Day in Impeachment: Senate Votes Against Considering Witnesses Senators have adjourned until Monday morning and will vote on Wednesday on whether to remove President Trump from office. Video transcript Back bars 0:00 / 1:45 - 0:00 transcript Impeachment Trial Highlights: A Showdown Over Calling Witnesses Senators rejected a call for additional witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, dealing a fatal blow to efforts by Democrats to bring about new evidence. “Mr. Blunt?” “No.” “No.” “Mr. Booker?” “Yes.” “Aye.” “Mr. Boozman?” “No.” “No.” “Are there any senators in the chamber wishing to change his or her vote? If not, the yeas are 49, the nays are 51. The motion is not agreed to.” “This will set a new precedent. This will be cited in impeachment trials from this point to the end of history. The documents the president is hiding will come out. The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories. And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance.” “There is a way to decide right up front in some quick way whether there’s really a triable issue, whether you really need to go to all the trouble of calling in new witnesses and having more evidence in something like that.” “It’s not just about hearing from witnesses. You need documents. The documents don’t lie.” “The question here before this body is, what do you want your place in history to be? Do you want your place in history to be, let’s hear the truth? Or that we don’t want to hear it?” “You did hear evidence. You heard evidence from 13 different witnesses, 192 video clips, and as my colleague the deputy White House counsel said, over 28,000 pages of documents.” Senators rejected a call for additional witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, dealing a fatal blow to efforts by Democrats to bring about new evidence. Credit Credit... Erin Schaff/The New York Times The Senate voted on Friday to block new witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, signaling a crucial turning point and steering toward an all but certain acquittal within days. See how each senator voted.

President Trump’s direct role in the Ukraine pressure campaign was earlier than previously known: He told his former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, in May to help, Mr. Bolton’s book says.

Senators will vote at 4 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday to render a verdict on President Trump’s impeachment trial. They will vote on procedural motions on Friday and return at 11 a.m. on Monday to give closing arguments. They will have a chance to give floor speeches on Tuesday before the vote on Wednesday.

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:59 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:59 p.m. ET By Senate adjourns until Monday morning. The Senate has adjourned and will reopen as a court of impeachment at 11 a.m. Eastern on Monday, when lawmakers will hear up to four hours closing arguments, divided equally between the impeachment managers and the White House defense team. Senators are expected to give speeches on the Senate floor on Tuesday — the same day President Trump is to deliver the State of the Union address to Congress — explaining their decisions. A final vote on whether to convict or acquit Mr. Trump is expected on Wednesday. After the Senate adjourned, the majority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, shook hands with several of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, including Jay Sekulow and Pam Bondi. Several Democratic senators walked up to Mr. Schiff to shake his hand as well.

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:59 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:59 p.m. ET By A consequential vote is captured in pencil. Image Credit... Art Lien for The New York Times The motion to include new witnesses and documents in the trial became less and less likely this week as prospective Republican defectors announced that they would not join Democrats in voting “yes.” But the final blow arrived Friday afternoon, when Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, announced that she would not support the motion. The courtroom artist Art Lien has been covering the trial for The New York Times. See all of Mr. Lien’s drawings here.

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:56 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:56 p.m. ET By Biden says his focus is on defeating Trump at the ballot box. As he walked into a presidential campaign event in Mount Pleasant, Iowa, Joseph R. Biden Jr. lamented the vote to block new witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, but said he wanted to focus on defeating him at the ballot box. “I’m not surprised they decided that they’re not going to hear any evidence,” he said. “They should.” He went on to add: “There’s a lot of evidence that looks like it’s coming across the transom right now. And it seems to me that there should have — the arguments not to hear these witnesses seem to me to be, you know, not make a lot of sense.” Mr. Biden faces a highly fluid and competitive primary race — his first electoral test of the campaign comes Monday, at the Iowa caucuses. “I’m focusing on how I beat Donald Trump, how I get the nomination and beat him,” he said. Earlier, he referred to a New York Times report indicating that, according to the unpublished manuscript of the president’s former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump had told Mr. Bolton to aid a pressure campaign aimed at producing negative information about Democrats. “I wonder why he’s so worried about me,” said Mr. Biden, who has been arguing that Republicans attack him because they are nervous about how he would perform in a general election. Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:54 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:54 p.m. ET By Democrats unsuccessfully try to force four amendments. As senators prepared to set the procedures for the final moments of the impeachment trial, Democrats tried to force four amendments to the resolution that would allow for the subpoenaing of documents and witnesses. All four failed. The first amendment would have subpoenaed John Bolton, the former national security adviser, Michael Duffey, an official in the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney, the acting chief of staff, and Robert Blair, a top aide to Mr. Mulvaney, as well as documents related to the decision to withhold important military funds to Ukraine. It failed on party lines, 53-47. The second amendment would have subpoenaed Mr. Bolton and failed on a 51-49 vote, with two Republican senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah, joining Democrats for the vote. The third amendment would have subpoenaed Mr. Bolton, and provided for a deposition and a day of in-person testimony within five days of the resolution’s adoption. It failed 51-49, with Ms. Collins and Mr. Romney again joining Democrats. All three amendments were put forward by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader. A fourth amendment, put forward by Senator Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, would have required Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. to rule on motions to subpoena witnesses and documents, and to rule on any assertion of privilege. That amendment failed on party lines, 53-47. Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:39 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:39 p.m. ET By Trump signed off on the plan for his trial’s close. Image President Trump boarding Air Force One on Friday. Credit... Calla Kessler/The New York Times Before he introduced a resolution laying out the final days of the impeachment trial, Senator Mitch McConnell placed a call to President Trump to run it by him, according to a person with knowledge of the call. Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, shared the details of the resolution with Mr. Trump, who gave his approval, according to the person, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the conversation. The resolution sets up four hours of closing arguments for Monday and a final vote on the articles of impeachment on Wednesday afternoon, after Mr. Trump delivers his State of the Union address.

