What's new

Donald Trump acquitted by Senate in impeachment trial

Summary

US Ambassador Gordon Sondland tells impeachment inquiry Trump directed pressure on Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden

In response, the US president pointed to testimony where it said he wanted nothing from Ukraine

Sondland also implicates US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo

"They knew what we were doing and why," he says in his opening statement

Sondland also says the president wanted diplomacy with Ukraine being led by his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani

The inquiry could see Trump removed from office, but only if the House of Representatives impeaches him and the Senate convicts him

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-50476322
 
A top US diplomat has told an impeachment inquiry that he followed President Donald Trump's orders to put pressure on Ukraine to investigate his Democratic rival Joe Biden.

Ambassador Gordon Sondland said the instruction came from Mr Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

The inquiry is assessing if Mr Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine as a precondition. He denies any wrongdoing.

It is illegal in the US to seek foreign help to gain electoral advantage.

Mr Biden is one of top contenders for the Democratic nomination for the 2020 presidential election.

Mr Sondland, the US ambassador to the EU, told the latest hearing in the US House of Representatives that Mr Giuliani had sought a public statement from Ukraine's leader Volodymyr Zelensky announcing a probe into "corruption issues".

Mr Giuliani specifically mentioned the company Burisma - which had the son of Democratic presidential candidate Mr Biden, Hunter, as a board member - and issues surrounding the 2016 US presidential election, he said.

If found guilty in a majority vote in the House, Mr Trump will face an impeachment trial in the Senate. But two-thirds of members of that Republican-controlled chamber would then need to vote for Mr Trump to be removed from office.

What exactly did Sondland say?
In his opening statement, Mr Sondland said he had worked with Mr Giuliani "at the express direction of the president". While he is the US ambassador to the EU, Mr Sondland said his brief included work on Ukraine alongside other colleagues - despite that country not being an EU member.

"We did not want to work with Mr Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the president's orders," he added.

He then confirmed that the president had sought an investigation in exchange for a White House visit for Mr Zelensky - a quid pro quo, meaning a favour in return for a favour.

"I know that members of this committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes."

However, Mr Sondland also said he had never directly heard from the president that military aid would be released in exchange for such a probe.

The US diplomat said he was "adamantly opposed" to the suspension of military aid to Ukraine, and was never told why it was withheld.

But he came to believe it was linked with Ukraine announcing corruption investigations.

Mr Sondland said he later told an aide to the Ukrainian president: "I believed that the resumption of US aid would likely not occur until Ukraine took some kind of action on the public statement that we had been discussing for many weeks."

Moreover, the ambassador insisted that this was not a secret plan, as some critics have suggested, instead arguing it was transparent and that his superiors were "fully supportive".

Who knew about the Ukraine plan?
Mr Sondland said the leaders of the state department, National Security Council and White House were informed, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. He does not remember any objections from his superiors to the policy.

The ambassador said he even discussed the fact military aid had been withheld with Vice President Mike Pence on a visit to Warsaw in September.

The chief of staff for Mr Pence has denied that the vice president ever spoke to Mr Sondland "about investigating the Bidens, Burisma, or the conditional release of financial aid to Ukraine based upon potential investigations".

Similarly, a spokesman for the State Department said Mr Sondland "never told Secretary Pompeo that he believed the President was linking aid to investigations of political opponents. Any suggestion to the contrary is flat out false".

Mr Sondland, a wealthy hotelier, donated to Mr Trump's 2016 election campaign and was appointed to his position by the president in July 2018.

Mr Trump has already responded to the testimony. Brandishing a copy of Mr Sondland's opening statement on the White House South Lawn, he read out a transcript of a phone conversation the pair had, in which the president said: "I want nothing. That's what I want from Ukraine."

He also told reporters he didn't know the EU ambassador "very well", but said he "seems like a nice guy".

Mr Giuliani has also denied Mr Sondland's testimony, tweeting that he "never met him and had very few calls with him".

A real bombshell
With his opening statement to the House impeachment hearings on Wednesday, Gordon Sondland fired a torpedo that has blown a hole in the White House's defences.

Water is rushing in, and it's now a question of whether the Trump presidency can be saved before it disappears beneath the waves.

Mr Sondland, the US ambassador to the EU, was working with Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, on Ukrainian policy at the explicit direction of the president.

There was a quid pro quo. A White House visit for President Zelensky was conditional on opening investigations that could help the president politically. Mr Sondland also came to believe that US military aid to Ukraine was being held up for this reason.

Everyone at the White House - acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former National Security Adviser John Bolton and others - was "in the loop".

The word "bombshell" gets thrown around a lot these days, but Mr Sondland's testimony, which represents a shift from his earlier closed-door statements, is a watershed moment in these impeachment investigations.

Who else did the panel hear from on Tuesday?
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence Laura Cooper and Undersecretary of State David Hale testified later on Wednesday.

Ms Cooper told the lawmakers that as early as 25 July - the day President Trump had his phone call with President Zelensky - she received expressions of concern about the aid from the Ukrainian embassy.

"The Ukrainian embassy staff asked - what is going on with Ukrainian security assistance?" She added that the embassy staff raised similar concerns with the state department.

Mr Hale said that in March he was "concerned" by a campaign of attacks in Ukraine against then-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and felt she needed a statement of support from the state department.

He told the hearing that he immediately briefed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the issue, but Mr Pompeo "did not issue a statement at that time".

In May Ms Yovanovitch was recalled by President Trump, who called her "bad news" in his controversial phone call.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50492438.
 
This is not ideal for Trump. He will likely be impeached by the House of Representatives and then put on trial in the Senate.

Things become less directly threatening to his position in the upper house. A supermajority of 67 Senate votes will be required to convict Trump of whichever charge(s) are progressed, which in a Senate with 53 Republican members and a Republican Vice President would require a huge swing.

Then again it depends on the charges and how damning the evidence is. It could be a classic case of choosing country or party. 20 Republican senators, a huge number, would need to break ranks and find Trump “guilty” in order for him to be removed from office.

The huge negative from this, even if he is exonerated, is the impact on Trump’s legacy and the embarrassment of going on trial during his presidential term. He may not wish to go through the distress and humiliation of becoming only the third US President in history (after Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton) to be impeached.

With the pressure that is being created, there is some talk of a deal being done cross-party for a Trump resignation for “health reasons” (either with immediate effect, or more likely at the end of his term) in return for the charges being dropped, which would trigger Mike Pence fulfilling a caretaker presidential role until the election in 12 months and a quickfire Republican nomination contest, but Trump is such a stubborn and overconfident limpet of a man that I doubt it would happen.

This is going all the way.
 
Witness warns of Russian 'fictional narrative' in damning testimony as president launches furious Twitter tirade

The fifth day of public impeachment hearings is kicking off with another pair of key witnesses delivering damning evidence against Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the president is lashing out against the proceedings on Twitter, writing: “Never in my wildest dreams thought my name would in any way be associated with the ugly word, Impeachment!”

Mr Trump has had a more controversial week than usual, as his EU ambassador, Gordon Sondland, implicated the president in a quid pro quo with Ukraine during his own impeachment hearings - along with vice president Mike Pence, secretary of state Mike Pompeo and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. “Was there a ‘quid pro quo’?" Mr Sondland said in his opening statement. "As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes."

The president's critics have said the proceedings are exposing impeachable offences, including ex-White House ethics lawyer Richard W Painter, who said it was effectively “game over” for his administration.

Mr Trump has attempted to undermine the inquiry, insisting that he barely knew his ambassador and wanted “NOTHING” from Volodymyr Zelensky in Kiev. As all that happened, the Democratic 2020 contenders took to the debate stage in Georgia to attack Mr Trump as "one of the most corrupt presidents" in US history.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...y-ukraine-call-biden-2020-polls-a9211711.html
 
troodon said:
Democrats are shameless creatures. It looks like they have given up on defeating Trump unless he is forcibly removed from the office.

Elections are just 1 year away and they cannot wait till then.
Click to expand...

I agree tbh. Democrats are a lost cause. Trump is the ultimate troll he feeds off controversy, this is all gonna end like Muellar investigation for them.
 
I don't think impeachment will happen. Democrats are wasting money and time.

Instead of trying to impeach Trump, they should look to beat him with a good candidate.
 
A federal judge has ruled that White House staff can be made to testify before Congress, rejecting the Trump administration's claims of immunity.

The ruling specifically compels former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify in the inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 US election.

When Congress sent him a subpoena in May, Mr McGahn refused to attend.

A Department of Justice spokesperson told Reuters news agency that they would appeal against the ruling.

Mr McGahn, who left his post in October 2018, was called to appear before the House Judiciary Committee in May to answer questions about the president's attempts to impede the now-concluded Mueller investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

Months later, the House Judiciary Committee was responsible for filing articles of impeachment against Mr Trump.

The Trump administration has refused to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry and other Democrat-led investigations, directing current and former White House officials to defy subpoenas for testimony and documents.

But in her ruling, US District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said that "no one is above the law".

"Executive branch officials are not absolutely immune from compulsory congressional process - no matter how many times the executive branch ahs asserted as much over the years - even if the president expressly directs such officials' noncompliance," she wrote.

Judge Jackson also explicitly said the president "does not have the power" to stop his aides from responding to subpoenas from Congress - adding that "presidents are not kings".

"No one, not even the head of the Executive branch, is above the law," Judge Jackson said.

But she did say that Mr McGahn could invoke executive privilege "where appropriate", to protect potentially sensitive information.

Judiciary Committee chairman Jerrold Nadler said that he expects Mr McGahn to "follow his legal obligations and promptly appear before the Committee".

Why is Congress investigating Trump?
Monday's ruling could have an effect on who testifies during the current impeachment hearings in Congress.

The US president is accused of withholding US military aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating his domestic political rival.

At the heart of the impeachment inquiry is a phone call on 25 July this year between Mr Trump and Ukraine's newly elected president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

During the call, Mr Trump urged his counterpart to look into unsubstantiated corruption claims against Democratic White House contender Joe Biden.

Mr Trump's critics say this alleged political pressure on a vulnerable US ally amounted to abuse of power.

What next with the impeachment inquiry?
The Judiciary Committee is expected to begin drafting articles of impeachment - which are the charges of wrongdoing against the president - in early December.

After a vote in the Democratic-controlled House, a trial would be held in the Republican-run Senate.

