After a day of procedural debate and voting, six days of opening arguments, and two days of question and answer, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump could conclude Friday with debate followed by Republicans voting to end the trial and cover up Trump’s abuses of power. But Democrats will be keeping up the fight for a fair trial.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:19:16 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

We’re back in business for the evening. The schedule is pretty much as expected, with 4 amendments tonight, all debate on Monday, and nothing but the vote on Wednesday afternoon.

Schumer asks Roberts if he will break ties, reminding him of votes in the Johnson impeachment. Roberts makes it clear he will not break ties. Which has to make McConnell ecstatic.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:21:02 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

First amendment

Schumer sends an amendment to subpoena the requested four witnesses: Mulvaney, Bolton, Duffey and Blair, along with documents. Which will probably end up with exactly the same vote count as the last call for witnesses.

I’m not sure of the strategy, if there is one, for making Republicans go on record concerning witnesses and documents when they just did so. I’m sure there is a strategy. Or at least … I think I am.

McConnell immediately moves to table the amendment without debate, which appears to be part of the agreement. If so, we’re going to get through these in a big hurry.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:28:24 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

The first amendment is tabled 53-47, so not a single Republican went along.

Next amendment from Schumer is to subpoena John Bolton. And again, I am completely unclear whey, having lost the fight to get witnesses, and then fought to get an opportunity to offer four amendments, all of them seem related to making Republican senators repeat the vote they already made.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:34:07 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And the amendment to subpoena just Bolton goes down 51-49.

Not only can I not see the point of these amendments, I can’t see why Schumer bothered to ask Roberts about ties. Because it seems obvious the amendments so far would attract less Republican support than a general vote on witnesses.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:36:33 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner Third amendment from Schumer is to subpoena John Bolton, but this time with limits of one day for deposition and one day for live testimony. Dammit. I’m not going to get any censure votes or sense of the Senate votes.  Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:38:10 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

I always have hopes that Inhofe or Kennedy will forget which way to vote.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:40:15 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Roberts validates the widely held view that he is a potted plant.

— digby (@digby56) February 1, 2020

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:44:36 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

The third amendment is tabled: 51-49.

The final motion is from Van Hollen, it is to have Roberts rule on subpoenas offered by a senator, and to have Roberts rule on assertions of privilege and … again, I do not get it.

There are so many other things that could have been done with those four amendments. Sigh.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:50:17 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And the last of the four amendments is tabled 53-47.

Did we get a vote on censure of Trump? We did not.

Did we get an acknowledgement of any form that Cipollone has been engaged in deeply deceptive malpractice? Nope.

Did we force Republicans to agree that the House managers had proved their case. Not that either.

Why not? Why blow all four amendments flailing at the same thing. Hell, if I was a Republican senator, I’d have been tempted to let VanHollen’s amendment pass, for all the good it would do.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 12:53:49 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Well that was a deeply frustrating hour that could have been more profitably occupied with a kazoo concert.

Saturday, Feb 1, 2020 · 1:00:45 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

We’re voting now on the resolution that McConnell introduced that schedules out the remaining time. Which can be expected to be pass along the same partisan lines.

And it passes 53-47. 

McConnell offers a series of proposals that carry things to Monday. So … that’s it. The end of this thing is lined out for Monday and Wednesday. See you then.

After a day of procedural debate and voting, six days of opening arguments, and two days of question and answer, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump could conclude Friday with debate followed by Republicans voting to end the trial and cover up Trump’s abuses of power. But Democrats will be keeping up the fight for a fair trial.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:39:04 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Surprise, they’re back and voting. After a “quorum call” lasting over an hour, McConnell returned to call the vote on witnesses, and then the Senate is going “back into recess” for an unspecified time.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:41:48 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

It’s not clear that Schumer and McConnell worked out anything in advance of this vote. So the recess might be for purposes of continuing to hammer out a deal, or we may be done or the day. It’s clear as mud.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:44:21 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

As expected, Republicans vote down all witnesses, for the first time in the history of impeachment, 49-51. Susan Collins got her hall pass to pretend she’s fair.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:46:57 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Chuck Schumer calls this a day that America will remember. A “tragedy on a very large scale.”

No information on what happens next.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:48:07 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Look, it’s our old friend the Fascism Watch. Fascism Watch, what time is it?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:59:10 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

The 49 Senators who voted to call witnesses represent 170 million AmericansThe 51 Senators who blocked witnesses represent 151 million Americans In the US Senate the majority doesn’t ruleThank you @imillhiser for doing the math https://t.co/imL6WiP2FM

— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:06:07 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

McConnell statement: "Senators will now confer among ourselves, with the House Managers, and with the President’s counsel to determine next steps as we prepare to conclude the trial in the ***coming days.***" (emphasis added)

— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) January 31, 2020

This statement makes it seem like the Republicans who want it all in the can tonight might not be getting their way. And there’s absolutely no reason Schumer should give it to them.

Again, if Democrats can make Republicans vote on endless amendments, let’s see amendments to censure Trump. Let’s see amendments to censure Mulvaney for his role in violating the Impoundment Control Act. Let’s see amendments to censure Cipollone for hiding his connection to the case. Let’s see a “sense of the Senate” call that Giuliani be disbarred. 

There is not a single reason to give them an inch on this.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:11:21 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Republican Senator says emerging view is that the Senate will take a handful of amendment votes tonight break for weekend and come back Monday. Nothing final until it’s final, obviously

— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:12:57 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Find clarity: it was always Senate Republicans on trial.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:24:56 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

New: GOP senators leave meeting and say there’s a deal for acquittal vote Wednesday

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:30:38 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

So, this is the apparent deal.

