Donald Trump

[SWP's back]

Summary:

If the Senate subpoenas him (which they’re now very unlikely to do), he will testify.

I think they’re gonna have to. He’s a first hand material witness. Surely even Graham will have to do this.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

He said 'testify to the Senate'. That is pretty specific, and given that McConnel has said he's going to be conspiring with the White House lawyers in the conducting of the trial, unless something pretty dramatic happens it is very unlikely Bolton will testify.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I think they’re gonna have to. He’s a first hand material witness. Surely even Graham will have to do this.

Don't bet on it. Graham is compromised.

 

[SWP's back]

Stable genius

 

[SWP's back]

He said 'testify to the Senate'. That is pretty specific, and given that McConnel has said he's going to be conspiring with the White House lawyers in the conducting of the trial, unless something pretty dramatic happens it is very unlikely Bolton will testify.

It’d be interesting to see what he does if the House subpoenas him, given they still have the power to do so. Even once it’s moved up to the senate.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

It’d be interesting to see what he does if the House subpoenas him, given they still have the power to do so. Even once it’s moved up to the senate.

I guess we'll see. If I were Schiff, I'd be drafting the subpoena as we speak.

This is pretty monumental, but I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I think they’re gonna have to. He’s a first hand material witness. Surely even Graham will have to do this.

McConnell and Graham have said several times, in various ways, that they do not want material testimony at the trial. They may not even want any testimony of any kind, and they could make that happen, which is what many of us (you included, of course) have banged on about for some time: the actual democratic institutions within the US (and UK) government are folding before our eyes.

Not even during the Clinton impeachment was there this much sycophancy (not even close, if you actually compare the process to what we are currently seeing).

It’d be interesting to see what he does if the House subpoenas him, given they still have the power to do so. Even once it’s moved up to the senate.

Bolton’s statement specifically cites the court decision to throw out the Kupperman case and then specifically mentions “if the Senate”, so I am guessing he would say the House has forgone their right to subpoena (and it would have to be taken up again by the courts to force him to testify).

 

[MillionMilesAway]

McConnell and Graham have said several times, in various ways, that they do not want material testimony at the trial. They may not even want any testimony of any kind, and they could make that happen, which is what many of us (you included, of course) have banged on about for some time: the actual democratic institutions within US (and UK) government are folding before our eyes.

Not even during the Clinton impeachment was there this much sycophancy (not even close, if you actually compare the process to what we are currently seeing).


Bolton’s statement specifically cites the court decision to throw out the Kupperman case and then specifically mentions “if the Senate”, so I am guessing he would say the House has forgone their right to subpoena (and it would have to be taken up again by the courts to force him to testify).

I agree the Senate reference is specific.
As I understand it, it requires the Chief Justice Roberts to allow a motion to call witnesses, requiring 4 Republicans to vote for it to pass. Without that, there is no way to make it happen.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Stable genius

As many of his former business partners, employees, confidants, and “friends” have said, everything he touches turns to ****.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I agree the Senate reference is specific.
As I understand it, it requires the Chief Justice Roberts to allow a motion to call witnesses, requiring 4 Republicans to vote for it to pass. Without that, there is no way to make it happen.

And even in such cases, the witnesses can still refuse to honour the subpoenas, based entirely on the precedent now set by the White House, and such action would then have to be litigated, likely eventually going to the Supreme Court, where none other than the Chief Justice (among the rest of the court, of course) would have to pass judgement or — has been his and their conservative majority’s tactic as of late — find some infinitesimal technicality allowing them to send it back to a lower court or rule in such a way as to not set any sweeping precedent of any kind, meaning any future witness refusals would also have to be litigated.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

McConnell and Graham have said several times, in various ways, that they do not want material testimony at the trial. They may not even want any testimony of any kind, and they could make that happen, which is what many of us (you included, of course) have banged on about for some time: the actual democratic institutions within US (and UK) government are folding before our eyes.

Not even during the Clinton impeachment was there this much sycophancy (not even close, if you actually compare the process to what we are currently seeing).


