The Center for Public Integrity went through the Freedom of Information Act to obtain copies of emails that, while heavily redacted, add more evidence that Trump directly ordered Ukraine military aid halted to pressure President Zelensky.
The Office of Management and Budget ordered the Pentagon to withhold military aid to Ukraine 91 minutes after President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky, emails released to the Center for Public Integrity show.
Details: The 146 pages of heavily redacted emails between the OMB and the Pentagon obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request and court order also show Trump asked about withholding aid to Ukraine the month before his July 25 call with Zelensky.
Today Chuck Schumer used the emails to argue for witnesses at the impeachment trial.
On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) zeroed in on newly disclosed emails from Mike Duffey, an Office of Management and Budget official, which show he had requested the hold on the military aid to Ukraine about 90 minutes after President Donald Trump’s infamous July 25 call with the Ukrainian president.
In the emails, obtained via FOIA request by the Center for Public Integrity on Friday, Duffey told OMB and Pentagon officials to keep information on the request “closely held to those who need to know to execute direction.”
“If there was ever an argument that we need Mr. Duffey to come testify, this is that information,” Schumer told reporters during a press conference on Sunday. “This email is explosive.”
“A top administration official, one that we’ve requested, is saying ‘Stop the aid’ 91 minutes after Trump called Zelensky, and said ‘Keep it hush-hush,’” the Democratic leader added. “What more do you need to request a witness?”
Mitch McConnell is holding out for a unicorn, or maybe a note from God. There is nothing that would justify holding a real trial.
White House officials are predicting that Nancy Pelosi will cave on the impeachment articles, but I don’t think so. We may be in a holding pattern for a while.
"Moscow Mitch wants to hold a trial without witnesses and evidence." That needs to be the Democratic mantra for as long as it takes the public to demand a real trial.
IMO, there are two ways the Democrats could hold the high ground on the rules of evidence. 1) Let Chief Justice Roberts independently declare what witnesses and evidence is relevant according to federal rules of evidence. OR
2) Agree to let either side call whatever witnesses they think will convict or clear Trump provided that exposing that witness publicly is not a violation of law! I'm not sure of the exact phrasing of the whistleblower act. If it says the source must remain secret (if such is his/her wish) then that witness is forbidden.
To hold the high ground the Democrats should NOT negotiate to protect Biden as a part of the deal. Either let both sides call witnesses or let Roberts decide but DON'T look like you want to call administration officials to damage Trump while you are protecting the leading Democratic candidate. (Hint: if you want to appear even-handed, don't negotiate for purely partisan rules.)
BTW, who decided what the redactions were?
To hold the high ground the Democrats should NOT negotiate to protect Biden as a part of the deal
I disagree with you there, Doug. Biden has absolutely nothing to do Trump's criminality. To allow Trump to divert attention or offer excuse from his criminal act by accusing the whistle blower of bias as a never Trumper, or Biden for some imaginary criminal act committed by his son would just introduce more confusion to the issue at hand and allow GOP Senators cover to protect Trump without a political cost.
At this stage in the impeachment process it's the United States Senate who is on trial with the American public as the jurors to see that the truth of what transpired is honestly arrived at. The Dem's are now in the strongest position they will ever be in. If they don't hold firm by insisting on witnesses who are relevant with first hand knowledge who can either clear or condemn Trump, then they'll be just giving Trump and McConnell a victory won through intimidation. It's better that the idea of a fair and honest trial die by GOP obstinance now then to try and accommodate a bunch of rabid scorched earth repug senators.
The time to fight the battle is before the trial because Trump is as guilty as hell and it's been made clear that the repug's are determined to protect him. So let then do it, but make them pay a price. I'd wager that Trump isn't as secure as he's projecting himself to be.
He wants his day in court…just like he wanted his day in court with Trump University
Swami – Trump is a bully, not a fighter. He likes beating a defenseless victim. He's gonna lose in a fair fight. McConnell is trying to rig the trial (against Trump's wishes) to be short, boring and limited to synopses of the public testimony from the investigation. McConnell knows Trump will get his balls cut off publicly with a defense that Biden is the actual culprit.
Trump imagines that McConnell can rig the game so that only Trump gets to throw punches in the trial. If Trump brings up Biden, IMO, the Dems can call Barr to find out if there was (or wasn't) an investigation of Biden ongoing. (There wasn't.) If Biden committed a crime, why wasn't DOJ investigating? (because Barr doesn't want to be behind bars himself.) WAS that investigation requested by Trump from Barr? What if Roberts rules Barr must answer – after all, Trump brought up Biden and crimes, so now it becomes relevant and more important than 'privilege.'
Everybody that Sondland said was 'in the loop' can be called to testify. Rudy might even be called. The ratings for the trial if it's an all-out slugfest will be off the scale. A huge public trial is what we WANT!
My opinion – if we can go head-to-head with Trump in a VERY public trial where both sides can call and cross-examine witnesses, Trump will get the stuffing kicked out of him publicly. Trump's people will not risk going to jail by perjuring themselves – the open trial is a dream scenario for Democrats. IF the testimony is damning – that Trump ordered a hit on Biden using aid as a lever, GOP Senators are forever bound by their public vote which condones that action. (This is why McConnell fears an open trial more than anything – they have to acquit Trump and then need the fig leaf of plausible deniability which an open trial might strip away.)
Pelosi needs to taunt Trump that he can't survive an open trial in the Senate so Pelosi and Trump both put the pressure on Moscow Mitch to open up the trial of the century. Swami is a wise old bird – I seldom disagree with him. Love to hear input from others on the best strategy.
