Is a trap being set for Trump in the Senate trial?

[DavidPT]

Can 20 U.S. senators withstand the potentially irresistible temptation to reverse the results of the 2016 election and remove a president a number of them openly or privately dislike?

Since Donald Trump announced his intention to run for the White House on June 16, 2015, many of the entrenched elites across the various power centers of Washington and beyond have spent many of their waking hours trying to stop or unseat him.

Is a trap being set for Trump in the Senate trial?


This particular Op-Ed is about a week old. I don't know if this has already been discussed here or not. But even before I read this a week back, I was already thinking along these lines way before that, that maybe some of these Republican Senators are setting a trap for Trump. One thing that led me to think that, they don't want any witnesses involved from either side, and that they have told Trump there is zero chance he will be removed.

If Trump let's his guard down though, he assuming it's a slam dunk that he won't be removed, and in the process forfeits his rights to call witnesses, such as Schiff, Joe and Hunter Biden, and in the end they vote to remove him, that would show Trump is not the genius he wants us all to believe that he is. I'm not even remotely a genius, yet if this were happening to me, there is no way anyone in a million years would be able to talk me out of calling in witnesses, such as Schiff, Joe and Hunter Biden.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

I'm sorry, but I just don't see that many elected officials turning against their own party's president.

 

[Nithavela]

Good question. Let's check with Admiral Ackbar.

 

[tulc]

I'm sorry, but I just don't see that many elected officials turning against their own party's president.

not if their vote will be on record maybe, but if it's done anonymously? Oh yeah I suspect they'd jump on that with both feet.
tulc(just a thought)

 

[Hank77]

not if their vote will be on record maybe, but if it's done anonymously? Oh yeah I suspect they'd jump on that with both feet.
tulc(just a thought)

Me too and the Christian right would be very happy with Mike Pence as President.

 

[Speedwell]

Me too and the Christian right would be very happy with Mike Pence as President.

You sure can't tell that from how they vilify Christianity Today for suggesting it.

 

[Albion]

Can 20 U.S. senators withstand the potentially irresistible temptation to reverse the results of the 2016 election and remove a president a number of them openly or privately dislike?

You mean...

20 REPUBLICAN Senators plus all the Democratic ones? That's what it would take.

And why would that many decide to commit political suicide like that?

 

[aurabass]

NO TRAP IS REQUIRED IF THE SENATE UPHOLDS THE CONSTITUTION
Many Trump supporters have been misled by disinformation concerning the Articles of Impeachment.
THE ISSUE IS NOT TRUMP'S "PERFECT" PHONE CALL.
Will enough Republican senators grow a conscience and decide to uphold the law of our Constitution? Or will they continue to misrepresent the actual facts that underlie the articles of Impeachment?
1) Abuse of Power -As Russia invaded and annexed the Crimea while supporting armed conflict in Dombass Ukraine, the President withheld desperately needed military aid already allocated by Congress. He demanded an investigation announcement against the family of his political rival Joe Biden.
Trump sent his personal lawyer to Ukraine to work with two indicted campaign finance criminals to set up the Quid Pro Quo.
Rudy Giuliani and his now-indicted pals wanted PTrump to remove Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch from her post in Ukraine to place Pete Sessions, a former congressman who called for Yovanovitch’s firing as her replacement.
Ambassador Yovanovitch found out what Rudy was planning with Trump to make Ukraine investigate the Bidens. Rudy wanted her out of the way and he defamed her reputation in order to force her removal.
Withholding military aid benefitted the Russians - the Russians interfered in our election on Trump's behalf. Trump's abuse of power damaged our free elections and thus our democracy.
Remember Trumps campaign manager convicted felon Paul Manafort came from Ukraine where he was a key aide for the former Russian backed President of Ukraine forced from the country as Russian backed troops took control of Crimea and engaged in a hot war in Dombass Ukraine was in dire need for the military assistance since their troops were dying in the fight with Russia and Trump's delay cost Ukraine lives in the conflict.
UKRAINE was in no position to interfere in our election - Ukraine our ally was fighting for its life holding off our enemy Russian's invasion. Ukraine is a democracy and Russia a dictatorship.
When a President withholds allocated aid in exchange for "the favor" of an announced investigation to damage his political rival it is ABUSE OF POWER.

2) OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS Trump prohibited White House and administrative staff from honoring Congressional subpoenas and he refused to provide any documents concerning the Russian interference or the Ukraine aid situation.
CONGRESS is a co-equal branch of our government, Constitutionally empowered to investigate the activities of the Executive Branch in the process of checks and balances that make us a Democracy - not a dictatorship. Trump thinks his office is above investigation but he is wrong.
These are both very serious charges backed up by indisputable facts in evidence. We know he withheld the aid in exchange for an investigation of his rival and we know he ordered staff to ignore Congressional subpoenas and requests for documents. There is no doubt about his guilt.
The Senators have a choice - they can ignore the Constitution and vote against Impeachment OR they can do their sacred duty acquired by oath and remove this corrupt President from office.
THIS IS A TRAP FOR REPUBLICAN SENATORS - ARE THEY OATH BREAKERS OR PATRIOTS?