Bolton’s statement specifically cites the court decision to throw out the Kupperman case and then specifically mentions “of the Senate”, so I am guessing he would say the House has forgone their right to subpoena (and it would have to be taken up again by the courts to force him to testify).

Mitch McConnel is trying to use the Clinton Senate trial as some kind of benchmark, but completely missing out the fact that during Clinton's impeachment trial there was no new evidence brought. All the evidence was presented at the House hearings.

In this case, that is the complete opposite. Republican lawmakers actively prevented witness/documentary evidence from being heard at the House hearings. There is one reason, and one reason alone why they did that, and it's because they know the revelation of that evidence would be damning. EVERYONE knows it. They couldn't look any more guilty if they tried. The GOP know the game will be up if any of that evidence ever sees the light of day in the Senate. They will literally do ANYTHING to try and prevent it from being heard. This is the hill they are prepared to die on, and they are not afraid of tearing down the institution in the process.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Mitch McConnel is trying to use the Clinton Senate trial as some kind of benchmark, but completely missing out the fact that during Clinton's impeachment trial there was no new evidence brought. All the evidence was presented at the House hearings.

In this case, that is the complete opposite. Republican lawmakers actively prevented witness/documentary evidence from being heard at the House hearings. There is one reason, and one reason alone why they did that, and it's because they know the revelation of that evidence would be damning. EVERYONE knows it. They couldn't look any more guilty if they tried. The GOP know the game will be up if any of that evidence ever sees the light of day in the Senate. They will literally do ANYTHING to try and prevent it from being heard. This is the hill they are prepared to die on, and they are not afraid of tearing down the institution in the process.

I truly wish we had not moved to the US so that I could only have to actively be invested in one (or two, depending on how things carry on in Spain) democratic implosion.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I truly wish we had not moved to the US so that I could only have to actively be invested in one (or two, depending on how things carry on in Spain) democratic implosion.

I go to the US with work about 3 or 4 times a year. I really don't want to be there when the whole thing comes crashing down.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Folks, just FYI -- the sycophancy for those who were part of the Republican power structure before Trump will end immediately if he's not re-elected. Well, immediately being on the inauguration of the new President. They are trying to outlast him and retain support of his cult for themselves until the election. They will not cross him, they will obstruct, they will do everything humanly possible to avoid putting themselves in a position in which they have to publicly choose him or the country with everything at stake.

I would bet all the money I had that a good number of Republicans who have been the most egregious Trump ass-lickers actually vote for his opponent while defending Trump publicly. Not the idiots who rode in on his coattails as freshmen Congressional representatives -- I'm talking the old school Republicans. When/if Trump makes public statements after he's gone, they can ignore them or say "a private citizen has the right to say what he wants, I have a job to do" to avoid having to prove their bonafides to his cult. They are spineless beyond all measure -- focused solely on self-preservation.

It may work. I suspect it will work.

 

[Vic]

I think they’re gonna have to. He’s a first hand material witness. Surely even Graham will have to do this.

Notwithstanding the party line, there must be some muttering among Republicans in the Senate about the mad Caesar. Just the humiliation of being given "notice by tweet" that he's going to commit war crimes must be giving some pause for thought - surely...

Et tu, Graham...

 

[SWP's back]

 

[SebastianBlue]

Notwithstanding the party line, there must be some muttering among Republicans in the Senate about the mad Caesar. Just the humiliation of being given "notice by tweet" that he's going to commit war crimes must be giving some pause for thought - surely...

Et tu, Graham...

To be fair, this has been said about every humiliation, indiscretion, and outright illegal action Trump as taken to date, so I personally don’t have much hope that this is when the Republicans will draw the line.

 

[SebastianBlue]

As referenced earlier, in that scenario we’re likely to see a further drawn out situation involving more litigation and judicial obfuscation.

 

[SWP's back]

As referenced earlier, in that scenario we’re likely to see a further drawn out situation involving more litigation and judicial obfuscation.

True but one can hope

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]