 2018 , at least eight patients had died under suspicious circumstances .
Several had been embalmed and buried , destroying potential evidence .
One veteran had been cremated .
Months after McDermott and Shaw died , investigators had their bodies exhumed .
A military medical examiner detected injection sites and evidence of insulin .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , spokesman for the Clarksburg VA hospital , said in a statement Thursday that hospital staff detected the suspicious deaths .
`` Clarksburg also fired the individual at the center of them , '' he said .
The hospital notified VA headquarters , which tipped off the VA inspector general .
Officials at the VA , from Walls up to the secretary of the agency , have criticized the inspector general 's office for taking so long to investigate the deaths .
Asked to comment Thursday , a spokesman for the VA Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued in August saying the office was investigating the deaths but could n't comment further .
Powell , the U.S. attorney , said the investigation is `` ongoing and active.
” “ We have made this case a priority from the beginning , '' he said , `` and will continue to do so . ''

Donovan Slack and Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY

Grand jury hearing evidence in potential serial killer case at West Virginia VA hospital
Show Caption Hide Caption Family devastated by VA hospital death ruled homicide George Nelson Shaw Sr. died at a VA hospital in West Virginia in 2018. His death was ruled a homicide by an Armed Forces medical examiner. It's one of 10 deaths under investigation by authorities. Jack Gruber, USA TODAY
Federal prosecutors have convened a grand jury to hear evidence in the case of a potential serial killer at a Veterans Affairs hospital in Clarksburg, West Virginia, according to an individual briefed on the case.
Investigators believe someone improperly injected 10 elderly veterans with fatal doses of insulin in 2017 and 2018. All were patients in the same ward and suffered severely low blood sugar before they died.
A hospital employee was fired, but no one has been charged. The individual briefed on the case spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing and sensitive nature of the investigation.
The convening of a grand jury, first reported by The Washington Post, signals the investigation is ratcheting up after 18 months.
The case drew the interest of U.S. Attorney General William Barr in August, when it became public that two of the deaths had been ruled homicides.
“Attorney General Barr reached out to my office a few months ago for an update on this matter,” said Bill Powell, the chief federal prosecutor in northern West Virginia, in a written statement. He is leading the probe in conjunction with the VA's inspector general.
Barr “offered all the resources necessary for the investigation and I am grateful for his support," Powell said.
A person familiar with the matter who is not authorized to comment publicly said Barr was drawn by the scope of the investigation and its “horrific” nature.
Investigators have told family members they believe the assailant targeted elderly veterans.
Suspicious deaths: What we know about veterans who died at the Clarksburg VA
A lawyer for several families of the victims, Tony O’Dell, said they are “very pleased” that a grand jury has been convened. “It has been a long time coming,” he said.
His clients include the daughter of Felix Kirk McDermott, 82, one of three veterans who died in April 2018 after suffering unexplained severe low blood sugar. McDermott and a veteran who died the next day, George Nelson Shaw, 81, were not diabetic.
Insulin is used by diabetics to keep blood sugar levels in check, but it can be lethal for nondiabetics.
Former U.S. attorney: 'This could take months'
William “Bill” Ihlenfeld, who preceded Powell as U.S. attorney, said a special grand jury probably had been convened, given the number of victims and volume of evidence to be gathered.
Federal grand juries in the district typically meet one day every two months for a year to consider cases of virtually every stripe, said Ihlenfeld, now a West Virginia state senator. Special panels often meet more frequently, even several times a week, to focus exclusively on one investigation.
“This is not going to be a grand jury that will meet on Tuesday, followed by the announcement of an indictment on Thursday,” Ihlenfeld said. “This could take months.
“More than likely, you’ll have staff from the hospital, FBI agents and voluminous medical records to review for each and every victim. This could be classified as a death penalty case, so they (prosecutors) will need to get it right. This will take time.”
Ihlenfeld said Barr’s interest in the case is unusual. In six years as U.S. attorney in the Obama administration, he said, he was never asked to brief the attorney general on a case.
But he acknowledged the case is unusual, too, and it's in one the smallest federal districts in the country.
“This is happening to veterans, who have always represented a special class of people, and it has brought political pressure from Sen. (Joe) Manchin,” Ihlenfeld said.
Manchin, D-W.Va., introduced legislation in December that requires the VA to report what steps it has taken to improve patient safety at its hospitals and prevent similar deaths in the future. The bill passed the Senate and is pending in the House.
“I’ve been calling on DOJ and VA OIG to complete this investigation because the victim’s family members and veterans across West Virginia deserve answers,” Manchin said in a statement. “I’m encouraged to see some forward momentum.”
'National tragedy': Surveillance, staffing under review after deaths at VA hospital
Lawyer for families says VA hasn't offered much information
O'Dell, the lawyer for several of the families, said that while he welcomes the developments in the case, his clients want more information from the VA about what happened.
“Unfortunately, the VA has not provided any answers or evidence of accountability for those within the VA that allowed this nightmare to go on for as long as it did,” O’Dell said. “It is long overdue.”
USA TODAY reported in October that hospital staff missed opportunities to figure out what was happening, which may have risked veterans' lives and limited evidence in the probe. The hospital didn't adequately track insulin, and there were no surveillance cameras on the ward, according to employees.
By the time hospital officials notified authorities in June 2018, at least eight patients had died under suspicious circumstances. Several had been embalmed and buried, destroying potential evidence. One veteran had been cremated.
Months after McDermott and Shaw died, investigators had their bodies exhumed. A military medical examiner detected injection sites and evidence of insulin. He ruled both deaths homicides.
Wesley Walls, spokesman for the Clarksburg VA hospital, said in a statement Thursday that hospital staff detected the suspicious deaths. "Clarksburg also fired the individual at the center of them," he said. The hospital notified VA headquarters, which tipped off the VA inspector general.
Officials at the VA, from Walls up to the secretary of the agency, have criticized the inspector general's office for taking so long to investigate the deaths.
Asked to comment Thursday, a spokesman for the VA Office of Inspector General pointed to a statement issued in August saying the office was investigating the deaths but couldn't comment further.
Powell, the U.S. attorney, said the investigation is "ongoing and active.”
“We have made this case a priority from the beginning," he said, "and will continue to do so."


usatoday--2020-01-31--Justice Roberts refuses to read question from Sen. Rand Paul – live impeachment trial updates

The Senate impeachment trial has resumed .
Refresh for live updates .
Ex-Giuliani associate gives more material to impeachment investigators Brace yourself for the possibility that House impeachment investigators might disclose more information from Lev Parnas , the Ukraine-born businessman who helped President Donald Trump 's lawyer , Rudy Giuliani , seek damaging information about former Vice President Joe Biden .