 

[DavidPT]

2) OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS Trump prohibited White House and administrative staff from honoring Congressional subpoenas and he refused to provide any documents concerning the Russian interference or the Ukraine aid situation.
CONGRESS is a co-equal branch of our government, Constitutionally empowered to investigate the activities of the Executive Branch in the process of checks and balances that make us a Democracy - not a dictatorship. Trump thinks his office is above investigation but he is wrong.
These are both very serious charges backed up by indisputable facts in evidence. We know he withheld the aid in exchange for an investigation of his rival and we know he ordered staff to ignore Congressional subpoenas and requests for documents. There is no doubt about his guilt.
The Senators have a choice - they can ignore the Constitution and vote against Impeachment OR they can do their sacred duty acquired by oath and remove this corrupt President from office.
THIS IS A TRAP FOR REPUBLICAN SENATORS - ARE THEY OATH BREAKERS OR PATRIOTS?

Let's consider this one for now. Did Congress seek the Courts to make sure these subpoenas were honored? I think we all know the answer to that. So that was sloppy work on the House's side. House Democrats should have sought help from the courts. So why didn't they then? Obviously because that might take too much time, so instead of doing things the correct way, they instead took the law into their own hands and charged Trump with obstruction of Congress. That's a bogus charge. How anyone cannot think so, is beyond me. Had they instead sought the Courts to settle this dispute, and had the Courts settled in favor of the Congress, and that Trump still prohibited White House and administrative staff from honoring Congressional subpoenas, then and only then, would it be a legit obstruction of Congress charge.

And I stayed out of Politics altogether until Trump was elected, yet I'm a fast learner for the most part, and that it didn't take me long to figure out that the obstruction of Congress charge is bogus, the fact they neglected to enforce the subpoenas through the Judicial Branch.

 

[camille70]

Me too and the Christian right would be very happy with Mike Pence as President.

Right now what is filtering out is the Trump talking points, that the dems are trying to undo the election and get a liberal in office. Adam Schiff had to keep reminding Congress after GOP members keep promoting similar nonsense in chambers that Pence, not Hillary would be president.

That said, I believe Pence is also neck high in corruption. I don't like him and the way he praises Trump in meetings, like Trump is a god or being worshipped, is disturbing, to put it mildly.

That said, if the GOP were smart they would end what I feel has been a national nightmare and vote to remove him just to get (somewhat) saner and, hopefully, less corrupt heads in charge.

 

[aurabass]

Let's consider this one for now. Did Congress seek the Courts to make sure these subpoenas were honored? I think we all know the answer to that. So that was sloppy work on the House's side. House Democrats should have sought help from the courts. So why didn't they then? Obviously because that might take too much time, so instead of doing things the correct way, they instead took the law into their own hands and charged Trump with obstruction of Congress. That's a bogus charge. How anyone cannot think so, is beyond me. Had they instead sought the Courts to settle this dispute, and had the Courts settled in favor of the Congress, and that Trump still prohibited White House and administrative staff from honoring Congressional subpoenas, then and only then, would it be a legit obstruction of Congress charge.

And I stayed out of Politics altogether until Trump was elected, yet I'm a fast learner for the most part, and that it didn't take me long to figure out that the obstruction of Congress charge is bogus, the fact they neglected to enforce the subpoenas through the Judicial Branch.

LINK repaired
YES THE DEMOCRATS WENT TO COURT FOR SUBPOENAS

There is nothing bogus about the Obstruction of Congress Article of Impeachment. The Trump refusal to comply was unprecedented - it wasn't sloppiness on the part of Democrats - it was unprecedented obstruction - not one document provided - HISTORIC OBSTRUCTION

the test case was over McGahn's subpoena - a case won by Democrats but the appeal process ran out the time McGahn Subpoena Case

 

[Hank77]

LINK repaired
YES THE DEMOCRATS WENT TO COURT FOR SUBPOENAS

There is nothing bogus about the Obstruction of Congress Article of Impeachment. The Trump refusal to comply was unprecedented - it wasn't sloppiness on the part of Democrats - it was unprecedented obstruction - not one document provided - HISTORIC OBSTRUCTION

the test case was over McGahn's subpoena - a case won by Democrats but the appeal process ran out the time McGahn Subpoena Case

Several of us can't read NYT's articles, they are behind a pay-wall. Could you quote the main points? Thanks.