The Senate will return to session at 7 PM.  Votes on Friday evening will be limited to 4 or 5 proposed amendments from Democratic senators. (no idea what they will be) McConnell will not hold debate or vote on acquittal tonight. On Monday, both legal teams will give closing arguments, and some senators will give Senate floor speeches. Still no vote. On Wednesday, senators will complete floor speeches and McConnell will call a vote on the articles in the afternoon.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 11:31:08 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

That is not official yet, but something similar has come from multiple sources.

After a day of procedural debate and voting, six days of opening arguments, and two days of question and answer, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump could conclude Friday with debate followed by Republicans voting to end the trial and cover up Trump’s abuses of power. But Democrats will be keeping up the fight for a fair trial.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:45:03 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And we’re back with Philbin in the box again. It’s really kind of amazing that the assistant deputy counsel has shouldered 99% of this trial, leaving Cipollone and Sekulow to shuffle forth only when their specific areas of conspiracy-speak are squeaked.

But then, Cipollone does have reasons to keep a low profile.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:48:34 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Someone on the Trump team has been keeping track of the number of video clips. Was it Purpura? Ken Starr? Lord knows they didn’t have anything better to do.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:52:59 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Philbin not only isn’t saying anything new here, it’s not apparent he’s put five minutes work into putting this together. It’s just a meander through claims he’s made previously—except worse.

Now Philbin is putting words in the mouth of the House team. Isn’t that supposed to be a no-no?

Finally, Philbin deploys the We Will Call Everybody Everywhere Forever and fight every witness tooth and nail ax. The “we will obstruct you so bad you can’t get through this obstruction charge” tactic.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:56:25 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Since Philbin brought up Federalist No. 65, let’s take one last look at what Hamilton says impeachment is all about: 

“The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:58:06 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

I believe the summary of Philbin’s closing argument is “Please show that the Senate is too lazy to do it’s job.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:59:57 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And now Jay Sekulow is standing. Give him ten seconds and he’ll be completely past mentioning anything on this case and talking about the Steele Dossier.

Oh, and as Sekulow mentions all these people he didn’t have the opportunity to cross examine, note that they all work for Trump. Sekulow can question them any time he wants, and twice on Sundays.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:05:14 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Sekulow saying the case isn’t proved …

Tell it to Alexander, Murkowski, and Rubio, all of who agreed that the case was proved.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:08:05 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Is there a way to set an alarm for when Jay Sominex finishes this speech?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:10:03 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

What was missing from the entire close of the Trump defense team? Trump’s lead attorney, Pat Cipollone. That’s one helluva coincidence.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:15:04 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff returns to the podium to wrap up the reply. And states that in the end the case from Trump’s defense team comes down to “So what?” 

Schiff: “So what? He has a God-given right to abuse his power. It’s the Dershowitz principle of constitutional lawlessness.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:17:44 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff makes this so compelling. I’d really like to think there are some people out there who didn’t think they would be interested in this, who happened to be in a room when Schiff began one of his talks, because he’s not just a good attorney and a good speaker, he’s like a great professor, bringing emotion to the issues and hitting his points with emphasis.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:18:36 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

There’s that little technical point again. The idea that “we don’t have kings here.” That’s the point where Republicans disagree.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:21:27 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff hits the idea that Trump’s team is saying “shame on the House for not fighting harder to overcome our obstruction” while Trump’s team continues to obstruct.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:23:17 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

SCHIFF: "'[The president] has a God-given right to abuse his power and there's nothing you can do about it' -- it's the Dershowitz principle of constitutional lawlessness. That's the end-all argument for them ... God help us if that argument succeeds." pic.twitter.com/qCKWXOSsXM

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:29:47 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff brings up the fact that Trump’s team could have questioned any of the government witnesses, including putting them under oath. Instead, they would prefer to simply threaten the Senate over using up months of their calendar.

And Schiff brings it back to where Sekulow ended — what’s the point of calling witnesses anyway, when under their claims they’ve made, Trump can do anything he wants anyway.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:31:00 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

BTW, Jerry Nadler isn’t there today because he’s at the bedside of his desperately ill wife, making tough decisions along with his family about how to proceed.

Alan Dershowitz isn’t there today because he left early to catch a flight to the Superbowl.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:34:05 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff reads from letter to the Senate by former Republican Senator John Warner.

x

NEW: Former Senator John Warner, a Republican and elder statesman of Virginia politics, has issued a statement calling on fellow Republicans to follow “judicial norms” by “welcoming relevant witnesses and documents” in President Trump’s impeachment trial. pic.twitter.com/GeRRjIkHfo

— Sheryl Gay Stolberg (@SherylNYT) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:35:52 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “If we have faith that the ship of state can survive the truth … this storm shall pass.”

McConnell calls for a quorum vote. Which is almost uniformly a stall for time so he can gets his ducks in a row. The question here is … are their wandering ducks?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:40:12 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schumer and McConnell talking together … apparently trying to determine what happens next, and whether they can wrap it all up today or events will roll to at least Monday. McConnell is surely moving to gets things done so Trump can spend the SOTU basking in the “exoneration.” 

