Senate GOP wants speedy Trump acquittal

Warlord

Member
Joined
May 2, 2013
Messages
11,694
After weeks of public haggling from within the caucus, GOP senators are largely lining up behind a shorter proceeding with few, if any, witnesses, paving the way for them to hand Trump an early election-year victory.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said his goal is “to have as short a trial as possible.”

“I think there's a desire by senators, quite honestly, to get this chapter closed and moved forward,” Graham told reporters.

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said that when it comes to a trial “shorter is better,” and that he thought his colleagues were coalescing behind that.

“I think shorter is better for lots of reasons,” Cramer said. “I think people are ready to move on.”

Republicans are also stressing though that they don’t want to simply dismiss the articles against Trump. The House voted earlier this month to impeach Trump on two counts: one charging him with abuse of power in his dealings with Ukraine and the second with obstructing Congress during its investigation of those actions.

“I’m ready to get this thing and get it done,” said Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.). “It’s time for him to have his day in court. … I don’t want to a vote to dismiss. I want a vote to acquit. The president deserves to have due process.”

Graham, who previously advocated dismissing the articles, added that a “motion dismissed will not stand. … I don't want a motion to dismiss. I want a vote on the articles themselves.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has emerged as a close ally of Trump’s, has floated trying to dismiss the article, including telling The Washington Post in November that he would make the motion “as soon as we possibly can.” A motion to dismiss would need 51 votes, and members of GOP leadership have suggested it would fall short.

Asked after the House impeachment vote if he still wanted to dismiss the articles instead of going through a trial, Paul sidestepped, telling The Hill that the “whole idea of the impeachment inquiry was ill-conceived … so I think the quicker it can be done the better.”

The embrace of a brief impeachment trial comes after the White House and top congressional allies initially called for a lengthy trial that would ground 2020 contenders in Washington into the early voting states and give Trump a public forum to probe former Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and Ukraine.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has left the door open to having witnesses, said if the White House is okay with skipping calling individuals to testify that he is ready to vote on the articles and move on.

“I’m ready to vote now,” Hawley said. “I think the articles are a joke.”

The change among GOP senators mirrors a similar shift in tone coming from the White House.

White House spokesman Hogan Gidley told reporters earlier this month that the president “has made clear” that he wants witnesses including the Bidens and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

But White House director of legislative affairs Eric Ueland told CBS News late last week that, similar to former special counsel Robert Muller’s investigation into the 2016 election, “the facts belie the allegation and the facts speak very strongly for themselves."

“The president is working closely and collaboratively with Leader McConnell,” Ueland added, asked if the president wants witnesses or not.

McConnell hasn’t given an exact timeframe for how long he thinks a trial should take. While he’s repeatedly stressed that the Senate GOP caucus writ large hasn’t made a final decision on witnesses, he told Fox News Radio that he does not believe witnesses are necessary.

“Do we know enough? Have we learned enough after listening to all this to go on and vote on the two very weak articles of impeachment? Or do we want to have a show trial in which both sides try to embarrass the other and put on a, you know, an embarrassing scene, frankly, for the American people?,” McConnell said, characterizing the decision on witnesses.

“Obviously, I think we've heard enough. After we've heard the arguments, we ought to vote and move on,” he added.

The timeframe, and whether or not to call witnesses, isn’t completely up to McConnell. The GOP leader, who likes to keep a tight grip on the floor, has said he doesn’t have as much “ball control” during an impeachment trial.

Fifty-one senators will decide whether or not to call witnesses. During the Clinton impeachment trial senators voted along party lines to sign off on closed-door depositions with three individuals.

Democrats say they also want a quick trial, but one that would include testimony from witnesses and document requests. Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said his caucus’s priority for the trial was that it was “fair and speedy.”

“I have proposed a very reasonable structure that would do just that,” he told reporters.

Schumer, in a letter sent earlier this month to McConnell, outlined a roughly two-week timeframe for the first phase of the trial, including 24 hours each for the House impeachment managers and Trump’s team to submit their case, followed by 16 hours for senators to ask questions.

Republicans, while taking issue with Schumer’s call for witnesses, have signaled they could support his outline for how the first part of a trial should go and how long it should last.

“I think we should take that on the first phase,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), referring to the Democratic proposal. “That seemed pretty reasonable.”

Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.), the No. 4 Senate Republican, said that Schumer’s estimate for phase one “sounded about right.”

No Republican senators have signaled that they will support Schumer’s witness request, which includes former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, nor his request that the Senate passes a resolution at the start of the trial that would cover both witnesses and procedure.

During the Clinton trial the Senate passed a resolution at the outset on the rules and then a second resolution after the proceeding started calling for three witnesses to testify behind closed doors.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the senators Democrats are hoping to win over, told WGAN, a Maine radio station, that she thought the Clinton process was a “good model.”

In an attempt to get Democrats to back down on witnesses, some Republicans are warning that if Democrats push the issue they could try to call individuals that Democrats oppose asking to testify, including Hunter Biden.

“Well, if we go down in the witness path, we're going to want the whistleblower. We're going to want Hunter Biden. You can see here that this is the kind of mutual assured destruction episode that will go on for a long time,” McConnell told Fox News Radio.

Republicans believe they could have an advantage because the administration is expected to exert executive privilege to prevent Mulvaney or Bolton from testifying, setting up a lengthy court battle for Senate Democrats.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) made that point during a recent closed-door caucus lunch, telling his colleagues that while Democrats’ witnesses could be tied up in a months-long court battle the GOP witness wish list would not currently face the same fight, according to a Republican senator who attended the lunch.

Kennedy echoed his warning publicly during a Fox News interview pledging that if Democrats want a “full-blown trial,” by calling witnesses Republicans oppose, GOP senators would follow suit.

“If they want a trial,” he said, “my God, we are going to have a trial.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/475906-senate-gop-wants-speedy-trump-acquittal
 
Because they all have their hand in the cookie jar. They dont want exposed. A senate trial with many witnesses would expose the one party system
 
Rand is backing it I don't think that's right.

What?! Seriously....what the heck Rand?

Just cuz Rand has on some issue tried to find common ground and appeared supportive of GOPA wing leader at times, it does not mean they are perpetual allies on everything.
From 'follow the money' standpoint, there are some deep seated differences considering who the top funder of GOPA wing is.


Sheldon Adelson hates Rand Paul, but is open to Rubio/Cruz

Trump gives Freedom Medal to Adelson
 
Just cuz Rand has on some issue tried to find common ground and appeared supportive of GOPA wing leader at times, it does not mean they are perpetual allies on everything.
From 'follow the money' standpoint, there are some deep seated differences considering who the top funder of GOPA wing is.


Sheldon Adelson hates Rand Paul, but is open to Rubio/Cruz

Trump gives Freedom Medal to Adelson

We get it "Sheldon bad". Completely agree that doesnt take away from Rand taking a bad position
 
What?! Seriously....what the heck Rand?
There are other ways to expose and prosecute the crimes, I trust Rand and I believe he is working with Trump on this.

Giving the Senate Neocons a chance to convict and remove Trump or blackmail him to give them things in exchange for not doing so is dangerous.
 
There are other ways to expose and prosecute the crimes, I trust Rand and I believe he is working with Trump on this.

Giving the Senate Neocons a chance to convict and remove Trump or blackmail him to give them things in exchange for not doing so is dangerous.

What are those ways?

So the neocons who would be exposed and Rand want to go the same route...

They would still vote either way. If the neocons wanted to remove him they still would vote the same way
 
What are those ways?

So the neocons who would be exposed and Rand want to go the same route...

They would still vote either way. If the neocons wanted to remove him they still would vote the same way
Huber, Durham, Barr and others are investigating and should result in prosecutions.

I trust Rand and I trust Trump to a certain extent.
 
They need the optics and the trial would provide the right exposure.

That way will look more like a political hit job... if they bring down people in both parties the optics is extremely better
 
2020 Presidential Election rapidly approaches - GOP candidate needed

:info: Need a quick Senate Trial & Speedy Conviction so that President Pence can ramp up his 2020 campaign. :eek:
 
They need the optics and the trial would provide the right exposure.

That way will look more like a political hit job... if they bring down people in both parties the optics is extremely better

They do want a trial but don't want the Biden's near it. They are protecting the Biden's that's all. Rand is going to expose them with a motion to acquit.
 
Of course you want a warmongering Neocon instead of Trump.

We know that already.

