GOP senators considering 'kill switch' option should impeachment trial spiral out of control

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reportedly is close to finalizing a rule that would allow President Trump's team to move to dismiss the articles of impeachment in the Senate quickly after some evidence has been presented, as a sort of safety valve in case Democrats try to drag out the trial for weeks.
The discussions came as Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that the trial could extend "to six to eight weeks or even longer" if the Senate decided to hear from additional witnesses -- a prospect that could interfere with the imminent presidential primary contests, as Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., likely would get pulled off the campaign trail.
McConnell, R-Ky., wouldn't be obligated to publicize the final version of his resolution setting the parameters of the impeachment trial until Tuesday, but top Republicans have said they supported affording Trump the opportunity to cut the trial short.
Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, for example, said he would be "very, very surprised" if McConnell's resolution didn't include that kind of kill switch.
"I am familiar with the resolution as it stood a day or two ago," Hawley told Axios. "My understanding is that the resolution will give the president's team the option to either move to judgment or to move to dismiss at a meaningful time."
Trump, Hawley wrote on Twitter after Axios' article was published, "deserves the right during Senate trial to ask for a verdict or move to dismiss - otherwise trial will become endless circus run by Adam Schiff."
Democrats, meanwhile, have voiced frustration privately that McConnell was holding the final rules for the trail close to the vest.
“The House managers have absolutely no idea what the structure of the trial two days before the trial begins,” one source with House Democrats working on the impeachment trial told Fox News.
The discussion may end up being moot: Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who is set to present an argument against impeachment during the Senate trial, said Sunday it will be clear there will be "no need" for witnesses if his presentation were to succeed. "Criminal-like conduct," Dershowtiz said, was required for impeachment.
For his part, Trump suggested earlier this month that an "outright dismissal" might be appropriate. But, Republicans almost certainly wouldn't be able to muster the votes necessary to end the trial prematurely.
The issue of witnesses may remain in limbo for a few more days. Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she's comfortable waiting to decide if more information would be needed as part of the Senate's impeachment trial until after hearing arguments from House managers and attorneys for the president.
Murkowski said Saturday she wanted to make sure there was a process that would allow senators to "really hear the case" and ask questions "before we make that determination as to, what more do we need. I don't know what more we need until I've been given the base case."
If Democrats were to try adding certain witnesses to an organizing resolution, Murkowski said she expected McConnell would move to table such a request and she would support a tabling motion.
"What I've worked hard to do is make sure that we have a process that will allow for that determination" — whether witnesses or documents would be needed, she said. "But, I want to have that at a point where I know whether or not I'm going to need it."
She said all senators faced political pressures but her responsibility was "not to focus on the politics of where we are but a recognition that we are in the midst of an infrequent and in many ways extraordinary process that the Constitution allows for, and I'm going to take my constitutional obligations very, very seriously."
Regardless of how one viewed the House's handling of the impeachment process, the matter has moved to the Senate, she said, adding later she did not want the proceedings to become a "circus."
No senators were more eager to avoid a circus, and get going with the proceedings, than the presidential candidates facing the prospect of being marooned in the Senate ahead of kickoff nominating votes in Iowa and New Hampshire.
“I'd rather be here,” Sanders said on New Hampshire Public Radio while campaigning Sunday in Concord.
During the trial, Sanders and other senators are required to sit mutely for perhaps six grueling hours of proceedings daily — except Sundays, per Senate rules — in pursuit of the "impartial justice" they pledged to pursue.
Fox News' Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

elizabeth warren cartoons

Murkowski wants to hear case before deciding on witnesses

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Alaska U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she’s comfortable waiting to decide if more information is needed as part of the Senate’s impeachment trial until after hearing arguments from House managers and attorneys for President Donald Trump and questions from members.

The Republican said Saturday she wants to make sure there’s a process that allows senators to “really hear the case” and ask questions “before we make that determination as to, what more do we need. I don’t know what more we need until I’ve been given the base case.”

Murkowski spoke to reporters from Anchorage ahead of Senate impeachment trial proceedings expected to begin Tuesday.

If Democrats try to add certain witnesses to an organizing resolution, Murkowski said she expects Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would move to table such a request and that she would support a tabling motion.