If Mr Trump was convicted by a two-thirds majority - an outcome deemed highly unlikely - he would become the first US president to be removed from office through impeachment.

The White House and some Republicans want the trial to be limited to two weeks.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50554162.
 
Congress has invited US President Donald Trump to its first impeachment hearing on 4 December.

Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said Mr Trump could either attend or "stop complaining about the process".

If he does attend, the president would be able to question witnesses.

It would mark the next stage in the impeachment inquiry, which centres on a July phone call between Mr Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

In that call, President Trump asked Mr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, currently the front runner to be the Democratic candidate in next year's presidential election, and his son Hunter Biden, who had previously worked for Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

The probe is looking into whether Mr Trump used the threat of withholding US military aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. The president has denied any wrongdoing and has called the inquiry a "witch hunt".

Last week, the House Intelligence Committee wrapped up two weeks of public hearings, which followed several weeks of closed-door witness interviews.

Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said the committees leading the probe - Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs - are now working on their report, which will be issued on 3 December.

What did Jerrold Nadler say?
Mr Nadler said in a statement that he had written to Mr Trump inviting him to the hearing next month.

"At base, the president has a choice to make," Mr Nadler said. "He can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process.

"I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other presidents have done before him."

In his letter to the president, Mr Nadler said the hearing would be an opportunity to discuss the historical and constitutional basis for impeachment.

"We will also discuss whether your alleged actions warrant the House's exercising its authority to adopt articles of impeachment," he added.

He has given Mr Trump until 18:00 EST (23:00 GMT) on 1 December to confirm whether or not he will be at the hearing, and if so, to let the committee know who his counsel will be.

What next with the impeachment inquiry?
The Judiciary Committee is expected to begin drafting articles of impeachment - which are the charges of wrongdoing against the president - in early December.

After a vote in the Democratic-controlled House, a trial would be held in the Republican-run Senate.

If Mr Trump was convicted by a two-thirds majority - an outcome deemed highly unlikely - he would become the first US president to be removed from office through impeachment.

The White House and some Republicans want the trial to be limited to two weeks.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50567994.
 
House judiciary committee chairman Jerry Nadler wrote to Donald Trump on Friday, asking if the president “intends to participate” in impeachment inquiry hearings due to begin next week.

“I look forward to your prompt response,” he wrote.

The president spent Friday at his Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida, having returned from a surprise Thanksgiving visit to troops in Afghanistan.

He did not immediately comment or tweet. Trump has said he would like to testify in the impeachment inquiry, as senior aides from the acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, to former national security adviser John Bolton have not.

Such refusals have stoked a standoff between the Democrats who control the House of Representatives and the White House over the proper exercise of constitutional powers and authorities.

A judge this week ruled that “presidents are not kings”, meaning Don McGahn, the former White House counsel, must testify in the impeachment hearings despite claims that he had “absolute immunity” as a top presidential adviser.

Nadler greeted that ruling as showing the White House stance had “no basis in law”. Nonetheless, the justice department immediately moved to appeal.

Nadler wrote to Trump earlier this week, offering him the chance to participate.

“At base,” he wrote, “the president has a choice to make: he can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process.”

The impeachment inquiry concerns efforts by Trump to have Ukraine investigate Joe Biden, a political rival and former vice-president, and a baseless conspiracy theory about supposed Ukrainian interference in the 2016 US election, rather than Russian.

Trump and Republicans deny the president abused his power but Mulvaney has admitted nearly $400m of military aid was held up in an effort to force Ukraine to comply and a succession of witnesses at hearings held by the House intelligence committee painted a damning picture of attempts to make Trump’s wishes reality.

Public opinion remains split on the issue, with about 50% of respondents in recent polls saying they favour Trump’s impeachment and removal. Trump has claimed, falsely, that support for the process is plummeting.

“I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry,” Nadler wrote earlier this week, “directly or through counsel, as other presidents have done before him.”

In his letter on Friday, Nadler quoted Adam Schiff, the chair of the House intelligence committee who has said his panel’s report will be submitted to Congress “soon after the Thanksgiving recess”.

“That report,” Nadler wrote, “will describe, among other things, ‘a months-long effort in which President Trump again sought foreign interference in our elections for his personal and political benefit at the expense of our national interest’ and ‘an unprecedented campaign of obstruction in an effort to prevent the committee from obtaining documentary evidence and testimony’.”

Nadler also underlined his own committee’s investigation of alleged obstruction by Trump detailed in the special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow.

The judiciary committee will decide if a formal impeachment vote will be held and, if so, what articles of impeachment will be presented.

If such a vote passes, as would be expected as the Democrats hold the House, Trump would be sent to the Senate for trial, probably in January. As Republicans hold that chamber and no significant cracks have appeared in GOP support, Trump would expect to avoid conviction and removal.

Nadler asked Trump for notice of “whether your counsel intends to participate … no later than 5pm on [Friday] 6 December 2019”. The first judiciary committee hearing is scheduled for Wednesday 4 December.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/29/trump-impeachment-hearings-nadler-letter.
 
The House Intelligence Committee will begin reviewing a report Monday on the committee’s investigation into President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine a committee official confirmed to The Hill.

The committee is then expected to consider and adopt the report Tuesday evening. The report and any minority views will be sent to the House Judiciary Committee, which could draft articles of impeachment against the president in the next few weeks, according to Politico.

This is a major event, moving impeachment proceedings one step closer to a possible impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate.

"We expect to allow HPSCI Members to view a draft report in committee spaces beginning Monday evening. On Tuesday, the Committee will hold a business meeting, following our regularly scheduled briefing, at 6 pm to consider and adopt the report. The report — along with any Minority Views — will then be forwarded to the Judiciary Committee pursuant to H.Res. 660" the committee official told The Hill.

The committee scheduled a consideration of the report that is "Part of the House of Representatives’ Impeachment Inquiry" on Tuesday of next week.

Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) told Democratic lawmakers in a “Dear Colleague” letter earlier this week that the committees overseeing the impeachment inquiry were preparing a report for the Judiciary Committee that they hoped to send shortly after lawmakers return to Washington from the Thanksgiving recess. The earlier letter did not contain a specific date.



Schiff said the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform committees continue to investigate the president, and he did not rule out the possibility of further hearings or depositions.
“Over the course of our inquiry, we have uncovered a months-long effort in which President Trump again sought foreign interference in our elections for his personal and political benefit at the expense of our national interest. As the evidence conclusively shows, President Trump conditioned official acts—a White House meeting desperately desired by the new Ukrainian president and critical U.S. military assistance—on Ukraine announcing sham, politically-motivated investigations that would help President Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign,” Schiff wrote Monday.

Schiff cited the record of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky detailed in a whistleblower complaint filed earlier this year. The complaint alleges that Trump pressured Zelensky to launch investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden (D) and his son, Hunter Biden, in exchange for hundreds of millions in military aide.

Trump and his allies have repeatedly denied that there was a “quid pro quo” between the two leaders.

Schiff’s letter alleges that House Democrats have uncovered “massive amounts” of evidence, in spite of “obstruction” from the Trump administration during two weeks of public hearings and 17 private marathon depositions. A dozen witnesses have defied lawmakers’ subpoenas, which Schiff alleged was “an unprecedented campaign of obstruction” from the White House.

The Intelligence Committee’s report is expected to include the allegations against the White House over the would-be witnesses, allowing the Judiciary Committee to potentially craft articles of impeachment on “obstruction of Congress,” according to Schiff’s letter.
Click to expand...

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...e-start-considering-impeachment-investigation.
 
White House: Trump 'will not participate in impeachment hearing'

The White House has said US President Donald Trump and his lawyers will not attend an impeachment hearing in the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

Mr Trump could not be expected to participate "fairly", White House counsel Pat Cipollone said in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee.

Last week, Chairman Jerrold Nadler said Mr Trump could either attend or "stop complaining about the process".

The White House did not say whether Mr Trump would attend a second hearing.

It said it would respond separately to an invitation to the second hearing - which does not yet have a date set - by Friday.

What did the letter say?
The letter, which has been published by Politico, accused the House committee of a "complete lack of due process and fundamental fairness" in the inquiry.

It said the invitation to attend on 4 December would fail to give the White House adequate time to prepare for the hearing and did not give information about the witnesses.

Mr Cipollone said press reports suggested witnesses were "apparently all academics" and would include "no fact witnesses". A fact witness testifies their personal knowledge of events while an expert witness assists the judge by offering an opinion.

The president's counsel also said that the committee had called three witnesses but allowed Republicans to call just one.

Mr Cipollone lambasted Mr Nadler's claim that the process was "consistent" with historical impeachment inquiries, arguing that President Bill Clinton had a fairer hearing in 1998.

He said that in order for Mr Trump to be represented in further hearings, Mr Nadler would need to ensure "that due process rights are protected" and that the process was "fair and just".

What will happen on Wednesday?
The hearing on Wednesday marks the next stage in the impeachment inquiry, which centres on a July phone call between Mr Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

In that call, President Trump asked Mr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, currently the front runner to be the Democratic candidate in next year's presidential election, and his son Hunter Biden, who had previously worked for Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

The probe is looking into whether Mr Trump used the threat of withholding US military aid to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. The president has denied any wrongdoing and has called the inquiry a "witch hunt".

Last week, the House Intelligence Committee wrapped up two weeks of public hearings, which followed several weeks of closed-door witness interviews.

Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said the committees leading the probe - Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs - are now working on their report, which will be issued on 3 December.

On Tuesday, the latest transcript of inquiry evidence was released, detailing testimony by senior budget official Mark Sandy.

Mr Sandy told the House investigators that two White House budget officials had resigned following the withholding of military aid to Ukraine. He said that one, a lawyer, had expressed concern that the action could be a violation of a 1974 budget law.

What did Jerrold Nadler say?
Mr Nadler wrote to President Trump last Wednesday, inviting him to attend the hearing.

"At base, the president has a choice to make," Mr Nadler said in a statement. "He can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process.

"I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other presidents have done before him."

In his letter to the president, Mr Nadler said the hearing would be an opportunity to discuss the historical and constitutional basis for impeachment.

"We will also discuss whether your alleged actions warrant the House's exercising its authority to adopt articles of impeachment," he added.

What next with the impeachment inquiry?
The Judiciary Committee is expected to begin drafting articles of impeachment - which are the charges of wrongdoing against the president - in early December.