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 7:30 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 7:30 p.m. ET By Roberts says it would be ‘inappropriate’ for him to act as a tie-breaker. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, on Friday evening asked a pointed question of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: Was he aware that the chief justice during President Andrew Johnson’s impeachment trial acted as the tie-breaker on two separate votes? Democrats have groused that the chief justice has not played an active enough role in President Trump’s impeachment trial, but Mr. Schumer appeared to ask the question simply to enter the query in the public record. Chief Justice Roberts appeared to be prepared for the question, and read his answer off a sheet of paper. It was probably not the answer Mr. Schumer had hoped to hear. “I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a different branch of government, to change that result so that the motion would succeed,” Chief Justice Roberts said.

Jan. 31, 2020, 6:59 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 6:59 p.m. ET By Patricia Mazzei and Senators say they’ve settled on a schedule that would end the trial on Wednesday. Image Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, speaking to reporters in the Capitol on Friday. Credit... Erin Schaff/The New York Times Senators will vote at 4 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday to render a verdict on President Trump’s impeachment trial. They will vote on procedural motions on Friday and return at 11 a.m. on Monday to give closing arguments, senators said on Friday. They will have a chance to give floor speeches on Tuesday before the vote on Wednesday. “I’d rather conclude it right away,” said Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri. But the rules allowed for more time and Democrats insisted, he added. “It gives everybody the flexibility if they need to go somewhere over the weekend,” said Senator Mike Braun, Republican of Indiana. The schedule means Mr. Trump would deliver the State of the Union address on Tuesday night with his all but certain acquittal pending. “The president is gratified that finally — at long last, after multiple delays — the Senate will set a schedule for his acquittals quickly as possible,” said Eric Ueland, Mr. Trump’s congressional liaison. “I do not believe that schedule interferes with his ability to deliver a strong and confident State of the Union message to the House of Representatives and the country next week.” But people close to Mr. Trump said he was unhappy about the prospect of giving the speech before the Senate acquits him, and is mystified as to why Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, could not force an end to the proceeding before his address. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose Mr. Trump’s thinking. Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a statement that Republicans “wanted to rush through an acquittal vote tonight” but Democrats wanted “ample time for every member to speak.” Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 6:18 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 6:18 p.m. ET By Key players in Ukraine affair hold court at the Trump hotel. Image The Trump International Hotel in Washington is a frequent meeting place for Trump administration officials and associates of the President. Credit... The New York Times Given the many Ukraine-related dramas that have played out over the last year in the lobby of the Trump International Hotel in Washington, it seems only fitting that key players in the affair were spending money this week at the hotel owned by the president’s family. President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani was there on Thursday, at his familiar spot in the lobby mezzanine, his nameplate “Rudolph W. Giuliani, Private Office” in front of him. Lunchtime on Friday featured Robert F. Hyde, a former landscaper from Connecticut and a long-shot Republican candidate for Congress, who was thrust into the spotlight when text messages he sent to an associate of Mr. Giuliani suggested he had the ambassador to Ukraine at the time, Marie L. Yovanovitch, under surveillance. For the patrons at the hotel’s bar and steak house, there was a certain satisfaction that this chapter of the Trump era was drawing to what — for them — was a predictable conclusion. “They knew they did not have a case,” said Mr. Hyde, sitting at the bar on Friday, eating a chopped wedge salad and sipping on a Diet Coke and cup of coffee. “There is no treason, no bribery. No abuse of power.” As the Senate prepared to vote on the question of whether witnesses would be called, the bar at the hotel was buzzing, dozens of patrons with drinks in hand. “Need popcorn,” one woman at the bar said, as the votes were being counted. “Waste of time and taxpayer money.” The only remaining question is when Mr. Trump will show up at his hotel to be greeted by his backers that gather here. It is not likely to be this weekend. He flew out Friday afternoon for Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, giving reporters a thumbs up as he left the White House. Read more

