Thursday is the second day of questions from senators to the House impeachment managers and Donald Trump’s defense lawyers. Questions are submitted in writing to be read by Chief Justice John Roberts, with questions alternating between Republican and Democratic senators and answers generally limited to five minutes.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 11:05:52 PM +00:00 · Barbara Morrill

Ongoing coverage can be found here.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:06:59 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Republicans send Trump’s team a question to allow them to pretend that the Senate “has already seen a lot of witnesses” in this trial and that “testimony was shown to you.” So, no need to talk to anyone.

Even though that has never been counted as Senate witnesses before. And we’re super concerned about precedent.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:12:29 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And Philbin is back to saying that if the case is proven by the House evidence, nobody needs to see a witness. And then says he says that he thinks that his team has knocked down the House case.

Which is the kind of thing that, in a trial, might suggest calling a witness. But Philbin wants to argue that because the House came in with a strong case, they don’t get witnesses. And he’s back to waving the club that says they would make everything long, long, long if anyone dares call a witness.

In case they’ve forgotten, trials work this way.

1. The prosecutor walks in, declares that he has a strong case against the defendant, and makes an opening statement. 2. The defense disputes that case, suggests that there are problems with the prosecutions evidence. 3. And then there are witnesses. Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:15:11 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Trump’s team gets a question about whether Giuliani was violating the Logan Act by conducting foreign policy … Philbin now claims Rudy wasn’t doing anything, he was just “a source of information.”

Like the source of information where he wrote a letter to the president of Ukraine seeking a meeting. Or when he set up interviews with former officials seeking information on Biden. Or when he directed Volker, Sondland, and others in their actions.

Philbin now makes the case that FDR had a “confidant” during World War II who helped him get information into delicate areas … so, not a problem then.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:21:39 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Kennedy (who really needs to work on that fake accent) goes specifically to Philbin and Nadler. I’m assuming he’s asking for Nadler because he doesn’t want Schiff to beat up his question and feels like Nadler can be shoved into a trap. The question is on whether or not a president can be impeached for ordering an investigation of an American citizen that is “legitimate.” 

Schiff answered a very similar one a few minutes ago, and Nadler hews pretty close to his answer, suggesting again that it’s hard to conceive of a case where that would be warranted and that there are other mechanisms. And, Nadler says, that’s not the case here.

Philbin is spending his time again on the pretense that there is a good reason to investigate Joe Biden. To make this claim, Philbin is back to the “mixed motive” claim that if there was any chance of a legitimate reason, it doesn’t matter if the primary reason was invalid.

Roberts objects to the calling out of specific attorneys. Which is too bad, because Democrats could have directed the next dozen questions are Bondi. 

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:24:00 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff gets a chance to backtrack on the claim from Philbin that Giuliani was “not conducting U.S. policy” … which seems like a conflict with the claims that the whole thing is “a policy issue.”

Schiff seems to have constructed a nice trap here. Either Rudy Giuliani was a private citizen conducting U.S. policy, or he was Trump’s private attorney driving events in Ukraine for Trump’s personal purposes. Either one of these is an issue.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:26:09 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff offers to “cabin” the depositions to one week, as took place during the Clinton impeachment. The Senate can go back to work, while depositions are collected. This is another really good thrust from the House side and from Schiff particularly.

And of course there is no way in hell Trump’s team will agree to it. 

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:32:34 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Murkowski asks for the line between political action and impeachable action. Philbin fields it first for Trump’s team, says (accurately for once) that politicians always have some aspect of their motives looking toward the next election … then hops right over the point where asking for an investigation of a political opponent is corrupt on its face. Philbin is back to rolling in Dershowitz’s mixed-motive defense, claiming that if there was any possible legitimate reason behind Trump’s actions, that makes it okay.

Schiff takes it for the House side and agrees that politicians are politicians, who take political acts. But he points out that impeachable offenses are inherently political crimes. That’s the definition. Shows Dershowitz excusing going after candidates and excusing anything in pursuit of office. Schiff makes the line is that political actions don’t excuse a corrupt act. “There is no limit to what foreign powers will feel they can offer a corrupt president.”