C-SPAN saying that Alan Dershowitz isn’t just absent, but that he’s official withdrawn from the defense team. Not sure what that’s about … maybe Cipollone didn’t tell him he was part of the Ukraine plot?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:43:09 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Schumer and McConnell are talking on the floor during the break Along with their top aides. And Thune too. This comes after McConnell huddled with Murkowski, Romney, Collins and Lamar in his office during the last break. All about how to end the trial

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:47:32 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

McConnell is apparently preparing an amendment that would set the scheduled for the end of the trial. But if he can’t get Schumer’s agreement, Democrats can offer amendments to that amendment, each of which would get two hours of debate.

In other words, tonight could end up looking like the starting day, were we went to 2 AM. Or … it could be worse.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:57:35 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schumer has left the Senate chamber. So has Roberts. No clue what the evening schedule is going to be like.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 9:58:12 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

McConnell and Schumer talked directly with a small group, including their respective floor generals - Laura Dove on GOP side and Gary Myrick on Dem side - doing a good chunk of talking.The two leaders spoke for a good 10-12 minutes before Schumer went to go huddle on his side

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:06:14 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

From the sound of it, McConnell left out some necessary steps in the resolution passed at the start of the trial. So to get the votes on the witnesses and articles he has to introduce an amendment to schedule them. Since that is in the form of an amendment, it's subject to amendment. Semi-endlessly.

Hey, where’s that article about how McConnell was so great at this?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 10:17:41 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Watching the Senate for weeks has given me one serious non-impeachment question ... why do these guys always stand around with their arms folded? Are their no pockets in their suits?

After a day of procedural debate and voting, six days of opening arguments, and two days of question and answer, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump could conclude Friday with debate followed by Republicans voting to end the trial and cover up Trump’s abuses of power. But Democrats will be keeping up the fight for a fair trial.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 8:44:01 PM +00:00 · Barbara Morrill

Ongoing coverage can be found here.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:11:35 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Crow hands off to Hakeem Jeffries, who quickly pulls up a statement from Fiona Hill as part of pointing out the deep involvement of Mick Mulvaney—and reminding the senators of that “drug deal” quote from Bolton. This followed by a clip showing Sondland being asked about that deal. Sondland says “Yeah, a lot of people were aware of it.” Jefferies returns to the “everyone was in the loop” statement that ties Bolton’s manuscript claims to statements in the investigation.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:13:35 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Jeffries making it clear again that the “perfect call” was not a stand alone event. It was part of a larger conversation conducted by Giuliani, Sondland, Volker and others that started well before that call.

Jeffries calls for “let’s question Mick Mulvaney under oath.” Which, I think, is the first time today there’s been a direct call for the testimony of anyone other than Bolton.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:16:28 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

jeffries plays an extended version of Mulvaney’s press conference statement, framing things both before and after the statements that have been shown in previous clips. Which — hopefully — gnaws away at the claims Mulvaney was either confused or misquoted.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:21:05 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Jeffries address the “policy disagreement” claims from Trump’s defense by repeating their own statements that Giuliani wasn’t involved in policy.

Jeffries also renews the call for Blair and Duffey — the officials who actually had to put their names on letters to DOD and others in withholding the aid. Duffey also authored notes making it clear that he and other officials at OMB were aware the hold was illegal, and instructed people to stay quiet about it.

So the House mangers are where they started in the first day of debate: Bolton, Mulvaney, Duffey, and Blair. Those are the witnesses they are requesting.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:26:21 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Jeffries doing a good job, again, of framing the gaps in our knowledge of what happened, how they seem to point to nothing other than malfeasance, and inviting senators to solve the mystery. He’s doing a good job of making just getting answers on OMB emails seem like something exciting and interesting.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:29:08 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Jeffries hands over to Zoe Lofgren.

Lofgren returns to the focus on the need for documents, speaking directly to the documents that are mentioned in testimony.

Lofgren: “But we haven’t seen any of them. I think it’s a cover-up.”

The House managers are making the same requests that they made coming in: four witnesses and specific documents. It’s hard for even Trump’s team to claim that the House is on a fishing expedition for whole new theories of the case … but they’ve made those claims, and will again in a few minutes.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:34:09 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lofgren reminds the Senate again that depositions and documents are completely within their control, that they can designate Roberts to adjudicate issues of privilege, that the House team has agreed to deal with witnesses and documents within a week. And that Trump is “the architect of the very delay” that’s being used as a threat to the Senate.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:35:31 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lofgren notes that Bolton, as a private citizen, is free to talk about any conversation he had with Trump that doesn’t include classified information. And that if Trump did try to invoke executive privilege “he would fail.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:37:31 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lofgren states — accurately — that Trump can’t deny the statements from Bolton, then use executive privilege to prevent Bolton from defending himself. Trump’s own morning statement is an argument that Bolton should be allowed to speak.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:38:54 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff steps up to bring this home.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:40:19 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “We agree with the president’s counsel on this much: this will set a new precedent. … if someone believes they would benefit from a trial with no witnesses, they will cite the trial of Donald J Trump.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:42:53 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff makes a clear argument that simply allowing Trump’s obstruction to stand is an abdication of the impeachment power, as well as Congress’ oversight authority. Trump will have been told that concealing evidence is an acceptable tactic.

Schiff: “Our country will no no longer have a government with three coequal branches.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:43:52 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “No matter what you decide to do here, no matter if you decide to let witnesses tell their story … The facts will come out. … Witnesses will tell their story in books and in hearings … the facts will come out.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:48:18 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff once again giving a pitch to simple honesty and common sense — everyone is going to learn the truth anyway. Why not ask while that truth can do some good? Why not show the public that Senate Republicans care about the truth?

Schiff: “A trial without witnesses is no trial at all. You either have a trial, or you don’t.” 

