SEE NEW POSTS

White House may assert executive privilege to block Bolton testimony, Republicans say If former national security adviser John Bolton is called to testify at the Senate impeachment trial, several Republicans told NBC News they believe that President Donald Trump will assert executive privilege. A president claiming executive privilege during the trial would be unprecedented, and it's unclear how the Senate would handle the dispute. Chief Justice John Roberts is presiding over the proceedings and can rule on what evidence can be allowed — but his rulings can be overruled or sustained by a majority of the Senate. Bolton testifying would touch off concern in the White House because of his proximity to presidential decision-making, according to a senior administration official. "It would be extraordinary to have the national security adviser testifying about his communications directly with the president about foreign policy and national security matters," the official said. Read more here. Share this -







Dems say they're pressuring GOP senators on impeachment in other ways In First Read Tuesday morning, we observed how Democrats aren’t trying to pressure vulnerable GOP senators over the TV airwaves on impeachment. Of the 11 impeachment-themed television ads airing across the country right now, according to the ad trackers at Advertising Analytics, all are from Republicans and GOP groups. But Democrats at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee tell us that they’ve been pressuring GOP senators — like Cory Gardner of Colorado, Martha McSally of Arizona and Susan Collins of Maine — in other ways. For Maine’s Senate contest, for instance, the DSCC has created a website – WhatChangedSusan.Com – highlighting how Collins called for more evidence and witnesses in Bill Clinton’s 1999 impeachment trial, but hasn’t made the same explicit demands for President Trump’s impeachment trial. And in Colorado, the DSCC has blasted out press releases noting that Gardner has refused "to answer basic questions on [the] president’s conduct” or on the demand for “a fair trial.” Share this -







Senators pour onto the chamber floor As soon as Schumer finished speaking, senators poured onto the floor. Democrats have thick binders with blue cover pages. Republicans, including Tim Scott of South Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas, walked up to greet White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump attorney Jay Sekulow. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., one of the House managers, enthusiastically greeted home state Democratic colleague Sen. Dianne Feinstein, while Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California, both erstwhile presidential candidates, chatted with Chaplain Barry Black in the back of the chamber for a while. While most senators sat, Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., wandered around, randomly doing mini squats as if to prepare for the long, seated day ahead. Share this -







White House counsel Cipollone: McConnell's proposal a 'fair process' White House counsel Pat Cipollone, speaking on the Senate floor Tuesday during the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s trial resolution creates “a fair process.” "We support this resolution. It is a fair way to proceed with this trial," Cipollone said. "It requires House managers to stand up and make their opening statement and make their case," he continued, adding that, "it is time to start with this trial. It's a fair process." "We believe that once you hear those initial presentations, the only conclusion will be that the president has done absolutely nothing wrong," he said. White House counsel Pat Cipollone calls impeachment resolution a ‘fair process’ Jan. 21, 2020 02:30 Share this -







Here's how we expect today to go The Senate impeachment trial resumed shortly after 1 p.m. Here’s how we expect the rest of the day to go: Senators, House managers, and the WH counsel should be in their seats and ready to go. We do not expect the Sergeant at Arms to introduce them like he did when they came to the floor and read the articles on Thursday. Chief Justice Roberts will gavel the trial back in session, saying something like, “The Senate will convene as a court of impeachment…” (There may be a prayer here.) Chief Justice Roberts will say: “The Sergeant at Arms will make the proclamation…” The Sergeant at Arms, Michael Stenger, will say: “Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye! All persons are commanded to keep silent, on pain of imprisonment, while the House of Representatives is exhibiting to the Senate of the United States articles of impeachment against Donald John Trump, President of the United States.” At this point, McConnell may pass a number of housekeeping measures about various issues related to the trial, including possibly entering the trial briefs into the Senate record. Then we expect McConnell will formally introduce the organizing resolution, and any senator can ask that the entire resolution be read on the floor. (In 1999, Sen. Robert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, asked for that to happen. It was only four pages, so it didn’t take long. The clerk would then read the resolution). There will be up to two hours of arguments, equally divided, by the House managers and the WH defense team. They may or may not use the entire two hours. After that, we expect Schumer/Democrats to introduce an amendment to the organizing resolution, which we expect would take up the issue of witnesses and documents. That is also subject to up to two hours of arguments, equally divided, by the House managers and the WH defense team. Again, they may or may not use the entire two hours. To reiterate, Senators cannot participate in this back and forth, only the House managers and WH defense team. This would mean that there would theoretically be up to 4 hours of back and forth before we see the first vote on Tuesday, and we expect all of this to be open. When they vote, each senator's name will be called, and the senator will stand and vote. There is a chance that the vote on that first Democratic amendment could be a vote on a motion to table, which would actually mean Republicans vote YES and Democrats vote NO to kill it (we'll alert everyone if this ends up being the case).

What happens after that vote? Likely more amendments, but that's all TBD. We expect Tuesday to be a long day. There is no limit on amendments, but we (obviously) don’t expect amendments to never end. We hope to have guidance early Wednesday on how many amendments Democrats will introduce. Again, it will largely depend on what’s in the organizing resolution.

We are in uncharted territory here. The reason why all of this isn't set in stone is simply because the Senate has never had a debate with amendments for the organizing resolution. In 1999, all 100 Senators agreed (after meeting in a closed session in the old Senate chamber) to pass unanimously this initial organizing resolution. Aides and senators who typically go back and look at precedent to determine how a session will go can’t do so here, so we’re all going to be riding this out together. Share this -







House managers say Trump 'exemplifies' why impeachment is in the Constitution House managers, in response to Trump's trial brief, said Tuesday that the president "exemplifies why the framers included the impeachment mechanism in the Constitution." "President Trump’s impeachment trial is an effort to safeguard our elections, not override them," the Democrats wrote. "His unsupported contentions to the contrary have it exactly backwards. President Trump has shown that he will use the immense powers of his office to manipulate the upcoming election to his own advantage. Respect for the integrity of this Nation’s democratic process requires that President Trump be removed before he can corrupt the very election that would hold him accountable to the American people." The managers also said Trump's brief "is heavy on rhetoric and procedural grievances, but entirely lacks a legitimate defense of his misconduct. It is clear from his response that President Trump would rather discuss anything other than what he actually did." The brief, they added, "does not explain why, even now, he has not offered any documents or witnesses in his defense or provided any information in response to the House’s repeated requests. This is not how an innocent person behaves." Read the full response. Share this -