Parnas ' attorney , Joseph Bondy , told a federal judge in New York on Thursday his office has downloaded material from his client 's Apple iCloud account and turned it over to the House Intelligence Committee .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' with a subpoena issued last year , Bondy said .
More material will be handed over as it is downloaded , he said , adding that he might make some of it public even if impeachment investigators do not .
During a Wednesday news conference with Parnas outside the U.S. Capitol , Bondy told reporters some of Parnas ' material could implicate Trump .
Bondy discussed the evidence after a hearing in a campaign finance case in which Parnas , business associate Igor Fruman , and two co-defendants are charged with funneling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money to U.S. election candidates and committees .
The case includes a $ 325,000 contribution that Parnas and Fruman allegedly made under false pretenses to a super PAC supporting Trump .
Unlike Fruman , Parnas has broken ranks with Giuliani and Trump — who maintains he does not know Parnas , despite a video showing Parnas with his arm on the president 's shoulder during a gathering at Trump 's Mar-a-Lago mansion in Florida .
Another hearing in the case is set for Monday .
Attorneys for all but one defendant said their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to attend .
But not Parnas .
`` We could n't keep him away , your honor , '' Bondy said .
Trump ’ s lawyers say Giuliani did not carry out U.S. diplomacy The first bipartisan question of the trial came from Sens .
Lisa Murkowski , R-Alaska , Susan Collins , R-Me.
, Kyrsten Sinema , D-Ariz. , and Joe Manchin , D-W.V.
, to Trump ’ s lawyers , asking them to “ assure the American public ” private citizens would not carry out American diplomacy .
`` I want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conduct of foreign policy being carried out here by a private person , ” said Deputy Counsel Patrick Philbin , noting the question likely referred to Trump ’ s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani .
Witnesses in the impeachment inquiry described Giuliani as part of a “ parallel track ” of American diplomacy to pressure Ukraine to open politically motivated investigations , and Giuliani has said his actions in Ukraine were part of legal work to defend his client , Trump .
“ The president ’ s policy is always to abide by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Philbin said , responding to a part of the question that noted unauthorized diplomacy by U.S. citizens was prohibited under the Logan Act .
Philbin also referenced precedent from previous presidents who had asked private citizens to act as messengers to foreign countries , as President George Washington had asked Gouverneur Morris to do with France .
“ That is a remarkable admission , ” House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , said later in the trial .
“ They have now acknowledged that the person in charge of this was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Giuliani was charged with trying to get Ukraine to announce were not policy , ” Schiff said .
Instead , they were “ domestic political errands , ” Schiff argued .
Hours before the Senate will decide whether it will consider additional witnesses and documents as part of the president 's impeachment trial , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell huddled with Sen. Lisa Murkowski , a key vote , for several minutes on the Senate floor during a break .
While the two were talking , Sen. Susan Collins , another key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Joe Manchin , one of the Democrats who is thought to be considering Trump 's acquittal .
The two locked arms and Manchin escorted Collins to the back of the chamber , where the pair talked for several minutes then left together .
Manchin also greeted Sen. John Thune , the Republican whip attempting to unify the GOP in voting against witnesses , with a handshake that turned into a hug .
Trump ’ s lawyer claims Trump did n't ask Ukrainian president to investigate the Bidens Several Republican senators asked both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic impeachment managers under what circumstances a “ president could request a foreign country to investigate a US citizen including apolitical rival who is not under investigation.
” Deputy Counsel Patrick Philbin answered the question by going back to the record of Trump ’ s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky .
Trump had asked Zelensky to “ do us a favor ” and look into allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden .
Philbin , however , asserted that Trump had not called “ for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or his son , but the situation in which the prosecutor had been fired , ” referring to the ouster of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin .
Republicans have argued Trump ’ s conduct on the call was justified because of his concerns about the Bidens and corruption .
Philbin continued , arguing that potential malfeasance by an American overseas would be “ perfectly legitimate '' to ask about , even if it ’ s “ not something that would mean a criminal investigation here in the United States.
” Sens .
Susan Collins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Marco Rubio , R-Fla. , and Mike Crapo , R-Idaho , had posed the question .
Collins is a key undecided vote on both allowing witnesses and Trump ’ s conviction or acquittal .
Democrats disagreed .
House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , said “ it would be hard for me to contemplate circumstances where that would be appropriate.
” Citing reforms made after the Watergate scandal , Schiff said such an ask would be “ contrary to the history of our legal traditions.
” Arguing in support of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , cited arguments made by Department of Justice lawyers today about the remedy for failure to comply with subpoenas .
Schiff said the Justice Department had argued Congress had the power to impeach the president if subpoenas were ignored – an incongruity , he said , that was in the category of “ you can ’ t make this stuff up , ” “ What more evidence do you need of the bad faith of this effort to cover up ?
” , Schiff asked senators .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the trial that the president can not be impeached over failure to comply with subpoenas because of executive privilege .
The Democratic side of the chamber erupted in laughter and sounds of exasperation as Schiff spoke , and many Democrats looked at each other and shook their heads in disbelief .
Senator Jeff Merkley , D-OR.
, threw his hands up in the air .
As Schiff kept speaking , and eventually answered the original question from Sen. Mazie Hirono , D-Hawaii , about the withholding of aid to Ukraine , many Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their cloakroom off the Senate floor .
By the end of Schiff ’ s remarks , USA TODAY counted 13 empty seats on the Republican side of the chamber .
Jeffries : US 'is not a banana republic' Rep. Hakeem Jeffries , one of the House managers in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump , declared that the United States “ is not a banana republic ” in blasting the president ’ s willingness to accept information from foreigners in his political campaign .
“ It ’ s wrong in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jeffries , D-N.Y. “ This is not a banana republic.
” The articles of impeachment accuse Trump of pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rival , former Vice President Joe Biden , while withholding $ 391 million in military aid .
Jeffries was responding to a question from Sens .
Sherrod Brown , D-Ohio , and Ron Wyden , D-Ore. , about the implications of foreign countries interfering in U.S. elections .
The House managers had just played a video of Trump telling ABC News in the Oval Office that he would listen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Another video featured Trump outside the White House telling reporters that China should investigate Biden .
“ There ’ s nothing wrong with listening , ” Trump told ABC News .
“ If somebody called from a country – Norway – we have information on your opponent .
I ’ d think I ’ d want to hear it .
It ’ s not an interference .
They have information .
I think I ’ d take it.