Schiff closes this section with a Adams quote about the importance of a fair trial. 

“Only Donald Trump, only Donald Trump of any defendant in America, can insist on a trial without witnesses or documents.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:49:12 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “The importance of a fair trial here is not less than any courtroom in America, it is greater than every courtroom in America. Because we set the example.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:51:04 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff wraps up his call eloquently, and McConnell calls for a short recess before Trump’s defense makes its statement on witnesses.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:55:03 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Rear Adm. Barry Black's opening #ImpeachmentTrial prayer: "Lord, help them to remember that they can't ignore you and get away with it. For we always reap what we sow." pic.twitter.com/RyxNvgdXp4

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 31, 2020

After a day of procedural debate and voting, six days of opening arguments, and two days of question and answer, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump could conclude Friday with debate followed by Republicans voting to end the trial and cover up Trump’s abuses of power. But Democrats will be keeping up the fight for a fair trial.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:17:07 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

As they get underway this afternoon, this heartrending post comes from Jerry Nadler.

x

I am sorry to not be able to stay in Washington for the conclusion of the Senate impeachment trial but I need to be home with my wife at this time. We have many decisions to make as a family. I have every faith in my colleagues and hope the Senate will do what is right.

— (((Rep. Nadler))) (@RepJerryNadler) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:12:16 PM +00:00 · Barbara Morrill

Ongoing coverage can be found here.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:19:25 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lisa Murkowski is reported to have announced that she is also a “no” on witnesses.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:22:47 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Adam Schiff opens the day, and will argue the House’s position first, while leaving some time to respond to the statement from Trump’s legal team.

Schiff moves directly to the new information from Bolton’s book, and pauses for effect before naming Pat Cipollone. Schiff calls out Cipollone for his claims that the House managers were suppressing facts when he was suppressing the fact that he was involved.

Schiff: “The facts will come out. They will come out.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:23:51 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Murkowski: "I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed."

— Aaron Blake (@AaronBlake) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:25:30 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “Let’s find out who is telling the truth. Let’s put John Bolton under oath. As Mr. Cipollone said, let’s make sure that all the facts come out.” 

Schiff hands off to Val Demings. 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:27:48 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Val Demings restates that the “evidence in the House record is sufficient to convict [Trump] on both counts, more than sufficient. But that’s not how trials work.”

Renews the call for witnesses, as in other cases. And reminds all the people in the room who have been complaining about precedent and tradition that there has never been an impeachment — not of a president, not of a judge — conducted without witnesses.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:29:55 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Demings lets emotion slip into her voice as she warns that allowing Trump to remain in office is giving him permission to undermine America’s security and election.

Demings: “Is this a fair trial? Is this a fair trial? Is this a fair trial without witnesses and documents? The answer is unequivocally no!”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:32:08 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

If the statements from Alexander and Murkowski were not already enough of an indictment of the process in the Senate, Marco Rubio’s is genuinely worse.

Rubio admits that the House made its case and Trump is guilty. He admits that Trump’s actions are impeachable. And he still isn’t going to vote for even bringing in witnesses.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:34:28 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Demings: “Will you let the American people hear, simply hear, the evidence?” Reminds the Senate that when the House managers asked for Bolton’s testimony last week, they did not know what they would say. “Now we know why.”

Not mentioned in Deming’s statement — Cipollone was sitting there arguing against Bolton’s testimony when he definitely knew what Bolton would say.

Demings: “The American people clearly know a fair trial when they see one. Large majorities of the American people want to see witnesses in this trial.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:36:55 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Demings reminds the Senate of the deal that Schiff proposed over the last two days, offering to bind the House team to an agreement to limit witnesses and the time of depositions. Her plea here is one of the best moments of this process. She’s pouring her heart into it.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:38:59 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Demings: “The Senate does not just vote on impeachments. It does not just debate them. The Constitution demands that the Senate try impeachments. And a trial requires witnesses.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:40:58 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Demings hands over to Rep. Sylvia Garcia.

Garcia opens, as have others, by thanking Senators for listening. Though the evidence that Republicans have listened seems to be scant.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:43:01 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Garcia points out that, as a lawyer or a judge, she’s never run into a situation in which the defendant is claiming there is no evidence, while acting to suppress all the evidence. She speaks directly to the subpoenas for documents, which are not protected by executive privilege, but have also been subject to a blanket cover-up.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:45:50 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Ha. Garcia gets in a mention of “those in the room where it happened” a double-play on Hamilton and Bolton’s book. She plays a clip of Cipollone demanding “all of the facts.”

Cipollone: “Who doesn’t want to talk about the facts? Who doesn’t want to talk about the facts? Impeachment shouldn’t be a shell game. They should give you all the facts.”

Garcia digs Cipollone for misquoting witnesses and leaving out parts of statements in an attempt to generate exonnerating evidence. 

Garcia: “Let’s be very clear. We are not the ones hiding the facts … That’s why we are the ones standing up here saying don’t allow [Trump] to silence the witnesses and hide this evidence.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:47:33 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Garcia has clearly read the statements from Rubio and Alexander, as she quotes some of their reasoning while calling for witnesses. This is also Garcia’s best moment of the whole trial. 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:49:06 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Wow who did this 😅 #LisaMurkowski pic.twitter.com/OmxToMzSUg

— Patricia (@patrikiwi) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:51:23 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Both Garcia and Demings have hammered the same points. Nixon and Clinton didn’t just allow their closest advisers to testify, they instructed them to do so. Trump is ordering his advisers not to appear … which definitely can be taken as an indication of what those advisers would say.

