Why the Senate Trial Will Be a Sham

All the incentives for the Senate Republicans align against allowing fact witnesses.

Senator Susan Collins of Maine promised to decide whether or not she will seek reelection before the Winter Solstice. On Wednesday, she announced her decision. She will seek another six-year term. The timing was probably fortuitous because it coincides with the impeachment of Donald Trump. Knowing that Collins will be an important juror in the ensuing trial, supporters of Trump will want to shower her with support in an effort to keep her in line on procedural votes. If she and three other Republican senators insist on witnesses, for example, Mitch McConnell will lose control of the process. Collins is probably less likely to make trouble for Trump than she would have been if she’d made the decision to retire. After all, she still has to win the Republican Party’s nomination.

One of the witnesses Susan Collins could demand is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, but that would really displease McConnell.

When Mitch McConnell pitches Mike Pompeo on running for the Senate in 2020, a periodic occurrence, the majority leader does not fail to mention that the chamber is a great steppingstone should the secretary of state harbor higher aspirations.

Fearing former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach could win the Republican nomination to succeed retiring Sen. Pat Roberts and put an otherwise red seat in jeopardy, McConnell and other party insiders are desperate for Pompeo to run.

It would not serve McConnell’s interests to have Pompeo muddied up during an impeachment trial, nor would it serve the interests of the Republican caucus in the Senate which seeks to maintain their majority.

Bringing pressure on the Senate will likely not be fruitful for these reasons. Since President Trump’s poll numbers are on the rise and support for removing him from office is in decline, the potential downside removes any political reason for the Republicans to relent on witnesses.

McConnell has been clear about where he stands: “I’m not an impartial juror. This is a political process. I’m not impartial about this at all.”

As the House of Representatives debates the impeachment of Donald Trump on Wednesday, the Republicans have been repeating “the process has been rigged from the start” like a mantra. It’s a ridiculous suggestion meant to distract from the seriousness of the charges against the president. But it would certainly apply to the coming Senate trial.

Author: BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.

6 thoughts on “Why the Senate Trial Will Be a Sham”

  1. Ipsos finds 57% think trump comitted an impeachable offense and 54% think there is enough evidence to impeach. They are partnering with 538.

  2. With this whole thing now plainly being a fait accompli for so long, I really don’t have a lot of interest in the minute by minute, blow by blow coverage of what is happening. Sure, it is very historical in its importance, and it at least plants some sort of flag that such lawlessness will at least get called out, to some degree, when the proper legislative body is in place. But when I see continuing headlines that the whole world is sitting on their hands, waiting with bated breath, to see which way the weathervane on Jeff Van Drew’s head will point when it comes time to take a vote, I know we are way on down past Chuck Todd territory when it comes to this impeachment thing.

    My mind is more looking forward to what happens after the Senate acquits, and Trump just continues on, doing all the same things that got him impeached? Because that is what it going to happen. He will continue to break the law, and probably much worse, from now until the election. And what are the Democrats going to do? Is there anything they can do? Or is the next check point for all of this going to be on November 3, 2020? I also wonder, after reading this letter yesterday, just how unhinged and provocative his rallies are going to be for the next 10-plus months? How much more blatant will his exhortations be to his flock that I/we are scum, enemies, traitors, and worthy of elimination? Because that is on my mind, too. How far is all this going to be taken by his most ardent followers? Many people who live in more mixed or blue areas probably don’t have to give much thought to that, but there are many who do. Threats of violence have to be taken seriously by some of us. I am already wondering if this needs to be a part of my personal accounting in the coming months.

    In my mind I always pictured that knocking on doors in my area for two elections in public support of a black President would be the most risky thing I would undertake. As it turns out, that might not have been the case.

  3. This is a bit of a technical point, but if you’re going to make an argument about polls, you really should link to polling averages, not individual polls which are often too noisy to provide reliable information about trends. That said, it does seem that Trump’s approval is up to the top end of his range (43%) over the past week, based on the 538 average. That is probably enough to dissuade Collins, Romney etc. from rocking the boat during the trial. If it had gone the other direction, it might be a different story.

  4. The battle is to define the Republican party as the party of criminals and take the House, the Senate and the Presidency in the next election. Collins voting to support Moscow Mitch’s cover-up and refusing to call any witnesses just makes that task easier.

    I’m disappointed I’m not hearing more indictments of the Republican party today, they should be just as much on trail as they are all obviously co-conspirators. I understand the theme on the Democratic side is “uphold our solemn oaths to the Constitution”, but of course every other word from Republicans is “partisan”, so the obvious question that needs to be asked of them is: “What crime can the president commit that would cause you to vote for impeachment?” Obviously, we know the answer already- there is no crime that he can commit that would cause them to vote for impeachment. Let’s get it out on the table now, so America knows what is really going on.

Comments are closed.