Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Schumer Wants Mulvaney, Bolton to Testify in Senate Impeachment Trial

Schumer Wants Mulvaney, Bolton to Testify in Senate Impeachment Trial

Something tells me Schumer will throw a fit if the Republicans call Hunter Biden to testify.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZtCfBR8ZZQ

The House has not voted on the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

That fact has not stopped Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer from writing out his demands for the trial in his chamber.

Schumer asked Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to call the following as witnesses:

  • Mick Mulvaney – acting White House chief of staff
  • John Bolton – former national security adviser
  • Michael Duffey – associate director for national security, Office of Management and Budget
  • Robert Blair – senior adviser to Mulvaney

These four men refused to testify in front of the House committees. More than likely, the Republicans will not subpoena the witnesses unless they receive permission from the White House.

Schumer told McConnell that the Democrats would happily hear from “other witnesses who have ‘direct knowledge’ of the decisions behind delaying aid to Ukraine and asking the government in Kyiv to announce an investigation into Joe Biden and son.”

However, Schumer appears not to like the idea of having Hunter Biden testify in the trial

Schumer wants a similar structure to President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1999:

In keeping with the bipartisan spirit of the procedures adopted in the trial of President Clinton in 1999, and in order to advance what I believe are our shared objectives for the process in the trial of President Trump, Senate Democrats propose the following provisions for your consideration and in advance of our upcoming discussion. These provisions are modeled directly on the language of the two resolutions that set forth the 1999 trial rules. The rest of those resolutions passed the Senate by a vote of 100-0, and the second resolution, allowing House Managers to call witnesses, passed with the support of all Senate Republicans.

Specifically, I propose that pro-trial housekeeping measures be adopted on Monday, January 6, 2020; that the swearing-in of the Chief Justice and Senators occur on Tuesday, January 2020; that after a period for preparation and submission of trial briefs, the House Managers be recognized on Thursday, January 9, 2020 to make their presentation for a period of not more than 24 hours, followed by the presentation by the President?s counsel, also for a period of not more than 24 hours.

In the trial of President Clinton, the House Managers were permitted to call witnesses, and it is clear that the Senate should hear testimony of witnesses in this trial as well.

Other demands include:

Schumer also proposes “that the Senate issue subpoenas for a limited set of documents that we believe will shed additional light on the administration’s decision-making.” Finally, Democrats want 24 hours for both the president’s lawyers and the House impeachment managers to each give “opening presentations and rebuttals” to the Senate, along with 16 hours of questioning by senators, divided equally between the parties. Witnesses would be questioned for four hours per side; in Clinton’s trial, however, witnesses gave closed-door depositions.

McConnell has said that he will not negotiate in the public until he speaks in private with Schumer.

McConnell and many other Republicans want a speedy trial that would end before the Senate calls any witnesses.

If McConnell and Schumer cannot agree on anything, “the Senate will vote at each step of the process.”

McConnell only needs 51 of the 53 Republican senators to support each vote. He will likely butt heads with Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Mitt Romney (UT).

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

You get nothing hahahaaha

The Senate Dems will end up adopting the same attitude and behavior as the House Dems. It’s about the “dark” (aka DIRTY) money they need to stay in office while selling their cancer. I’m more interested in seeing what the “3 GOP Commie Amigos”, Romney, Collins and Murkowski, do. I predict that it depends how many Dems vote against impeachment. If less than three, I expect that they will jostle to be the 3rd to vote No for wringing concessions out of Trump. If their votes carry the day for the Dems, all hell will break loose.

Model the senate trail on the “Schiff Rules”, dems do not get to call witnesses nor get to view relevant documents.

Someone said that Joe Biden and Adam Schiff should be called to testify and when they refuse the GoP votes to aquit Trump due to lack of charges.

    ….and McConnell can tell witnesses which questions they are allowed to answer

    Don’t need Schiff for Brains to testify. Get Ciaramella to testify about his contacts with the Intel Committee Democrats. If that is done there will be no reason to change the status quo and standard of one house of Congress not calling the other house’s members.

Call ALL the witnesses. If we’re going to have a circus, it might as well have three rings.

“McConnell only needs 51 of the 53 Republican senators to support each vote. He will likely butt heads with Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Mitt Romney (UT).”

I would add Lee and Sasse to that list as well, and there may be others. While I don’t think they will always vote together, enough of them will defect on the many votes that will be needed to hand control of the process to Schumer (who will nevertheless shriek about “Republican obstructionism”). Meanwhile, I would not be surprised if the GOPe blocks any witnesses Trump wants to call (the excuse the GOPe will use will be “fairness”, which is another way of saying that the coup that started in the House will continue uninterrupted in the Senate).

NEVER underestimate just how very badly the GOPe wants open borders, gun control and government-run health care. Removing Trump and installing a Democrat President is Priority #1 for Mitt Romneycare & Co.

The GOP wanted witnesses int eh House Circus too. That didn’t happen either.

Trump should call that Ukraine prosecutor that Biden had fired

How about the Democratic-socialist-fascists may only call witnesses who have already testified in the House, no more. Since the House will vote to impeach based on that testimony, that testimony should be enough to get conviction. The defense, the President, may call whomever is needed for his defense.

