“It’s a little too quiet” - US Politics February 2021

also it's COMPLETE bullshit that cruz, graham, and who knows how many others have just been allowed to meet and advise trump's defense team, in the middle of the "trial". there have been multiple accounts of this, photos - they just don't care. it's shameless.

https://i.imgur.com/GoBaJRJ.png

btw, even the B- rated WashPost online news team (or whatever the fuck this is) referred to it as "the democrats' frankly _astounding_ decision" to not call witnesses, especially after winning over some republicans for the cause

bullshit

the only thing they're hearing from democrats right now that "they want to move on", "don't want to gum up the works for biden's insurance", "doesn't make sense to drag it out"

I don't like Schumer and was wondering what alternatives there were a while back. Guess they're stuck with him now

AOC will defeat Schumer in 2022

fuck all of them

stevo he has to run for senate again in 2022, and no matter how much he pretends to have progressive values, he's going to get ass kicked if AOC primaries him, which she should

There has to be more to it than this. Democrats have signaled that they’re perfectly fine with encroaching fascism in this country. They’re gonna get their asses kicked in 2022.

Well done dipshits

According to a source close to Trump legal team, the former president is pleased there won’t be witnesses at the trial.
The source added that the legal team views the democrats‘ decision to not call witnesses as a clear victory.

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) February 13, 2021

why make a push for witnesses this morning, at all? why do that, only to turn around and not do it? that, by itself, is tactically idiotic and indicative of weakness and lack of resolve

Even if we somehow maintain a plurality of congressional seats in 2022, I look forward to dems conceding a number of the elections when republicans make mean noises about doing bad things if they don't get their way.

What's even the point of pushing back against terrible people if you're just gonna fold like a rickety lawn chair facing a stiff breeze, fuck everything.

Yeah somethings not right here

They need to have people on TV right now explaining what the fuck they’re doing and why they’re so eager to reward the GOP for being evil because they are absolutely gonna lose votes over this

What frogbs said

I am just completely baffled by giving up after the vote. Spineless and infuriating. Why give up on getting witnesses on the public record at this point? The outcome is a given either way, so why not get more damaging testimony out there. So disheartening. I’d like to believe there is a piece we aren’t hearing yet, but I fear this just more bullshit Dem caving in the name of mythological “unity”.

exactly how are they supposed to punish the GOP for being so evil? what's their mechanism here?

Had to go out for a couple of hours--so disappointed. They're settling for a piece of paper, to be filed away.

also, for the handful of the republicans with a soul who indicated this morning that they'd be willing to call witnesses, what message does that send? it's a 50/50 senate right now. as much as it blows to have to worry about the manchins of the party, democrats shouldn't count on the perpetual cooperation of romney, murkowski, especially not someone like collins. yet democrats forced them to take a vote that was damaging, and then, thought twice and reneged on it altogether. not good

exactly how are they supposed to punish the GOP for being so evil? what's their mechanism here?

when you manage to win a vote that actively causes mass panic within the GOP, maybe don't let them off the hook. drag them on live television, over and over again.

the only way this makes sense is if they come out and say "the GOP is a lost cause, we're not going to spend weeks dragging this out when people need help, which we're gonna do without any GOP support because fuck 'em". but they won't even eliminate the filibuster. they're not going to do anything. spineless cowards.

It snowed 9 inches here since last night and I don’t know why I’m even reading this thread, god knows watching whatever is happening live seems like the worst way to spend a Saturday I can imagine.

I got the impression that the only person that the House managers actually wanted to depose was Jamie Herrera Beutler? that it was call witness more than 'call witnesses'?

(xpost) Excellent point, KM. I was thinking "It's so great they don't even need Manchin, they've got four Republicans who are solid on this."

like maybe it was just "hey we want this one person's testimony", "well if you do that, we're going to ram through 300 people that we propose interviewing all of which will require a vote and take up a lot of time regardless of whether the Senate votes the witness down or not"

This move is tactically stupid and morally corrupt for leaving Herrera Beutler out to twist in the wind. I wasn't invested in witnesses because even if managers had Trump himself subpoenaed admitting to incitement it wouldn't have gotten the Dems to 67 votes. And besides us and our fellow libs/leftists I wonder how many people actually followed this trial all week -- it would surprise me if the trial were a thing in '22 even if the Senate had convicted him. Our republic barely survived an insurrection provoked by a president yet the legislators whose lives were in danger weren't moved at all. I knew the gig was up at the beginning of last week. There was no way this thing wouldn't have ended any other way.