” But Jeffries said Trump and his defense team were wrong , that foreign interference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FBI Director Christopher Wray saying the FBI “ would want to know about foreign election interference.
” Jeffries also quoted Ellen Weintraub , a member of the Federal Election Committee , who issued a statement on June 13 , 2019 , about foreign influence .
“ It is illegal for any person to solicit , accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election , ” Weintraub said .
“ This is not a novel concept .
Electoral interference from foreign governments has been considered unacceptable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In a fiery summation , Jeffries said foreign influence is at the heart of the case about why the Senate should remove Trump from office .
“ It is wrong .
It is corrupt .
It is lawless .
It ’ s an abuse of power .
It ’ s impeachable , ” Jeffries said .
“ And it should lead to the removal of President Donald John Trump.
” WASHINGTON – Sen. Rand Paul , R-Ky. , submitted a question during the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump that Supreme Court Chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted , ” said Roberts , who did not offer further explanation .
Paul walked out of the chamber after Roberts declined the question .
He told reporters his question didn ’ t name the alleged whistleblower - although his question , which he wrote in a tweet , mentioned the name of an official some Republicans have speculated is the whistleblower .
The question revived allegations from some Trump allies that the whistleblower “ conspired ” with a House committee staff member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president ’ s impeachment .
Paul did not offer evidence for the claim .
“ It was an incorrect finding to not allow a question , ” Paul said , but declined to say why he did not force a vote to overrule Roberts .
Before the question , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , opened the question session by assuring Roberts that the Senate would respect his `` unique position in reading in reading our questions . ''
“ I want to be able to continue to assure him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will continue , '' he said .
Pelosi : Trump 'will not be acquitted' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that President Donald Trump ca n't be exonerated if senators do n't call witnesses in his impeachment trial .
“ He will not be acquitted , ” Pelosi told reporters .
“ You can not be acquitted if you don ’ t have a trial .
And you don ’ t have a trial if you don ’ t have witnesses and documentation.
” The speaker was responding to repeated questions from reporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate clears Trump .
“ We ’ re still prayerful , hopeful , ” she insisted , “ that the Senate will have the courage to hear the truth.
” Does she think Trump will be chastened and understand that Congress is watching him , she was asked , or will he be emboldened ?
“ Does the president know right from wrong ?
I don ’ t think so , ” she said .
“ That ’ s all I can say.
” Attempt to block book : Donald Trump security officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's book Channeling Paul Revere , Pelosi warned that democracy and the nation ’ s system of government are at stake .
“ The Russians are coming .
The Russians are coming , ” she said .
“ And the president has led a clear path for them to interfere , once again , in our election as they are currently doing.
” Pelosi , who has said before that all roads lead to Russia , added : “ I don ’ t know what the Russians have on the president , politically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t see Russia as an adversary.
” Trump defense attorney Alan Dershowitz pushed back Thursday against criticism of his argument during the first day of questions in the trial that said it was not impeachable for elected officials to act for their own political benefit if they believe their election is in the public interest .
He said that engaging in a quid pro quo that broke the law , or was for personal financial gain , would be impeachable , however .
Critics , such as 2016 Democratic presidential candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument placed the president above the law and paved the way for unrestrained abuses of power .
And many compared it to former President Richard Nixon ’ s infamous declaration that no presidential act can be considered illegal .
Dershowitz said his argument was being “ willfully misconstrued ” and elaborated on his answer in a series of tweets .
He said he was responding to the House impeachment managers ’ “ claim that any electoral benefit would constitute an impeachable quid pro quo.
” He said his point was that a president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” that were both in the national interest and his or her own political interest .
Alan Dershowitz : Trump lawyer Dershowitz argues president ca n't be impeached for an act he thinks will help his reelection Another 8 hours of questions on tap Thursday The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump resumes Thursday with up to another eight hours of questions to House Democrats prosecuting the case and the president ’ s defense team .
The second and final question session begins at 1 p.m. With opening arguments out of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phase sets up pivotal votes Friday about whether the Senate will call witnesses such as former national security adviser John Bolton .
Many of the questions Wednesday focused on Bolton because the New York Times reported that his pending book says Trump demanded Ukraine investigate his political rival , former Vice President Joe Biden , in exchange for military aid .
Trump has denied saying it and his defense team attacked Bolton as a disgruntled former worker .
'Is that true ? '
: Here are questions senators asked during Trump 's impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmation of the central House impeachment allegation .
But the National Security Council contends the book contains classified information , which could hinder its publication scheduled in March .
The House managers led by Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , contend that the trial won ’ t be fair unless the Senate calls witnesses such as Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney .
But Trump ’ s defense team called the House case “ half-baked ” and said if witnesses were necessary , the House should have called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the testimony could potentially be blocked by executive privilege , in order to protect confidential advice from top aides .
Several questions focused on the burden of proof senators should weigh in deciding whether to convict Trump and remove him from office .
The president ’ s removal is unlikely because it would require a two-thirds majority in a chamber with 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats .
What are senators thinking ?
: Senators ' questions at Trump impeachment trial show most minds are made up Trump ’ s team has argued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t based on violations of criminal statute , but on vague accusations of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
The defense lawyers argued that the House managers should have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt , as with a criminal case .
House managers contend that the article on abuse of power has been used in past impeachment inquiries against former Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton .
In this case , Schiff said the charge is akin to bribery or extortion because Trump demanded an investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military aid .
The House managers said senators should use their own judgment in deciding whether to remove Trump .

Bart Jansen and Maureen Groppe, USA TODAY

Justice Roberts refuses to read question from Sen. Rand Paul – updates
Show Caption Hide Caption Trump impeachment trial: debate to allow witnesses The Senate impeachment trial against President Donald Trump reached a crossroads that could either extend the trial for days or see a vote soon. USA TODAY
The Senate impeachment session for Thursday ended. The trial is expected to begin again on Friday at 1 pm.
Below is a recap of how things played out.
Direct evidence?
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, presented one of the final questions of the evening, asking if there was “any evidence that anyone was directed by President Trump to tell the Ukrainians that security assistance was being held on condition of investigation into the Bidens?"
House Manager Adam Schiff said there were two pieces of direct evidence of the conditioning of aid: U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s testimony, and the statements from acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.
“The president made the direct link to Ambassador Sondland,” and Sondland talked with the Ukrainians about the linkage, Schiff explained.
Schiff also mentioned Mulvaney’s press conference in which the Trump administration aide had told reporters aid had been contingent on the opening of investigations, though Mulvaney later walked the remarks back.
