WITNESSES.
NOW, THE QUESTIONING WILL BE
BROKEN DOWN INTO TWO SEPARATE
DAYS BEGINNING TOMORROW FOR
ABOUT EIGHT HOURS AND THEN
THURSDAY FOR ANOTHER EIGHT
HOURS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE ARE JOINED BY DR. CHARLES, A
POLITICAL SCIENCE EXPERT FROM
NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY.
THIS IS GETTING PRETTY
INTERESTING RIGHT?
WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THE
OPENING STATEMENT BY THE
PRESIDENT'S LEGAL TEAM?
WELL, THEY DON'T HAVE A VERY
EASY CASE TO ARGUE.
ESSENTIALLY, THEIR CASE IS
NEGATIVE.
WHATEVER HE DID WASN'T WRONG,
IF IT WAS WRONG, IT WASN'T BAD.
AND IF IT WASN'T BAD, IT WAS
NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN BE
IMPEACHED FOR.
MOST OF THEIR ARGUMENTS, MOST
OF THEIR EFFORTS FOCUSED ON
MUDDYING THE WATERS, TRYING TO
MINIMIZE THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY
THE DEMOCRATS AND THE HOUSE
MANAGERS.
AND, THAT IS NOT AN EASY THING
TO ARGUE.
IT IS MUCH EASIER TO ARGUE WHEN
YOU HAVE FACTS ON YOUR SIDE
THAT YOU CAN BRING UP.
THE PROBLEM IS THE DETAILED
FACTS SEEM TO IMPLY, AT THE
VERY LEAST SOMETHING
INAPPROPRIATE.
WHETHER IT IS IMPEACHABLE IS A
WHOLE OTHER ARGUMENT.
AT THE VERY LEAST,
INAPPROPRIATE EXCEPT THE
PRESIDENT IS UNWILLING TO
ACCEPT THAT ARGUMENT.
TO THE PRESENT' AS LAWYERS
INEVITABLY MAKE THE CASE FOR
WITNESSES BY SAYING THEY NEED
MORE INFORMATION TO COME
FORWARD?
YES, THEY DID.
THEY ALSO MADE IT EASIER TO
BRING OUT THE INFORMATION OF
THESE WITNESSES BECAUSE BY
RAISING THESE ISSUES IN THE
SENATE OR BY THE PRESIDENT
TWEETING THEY HAVE EFFECTIVELY
SAID THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT
NEEDS TO BE HIDDEN AWAY, THIS
IS SOMETHING PRIVATE TO THE
INDIVIDUAL AND THE PRESIDENT,
IT IS NOT SOMETHING TO TALK
ABOUT PUBLICLY.
SO, THEY MADE A CASE,
EFFECTIVELY SAYING WE NEED MORE
INFORMATION.
WELL, IT MAY NOT BE THE
INFORMATION THEY WANT COMING
IN.
BUT, ULTIMATELY, THAT PUSHES
FOR BRINGING IN WITNESSES.
AND ONCE YOU ENTER ONE WITNESS,
THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OTHERS
THAT CAN COME IN.
NOT SPEAKING ABOUT
INFORMATION THE TRIAL WILL
ENTER A WHOLE NEW PHASE THIS
QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD.
I THINK WE HAVE A SHOT OF THE
CAR THE SENATORS WILL BE USING
TO SUBMIT THEIR QUESTIONS.
LOOKS PRETTY SIMPLE)?
PUT IN YOUR SENATOR, WHAT IS
YOUR NAME AND WHAT IS THE
QUESTION.
WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS YOU CAN
THINK THE SENATORS WILL COME UP
WITH?
I THINK YOU WILL SEE
SENATORS ASK PROCESS QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE PROCESS OF IMPEACHING
THE PRESIDENT.
THEY WILL ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT
THE DETAILS FROM BOTH SIDES.
AND, ULTIMATELY, ADDING THE
DEMOCRATS WILL ASK QUESTIONS
THAT WILL ALLOW THE HOUSE
MANAGERS TO REBUT THE
PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS AND
REPUBLICANS WILL ASK QUESTIONS
OF THE REPUBLICAN LAWYERS TO
EMPHASIZE THE STRONG SUITS THAT
THEY WANTED IN THEIR ARGUMENTS.
WHAT A SURPRISE.
Reporter: IT IS STILL A
DEBATE BETWEEN POLITICAL
PARTIES OVER WHAT THE OUTCOME
SHOULD BE.
AND, --
IF THE SENATORS WALK AWAY
FROM THIS PROCESS WITHOUT
CALLING A SINGLE WITNESS,
NAMELY JOHN BOLTON, WHAT DOES
THAT SAY AND WHAT KIND OF
PRESIDENT DOES IT SET?
IN TERMS OF PRECEDENT, EVERY
PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT HAS
BEEN UNIQUE.
THE PRESSURES, THE SITUATION,
CRIMES HAVE BEEN UNIQUE.
BUT, WHAT IT WILL SAY OR AT
LEAST ALLOW THE DEMOCRATS TO
ARGUE THAT THIS WAS A COVER-UP.
THEY WEREN'T INTERESTED IN
HEARING THE FACTS OR WHAT
REALLY HAPPENS.
THEY WEREN'T INTERESTED IN
TAKING THE PEOPLE WHO WERE IN
THE ROOM WHERE IT HAPPENED AND
PUTTING THEM UNDER OATH.
SO THAT THEY COULDN'T LIE.
AND, THAT IS GOING TO BE A
TOUGH ARGUMENT TO FIGHT AGAINST
COME NOVEMBER.
AND, THEY KNOW IT.
OF THE BOOK COMES OUT IN A
COUPLE OF MONTHS WITH SOME
REVELATIONS THAT THOSE
ACCUSATIONS OF A COVER-UP WILL
BECOME EVEN STRONGER.
VERY.
THANK YOU.
AS LAWMAKERS ON CAPITOL
