Why witnesses matter

[angrychair]

It would have meant more to hear it from McCarthy, under oath, in front of TV cameras.

It would have meant more to hear it from Tommy Tuberville as to why the POTUS and his lawyer were calling Tuberville directly given trump did not know him and he had not been a senator barely 24 hours

Would have meant more to hear from Pence and if he tried to ever communicate with trump and if so what was said. To hear his experience that day.

To communicate with head of USSS as to when they knew Pence was in danger and when they informed WH and when trump was informed.

To hear from EVERY SINGLE INJURED CAPITOL AND DC OFFICER and asked about their experience that day. To ask them if any suspect told them trump sent them.

There are a lot of different people that could have been brought out and asked questions on the Senate floor, in front of everyone, in front of cameras.

Now it's over. The moment is lost. Guess we just "get over it" now and pretend it didn't happen???

Don't say we know what would have happened. We don't. We didn't even try. What would Nixon's hearings have been without Dean?

I mean, as its been stated, their public excuses were:
its just to hard. It will take to long. Republicans might be mean to us. Call their bluff. Burn the filibuster. Pass legislation.

This is far worse than most realize. The US Senate just gave a greenlight to these terrorists to launch another attack. That the Senate has their back. This decision will come back to haunt us.

[Hugin]

1. The decision to not call witnesses after voting to do so was the greatest...

miscarriage of democracy I've ever personally experienced.

I will point out until I die that since there was no vote on reversing the course, there is no record of who was responsible.

Truly, the day democracy died.

[StarfishSaver]

13. Not calling witnesses who would have made no difference to the outcome

"was the greatest miscarriage of democracy [you've] ever personally experienced."

You don't get out much, do you? Or have you just been asleep for the past 40 years and only woke up just long enough to see that witnesses weren't called and then went back to sleep around noon yesterday?

[Kid Berwyn]

15. "Trump Acquitted" is what they're saying today.

Not “Trump tried to overthrow the Constitution,” which is what witness after witness would make plain today and for history.

[Hugin]

16. Posts like this make...

DU suck.

The Impeachment was a political move and as such should have been handled in a most open and transparent way. Every decision carefully and in a determined manner on the record.

It wasn't a football game with winners and losers. It was a situation where we were all losers and we need to hear why from those who brought it about in person.

It's turning out the decision to not call witnesses was driven by some who "wanted to get home for Valentine's Day" disrespecting those who will never return home Valentine's Day or for any other reason and those like myself who deeply believe in openness and transparency from our elected officials.

[uponit7771]

21. Has "get home for Valentine's day" been confirmed or just another "sources say". I'm not thrilled..

... at the justifications for not calling witness's they seem to be a myriad of strawmen arguments.

We already knew what the outcome was going to be we needed to demonize Trump and his terrorist that sided with him.

The "republicans were holding a gun to our heads" shit is tired too, the kGOP always seems to make situations like these a political advantage if the few times dems do it.

[Hugin]

37. The news cycle has conveniently (for them) slithered on...

Last edited Mon Feb 15, 2021, 05:06 AM - Edit history (1)

into Moscow Mitch's speechifying.

Strawmen is all I heard on the matter.

Mostly, "But, but, but, break! -pout-".

Although, one believable and alarming report had it that suddenly the main witness, Representative Jaime Herrera-Beutler (R-WA) was receiving credible threats on her life and well being. Since, Trump seemed to be paying rapt attention to the progress of the whole McCarthy Affair in the trial that seems plausible given his proven murderous way of dealing with uncomfortable things.

No record, though.

[Lars39]

2. Capitol police couldn't testify

and McCarthy would either refuse to testify or lie. Any other Republicans...rinse, repeat

[angrychair]

5. Respectfully don't agree

This is an excuse, not a reason.

McCarthy would lie? As much as I hate, deeply hate, Republicans, none of them would be so stupid as to lie under oath, in front of the entire word.

Lying in that situation carries criminal liability and they are not going to do that.

What does he have to lie about? We knew the content of the call already. The ount is just to hear it from him directly. Not second hand.

Why can't Capitol police testify? It a hearing about factual events they were involved in. So capitol police never go to court?

[Lars39]

10. They would just refuse to testify

There is still a witness from 1st impeachment trial that refused to testify. Police Chief, ongoing investigation is reason why for them iirc.

Here’s Plaskett explaining witness situation...
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10022302

[radius777]

36. +1. Unlike a criminal trial, they can just stonewall

and ignore the subpoena, which is what they would do as they did in the first impeachment.

More witnesses would not have changed how Repubs voted, and would've just dragged it out and annoyed the public, who care far more about getting help with Covid etc at this point.

[DonaldsRump]

3. I think the House Managers did great, but the way the witness issue was handled

wasn't good. It shouldn't have played out in the public and could have been dealt with behind the scenes. I do think they should have called witnesses, but I don't think there should have been a vote to call witnesses, and then no witnesses are called. Someone didn't coordinate with someone.