 

[DavidPT]

LINK repaired
YES THE DEMOCRATS WENT TO COURT FOR SUBPOENAS

There is nothing bogus about the Obstruction of Congress Article of Impeachment. The Trump refusal to comply was unprecedented - it wasn't sloppiness on the part of Democrats - it was unprecedented obstruction - not one document provided - HISTORIC OBSTRUCTION

the test case was over McGahn's subpoena - a case won by Democrats but the appeal process ran out the time McGahn Subpoena Case

I don't think we are on the same page here. I'm mainly meaning in regards to the witnesses that defied Congressional subpoenas, who Schumer is wanting McConnell to have testify at the Senate trial. Maybe I missed it, but where in that article does it mention anything about House Democrats going to the Courts to try and enforce subpoenas issued for the witnesses Schumer is wanting the Senate to call before them? Such as Mulvaney and Bolton. Isn't the fact that Mulvaney and Bolton both neglected to honor any subpoenas not part of the Obstruction of Congress charge?

 

[aurabass]

THIS IS THE MEAT OF THE JUDGES OPINION.
In a rebuke to the Trump administration, she wrote that the White House strategy to stonewall the House had actually strengthened lawmakers’ case. She cited Mr. Trump’s vow to fight “all” congressional subpoenas and an extraordinary directive by his White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, that executive branch officials should not provide testimony or documents to impeachment investigators.

“The White House’s stated policy of noncooperation with the impeachment inquiry weighs heavily in favor of disclosure,” Judge Howell wrote. “Congress’s need to access grand jury material relevant to potential impeachable conduct by a president is heightened when the executive branch willfully obstructs channels for accessing other relevant evidence.”

The administration is likely to appeal the ruling.

 

[Hank77]

the executive branch willfully obstructs channels for accessing other relevant evidence.”

willful Obstruction of Congress

 

[aurabass]

I don't think we are on the same page here. I'm mainly meaning in regards to the witnesses that defied Congressional subpoenas, who Schumer is wanting McConnell to have testify at the Senate trial. Maybe I missed it, but where in that article does it mention anything about House Democrats going to the Courts to try and enforce subpoenas issued for the witnesses Schumer is wanting the Senate to call before them? Such as Mulvaney and Bolton. Isn't the fact that Mulvaney and Bolton both neglected to honor any subpoenas not part of the Obstruction of Congress charge?

The Democrats test case was in regards to Don McGahn. Trump wanted immunity but on Nov 25 the judge compelled him to testify

NOVEMBER 25, 2019
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ordered former White House counsel Donald McGahn to appear before Congress in a setback to President Donald Trump’s effort to keep his top aides from testifying.

The outcome could lead to renewed efforts by House Democrats to compel testimony from other high-ranking officials, including former national security adviser John Bolton.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled Monday in a lawsuit filed by the House Judiciary Committee.

Not sure how that fails to address your point about obstruction and subpoenas.
Once again the complete lack of any compliance with Congress is unprecedented and the problem was with the time involved with litigation and appeals.

If the Republican Senators back Trump'immunity play, what does that do going forward when a Democrat holds the office and they want to investigate.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No, Mitch and his cronies will back Trump 100%...not a doubt in my mind.

The establishment GOP has figured out the strategy that as long as they back Trump unconditionally, their constituents will view them as "loyal patriots" and see them as "fighting the good fight" against democrats.

Look at how some of the GOP senators, who used to oppose Trump or be critical of some of his flip flopping or former policy position, now suddenly come out in support of him just to get a "cheap pop" from their fan base.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That said, I believe Pence is also neck high in corruption. I don't like him and the way he praises Trump in meetings, like Trump is a god or being worshipped, is disturbing, to put it mildly.

I've been saying (half-jokingly) for a while that I want it to come out that Pence is the Deep State Mastermind who's been trying to gaslight Donald from the beginning, and his show of loyalty has been nothing but a front.

If we're going to have political theater, we might as well have a few plot twists.

 

[rjs330]

Me too and the Christian right would be very happy with Mike Pence as President.

We certainly would.

 

[rjs330]

THIS IS THE MEAT OF THE JUDGES OPINION.
In a rebuke to the Trump administration, she wrote that the White House strategy to stonewall the House had actually strengthened lawmakers’ case. She cited Mr. Trump’s vow to fight “all” congressional subpoenas and an extraordinary directive by his White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, that executive branch officials should not provide testimony or documents to impeachment investigators.

“The White House’s stated policy of noncooperation with the impeachment inquiry weighs heavily in favor of disclosure,” Judge Howell wrote. “Congress’s need to access grand jury material relevant to potential impeachable conduct by a president is heightened when the executive branch willfully obstructs channels for accessing other relevant evidence.”

The administration is likely to appeal the ruling.

Which is fine. The Democrats don't win a case until it has gone through the system. It didn't. We ALL know or at least should that the appeal process is a perfect and legitimate judicial process and the lower courts are often overturned by higher courts. We don't know in this case if it was going to be.

It's incredibly biased to consider obstruction when the judicial process had not been completed. Had the process gone through the courts and subpoenas upheld and then Trump ordered people not to appear and they didn't, then and only then not only should Trump be impeached for obstruction. And those refusing to go should be locked up for obstruction.