Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

[JimL]

And also, it was dismissed because Democrats withdrew the subpoena and not because Kupperman didn't have a case, which is what Jimmy is implying.

And now that the Kupperman suit has been declared moot, Judge Jacksons ruling in the McGahn case becomes law and like McGahn, Bolton would now have to comply with a supoena.

[Mountain Man]

McConnell said he has the minimum of 51 votes to begin the trial in the format that he has long envisioned: opening arguments for both the House impeachment managers and for Trump’s defense team, as well as ample time for questioning by senators, said the two people on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private meeting.

The vote would be held after the Senate receives the articles from the House, and a decision would be made on whether to call witnesses once the first phase of the trial is over, under the majority leader’s plan.

Senate Republican leaders did a final vote check Tuesday morning to make sure they have the votes for McConnell’s plan, according to a GOP senator familiar with the discussions.

That echoes the format of President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial that was held 21 years ago, and McConnell has been able to convince his members that Trump should be treated in the same fashion.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...rticl-n2559110

I'm not sure what there is for Democrats to complain about: let both sides present their best opening argument with the option of hearing additional witnesses and evidence if enough people are on the fence. That all sounds perfectly fair to me.

Of course Democrats know their opening argument is going to be a dud, but that's their problem.

[seanD]

And also, it was dismissed because Democrats withdrew the subpoena and not because Kupperman didn't have a case, which is what Jimmy is implying.

Apparently, at least according to his excuse for the delay, he was waiting to see how the judge would rule (which kind of doesn't make sense -- if he has something he's willing and anxious to spill now, why wait for that decision to volunteer to do it then?). But the judge dismissed it shortly after the House retracted the subpoena. So the question is, why didn't Bolton appear before the House when that happened? Why doesn't he do it now, since the impeachment is still in limbo and there's no guarantee the senate will even hear his evidence?

[Mountain Man]

Jim, your own article says it was dismissed last month, not yesterday.

And also, it was dismissed because Democrats withdrew the subpoena and not because Kupperman didn't have a case, which is what Jimmy is implying.

[JimL]

Jim, your own article says it was dismissed last month, not yesterday.

Pelosi has the impeachment in limbo, remember? Perhaps you could make the argument Bolton didn't know whether he could still testify before the House because of this. I'm actually unclear of this myself.

My mistake, wrong Monday, same point though. It was dismissed December 30th, a week ago, long after the House impeachment was finalized. The House can still supoena him though, and who knows, they just might do that.

[seanD]

Yes it was.


http://www.politico.com/news/2019/12...dismiss-091407

Jim, your own article says it was dismissed last month, not yesterday.

Pelosi has the impeachment in limbo, remember? Perhaps you could make the argument Bolton didn't know whether he could still testify before the House because of this. I'm actually unclear of this myself.

[JimL]

No, it wasn't.

Yes it was.


http://www.politico.com/news/2019/12...dismiss-091407

[seanD]

Because Kuppermans suit was just dismissed yesterday.

No, it wasn't.

[JimL]

If that's the case, why couldn't he have volunteered to testify to the House when they dismissed Kupperman's subpoena? There is no assurance that the senate will even subpoena him for trial.

Because Kuppermans suit was just dismissed yesterday.

[seanD]

The reason for Boltons change of mind is the recent dismissal of his deputy, Mr. Kuppermans lawsuit, which leaves Bolton no legitimate reason for not testifying.

If that's the case, why couldn't he have volunteered to testify to the House when they dismissed Kupperman's subpoena? There is no assurance that the senate will even subpoena him for trial.

[JimL]

Oh please

If he has damning evidence against Trump, his aim would presumably be to sway senate Republicans.

The reason for Boltons change of mind is the recent dismissal of his deputy, Mr. Kuppermans lawsuit, which leaves Bolton no legitimate reason for not testifying.

[firstfloor]

Well, who is the "we" you were speaking of? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

No mouse, just a self elected spokesman for the citizens of the United States of America. I hope you do not think me unreasonable.

[seanD]

The venue of the testimony would not matter, as members are given equal time. Senate Democrats will not be pressing harder than their House colleagues and Senate Republicans will not be dissembling less than theirs.

--Sam

Oh please

If he has damning evidence against Trump, his aim would presumably be to sway senate Republicans.

[rogue06]

The venue of the testimony would not matter, as members are given equal time. Senate Democrats will not be pressing harder than their House colleagues and Senate Republicans will not be dissembling less than theirs.

--Sam

For one thing in the Senate you are far less likely to have someone in charge shutting down questioning that made him feel uncomfortable or even coaching witnesses by telling them what they meant (you ask for clarification not provide the clarification you want).

[Watermelon]

It still leaves the question of why he was unwilling to testify before the House.

Based on his statement he was waiting for the Kupperman case results to tell him whether to testify or not. Since the case became moot, Bolton hit the books to determine the correct option and came to a conclusion that he would testify if subpoenaed.