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

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