Impeachment witnesses are ‘increasingly likely,’ but top Republicans are still pushing cover-up

Republican sources are telling reporters that the news about former national security adviser John Bolton’s book makes it more likely that witnesses will be called at Donald Trump’s impeachment trial—but the dam hasn’t exactly broken wide open, and top Senate Republicans are still fighting to keep the cover-up intact.

“I think it’s increasingly likely that other Republicans will join those of us who think we should hear from John Bolton,” Sen. Mitt Romney said Monday. Sen. Susan Collins said the revelations that Bolton’s book manuscript recounts Trump saying that yes, he was holding up military aid to Ukraine until the country dug for dirt on his political opponents, “strengthen the case for witnesses and have prompted a number of conversations among my colleagues.” But no Republican senators previously opposed to calling witnesses has come forward to say they’ve changed their minds.

Campaign Action

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell—who reportedly feels blindsided by the Bolton news getting out at this juncture and released a statement saying he “did not have any advance notice” that this was coming—is not any more open to witnesses. Senate Majority Whip John Thune told reporters that “I don’t think that anything that he’s going to say changes the fact...I think people kind of know what the fact pattern is.” Despite all those times Republicans complained that there were no firsthand witnesses who heard directly from Trump that he was holding up the Ukraine aid to get an investigation of a political opponent, the emergence of a witness who could provide exactly that testimony changes nothing.

And in Thune’s telling, calling Bolton would just kind of be a big hassle. “If you start calling him, then the Democrats are going to want to call Mulvaney and want to call Pompeo ... and our guys are going to want to start calling witnesses on the other side to illuminate their case,” he said, continuing “And I think that gets us into this endless cycle and this drags on for weeks and months in the middle of a presidential election where people are already voting. My view is the fact pattern is what it is. I don’t think it’s going to change.” 

Oh. The fact pattern is what it is? So basically, all that talk of how Democrats hadn’t adequately made the case that Donald Trump withheld congressionally appropriated military aid to Ukraine because he wanted the country to interfere in the 2020 elections was just more Republican lies. It’s hard to draw any other conclusion from the fact that the number two Republican in the Senate says hearing from a firsthand witness who’s a longtime Republican official wouldn’t add any facts.

Some Republicans are operating with a little less bluster and bravado, though they’re still looking to cut a favorable deal. Sen. Pat Toomey wants a trade: one relevant witness to what Trump did for one irrelevant Republican witness with which to attack the very Democrats Trump was trying to attack all along. Sen. Lindsey Graham has a proposal to make it look like Republicans took Bolton seriously without actually allowing the public to hear what he has to say. And so on. 

There may be some cracks in the unified Republican determination for a cover-up, but there are just as many Senate Republicans frantically slapping spackle onto those cracks.

Lindsey Graham supports scheme to review Bolton manuscript in secret, prevent witnesses at trial

On Monday, Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma offered nervous Republicans an exit ramp from the dilemma posed by former national security adviser John Bolton. Rather than have Bolton appear as a witness in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, Republicans would instead have a chance to look at the manuscript of Bolton’s upcoming book, which claims that Bolton has knowledge as a firsthand witness to Trump’s alleged actions, in secret, and then determine how to proceed.

On Tuesday, Lindsey Graham signed on to this scheme, calling for the manuscript to be made available in ”a classified setting.” Not only is this an obvious ploy to prevent Bolton from ever answering questions in front of Mitch McConnell’s personally controlled camera; it also means that Republicans, after a trial in which they have constantly accused Democrats of changing the rules to gather evidence in “secret,” are genuinely looking to change the rules … so they can examine evidence. In secret.

Bolton has already volunteered to appear before the Senate if subpoenaed, and over the weekend The New York Times revealed that Bolton’s upcoming book details a conversation in which Donald Trump explicitly connects military assistance for Ukraine to extorting an investigation by that country into Joe Biden. Keeping that information out of the Senate trial has become a growing challenge, as polls show swelling support for the testimony of Bolton and other potential witnesses.

