This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/opinion/trump-impeachment-senate-trial.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate
(about 20 hours later)
The holiday break has thus far provided little respite for President Trump, who has spent much of his time venting over what he sees as the injustice of his impeachment.The holiday break has thus far provided little respite for President Trump, who has spent much of his time venting over what he sees as the injustice of his impeachment.
The refusal by the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to submit the formal articles to the Senate until she has a clearer sense of how the trial will be conducted is a travesty, the president told reporters on Tuesday morning at his Mar-a-Lago resort. “They treated us very unfairly, and now they want fairness in the Senate.”The refusal by the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to submit the formal articles to the Senate until she has a clearer sense of how the trial will be conducted is a travesty, the president told reporters on Tuesday morning at his Mar-a-Lago resort. “They treated us very unfairly, and now they want fairness in the Senate.”
By Christmas night, Mr. Trump had worked himself into a lather. “Why should Crazy Nancy Pelosi, just because she has a slight majority in the House, be allowed to Impeach the President of the United States?” he tweeted.By Christmas night, Mr. Trump had worked himself into a lather. “Why should Crazy Nancy Pelosi, just because she has a slight majority in the House, be allowed to Impeach the President of the United States?” he tweeted.
Short answer: Because that is how the separation of powers works. And what the Constitution prescribes when a chief executive abuses his office.Short answer: Because that is how the separation of powers works. And what the Constitution prescribes when a chief executive abuses his office.
The House conducted “this Scam” with “no Due Process, proper representation or witnesses,” charged the president, falsely. “Now Pelosi is demanding everything the Republicans weren’t allowed to have in the House. Dems want to run majority Republican Senate. Hypocrites!”The House conducted “this Scam” with “no Due Process, proper representation or witnesses,” charged the president, falsely. “Now Pelosi is demanding everything the Republicans weren’t allowed to have in the House. Dems want to run majority Republican Senate. Hypocrites!”
The tantrum bled into Thursday. “The Radical Left, Do Nothing Democrats said they wanted to RUSH everything through to the Senate because ‘President Trump is a threat to National Security’ (they are vicious, will say anything!), but now they don’t want to go fast anymore, they want to go very slowly. Liars!”The tantrum bled into Thursday. “The Radical Left, Do Nothing Democrats said they wanted to RUSH everything through to the Senate because ‘President Trump is a threat to National Security’ (they are vicious, will say anything!), but now they don’t want to go fast anymore, they want to go very slowly. Liars!”
To review: Mr. Trump and his legal team declined to participate in the House’s inquiry. His administration blocked requests for witnesses and documents, bogging down the investigation in the courts at every turn. Despite this, enough damning evidence came to light that the president’s apologists have largely avoided defending his behavior on the merits, instead taking refuge in specious complaints about process.To review: Mr. Trump and his legal team declined to participate in the House’s inquiry. His administration blocked requests for witnesses and documents, bogging down the investigation in the courts at every turn. Despite this, enough damning evidence came to light that the president’s apologists have largely avoided defending his behavior on the merits, instead taking refuge in specious complaints about process.
Now, charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, the president is counting on the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to make it all go away. “He’s very smart guy, a very good guy, a very fair guy,” gushed Mr. Trump on Tuesday.Now, charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, the president is counting on the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to make it all go away. “He’s very smart guy, a very good guy, a very fair guy,” gushed Mr. Trump on Tuesday.
The president’s confidence appears well placed. For months, Mr. McConnell has been touting himself as a backstop to Mr. Trump’s removal. In a Dec. 12 interview with the talk show host Sean Hannity, Mr. McConnell reassured viewers there was “zero chance” the president would be removed and vowed “total coordination” with the White House.The president’s confidence appears well placed. For months, Mr. McConnell has been touting himself as a backstop to Mr. Trump’s removal. In a Dec. 12 interview with the talk show host Sean Hannity, Mr. McConnell reassured viewers there was “zero chance” the president would be removed and vowed “total coordination” with the White House.
In a floor speech the morning after the impeachment vote, Mr. McConnell ranted at length about the flawed process in the House’s investigation, claimed the articles were “constitutionally incoherent,” and he proclaimed it the Senate’s “duty” to end what he called an assault on norms and precedent.In a floor speech the morning after the impeachment vote, Mr. McConnell ranted at length about the flawed process in the House’s investigation, claimed the articles were “constitutionally incoherent,” and he proclaimed it the Senate’s “duty” to end what he called an assault on norms and precedent.