Garcia: “There’s not much that the American people agree on these days, but they do agree [that this trial should have witnesses].”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:54:35 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Garcia hands over to Jason Crow.

Crow reminds the Senate that the House managers asked, not for dozens of witnesses, or unlimited witnesses, but four witnesses. And plays another Cipollone clip with the man who was in the room saying “Not a single witness” testified that there was a connection between military assistance and investigations.

Crow: “Denials in 280 characters is not the same as testimony under oath.” 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:55:01 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

.@RepAdamSchiff on reporting Trump directed Bolton to work with Giuliani on his scheme in May and that White House Counsel Cipollone was there:“Just as we predicted, and it didn’t require any great act of clairvoyance, the facts will come out. They will continue to come out.” pic.twitter.com/8qrF3U7DH0

— House Intelligence Committee (@HouseIntel) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 6:56:49 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Crow brings up the statement that “everyone was in the loop.” So far, the House managers seem to be mostly tiptoeing around the real implications of Cipollone’s involvement. I suspect that in part that’s because this information just landed on the a half-hour before the hearing began.

I also suspect Schiff will not be silent when he wraps this up.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:00:48 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Crow makes a nice point that Bolton was mentioned as someone who was trusted by Ukrainian officials. Bolton’s actual role here is something that Americans still don’t understand. It increasingly seems that Bolton was put in the center between a defense of national security and the plot that Trump and Giuliani were directing. There really does seem to be a lot more to come out to describe the whole shape of what happened.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 7:02:43 PM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Crow spends some time bringing things back to the role of Giuliani. Whose name should have been heard more often in this week. 

It would be interesting to go back over the week to see if Trump’s team has ever said anything about Giuliani not in response to a direct question.

Thursday is the second day of questions from senators to the House impeachment managers and Donald Trump’s defense lawyers, and they look to be taking up the whole 16 hours allotted. 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.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:36:56 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Looks like about half an hour remaining.  Probably about two more questions on each side.

Braun and Lee to the Trump’s team genuinely ask if what Joe Biden did is impeachable. Yes, we’re all the way around to asking if we can let go free and impeach Biden.

And of course Philbin is standing there and telling the Senate that Donald Trump can’t be impeached, but Joe Biden can. He really, really just did that. Even though none of the claims about Biden were true, even though Biden was working not just for the US and allies, but at the request of Republicans in the Senate. And Philbin knows all that.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:37:31 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Klobuchar asks a question … but it is missing in action. Paper shuffling going on.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:42:06 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Klobuchar asks the House team to address the ridiculous “impeach Biden” suggestion. Surprisingly, Nadler is the one who stands up to take this, which is likely to be the last question to the House team. 

Nadler talks about all the efforts being made to distract from the real question—did Trump withhold military power to force a foreign country to slander a political opponent.

The thing is that the Republicans have already agreed that they can live with that. They don’t need to hear witnesses, because they’re willing to surrender the Republic without witnesses.

There’s no more point even arguing over what Trump did. Republicans have just said they’re okay with what Trump did. 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:43:55 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

That is … kind of a fizzle for the end. The Biden can be impeached answer was so ridiculous, it seemed like it demanded a slap down, no matter what. But that’s all there is.

Now Alexander gets his moment in the spotlight to make his declaration.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:52:53 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

No one could say the House team did not give it their all. Or that Trump’s team produced a scintilla of exculpatory evidence. In the end, the decision from Republicans was simply that they would support Trump, even to the extent of accepting a theory that he can do whatever he wants.

All the points Adam Schiff made about Trump not being a king … it seems the Republicans disagree.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:59:35 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Sen. Susan Collins announces she is a YES on the vote to move to consider subpoenas for witnesses and documents

— Phil Mattingly (@Phil_Mattingly) January 31, 2020

No surprise. She is all mavericky, you know. Collins has a hall pass to try and protect her worst-in-the-nation rating.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 4:02:31 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Alexander is a no. 

His statement seems to agree that Trump did everything the House charges … and he’s okay with that.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 4:10:23 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Alexander's decision here is the WORST possible. He's acknowledging that the House case was proven, then saying that Trump cannot be removed for withholding military aid to extort slander designed to interfere in a U.S. election. In other words "Get over it, Trump is king."

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.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:37:46 AM +00:00 · Barbara Morrill

Ongoing coverage can be found here.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:01:48 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Jason Crow looking at the supposed claim that Ukraine was somehow involved in 2016 election hacking. Crow starts off a bit shaky, but finishes strong in making the case that the evidence is that Russia was 100% behind the 2016 hacks, and that giving Trump a win means that Putin and others get the signal they can use propaganda to manipulate the U.S.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:07:57 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And this question is … I believe the legal term is “stupid.” Also, we’ve been here about a hundred times already. Question is if the House case is so strong, why have witnesses? I think the point here isn’t to ask this question at all, but to simply generate five minutes of dead time so that Philbin can hit a backlog of things he might want to say.

And sure enough, he immediately ignores the question and jumps to claims that a Ukrainian official writing an op-ed and tries to make that the equal of a multi-million dollar effort by the Russian military.

Now Philbin is back to talking about subpoenas and how the Executive has a right to ignore than, and suggesting that if they want Trump to obey a subpoena they could “squeeze programs” and other general silliness.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:15:41 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Blumenthal asks the House team why Trump wanted to “take her out” in connection to Marie Yovanovitch. Schiff makes it clear that it was Rudy who set up Yovanovitch, and the removal of Yovanovitch made it clear that Giuliani was someone they had to deal with. So Yovanovitch was taken out both to clear the way for the investigations, and because it was a demonstration of Rudy’s power.