It marred what was an otherwise brilliant performance by Rep. Raskin and his fellow managers.

[angrychair]

6. I agrre

With this assessment. Thank you.

[soothsayer]

7. As I understand it, they wanted one witness, voted to get one witness

Instead got a stipulation for her written account of what she would have said.

We got all excited (well I did) and then disappointed but that’s just because I didn’t understand what they were up to.

[soothsayer]

4. Witnesses would have been fun but not without risk

But he wasn’t getting convicted by that gang of traitors on the GQP side. No matter what. Just wouldn’t have happened. They don’t have consciences and they don’t care. Secret ballot also would not have helped, imho.

[angrychair]

11. That is a theory, not fact

In the Watergate impeachment hearings there was ZERO support from Republicans until Dean's testimony.

The impeachment ended up being swung by a single witness.

We have no idea what could have happened. Not doing something gets a guaranteed outcome. Doing it still leaves open possibilities.

[soothsayer]

12. I'm disappointed too but those bastids are dug in like ticks

But I’d take the witness option too if given a choice.

The managers made their case though. It’s pretty clear to normal people what happened and who’s responsible. Even Moscow Mitch agreed.

[c-rational]

17. I hear you angrychair, and yet I will give the impeachment managers the benefit of the doubt.

By voting for witnesses (at the last minute unexpectedly based on new information), they did get the statement they wanted read into the record. We do not know how badly these reThugs could have muddied the waters in the weeks and months to come if witnesses had been forced.

We simply do not know all the political calculations that went into this decision.

[Turin_C3PO]

8. I'm glad it's over.

Time to move on to Biden’s agenda. Covid is our biggest threat right now and must be dealt with, we need that relief package to pass.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

9. This is far from over...

Witnesses, the voice of god or any other such thing was never going to lead to an acquittal.

We will hear from those people there are federal crimes, District of Columbia statutes, state charges are coming.

Witnesses in that senate trial could have refused to come. No sweat. I’m not sure about DC but the rest if they refuse a subpoena, jail time.

He would have received no real punishment, no jail, no fines not even a slap.

Federal and the rest could put him in prison or monetarily break him.

Witnesses in the impeachment trial could have lied big time with no real repercussions I believe.

[Kid Berwyn]

14. Missed opportunity to educate the politically illiterate.

McConnell and the GOP aren’t going to lift a finger to help President Biden and his agenda.

Not only do the NAZIs get away with treason, they’re free to continue spewing Big Lie after Big Lie.

Great OP, angrychair. Every word. And they’ll be back with guns, as the one turd said in the Capitol.

[frazzled]

18. The politically illiterate weren't watching

That’s why they’re what you called politically illiterate. So there’s that.

I’m a bit befuddled by all these calls for more witnesses (yes more, because the main, extensive evidence was already documented in the speeches, tweets, timelines, insurgents’ statements, etc.) It’s clear the media wanted more: it’s more sexy than having to air Covid Response Team press conferences. And a lot of people seem to want to revenge watch their favorite boogeymen. Very entertaining. But little of substantive value would have been added, I think, even if those subpoenaed agreed to testify ... which we know from previous experience was not the case.

I know many here would have liked this to have gone on forever ( which it would have if witnesses from both sides were called). I, for one, am anxious for Congress to focus in like a laser on getting the Relief package passed and a million other things that need to be fixed after four years of mismanagement, neglect, and depredation.

History has spoken its verdict (and guilty it will be for all eternity), and the people you wanted to hear from will eventually cash in with books and tv appearances. And or criminal or civil court appearances.

I, for one, don’t want to give these lowlifes a second more of my attention.

[StarfishSaver]

19. Thank you for saying this

I suspect that most of the those demanding this be dragged out with witnesses are looking for entertainment and gratification, and don't really think that anyone not already convinced by now would have suddenly changer their minds and believed that Trump incited an insurrection and needed to be convicted because they saw a congresswoman they never heard of talk about a phone call she overheard or saw Kevin McCarthy spar with Jamie Raskin - if they watched any of this at all.

This second-guessing is mostly about people wanting to be entertained, not an interest in achieving any specific outcome

[Kid Berwyn]

20. A Teachable Moment

As important as COVID relief is, there are more important issues facing the country as a result of Trump’s attempt to overthrow an election on Jan. 6: Justice for one, Democracy, another.

Failing to make testimony public only serves to make Trump think he can betray another day. And if he doesn’t try, his MAGANAZI mob will.

That won’t be a lesson America failed to learn. They never got the chance to hear it.

[StarfishSaver]

23. The impeachment trial is not the time for a "teachable moment" for people who aren't

paying attention.

It's crazy to think that people who were not swayed by the insurrection, it's aftermath and the case put on by the House managers all week will suddenly get all "teachable" because Jaime Herrara Butler talked about a phone call McCarthy had with Trump.

