Earlier than senators might get began on the cost in opposition to former President Donald J. Trump, they spent the afternoon on Tuesday debating w
Earlier than senators might get began on the cost in opposition to former President Donald J. Trump, they spent the afternoon on Tuesday debating whether or not they had the correct to strive a former president within the first place.
Listed below are 5 takeaways from the primary day.
Senators determined {that a} former president can, certainly, stand trial for impeachment.
In a 56-to-44 vote, the Senate rejected the argument from Mr. Trump’s protection crew, and determined alongside largely occasion traces that it had the jurisdiction to strive an impeached former president. This paved the way in which for the trial to proceed on Wednesday.
Solely a easy majority was required, not like the two-thirds majority wanted for a conviction. Six Republicans joined all 50 Democrats in deciding that the Senate might proceed with the trial.
Democrats, led by Raskin, promised compelling video footage of the occasions of Jan. 6, they usually delivered.
In a 13-minute video of scenes from the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, the lead Home impeachment supervisor, Consultant Jamie Raskin of Maryland introduced a graphic visible document of the assault, together with rioters’ express language and rally cries, in addition to clips of Mr. Trump’s feedback throughout the day — like his speech to supporters earlier than a few of them stormed the Capitol and a Twitter put up, hours after the assaults, during which he wrote, “Keep in mind at the present time endlessly.”
The scenes of chaos within the video confirmed a mob of protesters violently pushing previous safety barricades, and pictures from contained in the constructing included an officer screaming as he was being crushed by a door. The footage delivered completely different vantage factors from that day than what lots of the senators skilled firsthand, as they have been rushed out of the exact same Senate chamber in shock and worry.
The anticipated consequence of this Senate trial is identical as Mr. Trump’s first.
The Democrats would wish 17 Republicans to interrupt with the previous president and vote with them to have the two-thirds essential to convict Mr. Trump. If the six Republican senators who voted with Democrats on Tuesday additionally vote to convict Mr. Trump, Democrats would nonetheless want the assist of 11 extra Republicans to safe a conviction.
Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, is a witness, a juror and the decide.
Because the longest serving Democrat within the Senate, Mr. Leahy, 80, is the presiding officer within the Senate’s trial of Mr. Trump. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Vice President Kamala Harris declined to imagine the function, and since the Structure doesn’t stipulate who ought to oversee the trial of a former president, it fell to Mr. Leahy, giving him the authority to rule on key questions like what proof is admissible.
On Jan. 6, Mr. Leahy was among the many lawmakers who needed to rush away from the violent mob, making him certainly one of lots of of witnesses to the assault. And as certainly one of 100 senators, he may also vote on whether or not to convict Mr. Trump of inciting violence in opposition to the USA.
The primary lawyer to talk in Mr. Trump’s protection left senators a bit confused about his crew’s technique.
Bruce L. Castor Jr., the lawyer who started the Trump protection crew’s arguments on Tuesday, took senators down a winding path of generalizations concerning the Senate, Mr. Trump’s proper to free speech and the distinction between homicide and manslaughter within the felony justice system.
“I don’t know what he’s doing,” Alan M. Dershowitz, who served on Mr. Trump’s protection crew throughout his first impeachment trial final yr, mentioned on the conservative tv station Newsmax. “Possibly he’ll convey it residence, however proper now, it doesn’t seem to me to be efficient advocacy.”
And after the proceedings ended, Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, advised reporters: “The president’s lawyer simply rambled on and on. I’ve seen loads of legal professionals and loads of arguments, and that was not one of many most interesting I’ve seen.”