After a vote in the Democratic-controlled House, a trial would be held in the Republican-run Senate.

If Mr Trump was convicted by a two-thirds majority - an outcome deemed highly unlikely - he would become the first US president to be removed from office through impeachment.

The White House and some Republicans want the trial to be limited to two weeks.
Click to expand...

Source: bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50625550.
 
Trump impeachment evidence overwhelming - House report
Evidence for impeaching Donald Trump for misconduct in office is "overwhelming", according to the panel leading the US impeachment inquiry.

Evidence for impeaching US President Donald Trump for misconduct in office is "overwhelming", according to the panel leading the impeachment inquiry.

The president placed personal political interests "above the national interests of the United States", it states in a key report to House lawmakers.

He did so by trying to "solicit foreign interference" from Ukraine to help his 2020 re-election bid, it says.

The report is designed to lay out the case to remove Mr Trump from office.

He denies any wrongdoing, and has described the inquiry as a witch-hunt.

Before the draft report was released, the Republican president attacked the Democrat-led investigation as "very unpatriotic".

Following publication, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said the Democrats "utterly failed to produce any evidence of wrongdoing" and that the report "reflects nothing more than their frustrations".

The report now goes to the House Judiciary Committee, which will begin proceedings on Wednesday and consider formal impeachment charges against Mr Trump.

What does the report say?
The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report was made public on Tuesday by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

It says the inquiry "uncovered a months-long effort by President Trump to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election".

"President Trump's scheme subverted US foreign policy toward Ukraine and undermined our national security in favour of two politically-motivated investigations that would help his presidential re-election campaign," it says.

"The president demanded that the newly-elected Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, publicly announce investigations into a political rival that he apparently feared the most, former Vice-President Joe Biden, and into a discredited theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 presidential election."

Evidence of misconduct is overwhelming "and so too is the evidence of his obstruction of Congress", the report says.

What is Trump accused of?
Democrats say Mr Trump dangled two bargaining chips - $400m (£309m) of military aid to Ukraine that had already been allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting with Ukraine's new leader. They think this political pressure on a vulnerable US ally amounts to an abuse of power.

The first investigation Mr Trump wanted from Ukraine was into one of his main Democratic challengers, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. Hunter joined the board of a Ukrainian company when Joe Biden was US vice-president.

The second Trump demand was that Ukraine try to corroborate a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the last US presidential election. This theory has been widely debunked, and the US intelligence agencies are unanimous in saying Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic Party emails in 2016.

How does impeachment work?
Impeachment is the first part - the charges - of a two-stage political process by which Congress can remove a president from office.

If, following the hearings, the House of Representatives votes to pass articles of impeachment, the Senate is forced to hold a trial.

A Senate vote requires a two-thirds majority to convict and remove the president - unlikely in this case, given that Mr Trump's party controls the chamber.

Only two US presidents in history - Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson - have been impeached, but neither was convicted.

President Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50650216
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Trump impeachment: Three law experts tell committee he should be removed

There is no doubt that President Donald Trump's actions require him to be removed from office, three scholars of US constitutional law have testified.

The three experts described Mr Trump's efforts to solicit help from a foreign nation as a crime and accused him of obstructing justice.

Four experts, three picked by Democrats and one by the Republicans, have been testifying in Congress.

The fourth said Mr Trump's actions were wrong, but not impeachable.

As the investigation entered a new phase, the experts testified to the House Judiciary Committee which began hearings aimed at drawing up articles of impeachment.

Its hearings come hot on the heels of the House Intelligence Committee's investigation, which concluded on Tuesday with a 300-page report accusing Mr Trump of putting his own personal political interests "above the national interests of the United States" by soliciting foreign interference in the 2020 US elections.

The impeachment process began in September after an anonymous whistleblower complained to Congress about a July phone call by Mr Trump to the president of Ukraine, in which Mr Trump appeared to tie US military assistance to Ukraine launching investigations which would help him politically.

The White House has rejected the allegations made by Democrats, who hold the majority in the House of Representatives.

Speaking from the UK, where he has been attending a Nato summit, Mr Trump questioned the patriotism of Democrats. "You almost question whether or not they love our country and that's a very serious thing: Do they love our country?" he said on Wednesday.

Among formal impeachment charges expected to be considered by the judiciary committee are abuse of power, obstruction of justice and contempt of Congress.

Democrats are keen to hold a vote on impeachment in the House of Representatives before the end of the year, with the prospect of a trial in the Senate perhaps as early as January 2020.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50651514
 
Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House of Representatives will file impeachment charges against US President Donald Trump for alleged abuse of power.

"Our democracy is what is at stake, the president leaves us no choice but to act," the top elected Democrat said.

She spoke a day after the House Judiciary Committee began considering potential charges against the Republican president.

Mr Trump told Democrats to move quickly if they were going to impeach him.

What did Pelosi say?
The California congresswoman told Thursday morning's news conference: "The facts are uncontested. The president abused his power for his own political benefit at the expense of our national security, by withholding military aid and a crucial Oval Office meeting in exchange for an announcement for an investigation into his political rival."

She added: "Sadly, but with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our founders and a heart full of love for America, today I am asking our chairmen to proceed with articles of impeachment."

Democrats are keen to hold a vote on impeachment in the House of Representatives before the end of the year, with the prospect of a trial in the Senate perhaps as early as January 2020.

On Wednesday, Mrs Pelosi held a behind-closed-doors meeting on impeachment with her fellow Democrats and asked them: "Are you ready?"

The lawmakers responded with a rousing "Yes", according to the Associated Press news agency.

What did the White House say?

Mr Trump tweeted shortly before Mrs Pelosi's remarks: "If you are going to impeach me, do it now, fast, so we can have a fair trial in the Senate, and so that our country can get back to business."

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said immediately after Mrs Pelosi's remarks that Democrats "should be ashamed".

She added: "We look forward to a fair trial in the Senate."

Senior Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway told reporters: "We're ready for a trial."

"That's when the defence goes on the offence," she said, adding that Republicans look forward to calling their own witnesses.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50671570
 
IMMY69 said:
He was saying this leading upto the 2016 Elections...

Saudi’s spread Wahabism etc etc...

His lies have been exposed time and again and he’s sounding like desperate man who’s doing his outmost to rally his base whilst st the same time trying to attack the institutions..

I hope people don’t fall for this nonsense again...
Click to expand...

I think I was right. Sure Trump says all sorts of nonsense but no US President can continue if he mentions the military industrial complex, globalists etc and refused to attack Iran sacking Bolton.


Either he is impeached, assassinated or loses next election After this there will be some sort of civil uprising by the far right of the US.
 
KingKhanWC said:
I think I was right. Sure Trump says all sorts of nonsense but no US President can continue if he mentions the military industrial complex, globalists etc and refused to attack Iran sacking Bolton.


Either he is impeached, assassinated or loses next election After this there will be some sort of civil uprising by the far right of the US.
Click to expand...

Ike did. In fact he coined the term.
 
Pointless exercise this - even Democrats know that Senate will not allow this.
 
MenInG said:
Pointless exercise this - even Democrats know that Senate will not allow this.
Click to expand...

Even if the Senate Republicans and the GOP base aren’t swayed, it may well influence undecided voters and fire up the Democratic base for November 2020. The Dems can claim they did the right thing in spite of the GOP majority in the Senate.

There’s a legal angle to this as well, which I’m sure is not lost on the Democratic leadership: an impeached official cannot be pardoned. At some stage, Trump may need a pardon from his successor, and has even floated the idea of pardoning himself if need be. Once he’s impeached by the House (even if he’s not removed by the Senate), this would no longer be possible. Nixon, who was pardoned by Ford, chose to resign rather than be impeached, which would’ve meant no possibility of a pardon.
 
Another intriguing subplot is the GOP senators facing re-election in 2020: some of them are in swing states. This forces them to take a stand, one way or the other. If they vote not to impeach, and impeachment is popular enough in their states to jeopardize their reelection, the Dems benefit, and in a few cases win back those seats.
 
By the way, there’s a way around the GOP Senate majority, although it isn’t too plausible: if the Senators vote on impeachment in secret, we may be surprised by how many GOP Senators vote in favor.

For a secret vote to take place, a simple majority in the Senate (not 2/3rds) can first vote for a resolution calling for a secret ballot. This only needs four Republican votes. If Romney and a three others vote in favor, all bets are off.
 
MenInG said:
Pointless exercise this - even Democrats know that Senate will not allow this.
Click to expand...

It depends on the evidence - if it looks damning some GOP Senators could turn on Trump. He isn’t safe and this will dominate the news through the election. I think Pelosi is playing her hand well.
 
KingKhanWC said:
In the 50's. JFK made one of the greatest speeches in history imo, he was assassinated. Since then no other President has until now and he is being shoved out.
Click to expand...

You don’t think that the Dems are taking this course for the simple reason that it’s the right thing to do?
 
Trump impeachment: White House signals it will not attend hearings

The White House has indicated it will not take part in further impeachment hearings in Congress due next week.

In a letter sent to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, it urges Democrats to "end this inquiry now".

The letter does not explicitly rule out attending but officials told US media that the administration saw no reason to take part in an "unfair" process.

President Donald Trump is alleged to have pressured Ukraine in a way that would help him politically.

A deadline for the administration to decide whether to send a legal representative or witnesses to the House Judiciary Committee passed on Friday.

The committee is in the process of drawing up articles of impeachment against Mr Trump, leading to a vote in the House of Representatives before a trial in the Senate - possibly early in January.

What did the White House say?
The letter, from White House counsel Pat Cipollone to judiciary committee chairman Jerry Nadler, describes the impeachment process as a "charade".

House Democrats are proceeding with articles of impeachment without a "single shred of evidence", it says.

"Your impeachment inquiry is completely baseless and has violated basic principles of due process and fundamental fairness.

"You should end this inquiry now and not waste even more time with additional hearings," it goes on.

The letter finishes by reminding the committee that President Trump has called - if the impeachment process continues - for a "fair trial in the Senate" to happen soon.

Mr Trump's Republicans are in the majority in the Senate; the Democrats hold sway in the House of Representatives and on the judiciary committee.

"We haven't been given any fair opportunity to participate. The speaker has already announced the predetermined result and they will not give us the ability to call any witnesses," an official told Reuters.

