President Trump’s lawyer Alan Dershowitz decried his client’s impeachment over the weekend because, he said, there was no crime committed.
Impeachment calls for a standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors” – a much debated phrase that dates back to the Constitution and doesn’t necessarily mean the law has been broken.
A central plank in Trump’s defence is that impeachment should only be applied to allegations of criminal conduct.
But, in 1998, Mr Dershowitz seemed to make the opposite argument in a CNN interview.
Read Also: Trump’s Team Miscalculates Badly On Ukraine Topic
What’s the point of this whole process?
Q: If the Senate are (almost certainly) not going to vote to impeach Trump, then what is the point in this whole process? – Will Fox, Leeds
A: If you listen to Democrats, the reason they’re going through with this even though the outlook is slim to none for Senate conviction is because they feel obligated to hold the president accountable for his actions.
They view the president as having abused his power by pressuring Ukraine to open investigations into a political rival, and if they don’t draw the line here – even if it doesn’t result in his removal – the president will be emboldened to take further actions that could adversely affect Democrats in the 2020 election.
Then there’s the purely political fact that the Democratic base have been howling for impeachment for months.
If Democratic officeholders hadn’t taken action, they would have risked the ire of their most loyal supporters – and either faced primary challenges or lost general elections because their side didn’t feel sufficiently motivated to turn out at the polls.
Democrats try to amend rules
Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has introduced an amendment to his Republican counterpart’s resolution.
He’s asking for the ability to subpoena White House documents related to the Ukraine matter.
Who’s leading the prosecution?
Democratic members of the House of Representatives are acting as prosecutors in this trial. Two will be more prominent than the rest.
Adam Schiff is a 59-year-old is chairman of the House intelligence committee and has already become a figurehead of the investigation. A former LA prosecutor, he gained his seat in Congress in 1998 and was appointed to the intelligence committee a decade later.
He’s been a frequent target of the president, whose mocking nicknames for him include “Liddle Adam” and “Shifty Schiff”.
Mr Schiff said he was “humbled” by his appointment as lead prosecutor. Admirers see him as the man with extensive knowledge of the impeachment case, best suited to present it to the Senate.
Another key figure is Congressman Jerry Nadler – the head of the House Judiciary Committee.
The 72-year-old has served as a congressman for New York since 1992, and has a reputation as a passionate defender of civil liberties with a very liberal voting record.
Jason Crow, Val Demings, Hakeem Jeffries, Zoe Lofgren and Sylvia Garcia are the other House impeachment managers for the trial.
‘The truth will come out’: Schiff’s opening statement
In his opening statement, Democratic House manager Schiff decried what he called Trump’s “dangerous nonsense”, accusing the president of acting against America’s national security.
He added to the chorus of Democrats criticising the trial rules, asking: “How would you structure the trial if you didn’t know what your party was?”
Schiff, who is the lead Democrat impeachment manager, said most Americans “don’t believe that the Senate will be impartial”, while calling on Senators to act as proper jurors.
He played several clips of the president in which Trump said he: could do anything he wanted because of the Constitution; would be fine having officials testify in the trial; that he will fight subpoenas.
“In the name of national security, [Trump] would hide graphic evidence of his dangerous misconduct,” Schiff says. “The only question is … will you let him?”
Schiff also noted that in the past three Senate impeachment trials (including of judges), new witnesses were allowed. He said adding new witnesses was a “definitive tradition…when trying articles of impeachment”.
He wrapped up by saying “the truth will come out”.
“The question is, will it come out in time?” he said.
Trump weighs in from Switzerland
President Donald Trump addressed the impeachment trial directly on Tuesday for the first time since proceedings began.
“READ THE TRANSCRIPTS!” was his Twitter dispatch from Switzerland, where the president is attending the World Economic Forum in Davos.
He has tweeted “read the transcript” 37 times since September.
The transcript in this case refers to a read out of his 25 July call with Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelensky. What was intended by Trump in that call is the heart of the impeachment scandal.
Earlier in the day, before arguments had begun on the Senate floor, Trump told reporters at the mountainside resort that the forthcoming trial was a “hoax” and a “witch hunt going on for years”.
For the president, the trial might be far out of sight, but clearly not out of mind.