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 5:57 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 5:57 p.m. ET By Emily Cochrane and Senate trial timetable in limbo after a vote to block witnesses. The Senate vote on Friday to block new witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial signaled a crucial turning point, steering toward an all but certain acquittal within days. But immediately after the tally was finished, confusion reigned about the precise timetable for the trial’s endgame. “Nobody has any idea,” said Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, when asked what would happen next. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, called a recess after the vote, but gave no indication how long it would last. “Senators will now confer among ourselves, with the House managers, and with the president’s counsel to determine next steps as we prepare to conclude the trial in the coming days,” Mr. McConnell said. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, said he was heading to a meeting with Democrats to figure out how to proceed. “We’re still trying to figure out how to land the plane,” said Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 Republican. Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 5:50 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 5:50 p.m. ET By Senate recesses, with no indication when it will reconvene. After a motion to subpoena witnesses failed, the Senate recessed. It is unclear when the chamber will reconvene and the timing of the next steps in the trial.

Jan. 31, 2020, 5:42 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 5:42 p.m. ET By Michael D. Shear and Senate votes to block impeachment witnesses, moving toward acquittal. Image Senators Mitt Romney of Utah, left, and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, both Republicans considered critical swing votes, on Friday in the Capitol. Credit... Erin Schaff/The New York Times The Senate voted on Friday to block the consideration of additional witnesses and documents in President Trump’s impeachment trial, as Republicans shut down a push by Democrats to bring in new evidence and cleared the way for a swift acquittal in the coming days. The nearly party-line vote came after a bitter, four-hour debate between the prosecution and defense over the merits of prolonging the trial by introducing new information that could shed additional light on Mr. Trump’s behavior or moving forward with the all but certain verdict. The motion to consider new witnesses and evidence failed 49 to 51, with only two Republicans joining every member of the Democratic caucus in favor. “The facts will come out — in all of their horror, they will come out,” Representative Adam B. Schiff, the lead House manager, warned the senators before the vote. “The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories. And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance. What answer shall we give if we do not pursue the truth now?” Patrick A. Philbin, a deputy White House counsel, urged senators not to submit to unreasonable demands from the Democratic prosecutors, insisting that “the Senate is not here to do the investigatory work that the House didn’t do. The Republican victory was sealed just moments after the debate was gaveled open when Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, issued a statement saying that a vote for additional witnesses would only extend what she called a “partisan” impeachment, even as she lamented that the Senate trial had not been fair and that Congress had failed its obligation to the country. Her announcement followed a similar one on Thursday night by Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, who said the Democrats had proved their case that Mr. Trump had withheld military aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rival, calling the inappropriate but not impeachable. Two Republicans senators — Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine — broke ranks with their party and voted with Democrats in their demand for additional testimony. Friday’s vote prompted the final stages of the trial, in which senators will render their verdict on whether to remove Mr. Trump from office, which would take a two-thirds majority, or 67 votes. The final tally is expected to unfold largely along party lines to reject the two articles of impeachment, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Read more

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 5:11 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 5:11 p.m. ET By Former G.O.P. lawmakers call for witnesses. Claudine Schneider, a Republican who spent 10 years in the House representing Rhode Island, warned on Friday that by barring witnesses from testifying in President Trump’s impeachment trial, Senate Republicans would push the United States “closer than ever to authoritarian one-man rule.” Ms. Schneider, who runs a group of moderate Republican former members of Congress called Republicans for Integrity, was joined in her call for witnesses by four other Republican former members of Congress: David Durenberger, a former senator from Minnesota, and three retired congressmen, Jim Kolbe of Arizona, David Emery of Maine and Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland. Mr. Emery, whose home state senator, Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, intends to vote in favor of witnesses, said the founding fathers created the Senate “as a grand arbiter, able to envision the long-term consequences of our actions and measure them against the Constitution and the public interest.” “So far,” he said, “Republican Senate leaders have failed that test.” On Thursday, John Warner, a Republican elder statesman and former senator from Virginia, also issued a statement calling on the Senate to allow witnesses. Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 4:53 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 4:53 p.m. ET By The Senate waits as the leadership negotiates. The Senate slipped into limbo on Friday afternoon, pausing its debate over whether to consider witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial as Republicans and Democrats huddled on the floor apparently negotiating an agreement over how to proceed. With the Senate in what is known as a “quorum call” — essentially a way of pausing the proceedings while leaders decide what comes next — senators milled around the floor. Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat of Arizona, could be spotted chatting with Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, while Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California and one of the House impeachment managers, spoke quietly with Democratic senators. But in the center of the chamber, the focus was on Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, who stood tightly clustered with staff as they appeared to discuss timing for the trial’s next steps.