The idea of a secret review of the manuscript offers Republicans several attractive options. First, they can emerge from the classified setting to declare that there’s no there there, no matter what’s actually contained in the text. Second, they can condemn Bolton’s text as a money grab from someone whom Fox News is now repositioning from a longtime Republican hardliner to a “deep state agent” who is part of a conspiracy featuring former FBI Director James Comey. Finally, Bolton’s manuscript can be cherry-picked for both complimentary statements about Trump and derogatory comments about Democrats.

If this scheme goes forward, expect Graham to simultaneously claim that Bolton’s manuscript is a smear against Trump and that it says bad, bad things about Nancy Pelosi/Hillary Clinton/Barack Obama. But most of all, expect Graham and other Republicans to claim that, after reviewing the manuscript, they find no reason for Bolton to answer any more questions. Especially when Trump is going to fight Bolton’s appearance.

Then Republicans can demand that Joe Biden appear. After all, they’ll say, they heard from Bolton.

‘Space Force’ debuts new uniforms, Graham’s 2020 opponent, and more you might have missed this week

Yikes, where does the time go? How is it Sunday already? The impeachment trial has dominated the news cycle and our front page, but our staff also picked some other stories that might have flown under the radar but are definitely worth reading.

Without further ado, here are our staff picks.

Trump's 'Space Force' debuts some new uniforms. There's only one problem with them…

By. David Nir

The “United States Space Force,” a particularly bizarre Trump fever dream given life to feed the black hole of his ego, released their first uniforms to the public on Friday evening. Get a load of these beauts:

Democrats across the country seek to make California's mistake, destroying careers of freelancers

By. kos

It’s not an either-or situation. We can help workers truly exploited by the gig economy, while letting people who want to freelance continue to ply their professional wares. That’s where the focus should be, not on copying a flawed and dangerous California law.

Group of parents deported without their kids by Trump admin return to U.S. following court ruling

By. Gabe Ortiz

Their trauma also manifested in other ways, a medical director said according to the report. “Physical symptoms felt by separated children are manifestations of their psychological pain. You get a lot of ‘my chest hurts,’ even though everything is fine [medically]. Children describe symptoms, ‘Every heartbeat hurts,’ ‘I can’t feel my heart,’ of emotional pain.”

Trump administration reportedly moving ahead with plan that could destroy Medicaid in red states

By, Joan McCarter

In a joint letter to HHS, patient advocacy groups addressed the threat to the health of millions. "The block grant will include vulnerable eligibility groups such as children and people with disabilities and requests unprecedented changes that could make it harder for patients to get the treatments and services that they need," they wrote.

Lindsey Graham's 2020 opponent releases impeachment statement using Lindsey Graham's own exact quote

By. Walter Einenkel 

As one of the big proponents of impeaching then President Bill Clinton, back in 1998, Sen. Graham has come under fire over the past year for how starkly contradictory his public statements today when compared to those from 1998. Harrison justifiably has decided to use Graham’s words against him.

That’s it for this Sunday night, folks! But tell us in the comments: What stories did you read this week that stuck with you? Anything that you think flew so under the radar that we might have missed? Looking forward to chatting with y’all below! 

Lindsey Graham goes into hiding just before Jerry Nadler calls him out—with receipts

Rep. Jerry Nadler spoke today during the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump. At one point during his statement, Nadler wanted to make it clear to everyone that the top Republicans in the room were full of shit, especially by their very own standards. Nadler played a clip of Sen. Lindsey Graham recorded during the 1999 Senate impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton giving his opinion of what a “high crime” is.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: What is a high crime? How about if an important person hurt somebody of low means. That’s not very scholarly, but I think it’s the truth. I think that’s what they meant by high crimes. Doesn’t even have to be a crime. It’s just using your office and you’re acting in a way that hurts people. You’ve committed a high crime.