“Because what I’ve worked hard to do is make sure that we have a process that will allow for that determination” — whether witnesses or documents are needed, she said. “But I want to have that at a point where I know whether or not I’m going to need it.”

She said there are political pressures “on all of us” but said her responsibility is “not to focus on the politics of where we are but a recognition that we are in the midst of an infrequent and in many ways extraordinary process that the Constitution allows for, and I’m going to take my constitutional obligations very, very seriously.”

Regardless of how one views the House’s handling of the impeachment process, the matter is now before the Senate, she said, adding later she does not want the proceedings to become a “circus.”

Trump was impeached by the House on charges he abused his power by pushing Ukraine to investigate his Democratic political rival Joe Biden and that he obstructed Congress by blocking witnesses and testimony in the House investigation. Trump has said he did nothing wrong.

Murkowski said a recent Government Accountability Office report that concluded the White House violated federal law by withholding congressionally approved security aid to Ukraine reminded her of last year’s debate over Trump’s declaration of a border emergency that he invoked to spend more for border barriers than Congress had approved.

During that debate, she said she maintained the president could not take funds congressionally directed to one area and use them to advance his own policies. “Whether it was for the wall or for any other thing, I have been one that has said, ‘Congress has a very specific role when it comes to appropriation of funding and that needs to be respected,’” she said.

She said she viewed the GAO report with a “little bit of concern,” in part because of the need to respect Congress’ appropriation powers.

In a telephone interview Friday with the Anchorage Daily News, Alaska’s other Republican U.S. senator, Dan Sullivan, said he supports using the same rules as the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, which Sullivan said would give Trump a “fair and balanced” process. Under those rules, he said, the determination of whether or not to bring witnesses would happen in the second phase.

“I think this is going to be a stark contrast to what happened over in the House where you literally witnessed the most rushed most partisan and unprepared impeachment proceedings in the House in U.S. history,” Sullivan said.

National Archives: ‘We made a mistake’ altering Trump photos

President Donald Trump escorted by Col. Brian Daniels walks to board Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Friday, Jan. 17, 2020, en route to his Mar-a-Lago estate, in Palm Beach, Fla. ( AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — The National Archives said Saturday it made a mistake when it blurred images of anti-Trump signs used in an exhibit on women’s suffrage.

The independent agency is charged with preserving government and historical records and said it has always been committed to preserving its holdings “without alteration.”

But the archives said in a statement Saturday “we made a mistake.” The archives’ statement came one day after The Washington Post published an online report about the altered images.

The archives said the photo in question is not one of its archival records, but rather was licensed for use as a promotional graphic in the exhibit.

“Nonetheless, we were wrong to alter the image,” the agency said.

The current display has been removed and will be replaced as soon as possible with one that uses the original, unaltered image, the archives said.

The exhibit about the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, blurred some anti-Trump messages on protest signs in a photo of the 2017 Women’s March in Washington.

Signs that referred to women’s private parts, which also were widespread during the march, which was held shortly after Trump took office, also were altered.

The archives said it will immediately begin a “thorough review” of its policies and procedures for exhibits “so that this does not happen again.”

T he American Civil Liberties Union called on the archives to issue a more detailed, explanation.

“Apologizing is not enough,” Louise Melling, the organization’s deputy legal director, said in a statement. “The National Archives must explain to the public why it took the Orwellian step of trying to rewrite history and erasing women’s bodies from it, as well as who ordered it.”

Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman told the Post for its report that the nonpartisan, nonpolitical federal agency blurred the anti-Trump references “so as not to engage in current political controversy.”

References to female anatomy in the signs were obscured in deference to student groups and young people who visit the archives, Kleiman told the newspaper.

Kleiman did not respond to an emailed request for comment Saturday from The Associated Press. The public affairs office at the archives emailed the statement.

The archives issued the apology as thousands again gathered in Washington and in cities across the country Saturday for Women’s March rallies focused on issues such as climate change, pay equity and reproductive rights.

Trump team, House managers trade sharp views on impeachment

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s legal team issued a fiery response Saturday ahead of opening arguments in his impeachment trial, while House Democrats laid out their case in forceful fashion, saying the president betrayed public trust with behavior that was the “worst nightmare” of the founding fathers.