Jan. 31, 2020, 3:53 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 3:53 p.m. ET By Lev Parnas makes another appeal to testify. Image Lev Parnas in the Capitol on Wednesday. Credit... Erin Schaff/The New York Times As Senate Republicans appeared poised to block witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, Lev Parnas, a former associate of Rudolph W. Giuliani who played a key role in the Ukrainian pressure campaign at the center of the proceeding, made a last-ditch bid to testify. In a letter on Friday to Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, a lawyer for Mr. Parnas outlined an array of evidence that he might offer at the trial. “Mr. Parnas would testify that at all times he was acting at the direction of Mr. Giuliani, on behalf of his client the president, and that the president and a number of the people in his administration and the G.O.P. were aware of the demands being imposed upon Ukraine,” the lawyer, Joseph A. Bondy, wrote in the letter, which was also sent to Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader. While the letter did not detail major new revelations, Mr. Bondy hinted at important additions to the timeline of events surrounding the pressure campaign and the effort to remove the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie L. Yovanovitch. The letter also highlighted what Mr. Bondy described as Mr. Parnas’s first-hand knowledge of the events under scrutiny in the impeachment trial. That “personal knowledge,” he wrote, was “corroborated by physical evidence including text messages, phone records, documentary evidence and travel records.” In particular, Mr. Bondy wrote, Mr. Parnas would testify that he worked alongside a “handful of Republican operatives” to remove Ms. Yovanovitch and unearth damaging information about the Bidens. He then listed a number of senior officials who he said played a role “in this plot,” including the president, Vice President Mike Pence, the former energy secretary Rick Perry, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Attorney General William P. Barr and Senator Lindsey Graham. The letter also referred to the pressure the president appeared to be placing on John R. Bolton, the former national security adviser and the witness most sought by Democrats. The letter capped Mr. Bondy’s weekslong effort to present Mr. Parnas as a potential witness, even as Mr. Parnas, a Soviet-born businessman from Florida and former Trump donor, faces criminal charges in federal court in Manhattan. While it appeared highly unlikely that Mr. Parnas, or anyone else would be called, Mr. Bondy concluded his letter with a final appeal. “We urge you to endorse voting in favor of calling witnesses and hearing evidence, so senators can make a fully informed choice in the president’s impeachment inquiry, based upon all the relevant facts,” he wrote. Read more