Michael Purpura, counsel to the President, disagreed.
"In the House record before us, there was no evidence that the president told anyone to tell the Ukrainians that the aid was linked.”
He cited Sondland’s testimony and Sen. Ron Johnson’s statements that Trump had told them there was “no quid pro quo” and no connection between investigations and aid.
Former Republican senator calls for witnesses in Senate trial
Late Thursday evening, former Sen. John Warner, a Republican who represented Virginia from 1979 until 2009, issued a statement calling for witnesses in the Senate trial of President Donald Trump.
"As a lifelong Republican and a retired member of the U.S. Senate, who once served as a juror in a Presidential impeachment trial, I am mindful of the difficult responsibilities those currently serving now shoulder," Warner said.
Warner said the Senate could not risk Americans believing the trial was a "sham" because of a lack of additional evidence, so he would urge the Senate to follow "judicial norms" and welcome "relevant witnesses and documents as part of this impeachment trial."
During President Bill Clinton's trial, Warner voted against charges of perjury but for obstruction of justice.
- Nicholas Wu
Murkowski asks why Senators shouldn’t call John Bolton as a witnesses
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska., who is a potential swing vote, asked White House lawyers Thursday night why the Senate should not call former national security adviser John Bolton since the reported comments in his upcoming book contradict the president's legal team.
“This dispute about material facts weighs in favor of calling additional witnesses with direct knowledge,” the question asked, also pointing out the contradictions between Ambassador Gordan Sondland, Sen. Johnson, and Bolton on whether there was a quid pro quo. “Why should this body not call Ambassador Bolton?"
Philbin answered that the Senate shouldn't finish the House's job in terms of witnesses while adding Bolton hasn't verified reports about his manuscript.
“Ambassador Bolton has not come out to verify that to my knowledge, but then we should have this chamber called new witnesses and establish the new normal for impeachment proceedings as being that there doesn't have to be a complete investigation in the House, I think that is very damaging for the future of this institution,” Philbin said.
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., grimaced slightly as his name was mentioned when Chief Justice John Roberts read out the question.
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., an undecided vote on witnesses, looked up from the book he was reading and stared over at Murkowski.
Bolton allegedly wrote in the book that Trump demanded Ukraine investigate a political rival in exchange for foreign aid, an accusation that is central to the impeachment case against the president.
- Savannah Behrmann, Nicholas Wu
Democrats see hope in having Chief Justice Roberts break a tie
Senate Democrats see hope in having Chief Justice John Roberts break a potential 50-50 tie vote on witnesses tomorrow.
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, told USA TODAY Roberts “should” help break ties on witnesses.
"I would like him to step up for the traditional system and help us bring witnesses," Brown said.
Roberts should “absolutely” break a tie,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., told USA TODAY.
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., told reporters Roberts has "got the precedent if he wants to use it."
"In Andrew Johnson's impeachment trial, the Chief Justice broke two ties in terms of the questions of the visibility around witnesses and evidence, so he's got the precedent if he wants to use it," Coons explained.
One Senate Democrat, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., submitted a question during the trial pointed at Roberts and his role in the process.
“At a time where large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the Chief Justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus refused witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the Chief Justice, Supreme Court of the United States and Constitution?” Warren's question read.
Republicans disagreed.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a former clerk for Roberts, told reporters he would be “surprised if he broke the tie.”
Hawley explained the prior precedent for then-Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase’s tie-breaking votes during Johnson’s impeachment trial was “fiercely controversial,” with multiple motions introduced in the Senate to try to overturn them, though they all failed.
“I think he would probably take an out because it gets political at that point,” said Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind.
-Nicholas Wu and Savannah Behrman
Ex-Giuliani associate gives more material to impeachment investigators
Brace yourself for the possibility that House impeachment investigators might disclose more information from Lev Parnas, the Ukraine-born businessman who helped President Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, seek damaging information about former Vice President Joe Biden.
Parnas' attorney, Joseph Bondy, told a federal judge in New York on Thursday his office has downloaded material from his client's Apple iCloud account and turned it over to the House Intelligence Committee.
"We're doing everything possible to cooperate" with a subpoena issued last year, Bondy said. More material will be handed over as it is downloaded, he said, adding that he might make some of it public even if impeachment investigators do not.
During a Wednesday news conference with Parnas outside the U.S. Capitol, Bondy told reporters some of Parnas' material could implicate Trump.
Bondy discussed the evidence after a hearing in a campaign finance case in which Parnas, business associate Igor Fruman, and two co-defendants are charged with funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars in foreign money to U.S. election candidates and committees.
The case includes a $325,000 contribution that Parnas and Fruman allegedly made under false pretenses to a super PAC supporting Trump.
Unlike Fruman, Parnas has broken ranks with Giuliani and Trump — who maintains he does not know Parnas, despite a video showing Parnas with his arm on the president's shoulder during a gathering at Trump's Mar-a-Lago mansion in Florida.
Another hearing in the case is set for Monday. Attorneys for all but one defendant said their clients would prefer to waive their right to attend.
But not Parnas. "We couldn't keep him away, your honor," Bondy said.
- Kevin McCoy
Trump’s lawyers say Giuliani did not carry out U.S. diplomacy
The first bipartisan question of the trial came from Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Susan Collins, R-Me., Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., and Joe Manchin, D-W.V., to Trump’s lawyers, asking them to “assure the American public” private citizens would not carry out American diplomacy.
"I want to make clear that there was no conduct of foreign policy being carried out here by a private person,” said Deputy Counsel Patrick Philbin, noting the question likely referred to Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani.
Witnesses in the impeachment inquiry described Giuliani as part of a “parallel track” of American diplomacy to pressure Ukraine to open politically motivated investigations, and Giuliani has said his actions in Ukraine were part of legal work to defend his client, Trump.
“The president’s policy is always to abide by the laws and continue to do so,” Philbin said, responding to a part of the question that noted unauthorized diplomacy by U.S. citizens was prohibited under the Logan Act.
Philbin also referenced precedent from previous presidents who had asked private citizens to act as messengers to foreign countries, as President George Washington had asked Gouverneur Morris to do with France.
“That is a remarkable admission,” House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said later in the trial.
“They have now acknowledged that the person in charge of this was not conducting policy. So the investigations that Giuliani was charged with trying to get Ukraine to announce were not policy,” Schiff said.
Instead, they were “domestic political errands,” Schiff argued.
- Nicholas Wu
McConnell huddles with key vote hours before witness vote
Hours before the Senate will decide whether it will consider additional witnesses and documents as part of the president's impeachment trial, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell huddled with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a key vote, for several minutes on the Senate floor during a break.