The dueling filings previewed arguments both sides intend to make once Trump’s impeachment trial begins in earnest Tuesday in the Senate. Their challenge will be to make a case that appeals to the 100 senators who will render the verdict and for an American public bracing for a presidential election in 10 months.

“President Donald J. Trump used his official powers to pressure a foreign government to interfere in a United States election for his personal political gain,” the House prosecutors wrote, “and then attempted to cover up his scheme by obstructing Congress’s investigation into his misconduct.”

Trump’s legal team, responding to the Senate’s official summons for the trial, said the president “categorically and unequivocally” denies the charges of abuse and obstruction against him.

“This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away,” the president’s filing states.

Stripped of legalese and structured in plain English, the documents underscored the extent to which the impeachment proceedings are a political rather than conventional legal process.

They are the first of several filings expected in coming days as senators prepare to take their seats for the rare impeachment court.

Senators swore an oath to do “impartial justice”′ as the chamber convenes to consider the two articles of impeachment approved by the House last month as Trump’s presidency and legacy hangs in balance.

One Republican whose votes are closely watched, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, acknowledged Saturday the political pressure bearing on them.

“I’m going to take my constitutional obligations very, very seriously,” she told reporters from Anchorage on a call.

The House’s 111-page brief outlined the prosecutors’ narrative, starting from Trump’s phone call with Ukraine and relying on the private and public testimony of a dozen witnesses -- ambassadors and national security officials at high levels of government -- who raised concerns about the president’s actions.

The House managers wrote: “The only remaining question is whether the members of the Senate will accept and carry out the responsibility placed on them by the Framers of our Constitution and their constitutional Oaths.”

The Trump team called the two articles of impeachment “a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president.”

Trump’s team encouraged lawmakers to reject “poisonous partisanship” and “vindicate the will of the American people” by rejecting both articles of impeachment approved by the House.

The Senate is still debating the ground rules of the trial, particularly the question of whether there will be new witnesses as fresh evidence emerges over Trump’s Ukraine actions that led to impeachment.

New information from Lev Parnas, an indicted associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, is being incorporated in the House case. At the same time, Senate Democrats want to call John Bolton, the former national security adviser, among other potential eyewitnesses, after the White House blocked officials from appearing in the House.

With Republicans controlling the Senate 53-47, they can set the trial rules — or any four Republicans could join with Democrats to change course.

Murkowski told reporters she wants to hear both sides of the case before deciding whether to call for new witnesses and testimony.

“I don’t know what more we need until I’ve been given the base case,” Murkowski said.

The House’s impeachment managers are working through the weekend and will be at the Capitol midday Sunday to prep the case.

Trump’s answer to the summons was the first salvo in what will be several rounds of opening arguments. Trump will file a more detailed legal brief on Monday, and the House will be able to respond to the Trump filing on Tuesday.

Trump’s team led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump personal lawyer Jay Sekulow, is challenging the impeachment on both procedural and constitutional grounds, claiming Trump has been mistreated by House Democrats and that he did nothing wrong.

The filings came a day after Trump finalized his legal team, adding Ken Starr, the former independent counsel whose investigation into President Bill Clinton led to his impeachment, and Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard law professor emeritus who intends to make constitutional arguments.

White House attorneys and Trump’s outside legal team have been debating just how political Monday’s legal brief laying out the contours of Trump’s defense should be.

Some in the administration have echoed warnings from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that the pleadings must be sensitive to the Senate’s more staid traditions and leave some of the sharper rhetoric exhibited during the House proceedings to Twitter and cable news.

One Democratic aide said Saturday that Trump’s initial filing read more like a Trump campaign fundraising email than a legal document.

People close to the Trump legal team said Cipollone would deliver the president’s opening argument before the Senate and that Sekulow would follow. Starr and Dershowitz would have “discrete functions” on the legal team, according to those close to the legal team, who were not authorized to discuss the strategy by name and spoke on condition of anonymity.

At issue in the impeachment case are allegations that Trump asked Ukraine to announce an investigation of Democratic political rival Joe Biden at the same time the White House withheld hundreds of nearly $400 million in aid from the former Soviet republic as it faces a hostile Russia at its border.