Spotlight on the Senate candy desk
One tradition of bipartisanship that has survived the impeachment is the Senate candy desk, which legend has it has been stocked full of sweets since 1965.
The desk, full to the brim of various sweets, is currently operated by Pennsylvania Republican Pat Toomey. It’s a place for senators, includes those working long hours during rare impeachment trials, to grab a quick unhealthy snack. It is located near the entrance most frequently used by Republicans.
During the trial of Bill Clinton, the impartiality of Pennsylvania Republican Rick Santorum was questioned after it was found that candy was only being offered to Republicans.
“My response was, ‘Touche,'” Santorum told The Morning Call newspaper in a recent interview.
“So we immediately got candy to the Clinton defenders, and made sure that they were well-stocked for the rest of the trial. You have to be impartial when it comes to candy.”
The drawer drew attention last week as senators were being sworn in as jurors. Utah Republican Mitt Romney was seen by cameras pointing out the desk to the chamber’s newest member, Kelly Loeffler of Georgia.
Eleventh-hour adjustments by McConnell
Mitch McConnell made some last-minute changes to his proposal for how the Senate will conduct Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. The House managers and the president’s defence team now have three days each, instead of two, to present their opening arguments (although each side’s total time is still capped at 24 hours).
He has also changed the rules of evidence somewhat, allowing the House managers to introduce material gathered during their hearings unless a majority of the Senate objects.
McConnell has said he had the Republican votes he needed to pass his rules package, but perhaps he felt some pressure from within his own ranks to more closely align his proposal to the way Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial was run in 1998.
Democrats will still be calling for more, however. They want a guarantee of witnesses, something that doesn’t seem likely to happen.
What’s it like inside the room?
No pictures or filming are allowed inside the chamber, apart from a single feed from C-Span. But according to CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, the atmosphere inside today is focused, almost tense.
Many senators, on both sides, have been seen taking extensive notes, including Republicans Thom Tillis and Rob Portman, and Democrats Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bennet (both 2020 presidential hopefuls).
When the White House counsel presented his brief statement, lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff watched him carefully, attentively, with no overt emotion.
The Democrat House managers and House counsel have been interacting, according to CBS, but there is little talking between the White House counsel.
When Schiff played a soundbite of the president during his remarks, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer appeared to have a smirk on his face.
What do Americans think?
A Monmouth University poll released today shows that a majority of the country thinks the trial should allow new evidence, but that support is deeply partisan.
Here are the key stats:
- 57% say the House managers should be able to present new evidence
- Support for allowing new evidence comes from 87% of Democrats, 56% of independents, and just 24% of Republicans
- More than 3 in 4 Americans say Trump and his officials should be invited to testify, but only 40% think Trump should be compelled to testify
- 53% approve of the House of Representatives decision to impeach Trump, while 46% disapprove
- 49% feel Trump should be removed while 48% say Trump should not be removed
The director of the polling institute, Patrick Murray, said: “It is interesting that solid majorities in every partisan group would like to see Trump and members of his administration at least asked to appear.”
Trump is miles away, but watching closely
While impeachment envelops Washington, the subject of the trial, President Donald Trump, is nowhere near. He’s celebrating American prosperity at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland. But, as BBC’s Jon Sopel explains, the president will be tuning in from afar.
Donald Trump wants to project himself as a serious world statesman on the stage – talking about the economy, talking about the environment, talking about the things that matter, staying away from the dog fight in Washington.
Will he be watching closely on CNN or Fox? You bet.
The impeachment has obsessed him and he is deeply concerned about it. He wants to see what is going to happen next.
He may be 5,000 feet up a mountain, he may be seeking – literally – higher ground, but I think he’ll be monitoring proceedings in DC very closely.
Senators react
Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, who could be a swing vote in the upcoming trial, brushed off the idea that a quicker trial, as proposed by Mitch McConnell, would be detrimental.
“Whether it’s two days or four days, each side gets as much time as they did in the Clinton trial,” he said, according to The Hill.
Republican Marsha Blackburn defended the president; Democrats Bob Casey and Kamala Harris criticised the Republican proposal
Democratic rebuttal: ‘The most important decision to make’
Lead impeachment manager, Congressman Adam Schiff says the Democrat house managers “rise in opposition” to the resolution.