Rough stuff. Graham seems to have known this would be coming, and, according to The New York Times, Graham slipped out a few minutes before Nadler played the clip. Because there is at least one constant in the universe: Republican cowardice.

x

Republicans swoon with fake outrage after Nadler calls a cover-up a cover-up

It looks like the accurate characterization of Republican plans for the impeachment trial of Donald Trump as a cover-up is getting under some Republican skin. After Rep. Jerry Nadler dared to call a cover-up a cover-up on the Senate floor late Tuesday night, Republicans are clutching their pearls and declaring themselves offended in a blatant effort to change the subject from the cover-up to how Democrats are mean.

“It was so insulting and outrageous it was a shock to all of us,” Sen. John Cornyn huffed to CNN producer Ali Zaslav.

”They're on a crusade to destroy this man, and they don't care what they destroyed in the process of trying to destroy Donald Trump... I'm covering up nothing. I'm expose your hatred of this president, to the point that you would destroy the institution,” Sen. Lindsey Graham ranted.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski declared herself “offended.” Sen. Ron Johnson said Nadler was “insulting” and “completely inappropriate.” Senate Majority Whip John Thune called it “not helpful to [the Democrats’] cause,” a classic claim from Republicans: It’s not that they’re strenuously trying to change the subject from the facts of the case with an attack on Democrats; it’s that Democrats committed an unforced error.

Get them their fainting couches and smelling salts, now. Members of a historically norm-breaking, institution-dismantling party are just overcome with shock at someone daring to identify their actions for what they are. Or it’s all a strategy of distraction. Hmmm ...

Lindsey Graham’s 2020 opponent releases impeachment statement using Lindsey Graham’s own exact quote

Jaime Harrison is running for Senate as a Democratic candidate hoping to unseat incumbent Lindsey Graham. Sen. Graham, like Sen. Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republican Party stoolie squad, have fallen into line under the single-most transparently corrupt president in any of our lifetimes. As one of the big proponents of impeaching then President Bill Clinton, back in 1998, Sen. Graham has come under fire over the past year for how starkly contradictory his public statements today when compared to those from 1998. Harrison justifiably has decided to use Graham’s words against him, tweeting out from his personal account, Harrison posted a video, with “Official Impeachment Statement:” as the header. 

In the video we see Harrison speaking to the camera, reading a statement from a paper in his hands.

HARRISON: For the good of the nation, I think, it would serve us all well if we thought about this one idea. After we’re all dead and gone,

It is here, on the second sentence, that we can hear Sen. Graham’s wilting southern accent come up behind Harrison’s, as it is revealed to be Sen. Lindsey Graham’s statement on impeachment, from Dec. 22, 1998, to reporters somewhere underneath the Senate’s chambers.

GRAHAM: [continued] do you have something to present history that will withstand scrutiny, where everybody had a chance to have their say, in a reasonable way, in a focused way, so that history would judge us based on the facts, and based on a meaningful hearing not just on the political moment.

The image fades back to Harrison reading the end of Graham’s words.

HARRISON: [continued] And if we think about that, it’s very important to me that we leave behind a legacy that meets the model of American justice.

x

It may be hard to believe but before Donald Trump there were many Republicans, like Sen. Graham, who used a patina of eloquence in order to drive home their bleak and cynical world views. Now that this mask has been ripped free and the soul of the Republican Party has been revealed to be the monstrous faces of bigotry and greed, it is hard to connect the senator from South Carolina, who spoke so eloquently about impeaching then president Bill Clinton for his extramarital affair, with the senator from South Carolina who has said in no uncertain terms that he will not even pretend to participate in an impartial trial concerning the abuses of power in the Executive Branch of government.

SemDem has been covering a lot of Harrison’s moves in his trip toward the Senate, and you can learn a lot more about Harrison’s chances and stances here.