While the two were talking, Sen. Susan Collins, another key Republican vote, was approached by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, one of the Democrats who is thought to be considering Trump's acquittal. The two locked arms and Manchin escorted Collins to the back of the chamber, where the pair talked for several minutes then left together.
Manchin also greeted Sen. John Thune, the Republican whip attempting to unify the GOP in voting against witnesses, with a handshake that turned into a hug.
- Christal Hayes
Trump’s lawyer claims Trump didn't ask Ukrainian president to investigate the Bidens
Several Republican senators asked both President Donald Trump’s lawyers and Democratic impeachment managers under what circumstances a “president could request a foreign country to investigate a US citizen including a political rival who is not under investigation.”
Deputy Counsel Patrick Philbin answered the question by going back to the record of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump had asked Zelensky to “do us a favor” and look into allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.
Philbin, however, asserted that Trump had not called “for an investigation necessarily into Vice President Biden or his son, but the situation in which the prosecutor had been fired,” referring to the ouster of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin.
Republicans have argued Trump’s conduct on the call was justified because of his concerns about the Bidens and corruption.
Philbin continued, arguing that potential malfeasance by an American overseas would be “perfectly legitimate" to ask about, even if it’s “not something that would mean a criminal investigation here in the United States.”
Sens. Susan Collins, R-Me., Roy Blunt, R-Mo., Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, had posed the question. Collins is a key undecided vote on both allowing witnesses and Trump’s conviction or acquittal.
Democrats disagreed. House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said “it would be hard for me to contemplate circumstances where that would be appropriate.”
Citing reforms made after the Watergate scandal, Schiff said such an ask would be “contrary to the history of our legal traditions.”
- Nicholas Wu
Schiff cites the Justice Department’s argument against Trump’s lawyers
Arguing in support of the obstruction of Congress charge, House Manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., cited arguments made by Department of Justice lawyers today about the remedy for failure to comply with subpoenas.
Schiff said the Justice Department had argued Congress had the power to impeach the president if subpoenas were ignored – an incongruity, he said, that was in the category of “you can’t make this stuff up,”
“What more evidence do you need of the bad faith of this effort to cover up?”, Schiff asked senators.
Trump’s defense team has argued throughout the trial that the president cannot be impeached over failure to comply with subpoenas because of executive privilege.
The Democratic side of the chamber erupted in laughter and sounds of exasperation as Schiff spoke, and many Democrats looked at each other and shook their heads in disbelief.
Senator Jeff Merkley, D-OR., threw his hands up in the air.
As Schiff kept speaking, and eventually answered the original question from Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, about the withholding of aid to Ukraine, many Republican chambers left the chamber and walked into their cloakroom off the Senate floor.
By the end of Schiff’s remarks, USA TODAY counted 13 empty seats on the Republican side of the chamber.
- Nicholas Wu and Savannah Behrmann
Jeffries: US 'is not a banana republic'
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, one of the House managers in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, declared that the United States “is not a banana republic” in blasting the president’s willingness to accept information from foreigners in his political campaign.
“It’s wrong in the United States of America,” said Jeffries, D-N.Y. “This is not a banana republic.”
The articles of impeachment accuse Trump of pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, while withholding $391 million in military aid. Jeffries was responding to a question from Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., about the implications of foreign countries interfering in U.S. elections.
The House managers had just played a video of Trump telling ABC News in the Oval Office that he would listen to what a foreign country offered. Another video featured Trump outside the White House telling reporters that China should investigate Biden.
“There’s nothing wrong with listening,” Trump told ABC News. “If somebody called from a country – Norway – we have information on your opponent. I’d think I’d want to hear it. It’s not an interference. They have information. I think I’d take it.”
But Jeffries said Trump and his defense team were wrong, that foreign interference is illegal and disqualifying. He quoted FBI Director Christopher Wray saying the FBI “would want to know about foreign election interference.”
Jeffries also quoted Ellen Weintraub, a member of the Federal Election Committee, who issued a statement on June 13, 2019, about foreign influence.
I would not have thought that I needed to say this. pic.twitter.com/T743CsXq79 — Ellen L Weintraub (@EllenLWeintraub) June 13, 2019
“It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,” Weintraub said. “This is not a novel concept. Electoral interference from foreign governments has been considered unacceptable since the beginnings of our nation.”
In a fiery summation, Jeffries said foreign influence is at the heart of the case about why the Senate should remove Trump from office.
“It is wrong. It is corrupt. It is lawless. It’s an abuse of power. It’s impeachable,” Jeffries said. “And it should lead to the removal of President Donald John Trump.”
- Bart Jansen
Justice Roberts refuses to read question from Sen. Rand Paul
WASHINGTON – Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., submitted a question during the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read.
“The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted,” said Roberts, who did not offer further explanation.
Paul walked out of the chamber after Roberts declined the question. He told reporters his question didn’t name the alleged whistleblower - although his question, which he wrote in a tweet, mentioned the name of an official some Republicans have speculated is the whistleblower.
The question revived allegations from some Trump allies that the whistleblower “conspired” with a House committee staff member to reveal information that would lead to the president’s impeachment. Paul did not offer evidence for the claim.
“It was an incorrect finding to not allow a question,” Paul said, but declined to say why he did not force a vote to overrule Roberts.
Before the question, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., opened the question session by assuring Roberts that the Senate would respect his "unique position in reading in reading our questions."
“I want to be able to continue to assure him that that level of consideration for him will continue," he said.
- Bart Jansen
Pelosi: Trump 'will not be acquitted'
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that President Donald Trump can't be exonerated if senators don't call witnesses in his impeachment trial.
“He will not be acquitted,” Pelosi told reporters. “You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. And you don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation.”
The speaker was responding to repeated questions from reporters about Democrats’ next move if the Senate clears Trump.
“We’re still prayerful, hopeful,” she insisted, “that the Senate will have the courage to hear the truth.”
Does she think Trump will be chastened and understand that Congress is watching him, she was asked, or will he be emboldened?
Pelosi restated the question before answering.
“Does the president know right from wrong? I don’t think so,” she said. “That’s all I can say.”
Attempt to block book: Donald Trump security officials threaten to block publication of John Bolton's book
Channeling Paul Revere, Pelosi warned that democracy and the nation’s system of government are at stake.
“The Russians are coming. The Russians are coming,” she said. “And the president has led a clear path for them to interfere, once again, in our election as they are currently doing.”
Pelosi, who has said before that all roads lead to Russia, added: “I don’t know what the Russians have on the president, politically, personally or financially, but he doesn’t see Russia as an adversary.”