Schiff uses the back end of his question to address the items that Philbin just raised about the court situation. Which again is an insistence that “Congress must exhaust all rememdies.”

McConnell orders up a five minute break. We should have about an hour and … maybe twenty minutes remaining.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:19:27 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

This five minute recess is very likely not a bathroom break, but related to the decision to be made by Alexander and Murkowski. 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:22:23 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And I apparently forgot to stop my timer during one the breaks, so there are closer to two hours remaining. Sorry about that.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:28:50 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

We’re back, and the Trump team gets the chance to attack the House over not releasing a statement from the intelligence community inspector general, likely because it provides information that might point to the whistleblower.

Again… the whistleblower does not matter one whit. It would not matter a bit if the whistleblower turned out to be Joe Biden. It’s a diversion.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:29:53 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Alexander spends the countdown to his key impeachment decision on witnesses reading, "Impeachment: an American History," by @jmeacham, @TimNaftali @jeffreyaengel and household favorite @peterbakernyt

— Susan Glasser (@sbg1) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:36:26 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Question from Manchin and Sinema to the House managers asks if they should have starting an accommodation process with the White House after the passage of 660.

Schiff points out that Trump had already publicly said that he would block all subpoenas, and the White House counsel had already said they would not participate in the process. Schiff says they would have happily entered into negotiation over narrow claims of privilege, but it’s not possible to negotiate with absolute denial.

Schiff again appeals to the Senate that they can set up the process to provide one week for witnesses and documents. The Senate has the sole power on impeachment. This actually has to be appealing for Senators in that it provides a suggested mechanism within Senate control. 

It’s unlikely to make the difference, but it’s a good pitch.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:40:37 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Blackburn and Lee, so you know it’s going to be conspira-tastic. And it is. They ask the Trump team to opine on contacts between House staffers and the whistleblower. The whistleblower doesn’t matter. The whistleblower doesn’t matter. Repeat, infinitely.

Philbin is likely to take this time for more freeform complaints, since there’s nothing to say to the question he was asked. Philbin saying that the October 8 letter from Cipollone was an invitation to negotiate … a claim he makes by leaving out 90% of the letter, where Cipollone stated that he would not participate in the impeachment process.

What the letter actually says is that they won’t cooperate under impeachment, and if the House wants anything they have to close down the impeachment. Philbin will never admit this.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:46:02 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

House managers get a chance to kick the “no quid pro quo” but I want this for that phone call from Sondland. 

Schiff uses this to again make the case for release of documents. And for a nice run through of the events between Trump’s July 25 phone call and the Sondland phone call. We’re late in the day (figuratively and literally) to be walking through the events again, but Schiff is telling a pretty good short version.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:49:17 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Moran and Crapo question is just a repeat of the statements that Philbin said ten minutes ago about other ways Congress can lean on the White House. This is just another play to give Philbin free time to address anything he wants. There’s nothing here that the Republicans making the request really want to know.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 2:58:05 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Markey asks the House managers about recent reports that Russia has hacked Burisma. Questions how Russia could use any information gained in 2020.

Schiff warns that Russia could hack Burisma, drip out information in hopes of hurting the Bidens, and under the Dershowitz theory that would be fine, and so would be Trump making a deal to hold Ukraine aid explicitly to help Russia. Schiff states that the potential methods Philbin offered for Congress to exert pressure on the White House are completely inadequate to the scale of the threat.

Points out again that Trump made his call to Zelensky one day after Mueller testified … asks what Trump will do one day later if the Senate acquits him.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:01:20 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Lindsey sends a letter along with Cruz  — and Alexander and Murkowski — which certainly sounds like a final door closing on calling witnesses. And, yep it absolutely is.

The question is, isn’t it true that if Bolton testified there was a quid pro quo and Trump withheld military assistance in return for the investigations … it still wouldn’t be impeachable.

This is absolutely Alexander and Murkowski signalling that they’re buying the Dershowitz defense. It almost doesn’t matter what Philbin says here. In fact, it 100% doesn’t matter what Philbin says here.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:07:41 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff responds to the same question just asked, says it’s been a long week, and everyone knows what happened here. Makes it crystal clear that the House is right: Trump extorted Ukraine for sham investigations, and withheld military assistance to get his way.

What Republicans are saying — and not just Alexander and Murkowski — is they’re cool with that. That question from Alexander and Murkowski wasn’t a surrender on some technical issue. That was just a surrender of Senate to Trump.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:10:27 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff: “We know what happened here. They don’t want Bolton to testify because they don’t want it on live TV in all its ugly details.”

Roberts cuts him off. Damn. Again, Schiff was just getting cranked up.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:15:53 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And, sigh, now we’re getting more Republicans piling to to swear allegiance. The idea that there might be some last minute revolt from “moderates” is as dead as every other time someone thought that a Republican was going to demonstrate a spine.

Oh, and Trump’s team is now arguing that some rules that Biden suggested around impeachment of judges, which they just got through saying didn’t apply in this case, are now the critical positions. They waited until now to pull out the “Biden rule.” Because it’s nonsense.

Sekulow. Never missing an opportunity to start off the rails and simply wander in the swamp. Now talking about a case he argued before the Supreme Court, which has nothing at all to do with this question. But hell, he could sing at this point. In fact, it might be better.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:21:15 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Hakeem Jeffries gets back up to take a question about the Senate’s ability to hear from witnesses, and to set the witnesses it will hear. 

