Read on Twitter
For everyone upset because the Dems did not call witnesses (I was) here's some clarification from several sources, including Del. Stacey Plaskett:
1) We would not have seen witnesses testify in the Senate, the way we saw them testify in the House during the first impeachment.
1) We would not have seen witnesses testify in the Senate, the way we saw them testify in the House during the first impeachment.
The Senate rules do not allow for that. The witnesses would have given depositions, which would have been entered into the record.
2) It was not certain that the possible witnesses were willing to testify. If they were unwilling, subpoenas would have to be fought out
2) It was not certain that the possible witnesses were willing to testify. If they were unwilling, subpoenas would have to be fought out
in the courts, and we know that could have dragged things out for weeks, or longer.
3) Because these witnesses had not been pre-examined by the House Managers, they were not certain of exactly how they would testify. We all assume that Pence would have been a great witness
3) Because these witnesses had not been pre-examined by the House Managers, they were not certain of exactly how they would testify. We all assume that Pence would have been a great witness
for our side, but we have no reason to be confident of that. He's the ultimate * toady. He wants to retain *'s base. He could have gotten up there and downplayed everything * did, including *'s attacks on him. No smart lawyer EVER puts a witness on the stand if
they don't know what the witness is going to say. If you don't believe me, ask Bob Brennan.
4) The House Managers got what they wanted, which was Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler's testimony about Kevin McCarthy's phone conversation with Trump during the insurrection,
4) The House Managers got what they wanted, which was Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler's testimony about Kevin McCarthy's phone conversation with Trump during the insurrection,
entered into the record.
5) The despicable Lindsey Graham threatened that the Republicans would call as many as 100 witnesses. Again, this would have extended the trial for weeks, at minimum. And the Senate rules require that no other business can be conducted once the Senate
5) The despicable Lindsey Graham threatened that the Republicans would call as many as 100 witnesses. Again, this would have extended the trial for weeks, at minimum. And the Senate rules require that no other business can be conducted once the Senate
has started an impeachment trial. That would have meant no Covid Relief bill, no confirmations of Biden appointments, etc. The Republican Senators who were voting for impeachment told Schumer that no other Republican votes were to be found, and they might lose a few if
if they proceeded with witnesses.
6) Does anyone really believe that witnesses would have changed any more fascist Republican votes? How many witnesses? The fix was in from day one. Even though the Senate voted on Tuesday that it had jurisdiction to try a former President,
6) Does anyone really believe that witnesses would have changed any more fascist Republican votes? How many witnesses? The fix was in from day one. Even though the Senate voted on Tuesday that it had jurisdiction to try a former President,
a former President, several Republicans ignored that vote, and instead of voting on the facts, they used jurisdiction as an excuse to vote no, including McConnell. There was no way they were EVER going to vote guilty.
On to criminal prosecution, federal and state.
On to criminal prosecution, federal and state.