The Government Accountability Office said last week the administration violated federal law by withholding the funds to Ukraine. The money was later released after Congress complained.

The House brief said, “President Trump’s misconduct presents a danger to our democratic processes, our national security, and our commitment to the rule of law. He must be removed from office.

Trump’s attorneys argue that the articles of impeachment are unconstitutional in and of themselves and invalid because they don’t allege a crime.

Under the Constitution impeachment is a political, not a criminal process, and the president can be removed from office if found guilty of whatever lawmakers consider “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

_____

Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington and Becky Bohrer in Anchorage, Alaska, contributed to this report.

Trending on AP News

Trump lawyers respond to articles of impeachment: 'Constitutionally invalid'

President Trump's legal team on Saturday issued a full-throttle defense to the articles of impeachment, refuting the substance and process of the charges while accusing House Democrats of engaging in a "dangerous attack" on the right of the American people to freely choose their president.
"This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election -- now just months away," the legal filing said. "The highly partisan and reckless obsession with impeaching the president began the day he was inaugurated and continues to this day."
"The articles of impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face," the seven-page filing continued.
The legal paperwork is the first formal response to the two articles of impeachment read in the Senate on Thursday for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Trump's lawyers argued that the articles of impeachment "violate the Constitution" and are "defective in their entirety" because they were the product of invalid House proceedings that "flagrantly denied the President any due process rights."
At the crux of Trump's defense is that he did nothing wrong in his July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine when he asked for investigations into Democrats. The White House argues that military aid to Ukraine was ultimately released without any announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
The lawyers contend House Democrats fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever, let alone, high crimes or misdemeanors.
"In order to preserve our constitutional structure of government, to reject the poisonous partisanship that the Framers warned against, to ensure one-party political impeachment vendettas do not become the 'new normal,' and to vindicate the will of the American people, the Senate must reject both Articles of Impeachment," Trump's legal team wrote. "In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote."
The response is the first of many expected in the coming days from Trump's growing legal team as they battle to acquit the commander in chief in the Senate impeachment trial.
The House impeachment managers released their opening trial briefing Saturday evening, and Trump's lawyers will give their response by Monday at noon.
Adding to the Democrats' case is a legal opinion Thursday from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which found that the Trump administration broke the law by withholding defense aid to Ukraine. But a source close to Trump's legal team rejected the findings and accused the GAO of trying to insert itself into the impeachment "news cycle."
The third presidential impeachment trial formally began Thursday when Chief Justice John Roberts swore in the senators and each signed an “oath book” to cement their role as impartial jurors.
The trial will kick off in earnest Tuesday when House impeachment managers will prosecute the case and Trump's lawyers will offer a robust defense over a period of days.

California Cartoon

Tucker Carlson: Democrats want US to be more like California -- the state that's driving residents away

Tucker Carlson continued to take on the homeless crisis Friday night, this time tying it to the 2020 presidential election and asking viewers what kind of impact the election will have on the United States.
"The issues at stake are bigger than just the economy or even our foreign policy commitments. 2020 is about the broadest possible questions. What kind of country should we have? Who should live here? What will America look like 50 years from now?" Carlson asked on "Tucker Carlson Tonight."
"There are a lot of possible answers to those questions," he added, "but leading Democrats appear to have settled on their position. America, they're telling us, should be a lot more like California."
Carlson, who has covered California's problems extensively, mentioned Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg's recent comments praising the state.
"I think that California can serve as a great example for the rest of this country,” Bloomberg said last week.
Carlson said he sees Bloomberg's view as being woefully outdated.
"The people who moved here in 1960 when Bloomberg graduated high school found their American dream," Carlson said. "But things have changed. Now, the children and grandchildren of those people are fleeing California."
The Golden State's problems have included health and immigration -- and residents leaving the state because of failed policies, Carlson said.
"It's messed up, really messed up," Carlson said after playing a montage of homeless people taking drugs and leaving filth in the street.
"That's right. And so finally normal people are leaving California. For decades, the state led the nation in attracting migrants from other states. Now the flow has reversed."
Carlson blamed the politicians.
"Instead of fixing the problems that are forcing people to flee," he said, "politicians here have spent the last few years on policies that are frivolous and counterproductive."