The advantage the democrats have is their witnesses can provide (and have provided) evidence, direct and indirect, of Trump's guilt. This is why Trump has thus far prevented Pompeo, Bolton, Mulvaney, the OMB guy and others from testifying. And these guys can provide the direct evidence the GOP has been saying the democrats don’t have. Trump and republicans, on the other hand, do not have any witnesses that can provide evidence of Trump’s innocence. At best, any witnesses they’d have, including Giuliani and others, could only provide “evidence” of the conspiracy theories that, not only have already been thoroughly debunked, but have absolutely nothing to do with what Trump’s charged with, nor do they mitigate those charges in any way. Even worse, on cross, the answers these witnesses would provide would either end up corroborating democratic witness testimony and/or, worse still, provide new evidence of Trump’s guilt. For example, look at Giuliani – every time he goes on TV he ends up sinking Trump even further. That is in part because he’s insane, but also a function of the fact that they don’t have truth with respect to what Trump is charged with, to work with. Trump was demanding Schiff and even Pelosi testify, and if they did it would it be apparent they are immaterial to what Trump is charged with. Also, they could speak directly to the phony, emotional GOP charges of unfairness and unconstitutionality in ways that would make clear to the public (not that a majority don’t already see it, based on the polls) that the republicans have no argument on fairness, and that they and Trump have been given every opportunity to put up a defense and call their own witnesses, but have thus far refused, because they don’t have any such witnesses because they have no defense.
And imagine if they called the Bidens. There’s never been any indication of wrongdoing on their part. Bad judgement maybe, but nothing illegal. Remember, Trump said they were paid $1 billion dollars, and not only could this and other claims be shown to be false, it would underscore after the fact they provide no evidence of Trump’s innocence, or any mitigation of the facts that prove he did what he’s been charged with.
Mitch McConnell knows all of this, which is why he doesn’t want a trial. He knows a trial could be a disaster, not only for Trump, but the GOP senate, because after this there is no plausible deniability to support voting to acquit. McConnell has gotten away with so much, from shafting the dems on Garland, to appointing all these unqualified wingnut “judges” he’s become emboldened and bragged about how he would not be partial and he would openly work with Trump and his defense team. His hubris cause him to make an error in judgement to brag about this publicly, which gave Pelosi justification for holding back on sending the articles to the senate until they agree to a fair trial.
All that said, I believe the best outcome for the democrats is to have the trial opened up to all witnesses. Just like when Trump released the notes from his “perfect call” he mistakenly believes if he calls his witnesses not only will they “exonerate” him before the public, but he’ll also get his revenge. But Trump, dumb as ever and blinded by revenge doesn’t see how this will remove the ability of the senate to acquit him. This puts them all in a lose-lose situation: do we acquit Trump and show the GOP to be nakedly unfair and even accessories to Trump crimes and risk the loss of the senate in 2020, or do we vote to remove the moron and face the wrath of their own, and still end up losing seats if not the senate itself? McConnell is right in wanting no witnesses and a sham trial, but again, in his hubris, he’s screwed himself on that score.
So yes, I agree, let Trump have his witnesses, and the democrats have theirs. Given the facts, that truth is on the side of the democrats, and witnesses will cement the fate of not just Trump but McConnell’s crooked senate as well.
Here's a scenario:
Open trial, lots of witnesses, a big noisy spectacle, and a secret ballot at the end. More than 50 but less than 67 votes to remove. Typical Republican minocracy.
Trump stays in, but crippled; all of the R senators assure the base, in the primaries, that they voted against impeachment; then in the general election say that they voted for.
The man from La Mar a Lago and his trusty sidekick Poncho Pence-O are reported to be fighting windmills, toilets, showers and dishwashers for the politics of the populist. They must perceive this as the hot button issues that will rally the base. So far I have not seen evidence his base supporters in my area are as enraged about these issues as he is.
So more new information has come to light, once again supporting an extortion plan using tax dollars to aid in political theater for the benefit of the quest for legions to rally in his cause and also doing a little favor for the Kremlin to boot. I can see a lot of chiseling going on here, but more a really corrupt deal and not at all a well sculpted, artful one. Oh, and with written evidence that this needed to be done on the "down low". This is not good for the defense. Once again the quest to operate on what Dick Cheney liked to call the "dark side". Just let Rudy handle the details, no one would suspect this noted crime fighter of doing anything unethical, immoral, criminal, or otherwise untoward.
Now this is headed toward Moscow Mitch, who is up for re-election by the way. He got many good paying jobs into his district, but seems to have used a large pot of Rubles to do it with. He does not want exposure at this time, preferring to spend time in his shell until all threats go away. He is smart enough politically to know the damage the bright lights did to his Republican colleagues in the House. As will happen in the Senate, but with brighter lights, lame distortions of evidence and reality will be on trial too. For quite a number of Senators a lose-lose conflict awaits them. The dysfunctional and delusional wayward knight and his squire will joust with windmills and commodes while they ponder which poor option is more in their favor.
Listen, we can ALL see that tRUMP killed the truth in the kitchen with the bloody hatchet in his hand, but the 50+ Republican Sergeant Schultz's in the US Senate will 'know nothing and see nothing!'
Right now, I think the impeachment is in good hand's: Nancy Pelosi's! If anyone can get a pound of fat, orange flesh out of tRUMP's hide, it's she!!!
I would vote for her for POTUS in a nano-second!!!
I saw Moscow mitch on tv lying about trump claiming executive priviledge which he hasn't. They are fighting in the media now.
Funny to watch sit on it mitch ( merrick garland ,400 bills) complain about pelosi holding the articles.
They want witnesses then they don't. They spout Russian propaganda. Party of cowards.
Doug,
I think we want Nancy to play "Florida Hold-em!"
Just sit on the paper's, and let the goose stew himself.