– Maureen Groppe
Dershowitz responds to criticism of 'mixed motives' argument
Trump defense attorney Alan Dershowitz pushed back Thursday against criticism of his argument during the first day of questions in the trial that said it was not impeachable for elected officials to act for their own political benefit if they believe their election is in the public interest.
He said that engaging in a quid pro quo that broke the law, or was for personal financial gain, would be impeachable, however.
Critics, such as 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, said Dershowitz’s argument placed the president above the law and paved the way for unrestrained abuses of power. And many compared it to former President Richard Nixon’s infamous declaration that no presidential act can be considered illegal.
Dershowitz said his argument was being “willfully misconstrued” and elaborated on his answer in a series of tweets. He said he was responding to the House impeachment managers’ “claim that any electoral benefit would constitute an impeachable quid pro quo.” He said his point was that a president could act out of “mixed motives” that were both in the national interest and his or her own political interest.
- William Cummings
Alan Dershowitz: Trump lawyer Dershowitz argues president can't be impeached for an act he thinks will help his reelection
Trump impeachment: Two-day question-and-answer session begins The Senate entered a two-day question-and-answer session in which senators submit questions for Chief Justice Roberts to read aloud. USA TODAY
Another 8 hours of questions on tap Thursday
The Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump resumes Thursday with up to another eight hours of questions to House Democrats prosecuting the case and the president’s defense team.
The second and final question session begins at 1 p.m. With opening arguments out of the way for each side, the question phase sets up pivotal votes Friday about whether the Senate will call witnesses such as former national security adviser John Bolton.
Many of the questions Wednesday focused on Bolton because the New York Times reported that his pending book says Trump demanded Ukraine investigate his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, in exchange for military aid. Trump has denied saying it and his defense team attacked Bolton as a disgruntled former worker.
'Is that true?': Here are questions senators asked during Trump's impeachment trial
Bolton's accusation could serve as confirmation of the central House impeachment allegation. But the National Security Council contends the book contains classified information, which could hinder its publication scheduled in March.
The House managers led by Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., contend that the trial won’t be fair unless the Senate calls witnesses such as Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.
But Trump’s defense team called the House case “half-baked” and said if witnesses were necessary, the House should have called them. Trump’s team also said the testimony could potentially be blocked by executive privilege, in order to protect confidential advice from top aides.
Several questions focused on the burden of proof senators should weigh in deciding whether to convict Trump and remove him from office. The president’s removal is unlikely because it would require a two-thirds majority in a chamber with 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats.
What are senators thinking?: Senators' questions at Trump impeachment trial show most minds are made up
Presidential impeachment: Clinton, Johnson, Nixon test U.S. democracy Presidents have been impeached, but none have been removed from office due to impeachment. Confusing? Here's how. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
Trump’s team has argued that the impeachment is unconstitutional because it isn’t based on violations of criminal statute, but on vague accusations of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The defense lawyers argued that the House managers should have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, as with a criminal case.
House managers contend that the article on abuse of power has been used in past impeachment inquiries against former Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. In this case, Schiff said the charge is akin to bribery or extortion because Trump demanded an investigation in exchange for $391 million in military aid. The House managers said senators should use their own judgment in deciding whether to remove Trump.


usatoday--2020-01-30--Ahead of Trump rally, Biden makes his counter pitch: 'Character is on the ballot'

DES MOINES — Joe Biden seized on President Donald Trump 's visit to Iowa Thursday to deliver a forceful contrast with the president and make the argument to Iowans that `` character is on the ballot '' this year .
Biden used an address in Waukee to encourage Iowans to imagine a general election campaign between himself and Trump , criticizing the president on issues like health care , climate change , gun control , national security and , above all , character .
`` Ladies and gentlemen , in November America will have the chance to answer the question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter ?
Yes or no , '' Biden said to the crowd .
Trump will rally in Des Moines on Thursday evening , four days before the Iowa caucus , to urge Iowa Republicans to support him .
Although Trump has two primary challengers , he is expected to be the overwhelming choice of Republican caucusgoers .
Biden took advantage of the media attention surrounding Trump 's visit to Des Moines , delivering his address in front of dozens of members of the press — far more than the contingent of reporters that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you need to know about Trump 's Des Moines rally '' I do not believe we are the dark , angry nation that Donald Trump sees in his tweets in the middle of the night , '' Biden said .
`` I don ’ t believe we ’ re the nation that rips babies from the arms of their mothers and thinks that ’ s OK. '' Biden 's approach was similar to the last time he and Trump were in Iowa together last June .
That day , Biden also gave an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , calling him `` a threat to our core values '' and `` a threat to our standing in the world . ''
This time , Biden 's speech was more hopeful in tone as he made his closing argument to Iowans before Monday 's caucuses kick off the presidential nominating process .
`` The American people are good , decent , honorable people and given half a chance , they ’ ve never , ever , ever let their country down , '' Biden said .
`` They deserve a president who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after lie after lie .
They deserve a president who will put the country ’ s interests first , not his own self-interest . ''
Ashe has throughout his campaign , Biden leaned into a message of unifying the country .
`` I ’ m absolutely certain we can repair this country , '' Biden said .
`` We can repair our standing in the world .
We can win the battle for the soul of America .
The country ’ s ready .
Democrats , independents and a lot of Republicans .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ better than this . ''
`` He 's a healer , '' Donna Dickerson said of Biden at his Waukee event .
Dickerson , a nurse from Clive , said Biden will be bipartisan and listen to both sides if he 's elected .
`` Trump is not a role model to children , '' she added .
`` He is a detriment . ''
Maureen Fialkov , a 71-year-old retired opera singer from Clive , said she believes Biden can unite the country and work across the aisle if he 's elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ factor about him .
He ’ s just a nice person and that goes a long way , '' Fialkov said at Biden 's Waukee event .
`` And I don ’ t think he ’ ll use scare tactics , which is what the bully in the White House does now . ''
Stephen Gruber-Miller covers the Iowa Statehouse and politics for the Register .
He can be reached by email at sgrubermil @ registermedia.com or by phone at 515-284-8169 .
Follow him on Twitter at @ sgrubermiller .

Stephen Gruber-Miller, Des Moines Register

Ahead of Trump rally, Biden makes his counter pitch: 'Character is on the ballot'
DES MOINES — Joe Biden seized on President Donald Trump's visit to Iowa Thursday to deliver a forceful contrast with the president and make the argument to Iowans that "character is on the ballot" this year.