As for the trial, Mr. McConnell aims to keep things perfunctory. He is disinclined to allow witnesses; he has expressed a willingness to ram through rules on a party-line vote; and — to repeat — he has already announced what the ultimate finding must be.As for the trial, Mr. McConnell aims to keep things perfunctory. He is disinclined to allow witnesses; he has expressed a willingness to ram through rules on a party-line vote; and — to repeat — he has already announced what the ultimate finding must be.
It may also strike some observers as rich that Mr. McConnell is suddenly concerned about process, precedent and norms. This is the same Mitch McConnell who held open a Supreme Court seat for almost a year to deny President Barack Obama his rightful pick; who repeatedly tweaked the Senate’s rules to grease the skids for Mr. Trump’s judicial appointees; who keeps a chokehold on the Senate floor — stymying debate, frustrating members of both parties and reveling in his reputation as the legislative “grim reaper.” It may also strike some observers as rich that Mr. McConnell is suddenly concerned about process, precedent and norms. This is the same Mitch McConnell who held open a Supreme Court seat for almost a year to deny President Barack Obama his rightful pick; who repeatedly tweaked the Senate’s rules to grease the skids for Mr. Trump’s judicial appointees; who keeps a chokehold on the Senate floor — stymieing debate, frustrating members of both parties and reveling in his reputation as the legislative “grim reaper.”
Mr. Trump is correct that impeachment has exposed congressional hypocrisy. He’s simply confused as to its wellspring.Mr. Trump is correct that impeachment has exposed congressional hypocrisy. He’s simply confused as to its wellspring.
Considering how slippery Mr. McConnell can be, it may be that flamboyantly lashing himself to Mr. Trump’s defense team is a handy bit of hide-covering. Having put on such a grand display of fealty, the majority leader has plausible deniability in the event that some aspect of the proceedings winds up displeasing the White House.Considering how slippery Mr. McConnell can be, it may be that flamboyantly lashing himself to Mr. Trump’s defense team is a handy bit of hide-covering. Having put on such a grand display of fealty, the majority leader has plausible deniability in the event that some aspect of the proceedings winds up displeasing the White House.
But Mr. McConnell’s pledge to place the Senate at the president’s service puts other Republicans in an awkward spot — at least those still interested in maintaining a modicum of independence or integrity. And this week, a thin crack in conference unity appeared.But Mr. McConnell’s pledge to place the Senate at the president’s service puts other Republicans in an awkward spot — at least those still interested in maintaining a modicum of independence or integrity. And this week, a thin crack in conference unity appeared.
In an interview that aired on Christmas Eve, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told an Anchorage TV station she was “disturbed” by Mr. McConnell’s pledge to coordinate with the president’s legal team. It would be wrong to “prejudge” this matter, she said. “To me, it means that we have to take that step back from being hand in glove with the defense.” Mr. McConnell, she lamented, had “further confused the process.”In an interview that aired on Christmas Eve, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told an Anchorage TV station she was “disturbed” by Mr. McConnell’s pledge to coordinate with the president’s legal team. It would be wrong to “prejudge” this matter, she said. “To me, it means that we have to take that step back from being hand in glove with the defense.” Mr. McConnell, she lamented, had “further confused the process.”
Ms. Murkowski is known for her independence and has proved unafraid to buck her party and her president, including opposing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court last year. That said, her criticism should not be taken as a sign that she will vote to remove Mr. Trump. Ms. Murkowski has also criticized the House’s impeachment inquiry as flawed and rushed.Ms. Murkowski is known for her independence and has proved unafraid to buck her party and her president, including opposing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court last year. That said, her criticism should not be taken as a sign that she will vote to remove Mr. Trump. Ms. Murkowski has also criticized the House’s impeachment inquiry as flawed and rushed.
But in a Republican Party so cowed by this president, with most lawmakers too timid to question even his most grotesque behavior, Ms. Murkowski’s expression of concern sets her apart. The senator is sending a message, to her constituents as well as to Mr. McConnell, that she does not want to be viewed as a rubber stamp for a preordained acquittal. She takes her public duty more seriously than party loyalty, and she can be pushed too far.But in a Republican Party so cowed by this president, with most lawmakers too timid to question even his most grotesque behavior, Ms. Murkowski’s expression of concern sets her apart. The senator is sending a message, to her constituents as well as to Mr. McConnell, that she does not want to be viewed as a rubber stamp for a preordained acquittal. She takes her public duty more seriously than party loyalty, and she can be pushed too far.
If only more of her colleagues felt the same.If only more of her colleagues felt the same.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.