Impeachment: to call witnesses or not to call witnesses?
Now that the NY Times has come out with another perfectly-timed “bombshell” based on “I heard it through the grapevine,” it seems that enough RINO senators are leaning towards voting to hear witnesses that the gambit of supposed Bolton revelations has worked.
But it’s not at all clear to me that the Democrats will win much if anything by pressing for more witnesses and calling Bolton. Yes, the Democrats’ plan is most definitely to “Kavanaugh” the proceedings. But how did that work out on the end for the Democrats? Yes, it may yield some further grist for the Democrats’ mills. But I doubt it will deflect a single one of Trump’s supporters, and it will open the door for the GOP to call more witnesses, too. That might lead to the GOP’s own bombshells.
After all, we know a lot about what the Democrats’ witnesses might say. Some of it actually exonerates the president. We don’t know what Hunter Biden or the-whistleblower-who-must-not-be-named would say, and it could definitely open up several cans of worms for the Democrats. When last I checked, it’s McConnell who’s in control of who to call if the majority votes to call more witnesses. And even Mitt Romney has now come out in favor of the Republicans getting some witnesses of their own:
Sen. Mitt Romney, a Republican from Utah who wants former national security adviser John Bolton to testify in the president’s impeachment trial, said he supports Republican witnesses being called too.
When the Washington Examiner asked on Tuesday if former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter should be called as well, Romney responded, “I think if you heard from one side, you probably ought to have the chance to hear from a witness from the other side.”…
Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, told reporters Tuesday he is confident that 51 votes exist in the conference to call witnesses on the GOP list if necessary.
“I’ll make a prediction. There’ll be 51 Republican votes to call Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, the whistleblower, and the DNC staffer [Alexandra Chalupa],” he said.
Senate Republicans said Monday that any deal to call for witnesses will include Hunter Biden.
“If we need to hear from more people, it’s going to be a group of individuals,” said Sen. John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, on Monday.
This entire push could boomerang and hit the Democrats squarely in the face.
According to the reports I read a while ago, Trump was in favour of calling witnesses. I think it is best to defer to the street fighter on what is best. Why not also call Monica Lewinsky so that point can be made about the importance of witnesses during the impeachment proceedings. She is after all an expert in the matter of first “hand” witness, and not some hearsay, as well as impeachment. Make it a complete Kabuki theater.
So 4 Republican Senators vote to call witnesses (barring any Democrat defections, as Sen. Manchin, say) will make a majority? And these are?: Romney, Collins, Murkowski. . . and. . . and who? I just haven’t heard. Ratbastards, whoever it be.
Romney is such a meek little man: “I think if you heard from one side, you PROBABLY ought to have the chance to hear from a witness from the other side.”
He truly is a waffler. His highest public office should be dog catcher. The only argument one could make for him having been POTUS was that he would have displaced Barack Hussein from the White House.
Time and again, Democrat “gotcha” moments have turned into Wile E. Coyote moments. This may be another one.
Did Pam Bondi play the video of Joe Biden claiming he directly, in person,
pressured Ukraine by threatening to withhold $1 billion in aid? Did Democrats watch it? Do they want it repeated, with stumbling Joe not even sure of what he’s saying?
Cicero on January 28, 2020 at 3:49 pm said:
Romney… The only argument one could make for him having been POTUS was that he would have displaced Barack Hussein from the White House.
* * *
At the time, that was enough.
@sdferr –
I believe the 4th would be Alexander.
“Ratbastards” seems about right to me. We would also accept “indolent apparatchiks”.
I don’t know if Graeme Wood actually has a window into Bolton’s soul, but he writes as if he does.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/john-bolton-wont-give-anything-away-free/605614/
Unless I’m completely missing something, literally every piece of available evidence indicates that Trump is actually being HELPED by this impeachment mess. But instead of trying to cut their losses and flee the battlefield, the Democrats want to keep sending in reinforcements?
Mike
“This entire push could boomerang and hit the Democrats squarely in the face.” neo
Yes and if Republicans should regain the house and attain a 2/3rds majority in the Senate*… they should impeach and convict every activist federal judge who has ruled extra-constitutionally, having demonstrated their unfitness for the office they hold.
* yes, that’s too good to be true but what else are dreams for?
“But instead of trying to cut their losses and flee the battlefield, the Democrats want to keep sending in reinforcements?”
It’s because the alternative to their continuous and embarrassing yet completely insane raving is actually worse.
If they admit they notice that Trump is just a successful president who is achieving his goals and doing his job in a typical presidential manner- suited to the circumstances- then some yuuuge fraction of the people who normally vote democrat would decamp from that party forever, thus reducing it to the obscure fringe group that it rightfully deserves to be.
Can’t have that.
Thus, hysteria, 24/7.
The grand irony of the idea if having Biden testify is that he will refuse, claiming executive privilege… and the Democrats will agree with him.
I don’t know how Biden could claim executive privilege when his offense in Ukraine is self-admitted on video. Unless, of course, Senators ask him what Obama knew and when he knew it.
Before the Senate considers calling witnesses the House neglected to call, it should demand release of the ICIG’s testimony.
At this point, Republicans should point out that if Trump can be removed from office over Ukraine, so can the Democrats front runner, Joe Biden, if he were elected President. Just keep mentioning it here and there. Let that percolate with the Dem voters…..
Witnesses might supply the missing entertainment value. Whether that’s good tactics or strategy is a separate issue, although I lean to it hurting the dems.
Hunter can do one of three things:
Fess up and make his and his family’s shenanigans look really, really awful. But they’re dems and so it’s okay.
Lie and depend on connections and his relationship to “That’s Just Joe” to beat perjury charges.
Plead the Fifth.