Biden used an address in Waukee to encourage Iowans to imagine a general election campaign between himself and Trump, criticizing the president on issues like health care, climate change, gun control, national security and, above all, character.
"Ladies and gentlemen, in November America will have the chance to answer the question: Does the character of the president matter? Yes or no," Biden said to the crowd.
Trump will rally in Des Moines on Thursday evening, four days before the Iowa caucus, to urge Iowa Republicans to support him. Although Trump has two primary challengers, he is expected to be the overwhelming choice of Republican caucusgoers.
Biden took advantage of the media attention surrounding Trump's visit to Des Moines, delivering his address in front of dozens of members of the press — far more than the contingent of reporters that typically follows him.
More: What you need to know about Trump's Des Moines rally
"I do not believe we are the dark, angry nation that Donald Trump sees in his tweets in the middle of the night," Biden said. "I don’t believe we’re the nation that rips babies from the arms of their mothers and thinks that’s OK."
Biden's approach was similar to the last time he and Trump were in Iowa together last June. That day, Biden also gave an address where he took on Trump directly, calling him "a threat to our core values" and "a threat to our standing in the world."
This time, Biden's speech was more hopeful in tone as he made his closing argument to Iowans before Monday's caucuses kick off the presidential nominating process.
"The American people are good, decent, honorable people and given half a chance, they’ve never, ever, ever let their country down," Biden said. "They deserve a president who tells them the truth, not lie after lie after lie. They deserve a president who will put the country’s interests first, not his own self-interest."
As he has throughout his campaign, Biden leaned into a message of unifying the country.
"I’m absolutely certain we can repair this country," Biden said. "We can repair our standing in the world. We can win the battle for the soul of America. The country’s ready. Democrats, independents and a lot of Republicans. They know we’re so much better than this."
"He's a healer," Donna Dickerson said of Biden at his Waukee event. Dickerson, a nurse from Clive, said Biden will be bipartisan and listen to both sides if he's elected.
"Trump is not a role model to children," she added. "He is a detriment."
Maureen Fialkov, a 71-year-old retired opera singer from Clive, said she believes Biden can unite the country and work across the aisle if he's elected.
"He has that ‘nice’ factor about him. He’s just a nice person and that goes a long way," Fialkov said at Biden's Waukee event. "And I don’t think he’ll use scare tactics, which is what the bully in the White House does now."
Stephen Gruber-Miller covers the Iowa Statehouse and politics for the Register. He can be reached by email at sgrubermil@registermedia.com or by phone at 515-284-8169. Follow him on Twitter at @sgrubermiller.


usatoday--2020-01-30--Trump plans show of GOP force in Iowa at pivotal phase in Senate impeachment trial

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is preparing a massive show of GOP unity in Iowa ahead of the state 's presidential caucus and as a pivotal vote in the Senate impeachment trial exposes rifts among Republicans who will decide his fate .
Days before Iowans choose a Democratic candidate in the nation 's first presidential caucus , Trump will take the stage at Drake University in Des Moines for his fourth rally of the year .
The campaign will then send an unusually long list of GOP heavyweights to Iowa , including Cabinet officials , congressional leaders and members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign and Republican observers described the parade of political events as a flexing of muscles – a warning to Democrats that Trump 's operation is far better organized and funded than it was in 2016 .
But the display will also serve as a potent reminder of Trump 's grip on the party as Senate Republicans wrestle with whether to end his impeachment trial or extend it further by hearing from witnesses .
David Kochel , a veteran Republican political operative in Iowa , described the president 's itinerary in the state as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a very smart move and it has little to do with his own nomination , which is not in doubt , '' said Kochel , a senior adviser to Jeb Bush 's campaign in 2016 .
`` It ’ s to fire up our base , and step into the middle of their primary dance and take some of the oxygen . ''
The caucuses take place Monday , and the president 's travel will coincide with a last-minute push by several of the Democratic candidates seeking to replace him .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but friends say he 's prepared for a knife fight Iowa power : Do winners of the Iowa caucus typically become president ?
Trump 's rally will come hours after an official White House event in Michigan to highlight his new trade deal with Mexico and Canada , a rare bipartisan win for the president that will have implications for Iowa farmers and manufacturers .
Then , as the nation shifts its attention to the Democratic caucus race , Trump will send about 80 surrogates to the state .
The roster includes at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos .
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy , R-Calif. ; Rep. Jim Jordan , R-Ohio ; and Rep. Mark Meadows , R-N.C. , are also expected to stump for the president .
Donald Trump Jr. , Eric Trump and Lara Trump are among the president 's family members heading to Iowa .
Incumbent presidents , who usually do not face serious challenges for the nomination , rarely devote so much attention to campaigning so early in the process .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a `` good workout for our ground game '' and said that the caucuses are `` an opportunity to flex the organizational muscles of President Trump ’ s '' operation .
Democrats in the state framed the events as a sign of `` panicking . ''
`` No amount of kicking , screaming , or tweeting can spin that legacy of failure , or voters ’ desperation for something new , '' said Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price .
What impeachment questions were asked : Here are questions senators asked during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Iowa initially appeared to offer an opportunity to take a victory lap and a hard pivot to the election .
Senate Republican leaders signaled the impeachment trial could wind down as early as Friday , potentially yielding the long-expected acquittal on charges that Trump abused his power by withholding military aid to Ukraine .
A New York Times report a forthcoming memoir by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton raised new uncertainty about the trial timeline .
The Times said the book will allege the president demanded Ukraine officials open an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign aid – an issue at the center of the impeachment debate .
A handful of centrist Senate Republicans , including Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah , have said they are willing to hear from witnesses , including Bolton .
Friday will be the pivotal day when the GOP-led Senate will decide whether to extend the trial in order to hear from witnesses , or to move forward with a vote on possible acquittal .
Trump , who came in second in the Iowa caucuses in 2016 , carried the state in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points .
Polls suggest the contest could be closer this year , depending on who wins the Democratic nomination .
The president was about 2 points ahead of Biden in a New York Times/Siena College poll of likely caucusgoers released this month .
That same poll had Trump beating Sen. Bernie Sanders by 6 points and Sen. Elizabeth Warren by 5 .
Trump last traveled to Iowa in June to tout his efforts to promote gasoline with higher blends of ethanol – a popular position with many Iowa farmers .
He held a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a month before the 2018 midterm elections .
What senators are thinking : Senators ' questions at Trump impeachment trial show most minds are made up Republican operatives said the president 's visit to Iowa was a signal he intends to remain on the offensive and is n't taking even the states he won handily for granted .
They also predicted the effort may draw attention away from what is expected to be a huge turnout among Democrats .
