Daily Archives: January 26, 2020

Commentary:Theres a rule at trials: when one sides lawyers have improperly lost evidence, hidden evidence, or refused to show the jury evidence in their control, the judge may order jurors to assume that evidence is bad for the side controlling and withholding it. Its a life rule, too: if the warm chocolate-chip cookies are disappearing, and your kid is hiding his hands behind his back, dont you infer something?

So why shouldnt Donald Trumps unprecedented, across-the-board stonewalling of legitimate Congressional inquiry raise questions in everyones minds?

Simple: Republicans dont want us to know the facts about Donald Trumps allegedly impeachable conduct.

Not only are Republicans refusing to call material witnesses (even John Bolton, who, as an ambitious Republican with dreams of political office, cant be allthatdangerous), but theyve imposed strict new rules on reporters to hinder the free flow of information from senators to us. Normally, credentialed press have free run of most areas in the Senate; theyre now restricted to a specific area, and reporters are forbidden to walk along with a senator, continuing a conversation, even if the senator is willingly participating.

The House heard some devastating witnesses to Trumps misconduct. Most were patriotic career foreign service folks, not politicians. Plus Trumps own Gordon Sondland, scared into telling the truth.

Some important things have happened since the House investigation. Notably, thenonpartisanGeneral Accounting Office concluded, after careful investigation, that Trumps political hold-up of funds approved by Congress broke a 1974 law enacted by Congress over Richard Nixons veto. And Bolton is now available a Trump appointee who mocked the Ukraine extortion plot as that drug deal, refusing to participate.

Republicans mumble that the House did its investigation and reached its conclusions, so theres no need for further witnesses. They toss out the red herring of subpoenaing Joe and Hunter Biden, who have no firsthand knowledge about Trumps actions or motives. The truth is simple: the facts are inconvenient.

Theres a reasonable argument that Democrats are wasting Senate time. Not because these arent high crimes and misdemeanors, but because Republicans have strong political motives not to consider the evidence and convict.

Federalist Paper 65 says, The most conspicuous characters [deciding impeachment trials] will be too often the leaders or the tools of the most cunning or the most numerous faction, and . . . can hardly be expected to possess the requisite neutrality. They foresaw Mitch McConnell, but hoped that when our country needed them, politicians might put conscience above politics as McConnell fears some might.

What would a fair trial look like? Republicans would acknowledge the actual evidence, and consider its weight. Theyd hear more witnesses, because Trumps lawyers deny the facts. Most importantly, both parties would forego political speeches to discuss the real issue: when a president violates the law by holding up, for political reasons, Congressionally-mandated aid to a beleaguered ally, is that misconduct sufficiently important that we should impeach, or at least censure him?

The allegations against Trump are more serious than those made against Clinton, and perhaps even those against Nixon. You could argue about the relative seriousness of burglary vs. extortion; both Nixons burglary and Trumps effort to use Ukraine to tip domestic political scales were antidemocratic; and the Ukraine aid concerned national security.

Whitewashing Trump whites out our Constitution. It tells future presidents they need not follow the law or provide Congress information. Is that what we want?

Read the original:

Commentary: Note To Republicans- When You Are Innocent, Witnesses And Documents Should Be Welcomed - KRWG

I just watched Sen. Mitch McConnells opening remarks for the impeachment trial of the president. He stated, Our founders trusted the Senate to rise above short-term passions and factionalism. They trusted the Senate to soberly consider what has actually been proven and which outcome best serves the nation.

Trump tried to coerce foreign interference and sought to cheat in our 2020 election, and he endangered our national security by doing so. I watched and heard the witnesses in the House show over and over again just how true this was. If Trump is innocent, conducting a fair trial shouldn't be a problem. Invite the witnesses, hear what happened. Evidence from House impeachment as well as new evidence must be considered, given we hear new evidence almost daily.

We citizens know McConnell isn't being truthful when he says the House did not fairly present the case against the president. The senator gave an oath more than once. He claims to be a Christian, yet seems to ignore all the un-Christian-like and illegal behavior of the president. He should do the right thing and hold a fair trial. Trump is bringing down the Republican Party and our countrys values with corruption. I believe in Americas values and feel we must remove this president now. I hope the Republicans overcome their short-term passions and the factionalism they have helped cause in our country. They must do the right thing.

Kim Lawler, Beaverton

Read more from the original source:

Readers respond: Republicans must do the right thing - oregonlive.com

2020 Democrat Pete Buttigieg assured attendees and viewers of a Fox News town hall that he is not trying to trick Republicans into supporting him even though he aims to woo them.

"I'm meeting a lot of what I like to call 'future former Republicans' who are coming to my events. I'm not pretending we are going to agree on everything; I'm not trying to trick anybody," the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor said on Sunday. "But my message is that we can at least agree on this: That, if you're having trouble looking your kids in the eye and explaining this presidency to them, that you have a choice."

With one week until the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, Buttigieg, 38, aims to gain support from voters who cast their ballots for President Trump in 2016. Part of his reasoning is that he is from the Midwest, an area that Democrats need to win in 2020 to secure the White House.

Buttigieg said he was effectively demonstrating his strategy by appearing on Fox News, a network that many Democratic presidential candidates, such as Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, have actively avoided.

"We are doing it right now. This network is known for having a lot of more conservative viewers. But I don't think that you have to be a Democrat to see what is wrong with this president and this presidency," Buttigieg said.

He continued: "If there's an American majority that can agree on what we're against, there is an even bigger majority that agrees on what we are for. Remember, I'm proposing things that most Americans, even in conservative states, think we ought to do: raising wages, making sure that corporations pay their fair share in taxes, delivering paid family leave, doing something about gun violence. You know, more than 80% of Republicans think we ought at least to be doing universal background checks."

Buttigieg is in third place in the RealClearPolitics average of Iowa polls with 17.8% support, while former Vice President Joe Biden holds 21% support and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has 20.6%. Many analysts believe a strong showing in Iowa is critical for Buttigieg's path to winning the Democratic presidential nomination.

Link:

Buttigieg on plan to win over Republicans: 'I'm not trying to trick anybody' - Washington Examiner