However, if this move precipitates a series of awful, credulous, stupid errors moving the Biden agenda along for the next few months, we're in deep shit.

yet democrats forced them to take a vote that was damaging, and then, thought twice and reneged on it altogether. not good

that's a good argument against what they did. I agree with that, beyond the bad optics of being tentative and vacillating. I f you make a definite move, follow through, don't flinch back.

god knows watching whatever is happening live seems like the worst way to spend a Saturday I can imagine.

ILE politics BINGO!

i've won 3 times in a row now

well, Romney's unsullied Mormon soul can congratulate itself on having a conscience.

should also be noted it was Raskin who proposed witnesses, and this was not previously discussed with Democrat Senators. though they ultimately did vote for it, it's not as if they were the ones that proposed the idea and subsequently changed their mind. it sounds more like Raskin didn't let them in on his plan beforehand (idk if he was allowed to tbh).

Harder to get those bingos now that “Dr Morbius says bye” will go forever unchecked

my theory is they wanted to interview Beutler to get her statement into the record, realized the blowback and noise would needlessly extend the trial and not in the productive ways THEY wanted, but the way Republicans wanted, and realized they could just enter Beutler's original statement into the record and get the same effect.

not defending it per se (I'm not a fan of instareactions), but I don't get the impression that this was "Raskin has 100s of witnesses that are gonna shock you and break things open" as much as "Raskin has one key witness he wants to interview and the only way to do that is to take a vote on witnesses"

that's a good argument against what they did. I agree with that, beyond the bad optics of being tentative and vacillating. If you make a definite move, follow through, don't flinch back.

and on the other side of the coin, there would be much less outrage - probably almost none - if the democrats wouldn't have made a push for witnesses this morning. that's what was expected, in fact. the great outrage and disappointment right now is a product of their own creation! don't bother tantalizing people with glimpses of doing a good thing if you're not going to follow through!?

it sounds more like Raskin didn't let them in on his plan beforehand (idk if he was allowed to tbh).

if the other side is openly coordinating strategies you might as well do it yourself

This is bad and it doesn’t bode well but you’re all overestimating how much people without politics brain will know or care about what happened procedurally on a Saturday morning.

it's like telling your loved one, "hey, you know what? let's cook a really special meal tonight and just try to relax, does that sound good?", "oh yeah, i would love that!", *2 hours passes*, "nah, let's not do that. let's just eat this cardboard"

not defending it per se (I'm not a fan of instareactions), but I don't get the impression that this was "Raskin has 100s of witnesses that are gonna shock you and break things open" as much as "Raskin has one key witness he wants to interview and the only way to do that is to take a vote on witnesses"

otm

you’re all overestimating how much people without politics brain will know or care about what happened procedurally on a Saturday morning.

also ottm

It seems like such a misreading of the utter panic that Trump's lawyer exhibited this morning. And I'm still not sure what Graham switching his vote meant. I agree with Alfred that it looked very fishy, but if it was meant as a bluff, it's not much of a bluff on his own--a bluff, no matter how misguided, would need to involve a few of Trump's most loyal sycophants.

there would be much less outrage - probably almost none - if the democrats wouldn't have made a push for witnesses this morning

You can't open that door and then walk away. What was the point?

I still think there's a lot of framing ITT as if one party introduced and recalled something when once again, it was Raskin who proposed, Senate who voted on what they were proposed, and Senate who then made the deal with Raskin.

it sounds like if anybody erred, it was Raskin - assuming he could have had this conversation with Chuck in advance, well frankly he should have. since they weren't expecting it, they were figuring it out on the fly.

btw by "party" I meant "person" there, not political party.

you’re all overestimating how much people without politics brain will know or care about what happened procedurally

I agree about the effect of that on general public. It has more effect in terms of what KM noted, in alienating some of the goodwill which might have been available to the Senate dems from several 'moderates' who voted with them on the motion.