Nice exchange here that was genuinely illuminating of the relative positions.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:37:21 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

House managers get a question on why it matters that Trump is soliciting foreign interference.

Jason Crow takes the answer. Starts off by saying not one witness has presented any evidence that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election, and that both the FBI and Homeland Security has shot this idea down as a conspiracy theory. And that pushing the Ukraine conspiracy theory is actually helpful for Russia.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:43:55 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And here we go again. About half the Republicans — led by Cruz and Hawley — are punting a question to both sides. So you know it will be a DEEP STATE conspiracy theory.

And the question is about an NSA agent described as as saying he wanted to “take out” Trump. Plus whistleblower. Plus who the hell knows. And this is bullshit.

Schiff calls this a smear, expresses his disgust. “Members of this body used to care about whistleblower production … “ Wheh. Schiff is jumping on these guys both feet. We definitely need a clip of his, because it’s a genuinely key moment. “I don’t know who the whistleblower is, but I know who it should be—it should be every one of us.”

And of course Trump’s team is in on this. Sekulow is standing up to say that the whistleblower is protected against “retribution” but that’s not a promise that they can’t drag the whistleblower into the Senate, smear them with false claims, subject them to threats, and … I don’t know, maybe torture their dog.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:47:02 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Sylvia Garcia gets another swing at how voting against Article 2 of the impeachment would be a vote against Congressional authority that would leave both the House and Senate toothless.

I need a camera that looks out on the floor, because I want to see how many senators are still smoking after that last reply from Schiff.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:50:49 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Sullivan, Blunt, et al provide a freebie for the Trump team letting Philbin spend a round of patting the Senate on the back for being such good boys and putting up with that nasty House case. This is a nothing question. But hey, Mr. Sullivan, your name is in the record! Sit down now.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 9:54:51 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Oh, wait. Philbin has wandered into talking about Ukraine interfering in the election. Maybe. Or they could have. And just because Trump talks about Crowdstrike and the DNC server doesn’t mean he was asking about Crowdstrike and the DNC server. Chalupa! Oh, Philbin is channeling Doug Collins. And we’re now down to the idea that some Ukrainian officials said bad things about Trump. 

How we wandered down this hole on this question is completely unclear. Anyway, Roberts cuts him off.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:01:53 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Sen. Leahy provides the House managers with another opportunity to hit the Dershowitz theory, drawing everyone’s favorite comparison — withholding disaster release. 

Hakeem Jeffries handles it this time. The answer here is strong, but not surprising, because buying into Dershowitz’s argument required going way out into the boondocks. Jeffries provides a count of founding fathers who have been mentioned so far, declares that Thomas Jefferson “needs more love” and moves to a Jefferson quote about how tyranny deals with things that are illegal specifically because they are done by people in power. 

Jeffries does a really nice job here of taking what could have been just another walk down the same lines that are by now well covered, and refreshes it by comparing Trump’s actions to other crimes. Jeffries introduces the “Fifth Avenue Standard” in describing Trump’s position.

Nicely done.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:09:25 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Cassidy and Risch ignore Roberts request to not call on specific attorneys by calling on Zoe Lofgren to address comments she made during the Clinton impeachment. And then fits both a claim that “impeachment is the ultimate election interference” and an accusation that Lofgren is trying to dodge the question.

Cipollone calls impeachment cheating, then attacks Schiff for refusing to join in a smear of his own staff. “Calumny” says Cipollone. And then declares that it’s time that we stop assuming everyone has horrible motives. 

Lofgren does step forward, talks about how Ken Starr spent years, moving from topic to topic, to finally catch Clinton out in a personal lie. On the other hand, in both Nixon and Trump, the question is about an action that directly deals with misuse of presidential power. Which … seems like a pretty good answer.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:15:12 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

House managers get a chance to deal with a rather generic “have you ever been involved in a trial in which you were unable to call witnesses.” Val Demings is up for the House team.

Demings compares the trial to her 27 years of experience in law enforcement. Says she’s only been in such a situation when there are no witnesses.