He begins by reiterating the charges against Trump: abuse of power, related to the president’s dealings with Ukraine and obstruction of Congress.
“It is the president’s apparent belief that … he can do anything he wants, no matter how corrupt, outfitted in gaudy legal clothing,” Schiff says, adding that Trump’s actions are a “trifecta of constitutional misconduct justifying impeachment”.
He says the obstruction charge “is every bit as destructive of our constitutional order as the misconduct charge.” But, he says, the ultimate vote of whether or not to find Trump guilty is “not the most important”.
“How can that be? How can any decision you make be more important than guilt or innocence, than removing the president or not removing the president? I believe the most important decision in this case is the one you will make today,” Schiff says.
“Will the president and the American people get a fair trial? Will there be a fair trial?”
Pat Cipolonne is Trump’s ‘strong silent-type’ lawyer
White House lawyer Pat Cipollone – who Trump has privately referred to as the “strong silent type” was the first to lay out the White House’s defence to the Senate.
The corporate lawyer, who is a partner at America’s largest firm, is leading the White House defence along with figures including Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz.
Democrats have argued that Cipollone has first hand knowledge of Trump’s alleged violations of his oath and must be compelled to testify.
Their claim that Cipollone is a “material witness” was made just hours before the Senate trial got underway.
On the Senate floor he called the argument “absolutely absurd” and said senators will ultimately find that Trump “did nothing wrong”.
Trump lawyers: ‘We support this resolution’
Pat Cipollone, White House counsel, said that the president’s defence team supports the rules resolution as proposed by McConnell.
“It’s time to start with this trial,” Cipollone said.
“We are in favour of this [resolution]. We believe that once you hear those initial presentations the only conclusion will be that the president has done absolutely nothing wrong and that these articles of impeachment do not begin to approach the standard required by the Constitution… there is absolutely no case.”
“We respectfully ask you to adopt this resolution so that we can begin with this process,” he concluded. “It is long past time to start this proceeding.”
Rules for trial being read
The clerk has begun reading the rules, as proposed by Republican leader Mitch McConnell. A debate and vote will follow.
BREAKING Hear ye these rules now!
“Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye!” says the Senate sergeant-at-arms, who is tasked with enforcing senate rules.
“All persons are commanded to keep silent, on pain of imprisonment, while the House of Representatives is exhibiting to the Senate of the United States articles of impeachment against President Donald John Trump, President of the United States,” he says.
What do the calls for Clinton rules mean?
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell’s rules resolution has been met with fierce criticism from Democrats, who say it’s unfair and not what he promised (which was to stick to Bill Clinton-trial rules).
Lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff said in a press conference on Tuesday morning the resolution was a “profound departure from the Clinton impeachment trial”.
Here’s what McConnell’s resolution allows:
- Each side gets 24 hours to make opening arguments, starting Wednesday, to be completed in two days
- Senators given 16 hours to question the opposite side
- After questioning, four hours of debate to consider whether witnesses or documents should be allowed, followed by a vote
So what’s different?
His plan speeds up the proceedings and does not automatically admit into evidence all the House of Representatives’ findings. It also does not allow senators to introduce motions to call witnesses – they must first vote on whether to consider any new evidence at all before arguing over specific documents or witnesses.
House Republican Doug Collins, a ranking member of the judiciary committee, told Fox News the rules were “different in some ways, but you get the same basic gist”.
A simple majority (51 votes) is needed to approve the rules.
The US Constitution offers little guidance on how the Senate ought to run the trial, so the game play is almost entirely in the hands of the senators.
Schumer hits back at McConnell
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer followed McConnell on the floor to make the Democratic case for rules that allow more witnesses to testify.
Schumer said that if Republicans were to block witness testimony, it would allow future presidents to commit “impeachable crimes with impunity”.
The rules proposed by McConnell seemed to be “designed by President Trump for President Trump”, Schumer said, adding that the rules would “in ways “both shameless and subtle, conceal the truth from the American people”.
McConnell wanted “a trial with no existing evidence and no new evidence,” Schumer added.
“A trial without evidence is not a trial. It’s a cover-up,” he said.
BBC NEWS