It's just flat out false that "America didn't get to hear" the message. Maybe YOU didn't hear it, but only if you've been asleep for the last four years and in a coma for the past 6 weeks - and you also must believe that the House, Senate and media went out of business yesterday and there will never again be any opportunity for this information to be communicated to the public.

[Kid Berwyn]

25. Witnesses were not called.

Witnesses would add to the record.

Why the condescension? More than a reflection of you, it shows a small understanding of the issue.

[Kid Berwyn]

22. No, I am not interested in "entertainment and gratification."

I am interested in Justice and Democracy.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

24. I remember how talk of Watergate around my little town grew and grew and grew.

We lost State houses in November. We need to educate the electorate and nothing does that better than getting eyeballs on a trial and subsequent talk at the water fountain and gas pump.

[StarfishSaver]

26. You never saw any of the testimony in the Watergate impeachment

All of the talk about Watergate that occurred around the gas pump and water cooler came from hearings unrelated to the impeachment hearings.

An impeachment trial is not the only way to get this information before the public.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

33. Of course not

We didn't have time for those types of hearings leading up to this impeachment; events just didn't permit it.

Witness testimony in the Senate trial could have been a substitute for the public draw of the Watergate hearings. One risk of prolonging the trial is losing public attention. I remember the complaints about Watergate displacing regular programming (soaps!) on the networks. It takes more time to move the general public than it takes to turn a supertanker.

The House decided against calling witnesses. I can respect that -- they're in a helluva lot better position to make that decision than I am -- while at the same time respecting the opinion of those who think witnesses should have been called. Maybe there was no testimony out there that would cause people to tie up all communication lines to the GOPers in the Senate. Last poll I saw showed 71% wanting conviction. Maybe that's as high as it can go.

The trial is over. The talk about it is not.

[StarfishSaver]

34. Why do you think hearings can't be held now?

This impeachment was never intended to be a long, in-depth, drawn-out process. It was intended to be streamlined and quick - one of the reasons there was only one article of impeachment.

And I'm old enough to remember lots of people on this board throwing a fit that the trial didn't start sooner so it could be gotten out of the way. There was also a lot of griping about the possibility the trial would be delayed for a month or two to allow Biden to get his agenda moving. We were told by those hurry uppers that this needed to be done and over with quickly - And when it was pointed out that the house managers would need time to prepare so that they could do a thorough trial, the response was that that wasn't necessary.

So, in other words no matter what anybody did or how they proceeded, people were going to second-guess and complain and accuse them of doing it wrong.

And most of those complaints come from people who don't have even a fraction of the information, knowledge, or insights that the people responsible for this proceeding have, yet nevertheless feel perfectly qualified to berate them because they're certain they for did wrong.

As I've said, it's tiresome.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

39. A little sidetrack ...

I've seen several posts by you pointing out how subpoenas for witnesses involve delays. Here's an OP with a quote from Delegate Plaskett that illustrates the point pretty well:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215109582

[Kid Berwyn]

29. A Teachable Moment (originally intended as reply to your post)

Don’t know how, but I mistakenly posted this in answer to StarfishSaver. Expresses my thoughts on witnesses accurately there, too.

———=====———

As important as COVID relief is, there are more important issues facing the country as a result of Trump’s attempt to overthrow an election on Jan. 6: Justice for one, Democracy, another.

Failing to make testimony public only serves to make Trump think he can betray another day. And if he doesn’t try, his MAGANAZI mob will.

That won’t be a lesson America failed to learn. They never got the chance to hear it.

[frazzled]

38. I appreciate your ardor

But I personally believe that anyone open to being taught already learned the lesson well, and that those who refuse to be taught are unreachable and unteachable.

For now, I leave it to the courts to do whatever they will. And to fine organizations such as SPLC to unmask the hate groups and drive them back into the dark corners.

[gulliver]

27. The problem was we would lose Republican conviction votes

And the defense would have dragged it out for months by forcing Republican Senators to kick and scream about witnesses "Republicans wanted." Legislative compromise would have been impossible in the meantime.

I would have preferred to see witnesses too, but I think the right decision was made. I like there being seven Republicans voting for conviction. That's a big deal. And McConnell is clearly out to nail Trump.

[Dem4Life1102]

28. They don't

Witnesses wouldn’t have changed anything. The outcome would have been the same and not worth delaying Covid relief to those who really need it.

[moonscape]

32. And we really need Biden to keep filling

his Cabinet, esp get Garland confirmed,, etc

[Dem4Life1102]

35. Exactly nt

[coti]

30. You're absolutely right. There's a lot of after-the-fact

rationalization, but it sounds like they got tired.

[Xolodno]

31. What a lot of others are saying, the outcome would have been the same.

Worse, it delays Biden's agenda, appointments, etc. Better to have Garland sworn in ASAP and go from there. Plus this allows the State of NY to proceed quicker. The orange asshole is not out of the woods yet.