What is Mr Trump accused of?
An anonymous whistleblower complained to Congress in September about a July phone call by Mr Trump to the president of Ukraine, in which Mr Trump appeared to tie US military assistance to Ukraine launching investigations which could help him politically.

In return for those investigations, Democrats say Mr Trump offered two bargaining chips - $400m (£304m) of military aid that had already been allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Democrats say this pressure on a vulnerable US ally constitutes an abuse of power.

The first investigation Mr Trump wanted from Ukraine was into former Vice-President Joe Biden, his main Democratic challenger, and his son Hunter. Hunter Biden joined the board of a Ukrainian energy company when his father was President Obama's deputy.

The second Trump demand was that Ukraine should try to corroborate a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the last US presidential election. This theory has been widely debunked, and US intelligence agencies are unanimous in saying Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic Party emails in 2016.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50694769.
 
'No political bias' in FBI probe of Trump campaign

A US watchdog has found no evidence of political bias when the FBI launched an inquiry into the 2016 Trump campaign, despite "serious performance failures".

The US Department of Justice inspector general's report concluded the law enforcement bureau had "authorised purpose" to initiate the investigation.

But it also found applications to wiretap a Trump aide had "significant inaccuracies and omissions".

The 476-page report provides fodder for Trump critics and supporters alike.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz sought to assess the basis for the FBI's surveillance of Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser who had lived and worked in Russia.

How did the report criticise the FBI?
The inspector general identified 17 "significant inaccuracies or omissions" when the FBI applied to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) for surveillance warrants to monitor Mr Page's communications.

Mr Horowitz wrote that the errors resulted in "applications that made it appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case".

The watchdog also found that an FBI lawyer assigned to the Russia case doctored an email from the CIA to a colleague that was used in an application from the bureau to monitor Mr Page.

The attorney "altered an email that the other US government agency had sent" with the effect that "the email inaccurately stated that Page was 'not a source' for the other agency", the report said.

The watchdog also found FBI personnel "fell far short of the requirement in FBI policy that they ensure that all factual statements in a Fisa application are 'scrupulously accurate'".

The report said "so many basic and fundamental errors... raised significant questions regarding the FBI chain of command's management and supervision of the Fisa process".

How did the report back the FBI?
The inspector general found no basis for conservative claims that partisan hostility to Mr Trump had influenced the bureau's probe.

"We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations," he said.

Mr Horowitz also did not find that the FBI's mistakes were intentional.

The investigation was opened "in compliance with department and FBI policies", the report said.

Mr Horowitz also found the FBI's use of confidential informants was in compliance with agency rules.

What about the 'Steele dossier'?
The watchdog faulted how the FBI presented the work of former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who authored the so-called Steele dossier - a series of largely unsubstantiated allegations about Mr Trump.

Mr Steele was hired to do the research through a law firm on behalf of Mr Trump's political opponents, including Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Mr Horowitz said the FBI "overstated the significance" of Mr Steele's past work.

The watchdog also said the FBI left out relevant information about one of Mr Steele's sources, whom Mr Steele himself had called a "boaster" prone to "embellishment".

The report noted that the CIA itself viewed the Steele dossier as little more than "an internet rumour".

But the watchdog said ex-FBI Director James Comey and his former deputy, Andrew McCabe, argued the Steele dossier should not be dismissed.

Were FBI employees biased?
While Mr Trump has often spoken of a so-called deep state plot to undermine his presidency, Monday's watchdog report also makes clear some FBI employees celebrated his victory over Hillary Clinton.

One FBI agent said in an instant message he "was so elated with the election" and likened the coverage to "watching a Super Bowl comeback".

Another agent sent a message on the morning after the election saying: "Trump!" His colleague replied: "Hahaha." "LOL," the agent responded.

Mr Trump has often cited messages previously uncovered by Mr Horowitz that were sent on work phones between two FBI employees, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

The messages expressed "statements of hostility toward then-candidate Trump", the watchdog notes.

But the watchdog found no evidence that Mr Strzok or Ms Page's investigative actions were influenced by their own political opinions.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50720345.
 
The Democratic-controlled US House Judiciary Committee has unveiled charges against President Donald Trump, a key move in impeaching him.

The first article revealed by committee chief Jerry Nadler accuses Mr Trump of abuse of power and the second accuses him of obstructing Congress.

The Republican president is said to have withheld aid to Ukraine for domestic political reasons.

He insists he has done "nothing wrong" and dismissed the process as "madness".

If the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee votes to approve the articles later this week, they will then be submitted to the lower chamber for a full vote.

If, in turn, the articles are approved by the House - which is controlled by the Democrats - an impeachment trial in the Republican-held Senate will take place, possibly early in January.

The impeachment process was launched after an anonymous whistleblower complained to Congress in September about a July phone call by Mr Trump to the president of Ukraine.

We knew it was coming. The talk has been of little else, impeachment seems to be the only thing I've been reporting on for these past couple of months.

But when the chairman of the Judiciary Committee charged the president with "high crimes and misdemeanours", it still made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. For all the sound and fury of today's politics, this is not an everyday occurrence.

If the House of Representatives votes to impeach Donald J Trump, he will join Andrew Johnson (1868) and Bill Clinton (1998) as the only other presidents to be sanctioned in this way since American independence.

But that's for the history books. It's what happens next that matters. Will this be a grievous blow to Donald Trump winning a second term, or will the American people see this as a political hit job against their president?

The language is of upholding the Constitution, but don't be gulled: there is raw political calculation too.

What exactly is Mr Trump accused of?
He is alleged to have committed "high crimes and misdemeanours" (a phrase from the US Constitution) on two counts, outlined by Mr Nadler:

The first allegation is that he exercised the powers of his public office to "obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the national interest", by allegedly pressuring Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 presidential election

The second allegation is that "when he was caught, when the House investigated and opened an impeachment inquiry, President Trump engaged in unprecedented categorical and indiscriminate defiance of the impeachment inquiry...", thereby obstructing Congress
The charges are set out in detail in a Judiciary Committee document.

Mr Trump "sees himself as above the law", Mr Nadler said. "We must be clear, no-one, not even the president, is above the law."

In the July phone call to Ukraine's leader, Mr Trump appeared to tie US military assistance for Ukraine to its launching of investigations that could help him politically.

In return for those investigations, Democrats say Mr Trump offered two bargaining chips - $400m (£304m) of military aid that had already been allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Democrats say this pressure on a vulnerable US ally constitutes an abuse of power.

The first investigation Mr Trump wanted from Ukraine was into former Vice-President Joe Biden, his main Democratic challenger, and his son Hunter. Hunter Biden joined the board of a Ukrainian energy company when his father was President Barack Obama's deputy.

The second Trump demand was that Ukraine should try to corroborate a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the last US presidential election. This theory has been widely debunked, and US intelligence agencies are unanimous in saying Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic Party emails in 2016.

How strong is the case for impeachment?
President Trump railed at the announcement of the charges, declaring again on Twitter that it was a "witch hunt".

"Nadler just said that I 'pressured Ukraine to interfere in our 2020 Election'," he wrote.

"Ridiculous, and he knows that is not true. Both the President & Foreign Minister of Ukraine said, many times, that there "WAS NO PRESSURE." Nadler and the Dems know this, but refuse to acknowledge!"

Law professor, Jonathan Turley, who testified for Mr Trump's Republican Party before the House Judiciary Committee, told the BBC: "The problem is not with the legal basis for such impeachable offenses but the evidentiary record.

"This record remains both incomplete and conflicted. The Democrats have insisted on impeaching by Christmas rather than build a record to support such charges. This is now the fastest investigation with the thinnest record supporting the narrowest impeachment in modern history."

Congress is certainly split along party lines. The Democrats argue that Mr Trump must be stopped from standing for re-election next year not on political grounds but because he has committed an impeachable offence.

Adam Schiff, who oversaw Congressional hearings into the allegations, said that not to act against President Trump now would mean allowing him to "cheat one more time" in 2020.

"To do nothing would make ourselves complicit" in Mr Trump's actions, he said.

However, Mr Trump's 2020 campaign manager, Brad Parscale, accused the Democrats of trying to remove the Republican candidate now because they had nobody to defeat him next year.

"Americans don't agree with this rank partisanship, but Democrats are putting on this political theatre because they don't have a viable candidate," he said.

How does impeachment work?
Impeachment is the first part - the charges - of a two-stage political process by which Congress can remove a president from office.

If the House of Representatives votes to pass articles of impeachment, the Senate is forced to hold a trial.

A Senate vote requires a two-thirds majority to convict and remove the president - unlikely in this case, given that Mr Trump's party controls the chamber.

Only two US presidents in history - Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson - have been impeached, but neither was convicted.

President Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50731010
 
Trump on brink of impeachment, but far from falling

WASHINGTON: For a man on the brink of becoming only the third US president to be impeached, Donald Trump sure sounds confident.

“You’re so lucky I became your president,” he boomed to cheering supporters late Tuesday in Hershey, Pennsylvania.

“A regular president would have been under the table, thumb in mouth, saying ‘take me home, Mommy, this is too tough for me.’” Hours earlier in Washington, Democratic leaders unveiled two impeachment charges against Trump that the full House of Representatives, dominated by Democrats, will likely confirm in the near future.

The Republican businessman is now so entangled in controversy that it takes a hardened Washington politics junkie merely to unravel the strands.

Russia collusion, Ukraine quid pro quo, foreign emoluments clause, deep state coup — the terminology alone illustrates the increasingly exotic political mess engulfing Trump.

And less than a year from the 2020 presidential election, he’s also struggling in the polls. But Trump is protected by two things.

The first is that he presides over a booming economy, historically a surefire way to re-election.

The second is more personal: Trump loves to brawl, and with impeachment he has found a brawl that matches his formidable energy.

President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 before Congress could even take its impeachment vote over the Watergate affair. Trump, by contrast, is fighting back at every step.

Almost daily he brands impeachment a “hoax,” or as he said in Pennsylvania — with a typical flourish of vivid, often violent language — a “big, fat, disgusting fraud.” He has flat-out refused to allow government employees to testify in his case or to release documents to investigators.

That strategy led to one of the two impeachment charges being levied against him: obstruction of Congress. The other charge is for allegedly trying to force Ukraine to open a corruption probe aimed solely at embarrassing one of his main Democratic rivals Joe Biden.