Maybe the defense’s closing argument will consist of this playing through an old boombox while these doofuses throw the devil sign https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2QCORi-u0U

Never forget: The House committee probe into Benghazi lasted over 2 & 1/3 years!

it sounds like if anybody erred, it was Raskin - assuming he could have had this conversation with Chuck in advance, well frankly he should have. since they weren't expecting it, they were figuring it out on the fly.

yeah, the early reports are that the senate democrats were "blindsided" by Raskin's proposal. i get that. that was bad a good chat with chuck would have prevented that. but the problem is, after being blindsided, they still voted - with the support of 5 republicans - to call witnesses. the time to figure out if democrats were serious or not about calling witnesses was before that vote, not after

To Neanderthal's point. POLIICO:

When Senate Democrats stepped onto the floor on Saturday morning, they had no idea the House impeachment managers were about to drop a political grenade in their laps.

But after a brief schism that threatened to throw Donald Trump's trial into chaos, House and Senate Democrats quickly agreed to put the pin back in. House Democratic managers and the former president's lawyers ducked the issue of witnesses nearly as soon as it was raised, and Senate Democrats approved the turnaround.

Instead of a weeks-long drama over trial witnesses that risked upending the Senate schedule, a widely known statement from one House Republican was entered into the record. Trump’s team declined to dispute it. And amazingly, both sides decided to move on.

But that speedy resolution came after several hours of utter uncertainty.

While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and his members had prepared for the possibility of voting on witnesses, they got no warning that the lead House prosecutor was about to force a vote that could have prolonged the trial for days or weeks. The impeachment managers spent Friday night and Saturday morning wrestling with the question themselves, according to Democratic sources.

Then Senate Democrats held a 9 a.m. Saturday conference call where members still indicated they were in the dark about House Democratic managers’ plans. The managers didn’t make the final call to force a Senate vote until minutes before the Senate gaveled in at 10 a.m., Democrats said.

why did senate democrats vote for calling witnesses, 50-45, if it was so clearly a bad idea an hour and a half later?

and on the other side of the coin, there would be much less outrage - probably almost none - if the democrats wouldn't have made a push for witnesses this morning. that's what was expected, in fact. the great outrage and disappointment right now is a product of their own creation! don't bother tantalizing people with glimpses of doing a good thing if you're not going to follow through!?

yea that's what's irritating about this to me as well. the Republicans' only argument here, the one they've been using for FIVE FUCKING YEARS NOW, is "you hate Trump just because he's rude, you had it out for him on Day 1 and that's why we don't take any of this seriously". doing something like this just plays into that. "oh if your case was so airtight, why didn't you call witnesses??"

at the end of the day though it's hard to have TOO much ire for Democrats. they're trying to work in a fundamentally broken system that rewards evil. I don't think dragging this out would've changed any votes, nor would it have swayed too many voters; even without witnesses, the Dems' argument was a slam dunk, the GOP's defense pathetic. adding more evidence to the pile isn't going to change anything. the system is broken. I understand that. but they're sending a huge message that they don't take this shit seriously, either.

they had to vote one way or the other once it was introduced, and to call Herrera required a "yes" vote, is my thought.

which is a bit different than Schumer saying "let's have witnesses" *disco dance* "just kidding!"

Raskin probably didn't tell Schumer because the only reason he was motioning for witnesses is because he had one witness to call and he greatly misjudged how much of a clusterfuck it would be once he introduced it. he figured it'd pass on party lines or with aisle crossers, they'd call Herrera, and that's it, not the procedural wonkery that was proposed afterward.

Seems like the Senate GOP leaders had carefully gamed out how to react to a motion to call witnesses and had their countermove all ready in the bag, while Raskin and the House managers were simply reacting to Herrera-Beutler's statement on a last minute basis and hadn't gamed it out ahead - maybe because their heads have been deep into the process of putting together and presenting their case, not the parliamentary clusterfucks Mitch could spring on them.

weren't the GOP saying on television over and over that if the Dems called witnesses they'd spend months wasting time by calling pointless witnesses? they telegraphed this well in advance

anyway the shit that really gets me is that the Senate is adjourning for a week so it's not like they have important immediate business to attend to. this comes off like "we'd love to punish this insurrection but we're not gonna lose our vacation over it"

The way I understood it this morning was that the precedent says each side gets the same number of witnesses; if the Democrats proposed one, that's all the other side would get.

LIke I mean...

We keep pointing out the Senate voted "yes", but how big of an optics disaster would it have been if the Senate voted "no" after Raskin proposed it? You never want your party to be on different pages in a trial like this. The moment Raskin proposed it, they had to vote "yes".

I think they actually did want to depose Hererra, and used the vote to negotiate getting their statement added into the record and being able to avoid the clusterfuck.

it feels botched, but....I think some of you all are oversimplifying waht happened.