OnPolitics: Will there be new witnesses in the impeachment trial? Asking for a friend.
Senators heard for hours on Friday a case for and against the need to have additional testimony in the Senate impeachment trial. This comes after two days of questions.
House managers repeated the claim that it was the Senators’ constitutional duty to “try” the case by subpoenaing witnesses and documents.
Trump’s defense team said the Senate shouldn’t be expected to do the investigative required by the House.
I don’t have much time. What’s the news?
The Senate voted to reject introducing additional witnesses and documents in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
Democrats wanted testimony from four officials, including former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, but fell short.
The vote went 51-49, largely along party lines.
What happens now?
The Senate will now debate how to close the trial. A vote on conviction isn’t expected to take place until next week, but anything is possible. Remember that Trump’s State of the Union speech is also next week.
The House Democrats prosecuting the case and Trump’s defense team are expected to deliver closing arguments, but the length is among the issues open to debate.
Senate leadership must also decide how much time senators have to debate the verdict, and whether to have that debate in open or closed session.
Did I miss anything interesting?
First of all, this is history. It’s all pretty interesting if you know what to look for. But Friday provided a few moments worth pointing out.
- House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff accused Trump lawyer Pat Cipollone of hiding evidence. Schiff was referencing media reports that Cipollone was in a meeting involving Ukraine.
- Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, announced she’s a ‘no’ vote on calling witnesses. Murkowski was the last of a handful of Republicans who had expressed a potential openness to witnesses.
- Patrick Philbin, deputy White House counsel, argued that the accusation of obstruction was illegitimate because Trump was exercising his constitutional rights to protect the release of information in defying congressional subpoenas.