Democratic senator defends decision not to call witnesses: 'They weren't going to get more...

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill



Democratic senator defends decision not to call witnesses: 'They weren't going to get more Republican votes'

BY JOHN BOWDEN - 02/14/21 10:13 AM EST

A Democratic senator who along with his colleagues served as jurors for former President Trump's second impeachment trial defended the decision by House impeachment managers not to call witnesses even after the upper chamber voted in favor of doing so.

Speaking on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) asserted that Democratic managers had achieved their goal of drawing national attention to a statement released by Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.) revealing how Trump had told House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) that the rioters were "more upset about the election" than McCarthy was as the Capitol was being invaded.

"Frankly I think they did get what they wanted. They got the whole country tuned in," Murphy said.

"In the end, the managers made the decision that it probably wouldn't have helped their case," he added.



Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/538808-dem-senator-agrees-with-move-to-end-impeachment-trial-without

[frazzled]

1. Indubitably

How many smoking guns does it take to change a Republican’s mind? Infinity.
They were not interested in guilt. They knew he was guilty. They wanted an out on a (baseless) technicality. No number of witnesses was going to change that determination.

As was detailed in McConnell’s speech ... blistering indictment and admission of president’s guilt, but, you know, he’s not the president anymore. We made sure that he was no longer president before we allowed the articles of impeachment to be delivered to the Senate, and then we just ignore the bipartisan vote to deem the trial constitutional. Win-win!

[bottomofthehill]

2. The managers were amazing

They did their job and due to the tainted jury pool (the US Senate) they were never going to get to 67 votes. Those assholes were not going to vote to convict even though their own work place was attached, their Chamber was broken into, their personal desks were ransacked and still nothing. What can you expect from those like Rafael Cruz, who let the bum in the white-house attack his father for the Kennedy assassination, called his wife ugly, and said things like Trump is a pathological liar and Cruz: “I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father”

[Chainfire]

3. Jamie played the Trump defense team like a fiddle.

[Stuart G]

4. The managers knew that prolonging the trial wouldn't help their case.

Prolonging the trial a couple of weeks would have lost a lot of viewers. This way the trial was short and to the point,
and tens of millions watched it. Yes, the acquittal was upsetting but the trial did get a lot of people thinking about the
corrupt nature of the Republican Party. It is deeply corrupt and evil, and all you had to do was watch and listen to
the trial and that truth would be clear and easy to see.

[Bleacher Creature]

5. I trust Chris Murphy 100%.

If he says that, I believe him.

[CTyankee]

6. Yep, he's my senator too and I just love him. He makes sense!

[pazzyanne]

7. He is not my senator, but I love him, too!

He is so centered and so up on issues. He also communicates in easily understood, down-to-earth, language, which is a real plus!

[yaesu]

8. There is nothing that needs defending, the managers did the best job they could & ended with

an historic bipartisan margin, better than I expected.

[SWBTATTReg]

9. All this impeachment effort did, was give the former idiot in chief, more oxygen, more room to vent,

more crap in short.

What does get me, is that trump has seemingly been too quiet, too mute after having his twitter access taken away. Me thinks that perhaps something is physically wrong w/ him/trump?

Don't wake the sleeping dog (remember that saying to 'let sleeping dogs sleep'? Ignore trump. He's out of the picture. He has no vote on anything. He has no power what-so-ever, other than what people give him (which pathetically, the scared and cowardly republicans in Congress did give trump that power).

[malthaussen]

10. IMO, this is exactly the wrong attitude.

This impeachment trial was not about winning and losing, as any idiot knew the GOP was going to acquit from before Day 1. It was about exposure, getting the facts on record and in front of the public in a highly-visible, nationally-televised venue where the evidence would come not from the mouths of Democrats but from those involved in the coup attempt. By sweeping all that under the carpet, it becomes just another exercise in partisan grandstanding in the eyes of many viewers.

An investigation by the DoJ, supposing one is ever initiated, will never draw the kind of interest a full-on trial in the Senate would. By not calling any substantive witnesses and allowing the process to wrap up in FIVE DAYS, the Democrats can't help but appear to have flaccidly backed down in the face of Republican opposition. Who runs the Senate, exactly?

-- Mal

[tavernier]

11. It would have been a free for all

Because repubs would have brought 100+ “witnesses” in... one more loonier than the next, until it would have been a watered down mess and people would have turned away in disgust.
In the end the public so easily saw the truth, and the shameless stand McConnell and Co. took to keep the Trumpie numbers placated.

[LPBBEAR]

12. It should have gone on as long as it took.....

to achieve the goal of convicting that SOB and barring him from any future office. The House Managers were great but whoever pulled the plug let them down. They were totally capable of handling the ambulance chasers "100's" of witnesses. They call 100, we call 1000....including all the traitor Republicans in Congress who colluded with Trump.

[malthaussen]

15. You know, the Senate has to approve all witnesses...

... but even stipulating that it would have been a free-for-all, I would prefer that, if it brought out evidence of what was going down. A simple, cut-and-dried "Trump Bad" message does not even begin to scratch the surface of what happened. And I am not so sanguine as those who think the "message" got across clearly.

-- Mal

[58Sunliner]

13. Agreed.

[Javaman]

14. +1000 nt

[Steelrolled]

16. The entire trial was useless political theater

where the outcome was known well in advance. The faster they could end the stupidity, the better.

[DeminPennswoods]

17. Heilman said on O'Donnell's show

that McConnell's speech forcefully condeming Trump and validating the House manager's case was the concession Biden/Dems got in exchange for settling for Herrea-Butler's affidavit instead of live witnesses. He went on to say Dems are now trying to figure out how best to use McConnell's denunciation.

It immediately struck me of the behind-the-scenes role Ike played in the downfall of Joe McCarthy, who Trump very much resemebles. It makes me wonder if Biden and McConnell quietly have decided to join forces to rid the country of Trump just like Ike did with McCarthy. Couple this with McConnell's effort to stop Beshear from appointing his replacement if necessary and it makes for some interesting speculative possibilities.