Jeffries has done a great job throughout this whole sorry excuse for a trial. Jeffries brings up Gowdy, goes back to the statement on Bengahzi points out the the “noncooperation” in that case included testimony from the NSA, DIA, CIA Director, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. That what Gowdy called “noncooperation.”

Jefferies may not appear again in these proceedings. If that was his last time up, he did a fine job.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:27:29 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

A question to the House team about the conditioning of aid on the investigations, designed to get Schiff to say they have no direct evidence. Schiff is clearly exhausted, with a lot of the hope knocked out of him at this point. 

I have now doubt that Schiff will bring it home, just as he has night after night. But he really has left it all on the field this week. He’s burned the candle at both ends and the middle. Roberts cuts him off.

Purpura talks. I’d forgotten he’s still there. And he starts off by lying by saying that no one ever told Ukraine they needed to do the investigations to get the assistance. Sondland may have not heard Trump make that statement directly, but Sondland absolutely made that assumption to Ukrainian officials at every level.

Apparently it’s now safe to let Purpura say something. Any minute now we may see Pam Bondi. 

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 3:32:44 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

A collection of Democratic senators make a try at showing how the arguments that have been put forward by the Trump team are a definition of an imperial presidency.

Before addressing that, Schiff starts off by explaining, again, that Purpura was—charitably—completely wrong about the pressure applied to Ukraine and Sondland made it absolutely clear that there would be no money without investigations.

Then Schiff moves over to the question: “Yes, this is not just an imperial president, but a president with absolute power. Mentions the extreme example that was put forward by Senator King and Trump’s team would not say that example was impeachable. Murkowski and Alexander sat there on the King question and saw Trump’s team explain to them just what they were voting for. And they went for that.

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.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:58:55 AM +00:00 · Barbara Morrill

Ongoing coverage can be found here.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:39:59 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

And we’re back. Grassley follows right on the heels of the Alexander question in giving the Trump team another chance to rant about how the impeachment is nothing more than partisan hatred for Trump. Philbin is taking it, and will kick that can well enough, but I’m surprised this was not a clarion call that summoned Sekulow from the Conspiracy Cave.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:42:47 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

If you are just now coming back from dinner and missed Philbin’s response, don’t worry. Not one word of it was new.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:47:51 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

VanHollen teams with Klobuchar asks why Team Trump is opposed to letting the Chief Justice say if a proposed witness is relevant, with the Senate having a deciding vote. 

Sekulow says, uh, you know, no. We’re not willing to go with it. The reason here is clear enough—the big club of “We Will Eat Your Time Forever” would taken off the table, and that’s their best weapon to fend off all witnesses.

Schiff defends the constitutionality of the proposed process. Restates that he trusts Roberts to make a ruling on a witnesses as to whether they are there as relevant witnesses, or are just present for retribution. Schiff says it’s not that they don’t think Roberts would be fair, it’s that they “fear he would be fair.” Ties this refusal to the fact that they won’t produce documents or witnesses.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:50:58 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Here’s comes another Cruz-missile of smeardom. And frrracckkk we’re not talking about John Kerry’s step-son and someone else, and Burisma, and who the hell cares about this? I can only assume there’s a big “Q” on this somewhere.

Schiff: “The issue is not whether Hunter Biden should or should not have sat on that board.” Points out that Trump doesn’t give a flying fig about how much money Hunter Biden made — and neither does Cruz. It’s all about trying to imply that Joe Biden did something wrong, when what he did was with the cooperation and understanding of not just our allies, but Republican senators.”

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:53:28 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

I would pay to watch Ted Cruz and Adam Schiff debate. Cruz smugly thinks that ten minutes of browsing Breitbart gives him all the conspiracy fuel he needs to launch these attacks. Schiff burns him down in seconds.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 12:58:38 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Hakeem Jeffries comes up to take a question about the recent information released on Trump’s actions related to Turkey, looking toward a pattern of behavior. Jeffries moves the topic back to Ukraine, and stays pinned to the subject of corruption. 

Jeffries is doing a sound job, and once again making it clear that Ukraine had already met the corruption challenges that were required in the legislation. But there’s not a lot new to investigate here, and from the way the question was asked, it didn’t seem to suggest they had some new point to illuminate.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:04:58 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff gets a question on why the House “didn’t choose to enforce” subpoenas. He walks through the case with Kupperman, showing that they did request his appearance, then issue a subpoena, then engage in arbitration repeatedly. And the basis for the refusal to obey the subpoena was the same as the McGahn subpoena already being litigated. A reasonable question and a calm response. 

Not clear if it was seriously asked, or if Republicans are just burning time.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:09:25 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

(Sorry, had some fuzz in my feed there and missed part of the question) but the question is about the importance of protecting whistleblower.

Schiff talks to the importance of protecting a whistleblower in the intelligence community, explaining that they cannot go public, and that without them there is no check on misinformation related to intelligence. Talks about the threats Trump has made both directly against the whistleblower, and to others like Marie Yovanovitch. Without a mechanism to protect whistleblowers reporting wrongdoing, wrongdoing will increase. 

Schiff points at Grassley and Burr as “great champions” of whistleblowers.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:12:45 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Blunt and Hawley team up for something likely to be a slam dunk for Team Trump … sure enough, Blunt — whose entire family are lobbyists — sets Trump’s attorneys up to talk about Trump’s heavy duty commitment to making sure taxpayer dollars are “used wisely.”

That’s how we got to a trillion dollar debt this year. All that careful bookkeeping. Cipollone talking about how money to Ukraine should be going to the pockets of American billionairs … oh, wait. Maybe he said highways?