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 3:35 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 3:35 p.m. ET By With the votes against him, Schiff makes one final appeal for witnesses. Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the lead House manager, rose one final time on Friday to appeal to a Senate that had already essentially made up its mind against him. Vote for additional witnesses and documents, he implored them, or risk “long lasting and harmful consequences long after this impeachment trial is over.” Mr. Schiff’s warning to senators was threefold: First, he said, it would set a dangerous precedent for every future impeachment trial that witnesses and evidence were not necessary; second, the facts about Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine will come out regardless; and third, Americans will see that for the president, there is a double standard of justice. “The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories,” he said. “And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance. What answer shall we give if we do not pursue the truth now?” Mr. Schiff connected the trial to the enforcement of laws across the country. “Only Donald Trump out of any defendant in America can insist on a trial without witnesses,” he said. “The importance of a fair trial here is not less than in any courtroom in America. It is greater than in any courtroom in America, because we set the example for America.” Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 3:21 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 3:21 p.m. ET By Trump did it, some Republicans concede, but should not be removed. As the Senate marched toward the final phase of President Trump’s impeachment trial, a handful of Republicans coalesced around a common position: Mr. Trump did what he was accused of — pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rival — but should not be removed for it. Mr. Trump has repeatedly insisted that he did nothing wrong with regard to Ukraine, calling his telephone call with the country’s president “perfect” and insisting that the impeachment inquiry was a “hoax.” But even as they were poised to acquit him, several Republican senators were rejecting that assertion, saying his actions were wrong and inappropriate — just not grounds for the Senate to oust him. Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, said Thursday that House Democrats had proved the central allegation at the heart of the case. In a statement, he said it was “inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation.” But he added that the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office “simply for actions that are inappropriate.” And in an interview on Friday, he said that the public would not accept the Senate substituting its judgment on Mr. Trump for its own less than 10 months before an election. On Friday, Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, came to a similar conclusion. He agreed that the president delayed aid to Ukraine and asked a foreign country to investigate a political opponent, calling it “wrong and inappropriate.” Like Mr. Alexander, Mr. Portman said the president’s actions do not rise “to the level of removing a duly-elected president from office.” For months, Mr. Trump has demanded that his allies deliver nothing less than an absolute defense of his actions, and until now, most Republicans on Capitol Hill have largely toed that line. But as the proceeding neared its conclusion and senators began explaining a historic vote in only the third presidential impeachment trial in history, many were shifting their stance. Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, told reporters simply that, “Lamar speaks for lots and lots of us.” He did not elaborate. And Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, said in a statement that even if the president’s actions were wrong, impeachment and removal from office is not warranted. “For purposes of answering my threshold question, I assumed what is alleged is true,” Mr. Rubio said. “And then I sought to answer the question of whether under these assumptions it would be in the interest of the nation to remove the president.” He said he concluded it would not be. “Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” Mr. Rubio said. Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 3:16 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 3:16 p.m. ET By Schumer says Democrats have not agreed to any Republican timeline. Image “There is no agreement between Leader McConnell and myself,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader. Credit... Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said on Friday that he had not said yes to holding a final impeachment vote on Wednesday, as his Republican counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, has suggested. “There is no agreement between Leader McConnell and myself,” Mr. Schumer said. “We have stood for one thing: We do not want this rushed through. We do not want it in the dark of night. Members have an obligation to tell the American people and to tell the people of their states why they are voting.” Democrats’ ability to extend the trial might be limited, but it is not nonexistent, he added. “We do have some power in the minority,” Mr. Schumer said. “And we will use it to get things — to prevent things from just being truncated in the dark of night.” Read more

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Jan. 31, 2020, 2:40 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 2:40 p.m. ET By Without witnesses, Senate ‘shirks’ its responsibilities, John Kelly says Image “In my view, they kind of leave themselves open to a lot of criticism,” John F. Kelly, President Trump’s former chief of staff, said of the Senate. Credit... Doug Mills/The New York Times John F. Kelly, President Trump’s former chief of staff and secretary of homeland security, said on Friday that the Senate would be known forever as a body that “shirks its responsibilities” if it wraps up the trial of his former boss without hearing witnesses. Mr. Kelly, breaking even further with the president, said the impeachment proceedings would be only “half a trial” if the senators did not hear testimony from the likes of John R. Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser, who wrote in an unpublished book that Mr. Trump directly conditioned American security aid to politically beneficial investigations. “In my view, they kind of leave themselves open to a lot of criticism,” Mr. Kelly told NJ Advance Media in an interview tied to an upcoming speech at Drew University. “It seems it was half a trial.” Mr. Kelly, who already said this week that he believed Mr. Bolton’s account, which the president has denied, pointed to polls showing overwhelming public support for witnesses. “If I was advising the United States Senate, I would say, ‘If you don’t respond to 75 percent of the American voters and have witnesses, it’s a job only half done,’” he said. “You open yourself up forever as a Senate that shirks its responsibilities.” Read more

Jan. 31, 2020, 1:55 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020, 1:55 p.m. ET By Republicans argue Trump’s removal would only deepen divisions. Image Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, avoided making a determination as to whether the president’s conduct was appropriate. Credit... Anna Moneymaker/The New York Times As Republican senators announced they would vote to acquit President Trump, they cited a reason divorced from the merits of the president’s conduct, arguing that removing Mr. Trump months away from the presidential election would serve only to deepen the nation’s bitter divisions. Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, announced on Friday that he would vote to block hearing from additional witnesses and acquit Mr. Trump, though he reiterated that he found some of the president’s actions “wrong and inappropriate.” “Our country is already too deeply divided and we should be working to heal wounds, not create new ones,” Mr. Portman said in a statement. “It is better to let the people decide.” Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, in announcing his vote in a lengthy statement on Friday, used similar language, but avoided making a determination as to whether Mr. Trump’s conduct was appropriate. “Can anyone doubt that at least half of the country would view his removal as illegitimate — as nothing short of a coup d’état?” Mr. Rubio wrote. “It is difficult to conceive of any scheme Putin could undertake that would undermine confidence in our democracy more than removal would.” Read more