Even if the Democrats do vote for impeachment as expected, the case will then go to the Republican-controlled Senate, where Trump sees a chance for revenge.

According to CNN, Trump is pushing reluctant Republican leaders in the Senate to make the trial a media extravaganza, giving his take on the Ukraine affair —including a series of unproven conspiracy theories — a dramatic hearing.

“If you are going to impeach me, do it now, fast, so we can have a fair trial in the Senate,” he dared the Democrats in one of his torrents of tweets on the crisis.

The latest national numbers on polling analysis website FiveThirtyEight look bad for Trump.

The billionaire real estate dealer is shown losing to nearly every one of the multitude of Democrats scrambling to take him on. Even Pete Buttigieg, an Indiana small city mayor whose name most Americans couldn’t pronounce a couple of months ago, is shown beating Trump if the elections were held today.

But those polls are taken on a nationwide basis, while US presidential elections are won state by state.

Just as in 2016, the 2020 election is expected to go down to the wire in handful of swing states as Trump and his eventual challenger try to claw their way to the magic number of 270 electoral college votes.

So Trump is happy with a new survey from Republican pollster Firehouse that shows him ahead against all comers in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

“As the impeachment process heats up in Washington, Donald Trump is seeing a boost in support in crucial swing states,” the firm said.

It is true that Trump suffered the embarrassing defeats of Republicans he campaigned for in recent state elections in Kentucky and Louisiana. His party also took a tough hit in the 2018 congressional midterm elections and Democrats appear to be highly energized for 2020.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1521765/trump-on-brink-of-impeachment-but-far-from-falling.
 
A US House of Representatives panel is expected to approve impeachment charges against President Donald Trump later in a marathon session of rancorous debate.

The judiciary committee is debating two articles of impeachment alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

A full vote by the Democratic-run House next week will likely make him the third US president ever impeached.

But the Senate, controlled by Mr Trump's fellow Republicans, is not expected to remove him from office.

"No crime!" the US president said on Twitter early on Thursday.

What do the articles of impeachment say?
Mr Trump is accused of trying to force Ukraine to launch a corruption investigation into his political rival Joe Biden, a leading Democratic contender for the White House next year; and obstruction of Congress for stonewalling the House investigation.

The Democrats who run the committee have agreed the language of the nine pages detailing the charges, saying that Mr Trump "betrayed the nation" by acting "corruptly".

There are 41 members on the panel, which is expected to vote along party lines on Thursday afternoon local time.

Republicans are trying to introduce amendments, but unified Democrats on the panel are rebuffing such proposed changes.

Media captionWhat does it take to impeach a president?
What is being said in the debate?
The judiciary committee launched the two-day session on Wednesday evening at the Capitol.

Republicans decried the impeachment case as "hot garbage", while one Democrat accused the president of a "constitutional crime spree".

Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, said Democrats were only impeaching Mr Trump because "they don't like the 63 million people who voted for this president, all of us in flyover country, all of us common folk".

But Democrats rebuked Republicans for their loyalty to Trump.

"Wake up!" said Representative David Cicilline, accusing the other party of "wilfully ignoring the facts to protect a corrupt and dangerous president".

A SIMPLE GUIDE: If you want a basic take, this one's for you
GO DEEPER: Here's a 100, 300 and 800-word summary of the story
WHAT'S IMPEACHMENT? A political process to remove a president
VIEW FROM TRUMP COUNTRY: Hear from residents of a West Virginia town
CONTEXT: Why Ukraine matters to the US
FACT-CHECK: Did Ukraine interfere in the 2016 election to help Clinton?
What will happen next week in the House?
A handful of Democrats in swing districts remain unsure how they will vote on impeachment when it comes to next week's debate.

But Democrats have a 36-seat lead over Republicans in the House so passage is still expected to go ahead.

Democrats stepped back from including in the impeachment charges findings by Special Counsel Robert Mueller that Mr Trump may have obstructed the justice department's inquiry into alleged Russian election meddling.

The party's lawmakers from more conservative districts have argued the focus should be limited to Ukraine.

Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday they would not whip the historic vote, allowing members to make their own personal choice.

What will happen in the Senate?
The Senate is expected to hold a trial next month on the charges and acquit the president.

Republicans who hold sway in the chamber appear to favour a quick vote, limiting political fanfare.

Mr Trump has indicated he would like to see witnesses called such as Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who worked for a Ukrainian gas firm that the US president wanted investigated.

Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, said on Wednesday no decision had yet been made over how to conduct the trial.

Analysts say the 100-seat chamber does not have the 67 votes needed to remove Mr Trump from office.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50763484
 
Boris Johnson has said he hopes his party's "extraordinary" election win will bring "closure" to the Brexit debate and "let the healing begin".

Speaking in Downing Street, he said he would seek to repay the trust placed in him by Labour supporters who had voted Conservative for the first time.

He said he would not ignore those who opposed Brexit as he builds with Europe a partnership "of sovereign equals".

He urged the country to unite and end years of wrangling.

Mr Johnson has been returned to power with a Commons majority of 80, the party's largest since 1987.

He said he would use his new authority to bring the country together and he recognised that the NHS was the "overwhelming priority" of the British people.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50787094
 
Donald Trump is expected to become only the third US president in history to be impeached on Wednesday for his actions with Ukraine. Some Democratic politicians' constituents are angry.

Swing state congresswoman Elissa Slotkin knew she was in for a bumpy ride ahead of her appearance in front of hundreds of Michigan constituents on Monday morning.

The Democrat, who last year was elected to represent a district that voted for Trump, had announced just hours earlier that she was coming out in favour of impeachment.

She'd gone home to her farm in Holly at the weekend and sat at her desk with coffee and papers to weigh up the evidence in front of her. It was clear, the former CIA analyst decided, that the president's actions had crossed the threshold and that she was going to vote for the two articles of impeachment.

Now she had to stand up in front of 400 local residents to explain why.

Outside the town hall meeting at Oakland University, near Rochester, people were making their views loud and clear.

A really simple guide to impeachment story
There was a stand-off between those who support her decision and Trump supporters who think she's in the wrong, and should be impeached herself.

Waiting to go into Ballroom A for the event, they stood on either side of the hallway with their placards ("Impeach Slotkin, keep Trump" one read), exchanging chants. Some tried covering up pro-Slotkin signs with their own, leading to a minor tussle by a Christmas tree.

Inside the ballroom, there was a chorus of loud boos competing with cheers the moment the congresswoman stood up. The meeting organiser asked for everyone to respect each other, but that didn't stop the yelling.

"Hey hey, ho ho, Elissa Slotkin's got to go!" came the chants from one corner of the ballroom, peppered with "four more years!" and "MAGA!". One man stood with his back turned to the congresswoman for most of the hour-long event.

"I'm glad to see so much enthusiasm for civic engagement," she began.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image caption
There was a confrontation between a man holding a sign condemning white supremacy and a woman supporting Trump
As she set out to explain her reasoning, sometimes the shouts threatened to drown her out. "Let's have a civil conversation," she said at one point. "I'm going to continue - I have the microphone."

When she came on to the subject of impeachment, she was greeted with a standing ovation.

What was different in this case, says the congresswoman, was that the president in his phone call to the Ukrainian president at the heart of the allegations against him, decided to act for his own personal gain "and not in the interests of the United States".

"Short of declaring war, this is one of the biggest decisions I will be voting on in my short time in Congress. I take it very seriously."

There were yells of "you're not fooling anybody" as she continued: "Whether you agree with me or not, I have attempted in all I can to be transparent. For me, this is an issue of principle."

She said she's aware that her stance could lose her her seat in the 2020 elections.

"I know, and I can hear, that this is a very controversial decision.

"The thing that's different for me is this very basic idea that the president of the United States would reach out to a foreign power and ask for an investigation for personal political gain.

"While you may not agree, I hope you believe me when I tell you I made this decision out of principle and out of a duty to protect and defend the constitution. I feel that in my bones.

"And I will stick to that regardless of what it does to me politically because this is bigger than politics."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50814838
 
President Donald Trump has lashed out over his impending impeachment in an irate letter to top Democrat Nancy Pelosi, accusing her of declaring "open war on American democracy".

"You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment!" he wrote in the letter, sent on Tuesday.

Mr Trump faces an impeachment vote on Wednesday over allegations he pressured Ukraine for personal political gain.

He is expected to be impeached, setting up a trial in the Senate.

With little hope of changing the outcome of Wednesday's vote in the House, Mr Trump used his six-page letter to angrily rail against the process and denounce Ms Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker of the House.

It was a remarkable intervention by the president, who has fought to stymie the impeachment process by preventing key aides from testifying before the House of Representatives.

Mr Trump claimed in his letter he had been "deprived of basic Constitutional Due Process from the beginning of this impeachment scam" and "denied the most fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution, including the right to present evidence".

"More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch Trials," he wrote.

The president was in fact publicly invited by the Democratic chair of the House Judiciary Committee to give evidence in the impeachment process, which would have also allowed his legal team to question witnesses, but he declined.

The Mayor of Salem, Kim Driscoll, tweeted that the president should "Learn some history," saying the witch trial convictions were made in the absence of evidence, whereas the case against the president involved "ample evidence".

Ms Pelosi told reporters at the Capitol that she hadn't read the letter in full but had seen "the essence" of it and thought it was "really sick".

In a statement announcing Wednesday's vote on impeachment, she said the House would "exercise one of the most solemn powers granted to us by the constitution".

"During this very prayerful moment in our nation's history, we must honour our oath to support and defend our constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic," she added.

Mr Trump is facing two impeachment charges: obstruction of Congress, by refusing to co-operate with the impeachment probe, barring staff from testifying, and holding back documentary evidence; and attempting to use his office to pressure Ukraine to investigate his Democratic political rival Joe Biden.

If the House votes as expected on Wednesday along party lines, Mr Trump will become the third president in US history to be impeached. He will then go on trial in the Senate, where Senators from both parties are obliged to act as independent jurors.

The Senate is controlled by the president's Republican Party. Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell outraged Democrats last week when he said Republican senators would act in "total co-ordination" with the president's team during the trial and vote against the process.

Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Minority Senate Leader, said: "If articles of impeachment are sent to the Senate, every single senator will take an oath to render 'impartial justice'. Making sure the Senate conducts a fair and honest trial that allows all the facts to come out is paramount."