Cipollone is … seriously claiming that the fact that the White House eventually produced some requested documents for the Mueller report means that they didn’t have to give anything this time around. Declares that Trump has “fully cooperated.” Heh.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:18:30 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lee—who has been about 10x more awful in this than I expected—asks if Obama or Bush would have been subject to possible impeachment under the standard of the House managers. Cipollone is back again to say “I guess.”

Since one of the items that Lee offered up was impeaching Bush for waterboarding, I do want to say absolutely, I would have been down with that.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:25:14 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Split question on the value of an announcement of an investigation into the Bidens, with a quote of previous cases showing that foreign contributions of all sorts are forbidden.

Philbin says the Barr DOJ has already looked at the whistleblower claims and said it’s not prohibited. And that if it was, campaigns would have to report every time someone gave them information.

Schiff points out the number of steps that Trump was willing to take to secure the investigations as evidence of their value. Cites the heavy use of stolen Russian documents by Trump in 2016. 

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:31:25 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And now it’s a Graham, Cruz, Cornyn three-way. So expect yet another attack on Biden, or whistleblower, or Schiff. Or all three.

The question here is an extension of the idea that investigating Trump was started because information came in from foreign sources. Schiff is dealing with the answer, but the answer here is that it wasn’t Barack Obama who was getting on the phone to tell the FBI to get on that Trump business. Schiff spends his time pointing out the obvious — what happened in Carter Pages FISA warrant has diddly to do with the current case.

I’m expecting Sekulow on the other side, because this is exactly down his alley… And here he is!

Sekulow of attacking Comey. Now yelling at Schiff for the FBI. Starts to offer a primer on the FISA court. Lots of chiding … still not a damn bit of connection.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:38:22 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Durbin sends a question to both sides about the distribution of funds and communications between DOD and OMB on the hold.

Crow does something good here by pointing out that Philbin has made claims about what was happening that mean he knows more about it than anyone who has testified, or any document that’s available. Crow points to the email and how the OMB—which acted as Trump’s agent in making the hold—then tried to blame the DOD when the money could not be spent.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:39:32 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Stack of Republican senators give Trump’s team the chance to say that it’s okay for Trump to ask for help with corruption. Shockingly, they say yes. 

Isn’t it about time for a break? Surely we get a break soon.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:46:50 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Elizabeth Warren asks the House team to comment on whether it diminishes the legitimacy of Roberts and the Supreme Court to have Roberts sitting there while the Senate refuses to allow witnesses.

Schiff defends Roberts, launches into a story concerning the loss of U.S. respect abroad because of the actions Trump took in Ukraine. Schiff upholds the impeachment proceeding as the answer to show that the United States still has the rule of law. “This trial is part of our constitutional heritage … I don’t think a trial without witnesses reflects adversely on the chief justice, I think it reflects badly on us.”

Makes a compelling speech about the need for a fair trial. Schiff continues to be so good.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:51:55 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And now Philbin gets another chance to kick the idea that Trump committed bribery. And again, amazingly, Philbin is back to talking about how it is so, so wrong to make a comment about Trump committing bribery when it’s not on the charges by name.

But for Philbin to accuse Biden of bribery, accuse the whistleblower of being corrupt or level evidence-free claims against any number of people is dandy.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 10:58:24 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Warner asks about Russian interference in the 2016 election, and connects it with the Dershowitz theory that soliciting foreign interference is cool.

Schiff takes the response, calls Dershowitz’s theory a “bastardization of the Constitution.” Takes this time to deal with a number of issues that have come up on subpoenas, the structure of articles—basically, whether the White House can define how impeachment is done.

Thursday, Jan 30, 2020 · 11:02:40 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Inhofe throws a snowball. Actually, it’s another softball. Allowing the Trump team to declare that the House will never agree that the trial is fair unless Trump loses.

Sekulow takes it, because there’s no actual facts to be examined here. It’s just an invitation to attack. And now Sekulow makes a convincing case that he can’t do math after he declares that 3 Democratic witnesses and one Republican witness is a 4-1 ratio. He then declares that he wants 4 witnesses in the Senate for every witness called by the House managers.

One of the big revelations from this whole thing is just how awful, Jay Sekulow turns out to be.