If the turnout is larger than usual , it could be read as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ implications beyond Iowa .
`` Deploying this many surrogates on caucus night – and the caliber of the surrogates covering the amount of ground statewide – will yield tremendous dividends as Iowa Republicans begin focusing on the general election , '' said Jimmy Centers , a Republican consultant who worked for former Iowa Gov .
Terry Branstad .
Centers rejected the idea that Trump 's show of force in the state had anything to do with the impeachment trial , noting that voters have generally not named impeachment as a top election issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the Iowa caucuses , '' he said , `` is nothing more than a coincidence . ''
Trump barely mentioned the trial during a rally in New Jersey on Tuesday .
He slammed Democrats for “ demented hoaxes , crazy witch hunts and deranged partisan crusades , ” but that language is similar to what he has embraced at his rallies for years .
Trump told a crowd of cheering supporters that Democrats had been working for years to overturn the results of the 2016 election .
And he vowed they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure they face another crushing defeat in the next election , '' Trump said .
`` We are going to have a victory that is even greater than 2016 . ''

Trump plans show of GOP force in Iowa at pivotal phase in Senate impeachment trial
Show Caption Hide Caption Iowa caucus: Just how much influence does it have on the primary? The Iowa caucus is sure to be competitive this year. But what makes caucuses different from primaries? Just the FAQs
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is preparing a massive show of GOP unity in Iowa ahead of the state's presidential caucus and as a pivotal vote in the Senate impeachment trial exposes rifts among Republicans who will decide his fate.
Days before Iowans choose a Democratic candidate in the nation's first presidential caucus, Trump will take the stage at Drake University in Des Moines for his fourth rally of the year. The campaign will then send an unusually long list of GOP heavyweights to Iowa, including Cabinet officials, congressional leaders and members of Trump's family.
The president's campaign and Republican observers described the parade of political events as a flexing of muscles – a warning to Democrats that Trump's operation is far better organized and funded than it was in 2016. But the display will also serve as a potent reminder of Trump's grip on the party as Senate Republicans wrestle with whether to end his impeachment trial or extend it further by hearing from witnesses.
Live impeachment updates: Trump Senate impeachment trial to resume with final questions
David Kochel, a veteran Republican political operative in Iowa, described the president's itinerary in the state as "classic Trump."
"It’s a very smart move and it has little to do with his own nomination, which is not in doubt," said Kochel, a senior adviser to Jeb Bush's campaign in 2016. "It’s to fire up our base, and step into the middle of their primary dance and take some of the oxygen."
The caucuses take place Monday, and the president's travel will coincide with a last-minute push by several of the Democratic candidates seeking to replace him.
Bolton: John Bolton stirs GOP fury but friends say he's prepared for a knife fight
Iowa power: Do winners of the Iowa caucus typically become president?
Trump brings GOP star power to Iowa
Trump's rally will come hours after an official White House event in Michigan to highlight his new trade deal with Mexico and Canada, a rare bipartisan win for the president that will have implications for Iowa farmers and manufacturers. Then, as the nation shifts its attention to the Democratic caucus race, Trump will send about 80 surrogates to the state.
The roster includes at least eight members of the Cabinet, such as Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.; Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., are also expected to stump for the president. Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Lara Trump are among the president's family members heading to Iowa.
Incumbent presidents, who usually do not face serious challenges for the nomination, rarely devote so much attention to campaigning so early in the process.
Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh described the effort as a "good workout for our ground game" and said that the caucuses are "an opportunity to flex the organizational muscles of President Trump’s" operation.
Democrats in the state framed the events as a sign of "panicking."
"No amount of kicking, screaming, or tweeting can spin that legacy of failure, or voters’ desperation for something new," said Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price.
What impeachment questions were asked: Here are questions senators asked during Trump's impeachment trial
Rally on eve of key trial vote
Trump's visit to Iowa initially appeared to offer an opportunity to take a victory lap and a hard pivot to the election. Senate Republican leaders signaled the impeachment trial could wind down as early as Friday, potentially yielding the long-expected acquittal on charges that Trump abused his power by withholding military aid to Ukraine.
A New York Times report a forthcoming memoir by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton raised new uncertainty about the trial timeline. The Times said the book will allege the president demanded Ukraine officials open an investigation into Biden in exchange for U.S. foreign aid – an issue at the center of the impeachment debate.
A handful of centrist Senate Republicans, including Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, have said they are willing to hear from witnesses, including Bolton. Friday will be the pivotal day when the GOP-led Senate will decide whether to extend the trial in order to hear from witnesses, or to move forward with a vote on possible acquittal.
Trump, who came in second in the Iowa caucuses in 2016, carried the state in the general election by more than 9 percentage points. Polls suggest the contest could be closer this year, depending on who wins the Democratic nomination. The president was about 2 points ahead of Biden in a New York Times/Siena College poll of likely caucusgoers released this month.
That same poll had Trump beating Sen. Bernie Sanders by 6 points and Sen. Elizabeth Warren by 5.
Trump last traveled to Iowa in June to tout his efforts to promote gasoline with higher blends of ethanol – a popular position with many Iowa farmers. He held a campaign rally in Council Bluffs, Iowa, a month before the 2018 midterm elections.
What senators are thinking: Senators' questions at Trump impeachment trial show most minds are made up
'Demented hoaxes'
Republican operatives said the president's visit to Iowa was a signal he intends to remain on the offensive and isn't taking even the states he won handily for granted. They also predicted the effort may draw attention away from what is expected to be a huge turnout among Democrats. If the turnout is larger than usual, it could be read as a show of strength by Democrats with implications beyond Iowa.
"Deploying this many surrogates on caucus night – and the caliber of the surrogates covering the amount of ground statewide – will yield tremendous dividends as Iowa Republicans begin focusing on the general election," said Jimmy Centers, a Republican consultant who worked for former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad.
Centers rejected the idea that Trump's show of force in the state had anything to do with the impeachment trial, noting that voters have generally not named impeachment as a top election issue in polls. "The trial occurring around the Iowa caucuses," he said, "is nothing more than a coincidence."
Trump barely mentioned the trial during a rally in New Jersey on Tuesday. He slammed Democrats for “demented hoaxes, crazy witch hunts and deranged partisan crusades,” but that language is similar to what he has embraced at his rallies for years. Trump told a crowd of cheering supporters that Democrats had been working for years to overturn the results of the 2016 election. And he vowed they would not succeed.
"We will make sure they face another crushing defeat in the next election," Trump said. "We are going to have a victory that is even greater than 2016."
Contributing: Christal Hayes, Michael Collins