Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority chief, acknowledged on Wednesday that profitable sufficient Republican votes to permit
Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority chief, acknowledged on Wednesday that profitable sufficient Republican votes to permit witnesses to testify was unlikely.
“We’ve at all times recognized it will likely be an uphill battle on witnesses and paperwork, as a result of the president and Mitch McConnell put enormous stress on these people,” Mr. Schumer mentioned throughout a break within the impeachment trial.
His silver lining?
“We now have received over the American individuals,” he mentioned. “Our Republican colleagues — at the least a few of them — notice that if they’re to reject witnesses and paperwork, they’re going in opposition to not only a small group or not simply Democrats however in opposition to the entire grain of America. And so they know that they might be held accountable to that.”
He maintained he held out hope that sufficient Republican senators would agree.
“Is it extra possible than not?” he mentioned. “In all probability no. However is it a good, good probability? Sure.”
Pushing again on President Trump’s protection staff’s expansive view of his presidential prerogatives, Consultant Adam B. Schiff of California, the chairman of the Home Intelligence Committee and the lead impeachment supervisor, accused Mr. Trump of being “a president who identifies the state as being himself.”
His remarks got here after Senator Kamala Harris, Democrat of California, requested a query citing Mr. Trump’s previous feedback declaring his personal broad energy, together with the infamous vulgar comment he made earlier than he was elected whereas filming a section for “Entry Hollywood”: that “while you’re a star, they allow you to do it. You are able to do something.”
Alan Dershowitz, one of many president’s attorneys, had argued earlier within the afternoon that any motion taken by the president to assist his personal re-election is, by definition, within the public curiosity.
Mr. Schiff used the query from Ms. Harris to forcefully push again.
“It’s the form of mentality that claims, ‘Underneath Article Two, I can do no matter I would like, that I’m allowed to battle all subpoenas,’” Mr. Schiff mentioned.
However the courts have declared, Mr. Schiff mentioned of the president, “You’re not a king.”
The flexibility to ask questions — albeit solely in writing — introduced a brand new dynamic to the ground. Senators handed notes and seemed to be drafting questions on the fly, based mostly off earlier questions and the responses from President Trump’s attorneys and the Democratic Home managers.
In an indication that every aspect was rallying its personal staff, most Democrats requested pleasant questions of Home managers, and most Republicans requested pleasant questions of the president’s staff.
The attorneys shuffled papers, regularly whispered and held up handwritten word playing cards signaling one another when his or her talking time was virtually up. (Republicans started using them to alert Mr. Trump’s attorneys how a lot time that they had left, and Democrats picked up the apply.)
Senators reacted brazenly, if quietly, to what was being mentioned.
A query by Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority chief, asking the Home managers to “please reply to the reply that was simply given by the president’s counsel” prompted some laughter from the Democratic aspect of the aisle.
When Alan Dershowitz, certainly one of Mr. Trump’s attorneys, argued that every public official believes his or her election is within the public curiosity, Senators Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Martha McSally of Arizona, all Republicans, exchanged seems and chuckled.
And when Consultant Adam B. Schiff of California, the lead Home supervisor, requested Republicans to think about how they’d react if it had been former President Barack Obama asking for investigations into Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, his one-time rival, Mr. Romney, behind the room, half-smiled.
Alan Dershowitz, certainly one of President Trump’s impeachment attorneys, pushed a very expansive view of government energy throughout his trial on Wednesday, arguing that any motion taken by the president to assist his personal re-election is, by definition, within the public curiosity.
“If the president does one thing that he thinks will assist him get elected, within the public curiosity, that can’t be the form of quid professional quo that ends in impeachment,” mentioned Mr. Dershowitz, a star lawyer and constitutional legislation professor.
The assertion amounted to an argument that even when all of Democrats’ impeachment allegations are true — that Mr. Trump was, actually, searching for election benefit when he demanded that Ukraine examine his political opponents — it could nonetheless be applicable.