Did Democrats cave today on the issue of calling witnesses in the Senate trial of donald trump? After a successful vote to call witnesses and some backroom negotiations, Democrats agreed to not call witnesses and close up shop today, in return for including testimony from Rep. Herrera-Beutler in the record.
I am no expert in law and impeachment proceedings (neither are most of us here), but I tend to think that Democratic lawyers and lawmakers are and I rely on their judgment to do what is right for the country. We all do that too — every day, although we also keep an eye on the decisions they make and the opinions they opine, to make sure our concerns and ideas are taken into account. We also rely on reputable subject-matter experts to inform and guide us.
So, here are a few opinions on the subject from experts, who have solid reputations and who, we will have to agree, understand this better than most of us.
The overall consensus among many experts (they do not all agree, that’s how we Democrats work) is that calling hostile witnesses without much preparation would have thrown a monkey wrench into the case. Besides, the outcome of the vote is already written in stone; republicans will not vote to convict trump even if he shot Lady Liberty on Pennsylvania Avenue (which is what he attempted to do anyways). Also, Democrats have made their case masterfully, mainly aimed at the American People; there is probably not much else left to uncover or to present.
Former DOJ IG and Asst US Attorney Michael Bromwich -
Former Lead Counsel, House Impeachment Inquiry Daniel Goldman notes that the witnesses of interest would have been hostile witnesses -
Prof Randall Eliason at GWLaw notes that the motion was to call one witness, not a gaggle of them. Many of us did not know this, did we?
Lawrence Tribe’s opinion -
Not sure how this evidence will be used, but Daniel Goldman, former Lead Counsel, House Impeachment Inquiry, thinks it’s important.
Yes, Dem leadership needs to be in front of this story — and keep educating the public, says Kate Shaw, Law Professor @CardozoLaw and former Obama WH lawyer.
So, let’s tone down the anger and the rhetoric until we understand more. Let’s listen more to the experts and less to media personalities and arm-chair pundits posting on social media (some of whom are the same old right-wing trolls that have turned our country upside down with their lies and propaganda). Let’s stop using the word cave, that’s what republicans want us to do and I am sure many of them are posting that word with great delight on twitter and facebook.
And let’s send some thanks and words of appreciation to the house impeachment managers for the stellar job they did against the party of thugs.
Joyce Alene, Prof at U. of Alabama Law School and Obama US Atty -
Joy and Neal Katyal, Supreme Court lawyer, law professor, and former US Acting Solicitor General.
Here is the closing argument by the esteemed Rep. Jamie Raskin -
Now, let’s hear your informed opinion and insights. If you disagree with the experts cited here (or even if you agree), please provide a cogent argument based on evidence, logic and reason (yelling and screaming won’t cut it, nor will fear and frustration 😄). Let’s also hear about what should happen next.
Breaking — final Senate vote is 57:43, not enough to convict. Republican Senators Burr, Cassidy, Collins, Murkowski, Romney, Sasse and Toomey voted for conviction. McConnell did not.
Fork-tongued McConnell came out attacking trump in his post-vote speech. He could have attacked Democrats instead, but he didn’t. Will this drive a wedge between trump supporters and the republican establishment? To which we should say, please proceed.