Is it infrastructure week again?

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:13:55 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Team Trump making a ringing call for following precedent and having one standard ... which doesn't include the witnesses that were critical to every other impeachment.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:15:19 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

King asks Trump’s attorneys if it would be okay for Trump to withhold Israel aid until the prime minister comes and fingers Biden as anti-Semitic.

Which is a ridiculous question. Bibi will do that for free.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:16:41 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Philbin isn’t actually going to answer that question, by the way. Except to leave if hanging that they won’t condemn the idea.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:24:05 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Murkowski sending along a question. This might hint at her conversation with Lamar! Her question goes to the statements from Sondland and Johnson on “no quid pro quo” which is in conflict with Bolton. She asks directly “why should this body not call Bolton?”

Philbin starts off with the “the House didn’t,” and the claim that it would set a precedent for the Senate to call witnesses not heard by the House. Which already is the precedent. In every case. Philbin is sticking to the “the House should have done if for you” part of this for a long time. Philbin tries to push the idea that the entire chamber of the Senate has to sit for testimony — which isn’t true, and wasn’t true for the Clinton impeachment. That’s a pretty light use of the We Will Kill Your Schedule hammer I expected. 

That question probably means that Murkowski has made up her mind and will announce some “well, I was convinced by...” But it’s uncertain which side she will fall on.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:27:45 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Whitehouse, et al bring the question back to King’s Israel hypothetical, with Schiff also getting a swing at it. And gives another good possibility related to Turkey and Trump’s ability to show preference to countries where he has property.

Philbin … slowly, grudgingly admits that if Trump forced a foreign leader to come to the United States and lie “that would be wrong.” But holy hell, he still will not say it’s impeachable. That’s genuinely incredible.

Instead, Philbin pivots to attacking Bolton’s book. That was kind of jaw-dropping.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:32:47 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

A question about claims from Shokin made in a Washington Post last June that he was going to investigate Burisma—which ignores that Shokin reversed himself days later in an interview with Bloomberg and admitted that he only made those claims to ingratiate himself with Trump and Giuliani.

The reason that WP article came up at all was because Rudy Giuliani brought that information to the Post. Giuliani was directly responsible for the article that was cited in that question. Neither the WP or the NYT actually followed up on the articles Rudy brought them by going to Ukraine  and asking hard questions. Bloomberg did.

Shokin not only retracted, he has spoken of it in other articles since that point. To get that claim, they have to take a specific article and ignore all others.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:39:52 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

A question from Peters and Cornyn … a strange pairing. Question on how the verdict will change the balance of powers.

Cipollone stands up to say, of course, that acquittal would be great. Super great. And because it’s Cipollone, there’s mention of tearing up ballots, votes, etc. Oh, and Cipollone now turns on the deal Schiff proposed for the trial and says it would screw with executive privilege. Cipollone challenges Schiff over speech and debate rules — stay tuned.

Schiff says he trusts Roberts to make the right decision. Also points out that depositions were taken with just a couple of senators during Clinton impeachment. 

Schiff says if the White House is allowed to determine which subpoenas are valid or invalid, oversight power is “eviscerated.” An acquittal also means buying Trump’s theory of the case, which gives him essentially unlimited power. Roberts cuts him off just when he was ramping up. Drats.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:40:33 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

x

Sen. Lamar Alexander just had a Senate page deliver a note to Sen. Mitch McConnell. McConnell let it sit on his lap for a couple minutes, then read it and stuffed it in his suit jacket pocket. McConnell’s face is tough to read. But he didn’t look in Alexander’s direction.

— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) January 31, 2020

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:44:20 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Schiff knocks back a claim that Trump is being impeached because he’s ignoring the advice of his advisers. Says that Trump is certainly allowed to disagree with advice, even good advice. Trump is being impeached for acting with a corrupt motive.

Philbin then simply ignores what Schiff just said, tosses a snide remark Schiff’s way, and says that it would have damaged the separation of powers if Trump had given the House what they asked for. Except that’s exactly what both Nixon and Clinton did.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:45:26 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

By the way, Trump legal dudes ... sitting in the Senate and warning them that they might destroy executive privilege isn't a threat. It's an appetizer.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:50:58 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Question to Trump’s team on holding up until the McGahn case is settled, which Trump’s team pretended was moving “swiftly” just yesterday. Now Philbin is aghast at the idea, says McGahn will certainly go to the Supreme Court, there’s no way to wait, Trump deserves to have this over with … that McGahn case could be “hanging over the country for months on end.” Which only shows that Trump’s White House is arguing that they were never going to be answerable in the House.

Schiff shows that the ruling in McGahn against absolute immunity only repeats past rulings … and then the DOJ is arguing that the subpoena can’t be enforced. He agrees with Philbin that it’s headed for the Supreme Court. Again offers to hand the decision to Roberts.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:56:44 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Scott, Hawley, et. al. have a question about … Benghazi! Though it’s hard as hell to know which Benghazi they’re talking about, since there were eight separate Benghazi investigations.

And because we have Sekulow up there, we’re also getting “fast and furious” … where Obama turned over 90,000 pages of documents before going to court over issues of sources and techniques. 

Sekulow is terribly frightened by the idea that the Senate may take Schiff up on his deal. That’s good to see.

Friday, Jan 31, 2020 · 1:57:34 AM +00:00 · Mark Sumner

Flipside of the softball that the Trump team got a few minutes ago, now the House team gets to address the consequences of acquitting Trump when it comes to intelligence issues.