Oppose ultra warmonger NWO neocon Donnell.

Pence won't last long he's about as popular as Gerry Ford, IOW a loser. Opens up possibility for other R candidates, Massie, Paul, etc....

:question: You never even considered the possibility of a pro-American candidate, did you?
 
Oppose ultra warmonger NWO neocon Donnell.

Pence won't last long he's about as popular as Gerry Ford, IOW a loser. Opens up possibility for other R candidates, Massie, Paul, etc....

:question: You never even considered the possibility of a pro-American candidate, did you?
LOL

You are the one pushing every anti-American candidate against the most pro-America President we have had in a long time.

Your ROLCON is weak.

Rand supports Trump and so does Massie.


The John Birch Society has increasingly been linked to the presidency of Donald Trump by political commentators such as Jeet Heer of The New Republic, arguing that "Trumpism" is essentially Bircherism. According to Politico, Trump's former personal lawyer and early mentor Roy Cohn was deeply involved with the Society and its leaders. Trump confidante and longtime advisor Roger Stone said that Trump's father Fred Trump was a financier of the Society and a personal friend of founder Robert Welch.[SUP][80][/SUP] Trump's Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney was the speaker at the John Birch Society's National Council dinner shortly before joining the Trump administration.[SUP][81][/SUP] U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), widely reported to be one of Trump's top advisors on foreign policy, is also tied to the John Birch Society.[SUP][82][/SUP] The senator's father, former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas), has had a long and very close relationship with the Society, celebrating its work in his 2008 keynote speech at the John Birch Society 50th anniversary event and saying that it was leading the fight to restore freedom.[SUP][83][/SUP] The keynote speaker at the group's 60th anniversary celebration was Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky.), who maintains a near-perfect score on the Society's "Freedom Index" ranking of members of Congress.[SUP][84][/SUP] Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who hosted Trump on his Infowars radio show and claims to have a personal relationship with the president, called Trump a "John Birch Society president"[SUP][85][/SUP] and previously claimed Trump was "more John Birch Society than the John Birch Society."[SUP][86][/SUP]

More at: https://everything.explained.today/John_Birch_Society/

Trump has a pedigree that suggests he is for real, too. “People don't know it, but Trump comes from a long line of anti-communists,” Stone explained. “His father was a quiet funder of the John Birch Society, his father was a personal friend of Billy Graham, a personal friend of [JBS founder] Robert Welch, a supporter of Dr. Fred Schwarz's [Christian] Anti-Communism Crusade, and had been a major, major fundraiser and donor for Barry Goldwater. He kept his national politics quiet, because of course in Queens, all of the zoning and permitting for the Trump residential real-estate business was controlled by machine Democrats.”

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...er-stone-warns
 
Understandable why they would want to have a speedy trial. The more the trial drags on, the more people will have to testify and a lot of people are going to get exposed in the process.
 
Understandable why they would want to have a speedy trial. The more the trial drags on, the more people will have to testify and a lot of people are going to get exposed in the process.

Graham and co are supporting Pelosi in private. They want a trial but they want to rig it. Rand wants the Biden's to testify in any trial. Can't have that.

So Rand is trying to force a vote on a motion to dismiss the whole thing. That should smoke out the neocons and they will have to explain why they didn't vote for the motion. They don't want that either.

Fascinating.
 
I can see the whole thing taking one day.

Give the floor to Trump's representative and let them make the case that Biden bragged about extorting the Ukrainian government and how that legitimately should be investigated.

Present sworn affidavits from Ukrainian officials testifying to the Biden extortion.

Present all of the Constitutional authority the President has to pursue such crimes.

Present the argument that a citizen isn't exempt from prosecution simply because they are running for their party's nomination to run for President.

Mention how Joe Biden isn't even running against Donald Trump, but instead is running against other Democrats.

Basically make the case that Biden admitted to extortion and that created probably cause to investigate.

Heap on top of that how the President has a duty to make sure he isn't giving aid to a corrupt government that will simply pocket the money.

Lay out the timeline of how the aid was released before the Ukrainian government was even aware that it was temporarily held.

Conclude with the argument that there was no abuse of power, but rather a proper use of executive power.

Ask for a vote to dismiss the charges.

Watch the vote to dismiss pass.

Done.
 
Back
Top