While Trump is refusing to testify at his own trial, House impeachment managers should not rest their case on public evidence.

That evidence is helpful—even damning—but there is other relevant evidence that should be presented. Stone’s and Flynn’s testimony, for example. THREAD

Stone is a longtime confidante of Trump’s. The morning of the insurrection he met with people later charged with crimes for their involvement in it.

Flynn spoke at many rallies in DC prior to 1/6. He met with Trump privately in the Oval a number of times in the relevant period.

Both men should be asked about Trump’s comments prior to the rally. Both men should be asked about communications they had about the rally. Both men should be asked about convos they had with rally organizers and attendees.

Maybe they’ll plead the fifth—but that matters too.

Trump campaign staff set up the rally. They should be asked about it under oath.

What did the campaign want to do with the rally? Why did they say on their permit application there would be no march, but then Trump explicitly said in his speech they would march to the Capitol?

House managers should subpoena Trump as well—despite his refusal. Maybe he pleads the fifth; maybe he refuses to show; maybe he lies under oath. All are constitutionally, historically, and factually relevant here.

Many Republicans have made bogus arguments about Trump’s impeachment, but one legitimate argument they made in the House was about due process: that investigation matters, that evidence should be presented, and that witnesses should testify on the record during legal process.

I know people want a quick trial and think facts speak for themselves. But in Trump’s first impeachment, the Senate refused to have witnesses—a terrible first for a trial. We shouldn’t normalize trials without evidence just because TV/social media keeps us informed.

This trial is historic in so many ways. We need to understand what happened here; who organized it; what the President knew about the insurrection and when. That requires more than public evidence.

The Senate has the ability to demand information. It should.