Earlier on Tuesday, Mr Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani appeared to confirm that he worked to remove the US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, to clear the way for investigations that could be politically useful to Mr Trump.

Mr Giuliani told the New York Times he passed along to Mr Trump "a couple of times" information about how Ms Yovanovitch had got in the way of potential investigations.

"I needed Yovanovitch out of the way," Mr Giuliani told the New Yorker magazine.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50830736
 
Donald Trump is set to become the third US president in history to be impeached later by the House of Representatives.

Democratic lawmakers are expected to approve two impeachment charges against the Republican president on Wednesday.

Mr Trump is scheduled to face a trial in the Senate next month, but that chamber is controlled by members of his party and it is unlikely to vote that he should be removed from office.

The president has called the process an "attempted coup" and a "witch hunt".

In a six-page letter on the eve of the vote, Mr Trump argued he had been denied his rights "from the beginning of this impeachment scam".

He has blocked top aides from testifying before lawmakers in the House and declined an invitation to appear himself.

On Tuesday, Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced the vote on both charges.

Mrs Pelosi wrote to colleagues that impeachment is "one of the most solemn powers granted to us by the Constitution", and called it a "very prayerful moment in our nation's history".

Members of the House will meet from 09:00 local time (14:00 GMT) on Wednesday. Votes on both articles of impeachment are expected between 18:30 and 19:30.

As the House prepares to vote, President Trump will fly to Michigan for a "Merry Christmas" rally along with Vice-President Mike Pence.

What are the charges?
After hours of debate, the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary Committee approved two charges against Mr Trump last week.

The first is abuse of power. It accuses the president of trying to pressure Ukraine to smear his political rival, Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden.

Mr Trump and his conservative allies have alleged without evidence that while he was US vice-president Joe Biden encouraged Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor in order to stop him investigating a Ukrainian gas company that employed his son, Hunter Biden, as a board member.

Democrats say Mr Trump dangled $400m of US military aid and the prospect of a White House meeting for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as bargaining chips to prod the US ally into announcing a corruption inquiry into the Bidens.

The second charge is obstructing Congress. Mr Trump is accused of failing to co-operate with the House impeachment investigation.

The president has denied withholding US aid to benefit himself politically and maintains it was appropriate to ask Ukraine to look into alleged corruption.

What is impeachment?
Under the US constitution, a president "shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanours". It is a political process, not a legal one.

The first step takes place in the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by Democrats. Members there hold a vote to impeach, which only needs a simple majority to pass.

When this happens as expected, Mr Trump will formally have been impeached, and proceedings go on to the Senate for a trial. If two-thirds of senators then vote to convict the president, he is removed from office.

Two US presidents have been impeached - Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998 - but in both cases the Senate did not vote to force them from office.

Richard Nixon resigned the presidency in August 1974 when it became clear he would be impeached and ousted by Congress in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

Groups of demonstrators in favour of Mr Trump's impeachment rallied in major cities across the US on Tuesday.

Many held signs reading "Dump Trump" and bearing the hashtag #ImpeachNow.

Surveys suggest the country is split on the process. US political website FiveThirtyEight's collection of national polls shows just over 47% back impeachment, while 46.4% do not support it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50834324
 
The House of Representatives, the lower chamber of Congress, is to vote on whether to impeach President Trump
A historic day has just begun with a debate and it will be followed by the vote later, probably in the evening
The president is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to his dealings with Ukraine
If he is impeached in the Democratic-controlled House, it will be up to the Republican-led Senate to convict and remove him from office
A Senate trial would then begin in January but with Republicans in control, the president will probably be acquitted
Only two US presidents have ever been impeached - Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton - and neither was removed by the Senate

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-50827072
 
Much a do about nothing, the Republican Senate will never remove him, both Clinton and JOhnson served their full terms. Trump will use this to his advantage to cry wolf and his supporters will vote him in for a second term.
 
DeadBall said:
Much a do about nothing, the Republican Senate will never remove him, both Clinton and JOhnson served their full terms. Trump will use this to his advantage to cry wolf and his supporters will vote him in for a second term.
Click to expand...

This is just point scoring and trying to damage Trump before elections - could well have opposite effect.
 
MenInG said:
This is just point scoring and trying to damage Trump before elections - could well have opposite effect.
Click to expand...

Well definitely have an negative effect, Trumps supporters are already crying foul and how its a conspiracy and what not. Besides Trump won the last time due to the electoral college as Hillary had the popular vote and it will be the same this time.
 
The House of Representatives is debating whether to impeach President Trump ahead of a vote
The president is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to his dealings with Ukraine
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it was "tragic" his "reckless actions" made this necessary. "He gave us no choice."
Republican Doug Collins said: "Today is going to be a lot of things. What it is not is fair. What it is not is about the truth."
If Trump is impeached in the Democratic-controlled House, a Senate trial would then begin in January
But with Republicans in control there, the president will probably be acquitted
Only two US presidents have been impeached - Johnson and Clinton - and neither was removed by the Senate

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-50827072
 
Starting to think that this probably meaningless (and slightly cynical) impeachment will just be spun by Trump’s team to his advantage and he will create a “President against the Congress” outsider narrative, consequently picking up another win in November.
 
Donald Trump has become the third US president in history to be impeached by the House of Representatives, setting up a trial in the Senate that will decide whether he remains in office.

The House voted first that the president abused his power and then that he had obstructed Congress.

Both votes fell along party lines with nearly all Democrats voting for the charges and all Republicans against.

As voting took place, President Trump was addressing a rally in Michigan.

The proceedings on Wednesday began with members of Mr Trump's Republican Party calling for votes on procedural issues in an effort to frustrate the process.

That was followed by a vote on the rules to be set out for the impeachment, which kicked off six hours of partisan debate on the merits of the two impeachment charges against President Trump.

At about 20:30 local time (01:30 GMT), the House called for votes on the two charges: first, abuse of power, stemming from Mr Trump's alleged attempt to pressure Ukraine to announce investigations into his Democratic political rival, Joe Biden; and second, obstruction of Congress, because the president allegedly refused to co-operate with the impeachment inquiry, withholding documentary evidence and barring his key aides from giving evidence.

The vote on the first article meant Mr Trump had been impeached, placing him alongside only two other presidents in the nation's history - Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton - and setting up a trial in the Senate for his presidency.

A day of hyper-partisanship
And so it is done. Donald Trump now becomes the third member of the exclusive club that no-one wants to be a member of.

But the framers of the constitution with its impeachment provision could never have imagined the hyper-partisanship - on both sides - that has been witnessed during today's sterile House proceedings. Each side with its own narrative, neither side listening to the other. And one can say with some certainty - I would bet all my yet-to-be-gifted Christmas presents - that it will be much the same once this becomes a trial in the Senate in the New Year.

Donald Trump will be acquitted. He won't be forced from office. So what changes? Well, Donald Trump will have a place in the history books - and for a man with such a huge sense of self that will hurt. Acutely. But 2020? Far from this being a killer blow against President Trump, it might turbo charge his bid for a second term. The House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was always wary about going down the impeachment route. We'll discover next November whether that concern was well founded.

During the House debates, Mr Trump tweeted several times, calling the Democratic arguments "ATROCIOUS LIES BY THE RADICAL LEFT" and an "ASSAULT ON THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!!!".

The Republican Party has a majority in the Senate, making it highly unlikely the president will be removed from office when senators cast their votes. Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell last week said that Republican senators would act in "total co-ordination" with the president's team during the trial, outraging Democrats who pointed out that Senators are obliged to act as impartial jurors.


What did House members say?
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opened the debate on Wednesday with a speech from the floor of the House.

"For centuries Americans have fought and died to defend democracy for the people, but very sadly now our founder's vision of a republic is under threat from actions from the White House," she said,

"If we do not act now, we would be derelict in our duty. It is tragic that the president's reckless actions make impeachment necessary. He gave us no choice."


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us...nald-trump&link_location=live-reporting-story
 
Tulsi is going to be a pariah! And why is Present even an option, this is where Republicans whoop Democrats no unity at all , most republicans have no love for Trump but lol everyone were synced.
 
I have no clue what the Democrats are aiming to achieve by this. This will not go through from the Senate.

Less than a year before the election, their focus should be on rallying behind a candidate and trying to defeat Trump. But nope, it looks like the Dem reps in the House just want to play to the gallery and feel smug about "achieving" the 'Impeach' that their base has been shouting since 2016.

The question is: are you sure you will not lose again in 2020? lol
 
US President Donald Trump has demanded an immediate impeachment trial in the Senate, amid an impasse among Democrats and Republicans over when it may start.

On Wednesday, the House impeached Mr Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

But Democrats have refused to start the proceedings, arguing the Republican-controlled Senate is refusing witnesses and will not hold a fair trial.

The Senate's numbers mean Mr Trump is almost certain to be acquitted.

The impeachment process has been highly toxic and divided almost totally along party lines.

The two charges agreed on Wednesday follow accusations that Mr Trump pressured Ukraine to dig up damaging information on Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son Hunter, and then refused to co-operate with a congressional inquiry into the matter.

What has Mr Trump said?
In a series of tweets, the president accused the Democrats of not wanting to go to trial because their "case is so bad".

He tweeted: "So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial. Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!"

The president said the Democrats did not want Adam Schiff, who led the impeachment process, the Bidens and a CIA whistleblower who sparked the inquiry to testify.

The Democrats have argued that it is Mr Trump's Republicans who are balking at the appearance of witnesses. The House did also invite the president to testify before its investigators but he declined to do so.

Why is there deadlock over the start of the trial?
To get things rolling, the Democrat-controlled House must transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is refusing to do so until the rules of the Senate trial are acceptable to the Democrats.

The Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, will determine the terms of the trial and the Democrats want him to provide details on which witnesses and what testimony will be allowed.

He has refused to play ball. "We remain at an impasse," he said, after a brief meeting with the Democrats' Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer.

Mr McConnell has the numbers. There are 53 Republicans in the 100-seat Senate and impeachment would require a two-thirds majority in favour.

Mr McConnell has called the impeachment process the "most rushed, least thorough and most unfair" in history, signalling the kind of bipartisan rancour expected when the trial starts.

The Democrats hope the delay will both move public opinion in favour of a fuller trial and deny Mr Trump - only the third US president to be impeached - a swift acquittal.

The Democrats want at least four current and former White House aides with knowledge of the Ukraine affair to testify.

They say the trial has to be fair, with senators acting as impartial jurors, and that Mr McConnell's comments show he has no plans to do this. He earlier said Republican senators would act in "total co-ordination" with the president's team.

What is the president accused of?
He is accused of having withheld $400m (£307m) of military aid to Ukraine already allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for Ukraine's new president, until Ukraine looked into potentially damaging material on Joe and Hunter Biden.

Hunter worked for a Ukrainian company when Joe Biden was US vice-president.

The Democrats say this amounts to an abuse of presidential power, using the office for personal political gain and to the detriment of national security.

Mr Trump is also accused of obstructing Congress by refusing to co-operate with the congressional inquiry.



https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50863967
 
Anyone who thinks this impeachment means anything is an idiot. The people impeaching him are just as bad. Trump is no worse than Obama or Bush. American liberals are just idiots
 
The top Democrat in the US Congress, Nancy Pelosi, has written to President Donald Trump inviting him to give his State of the Union speech on 4 February amid the partisan impeachment battle.

The annual speech would come during or soon after his trial in the Senate, where he is likely to be acquitted.

He was formally impeached by the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

House Speaker Pelosi told Associated Press he would be "impeached forever, no matter what the Senate does".

The impeachment vote two days ago in the Democrat-led House of Representatives split almost totally along party lines.

Democrats and Republicans have yet to agree on when the upcoming Senate trial will take place.

What did the letter say?
The letter sent by Mrs Pelosi on Friday begins with a pointed reminder to Mr Trump of the "separation of powers" enshrined in the US Constitution.

The three branches - the judicial, executive, and legislative - she said are "co-equal branches acting as checks on each other".

"In the spirit of respecting our Constitution, I invite you to deliver your State of the Union Address," she wrote, adding: "Thank you for your attention to this matter".

White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said that Mr Trump had accepted the invitation to speak.

A top Republican in congress, Texas Senator John Cornyn, reacted to the invitation with the hashtag "#somanymixedsignals".

"Guess she expects him to still be in office then," he tweeted.

Mr Trump faces two charges, or articles of impeachment: abusing his power by requesting that Ukraine investigate his political rival so as to gain political advantage; and obstructing Congress by refusing to co-operate with the impeachment investigation.

The second charge came after Mr Trump refused to allow White House officials to testify and withheld documents. Democrats charge that this breached constitutional protocol which requires Congress to provide oversight of the White House executive branch.

What has Mr Trump said?
The Democrats and Republicans are wrangling over how the Senate trial should be conducted, casting doubt over when it will start.

This prompted a series of tweets from the president on Thursday accusing the Democrats of not wanting to start the trial because their "case is so bad" and demanding it begin immediately.

He tweeted: "So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial. Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!"

The president said the Democrats did not want Congressman Adam Schiff, who led the impeachment process, the Bidens and a CIA whistleblower who sparked the inquiry to testify.

The Democrats have argued that it is Mr Trump's Republicans who are balking at the appearance of witnesses. The House did also invite the president to testify before its investigators but he declined to do so.

What else is happening in early February?
The Tuesday night primetime speech will come only one day after Democrats hold their first-in-the nation nominating vote for the 2020 presidential election.

The Iowa caucus will be the first time that voters pick their preferred candidate to take on Mr Trump in November.

The speech will come two days after another primetime event. Super Bowl Sunday - the US football championship - is the most-watched television event in the US each year.

Later that week, on Friday, Democrats will hold another primary debate in New Hampshire - another early voting state.

A Senate impeachment trial may have already begun, or even be over, as Mr Trump speaks, but the actual date has yet to be confirmed amid the impasse among lawmakers.

Why is there deadlock over the start of the trial?
To start the next stage, the Democrat-controlled House must send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is refusing to do so until the rules of the Senate trial are acceptable to the Democrats.

The Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, will determine the terms of the trial and the Democrats want him to provide details on which witnesses and what testimony will be allowed.

He has so far refused to do so. "We remain at an impasse," he said, after a brief meeting with the Democrats' Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer.

Mr McConnell leads the majority in the Senate, with 53 Republicans in the 100-seat chamber.

Mr McConnell has called the impeachment process the "most rushed, least thorough and most unfair" in history.

The Democrats hope the delay will both move public opinion in favour of a fuller trial and deny Mr Trump - only the third US president to be impeached - a swift acquittal.

The Democrats want at least four current and former White House aides with knowledge of the Ukraine affair to testify.

They say the trial has to be fair, with senators acting as impartial jurors, and that Mr McConnell's comments show he has no plans to do this. He earlier said Republican senators would act in "total co-ordination" with the president's team.

What is the president accused of?
He is accused of having withheld $400m (£307m) of military aid to Ukraine already allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for Ukraine's new president, until Ukraine looked into potentially damaging material on Joe and Hunter Biden.

Hunter worked for a Ukrainian company when Joe Biden was US vice-president.

The Democrats say this amounts to an abuse of presidential power, using the office for personal political gain and to the detriment of national security.

Mr Trump is also accused of obstructing Congress by refusing to co-operate with the congressional inquiry.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50871951
 
The White House sought to freeze aid to Ukraine just 91 minutes after President Trump spoke to President Volodymyr Zelensky by phone in July, a newly-released government email has revealed.

In the call, Mr Trump asked the Ukrainian leader to investigate his political rival, Democrat Joe Biden.

Democrats say it shows Mr Trump used the office for personal political gain.

The fateful phone call is key to the abuse of power charge on which Mr Trump has been impeached.

A US whistleblower who heard about the conversation raised concerns, which ultimately triggered the impeachment inquiry.

Mr Trump was formally impeached by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives on Wednesday, but is unlikely to be removed from office as the case will go to trial in the US Senate, where his Republican party has a majority.

What's in the email?
The newly-released email was obtained by the Center for Public Integrity following a court order in a freedom of information case.

It shows that a senior White House official, Mike Duffey, contacted senior defence officials about withholding Ukraine's aid just over an hour-and-a-half after Mr Trump ended a 25 July call with President Zelensky.

A rough transcript of that call was declassified by the White House following a whistleblower complaint it was being covered-up.

The transcript shows Mr Trump asked Mr Zelensky to "do us a favour" and investigate Joe Biden, currently a frontrunner to be the Democratic candidate in the 2020 White House race, and his son Hunter Biden, who had previously worked for a Ukrainian energy company.

In the email Mr Duffey asks that the Department of Defense "hold off" on providing aid following the administration's plan to review.

"Given the sensitive nature of the request, I appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction," the email reads.

What has the reaction been?
Rachel Semmel, a spokeswoman for the Office of Management and Budget, dismissed the characterisation of the email in a statement to US media on Sunday.

"It's reckless to tie the hold of funds to the phone call. As has been established and publicly reported, the hold was announced in an interagency meeting on July 18," CNN quoted her as saying.

"To pull a line out of one email and fail to address the context is misleading and inaccurate."

Meanwhile the top Democrat in the US Senate, Chuck Schumer, said the email proved the need for new witnesses and evidence at President Trump's impeachment trial.

"If there was ever an argument that we need Mr Duffey to come and testify, this is that information. This email is explosive," Mr Schumer said.

"A top administration official, one that we requested, is saying, stop the aid 90 minutes after Trump called Zelensky and said keep it hush, hush. What more do you need to request a witness?"

"Until we hear from the witnesses, until we get the documents, the American people will correctly assume that those blocking their testimony were aiding and abetting a cover up, plain and simple," Mr Schumer added.

"So I'll close by saying this: President Trump, release the emails, let the witnesses testify, what are you afraid of?"

What happens next with impeachment?
The start date of the trial is in doubt, as partisan wrangling between the parties continues.

Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader who will determine the terms of the trial, wants the case to be considered without testimony.

But Democrats say new witnesses should be heard in the Senate, including at least four current and former White House aides with knowledge of the Ukraine affair.

They want Mr McConnell to clarify whose testimony will be allowed.

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker of the House, has postponed sending the impeachment charges to the Senate until the rules of the Senate trial are acceptable to her party.

Mr Trump tweeted on Sunday that the Democrats' case in the "impeachment hoax" was "dead" and called Ms Pelosi "crazy Nancy".

Republicans currently hold 53 seats in the 100-seat chamber, making a conviction - which requires a two-thirds vote - extremely unlikely.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50886437
 
Republican and Democratic leaders in the US Senate have clashed over the rules of President Trump's impeachment trial.

Democrats want assurances witnesses and documents will be allowed, to enable what they term a fair trial.

Top Democrat Chuck Schumer says the recent release of an "explosive" email about aid to Ukraine is a reminder of why openness is necessary.

Republican leader Mitch McConnell says he has not ruled out witnesses.

But he stopped short of agreeing ahead of time to take testimony during the trial.

President Trump was formally impeached by the House last week for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

He is the third president in US history to be impeached. However, he is unlikely to be removed from office, as his Republican party has a majority in the Senate, where the trial will be held as stipulated in the US Constitution.

Mr Trump is accused of pressuring Ukraine's president to start an investigation into his political rival, Democratic presidential front runner, Joe Biden.

Mr Trump is accused of doing this by withholding military aid and making a White House visit contingent on co-operation.

The trial is expected to begin next month, after the holiday break.

But Democrats have so far refused to hand over the articles of impeachment voted through in the House - the charges - to the Senate.

They want assurances from Mr McConnell that their chosen witnesses - at least four current and former White House aides with knowledge of the Ukraine affair - will be allowed to testify.

What did Mr McConnell say?
"We haven't ruled out witnesses," Mr McConnell told Fox News on Monday.

He suggested holding a trial similar to former President Bill Clinton's in 1999, in which senators decided which witnesses to call after opening arguments and a written question period.

Mr McConnell accused Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of holding "an absurd position" for delaying handing over the impeachment articles and said she is "apparently trying to tell us how to run the trial".

"You know, I'm not anxious to have this trial, so if she wants to hold on to the papers, go right ahead.

"Look, we're at an impasse. We can't do anything until the Speaker sends the papers over, so everyone enjoy the holidays," the Kentucky Republican added.

What are Democrats saying?
They renewed their demand for witnesses over the weekend after an email emerged suggesting the White House sought to freeze aid to Ukraine just 91 minutes after Mr Trump spoke to President Volodymyr Zelensky by phone in July. That call is at the centre of the allegations against Mr Trump - charges he denies.