Chuck Schumer, is Schiff and Pelosi, is evil to the core, and lies with the same ease with which we breathe.

My bet is that the Senate will hold an up or down vote to hold the impeachment trial and it will end there. None of the senators want any chance of exposure to their “Investments” in Ukraine or other foreign countries.

Dems still don’t get it… It doesn’t matter what “discussions” were had behind the scenes, none of it matters because nothing the Dems are pushing was communicated to the Ukrainian government (and they have repeatedly stated publicly, that they felt no pressure) and the aid was released before the deadline without ANY of the things Trump wanted accomplished. They have nothing and should receive even less than Republicans got during the House “hearsay hearings.”

Schumer wants….
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Better that McConnell will go forward with the acquittal than to extend the foolishness from the House flunkies.

Lucifer Morningstar | December 16, 2019 at 1:31 pm

Dear Mr. Schumer,

We will give the democrats in the Senate the exact same consideration the democrats gave the Republicans in the House. None whatsoever. Request denied.

Karma’s a bitch, ain’t it Chuck.

Yours,
Mitch

“that the Senate issue subpoenas for a limited set of documents…”

Yeah, how many million pages do you want tomorrow, Chuckie?

Question? Can the Vice President sit over the rules votes prior to impeachment.?

Rules change no impeachment will be accepted by Senate unless Minorty leader in Senate certified it was bipartican.

Who cares what Schumer or any Dem says? And why even have testimony? The House has not sent over a prima facie case, dismiss it immediately.

Then open hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee and subpoena Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, even Adam Schiff. Those hearings should have no power to affect the President, just seeking to discover the crimes of those summoned to appear.

The reaason why McConnell is coordinating with the WH, is to protect the Congress Critters. Trump, who has not availed himself of any largess, especially foreign largess, Want to drag all of this slime into the open. He has nothing to lose. McConnell and the members of the Congress, on the other hand, are up to their necks in unlawfully obtained largess, both foreign and domestic. If the money trail can be illustrated during an impeachment trial, the are close to 63 MILLION people in this country who are going to demand that Congress Critters go to jail. And rational Congress Critters want none of that. The delusional ones still think that they are going to be protected, should this huge pay to play practice comes to light. Does anyone wonder why 40% [96] of the Republican Congress Critters resigned, retired or announced that they are not seeking reelection since Trump took office?

McConnell will try to convince Trump to allow the Senate to simply state that there is no evidence that Trump committed any impeachable offense and skipp a trial.

    Ghost Rider in reply to Mac45. | December 16, 2019 at 2:21 pm

    The pay to play game is rampant in many parts of the government. Rumor is that Gramnesty/McCain had some shenanigans in the Ukraine themselves…. along with Pelosi and others. I’m thinking the impeachment is all for show to the Dem base in the House. But it will die relatively quietly in the Senate.

    Valerie in reply to Mac45. | December 16, 2019 at 4:49 pm

    A lot of that largess may be lawful, especially given Congress’ ability to exempt its members from the rules applicable to the rest of us. What may be at stake is the FUTURE ability of these very wealthy families to continue to have access to taxpayer funds.

      Mac45 in reply to Valerie. | December 16, 2019 at 5:17 pm

      Bribery is still bribery, whether it is legal or not. Look, what politicians have been doing since the Roman Senate is to feather their own nests using public and private money. Sometimes it is an actual exchange of cash. Sometimes it is business or investment opportunities. But, it is always geared to doing something for special interests and usually to the detriment of the public who the politician was elected to serve.

      The future is at stake, for politicians. But, the past can effect their present as well. Politicians, by and large, have no other skill than selling influence for special interests in exchange for money. They do not want to the leave the special interest trough, and, usually the only reason that they do is because if it comes to light that they have been feeding at this trough they will suffer for it, in some manner.

Last week, I got a survey from my D rep asking for advice on what to do in 2020. Note – this person is one of the 31 D reps in Trump country. Ha, some survey since you could only pick one item and leave no comments. I called instead and was surprised that I got through on the first ring!

I told them…
– no on impeachment since Obama did far worse than Trump,
– yes on USMCA,
– yes on getting budgets voted on and stop doing the temp CA
– work on national security including the southern wall and immigration reform and let the US Military help on protecting the border instead of guarding some border overseas
– take care of the military and vets first before you turn to national healthcare into a big VA wasteland
– start reforming government by getting rid of departments and letting the states manage. I gave examples of land management and education.

I stopped since I’m sure the guy had stopped taking notes. But I felt better.

Surely there should first be a vote in the Senate along the lines of a motion for dismiss for failure to state a claim.

I did not see anything to suggest that DJT had committed a high crime or misdemeanor. Further, I did see the witnesses all say that they did not see any such thing, either.

Are they going to hold debate on the House floor as they should? The committee members heard testimony behind closed doors. The house in impeachment, NOT the committees, is sitting as the grand jury deciding indictment, er, impeachment. The house as a whole needs to be privy to all the testimony and all the witnessing that’s been heard by the committees, including that behind closed doors. With live coverage so We, the People, the bosses of Congress, can see.

In a sane world Graham would insist on a public meeting with Scheemer, and let him have it.

Hey Chuckie…How does it feel to want?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend