Soon the House will vote to impeach Trump.
Then the senate will try Trump.
Now the senate wants to end this as soon as possible
But what then happens to a careful examination of the evidence? after all the purpose of a trial is to discover the truth as exhibited by the evidence.
A speedy end to the trial will only serve to deny Americans an examination of the evidence.
After the IG report it is clear that politicians of both parties, the justice department and the media mislead the public as to the facts about Trump and Russia.
This has been done with special counsel, leaks, internal investigations, show trials and so on. Primarily outside the public eye.
Do Americans deserve to know the truth from public hearings?
Senate Republicans have no interest in a trial. They decided long ago that they wouldn’t entertain impeachment. Evidence is not necessary. I expect that the biggest GOP blowhards will simply make speeches again about the process and avoid any talk about the actual articles of impeachment. Then gavel. And done.
Every senator knows that the president won’t be removed from office (both democrats and republicans). Just as almost every senator knows that trump was wrong in what he did. The need for a long drawn out trial is unneccessay. We all know what trump did and we all know he won’t be removed. No need for a long trial.
If we can’t hear from the key players what good will be accomplished by a long trial.
The House will impeach on what they consider to be sufficient grounds of evidence. If the Senate looks at that evidence and agrees that it is sufficient for a finding of guilty, then Trump is removed.
If the Senate looks at the same evidence and decides it is not sufficient to convict, then they can vote no.
They are under no obligation to go out and look for additional evidence. In a court trial you don’t hear the prosecutor say “Your Honor, we don’t have enough evidence to convict now but we would like to do some more investigating.”
Now, if the Senate chooses to add additional evidence either of guilt or exculpatory, they get to vote on whether to do that.
Its up to them.
And, as with the Clinton trial, a vote not to convict doesn’t mean that it was determined that there wasn’t anything wrong with what was done. It means that not enough Senators thought it reached the level of removal.
I think anyone with half an ounce of common sense can agree that Trump has not acted in the most ethical way on this and a myriad of other issues but the question for everyone is does this meet the standard for impeachment?
Your last comment about a vote not to convict does not mean that Trump did not do anything wrong is so true but it will not stop Trump and his supporters saying the Senate exonerated him and proved Trump did nothing wrong.
I have to give Trump credit because he sure knows how to control and dictate the narrative on any issue.
Why? It’s politics and we have been going down the road of hyper partisan politics for the last decade my side right your side wrong. I would imagine 5% of politicians are honest and those 5% don’t stand a chance.
Look at the impeachment mess dominating the news. Everything is about ratings and team play hardily a mention the over 700,000 people are losing food stamps, McConnell on the way to pack the court with 180 judges, patriot act extended, etc… We are truly sheep.
I agree with this. I will also add that the Senate should call witnesses that can rebut the house. If they don’t, I believe that will be a mistake. They should call all of the people with first hand knowledge like
Mulvaney
Pompeo
Perry
Guliani
Bolton
To name a few. Why wouldnt the Senate call first hand witnesses to offer counter testimony to clear the president.