Chuck Schumer said he and his Republican counterpart remain at an impasse after holding a "cordial" meeting on Thursday to discuss trial rules.

During a news conference in his home state of New York on Sunday, Mr Schumer said Republicans "have come up with no good reason why there shouldn't be witnesses, why there shouldn't be documents".

He added: "We don't know what the witnesses will say. We don't know how the documents will read. They might exonerate President Trump or they might further incriminate him. But the truth should come out on something as important as an impeachment."

Democrats argue that Republicans will not act as impartial jurors during the impeachment trial, after Mr McConnell pledged last week to work in "total co-ordination" with the White House.

Meanwhile, House of Representatives officials raised the possibility of a second impeachment if new evidence of obstruction by Mr Trump came to light. The suggestion came in court papers filed by Democrats as they seek the testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50895787
 
Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski has said she is "disturbed" by her party's stance before President Donald Trump's impeachment trial.

Mr Trump was this month impeached by the Democrat-run House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

He now faces trial in the Republican-dominated Senate, whose members are supposed to remain impartial.

However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has pledged "total co-ordination" with the White House.

Mr Trump, the third president in US history to be impeached, is unlikely to be removed from office because of the Republican control of the Senate.

The president has repeatedly described the impeachment proceedings as a "witch-hunt".

What did Ms Murkowski say?
Ms Murkowski told Alaska's KTUU news channel that she was uncomfortable with Mr McConnell's comments about "total co-ordination".

"When I heard that I was disturbed," she said.


Media captionWhat does it take to impeach a president?
The senator also said there should be distance between the White House and the Senate over how the trial is conducted. "To me it means that we have to take that step back from being hand in glove with the defence," she said.

At the same time, she described the impeachment proceedings as "rushed".

Ms Murkowski, a moderate Republican, has criticised President Trump on a number of policy issues. In October 2018, she opted not to vote to confirm Mr Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, after sexual assault allegations.

What about Mr McConnell's role?
Mr McConnell will play a key role in how the impeachment trial - which is supposed to be impartial - will be conducted.

But he publicly stated last week that he was not "an impartial juror" in the proceedings.

"This is a political process. There is not anything judicial about it. Impeachment is a political decision," he said.

And Mr McConnell also said he was confident that Mr Trump would be acquitted in the Republican-led Senate. "We will have a largely partisan outcome," he said.

Republican and Democratic leaders in the Senate have repeatedly clashed over the rules of the trial.

Democrats want assurances witnesses and documents will be allowed, to enable what they term a fair trial.

Mr McConnell has so far stopped short of agreeing ahead of time to take testimony during the trial.

What is President Trump accused of?
Mr Trump is accused of pressuring Ukraine's president to start an investigation into his political rival, Democratic presidential front runner, Joe Biden.

Mr Trump is accused of doing this by withholding military aid and making a White House visit contingent on co-operation.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50913932
 
This is a gift for Trump. He will milk it to the max and be sitting in the Whitehouse against for a second term
 
MenInG said:
This is a gift for Trump. He will milk it to the max and be sitting in the Whitehouse against for a second term
Click to expand...

Spot on.

The Senate will not vote to remove him. Trump knows this. The Democrats know this. Trump is laughing all the way to 2024.

If only the Democrats spent more time on grooming a fresh candidate for 2020 instead of moaning for the past 3.5 years.

Hasn't been a good few years for the left in USA, and UK for that matter. Add mainland Europe to the list too.
 
MenInG said:
This is a gift for Trump. He will milk it to the max and be sitting in the Whitehouse against for a second term
Click to expand...

He was always gonna get the 2nd term . Very rarely would an incumbent president be beat, specially if economy is doing so well . There is also that $200+ re election fund that he he siting pretty on.He has Out raised the crap out of his dem counterparts .The sad truth is that money goes a LONGGG way in winning any election in the U.S and probably all over the world.
 
MenInG said:
This is a gift for Trump. He will milk it to the max and be sitting in the Whitehouse against for a second term
Click to expand...

His base will never give up on him. More the resistance more they will be united. All I can do is NOT to vote for him :( Nothing else.
 
US President Donald Trump is facing staunch criticism for retweeting a post that included the alleged name of the whistlebower whose complaint led to the president's impeachment.

Mr Trump shared a post from a user named [MENTION=9263]surfer[/MENTION]mom77, who described themselves as a "100% Trump supporter".

The retweet was later removed from the president's Twitter timeline but could still be found via a direct link.

Mr Trump has repeatedly called for the whistleblower to be identified.

The US has federal laws that guarantee the protection of whistleblowers, designed to shielding those who come forward with evidence of wrongdoing by the government.

In November, lawyers for the whistleblower - who is said to work in the US intelligence community - issued a cease-and-desist warning to the president, saying their client was "in physical danger". But the president ignored the warning and continued to call for them to be named.

Previous posts by [MENTION=9263]surfer[/MENTION]mom77 - the Twitter user retweeted by President Trump - include anti-Islam content and posts spreading the false conspiracy theory that President Barack Obama was a Muslim.

According to a report by the Associated Press, the account bears the hallmarks of an automated "bot" account, "including an unusually high amount of activity and profile pictures featuring stock images from the internet".

The account's profile picture - a stock photo of a woman in business attire that was pulled from the internet - was changed on Saturday to an image of Mr Trump.

Facebook has a policy of banning posts that name the alleged whistleblower, the New York Times reported, but Twitter does not. In a statement issued to the to Associated Press, Twitter said the [MENTION=9263]surfer[/MENTION]mom77 tweet was "not a violation of the Twitter Rules".

It was not immediately clear why President Trump's retweet disappeared from his timeline, when he did not appear to have unretweeted the post.

What was the reaction?

The president had already faced criticism from Democratic leaders over his ongoing efforts to publicise the whistleblower's identity.

In response to his retweet on Saturday, attorney Stephen Kohn, an expert in whistleblower protection laws, told the Washington Post that the president was violating his duty to safeguard whistleblowers.

"The paradox is that it was the president's duty to protect this person," Mr Kohn said. "It's inconceivable that he not only doesn't do it, but violates it."

A former whistleblower told the Associated Press that the ease with which the person's identity had been spread online demonstrated the need for greater legal protection.

Michael German, who left the FBI after reporting allegations of mismanagement, said it was "completely inappropriate for the president of the United States to be engaged in any type of behaviour that could harm a whistleblower".

With a wealth of first-hand testimony, Democrats have moved the impeachment on from the whistleblower's evidence. But the president and other Republicans have worked to keep the whistleblower in the press.

In an audio recording that emerged in September, President Trump was heard comparing the whistleblower's sources to a "spy". Then in an apparent reference to the execution of spies by the US in the past, he said: "You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right? We used to handle them a little differently than we do now."

According to reports in the Washington Post and the Guardian, the person named by right wing media as the whistleblower was receiving a spike in threats when the president tweeted about them, and was being driven to and from work by armed security officers following the threats.

How did the whistleblower become involved?
In August, the whistleblower filed a report expressing concern over a phone call a month earlier in which Mr Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, a Democratic front-runner for the 2020 US presidential election.

Democrats said the call transcript showed President Trump abusing the power of his office to pressure President Zelensky to damage a US Democratic political rival. President Trump defended the call, saying it was "perfect". He has dismissed the impeachment process as a "witch-hunt".

The whistleblower's report led ultimately to an inquiry in the House of Representatives which culminated in the president's impeachment on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, making Mr Trump only the third president in US history to be impeached.

The president now faces a trial in the Republican-controlled Senate, which is expected to acquit him along party lines.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50936816
 
Washington (CNN)Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden on Saturday said he would "obey any subpoena" that is sent to him -- his most forceful statement yet to clarify a previous remark that he wouldn't testify in a Senate impeachment trial

"First of all, I'm going to obey any subpoena that was sent to me," Biden said at a campaign event in Fairfield, Iowa.

The former vice president's comments come one day after he reiterated to the Des Moines Register's editorial board that he wouldn't comply with a subpoena followed by a series of attempts to clarify what he meant.

Biden originally told the newspaper he wouldn't comply "because it's all designed to deal with (President Donald) Trump doing what he's done his whole life -- trying to take the focus off him." Biden told the newspaper his testimony would enable the President to "get away" from the trial's focus.

"If I went, let's say I voluntarily, just said let me go make my case, what are you going to cover?" he asked, referring to the press. "You guys, instead of focusing on him, you're going to cover for three weeks anything I said. And he's going to get away."

Biden first sought to clarify the comments earlier Saturday in a string of tweets, saying that "in my 40 years in public life, I have always complied with a lawful order."

He added: "But I am just not going to pretend that there is any legal basis for Republican subpoenas for my testimony in the impeachment trial. That is the point I was making yesterday and I reiterate: this impeachment is about Trump's conduct, not mine."

"The subpoenas should go to witnesses with testimony to offer to Trump's shaking down the Ukraine government — they should go to the White House," Biden tweeted.

He then expanded on those tweets in comments to reporters in Tipton, Iowa, telling them he would "honor whatever the Congress in fact legitimately asked me to do" but stopped short of saying he would outright comply with a subpoena. When asked at that time if he would challenge a subpoena in court if he felt he didn't have relevant facts to bring to the investigation, Biden replied, "I don't think that's going to happen to begin with. Let's cross that bridge when it comes."

He added: "I would in fact abide by the, whatever was legally required of me."

Republicans have threatened to call Democrats -- including Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden -- to testify in a Senate trial after the House impeached Trump earlier this month, accusing the President of abusing his power and obstructing Congress in relation to a Ukraine pressure campaign.

Biden maintained Saturday that the conversation over his compliance was a distraction from Trump's conduct, which he said needs to be the focus of the Senate trial.

"Every single solitary person who's investigated what's happened in Ukraine, including all the people under oath in his administration, said Biden's as clean as a whistle," he said at the Fairfield event. "Biden did his job."

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/28/politics/biden-senate-impeachment-trial/index.html
 
US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi has named the lawmakers who will prosecute the impeachment case against President Donald Trump.

She appeared at a news conference with the seven "managers", led by Adam Schiff, chairman of the House intelligence committee.

The House will vote later on Wednesday to send the impeachment charges against Mr Trump to the Senate.

The Senate impeachment trial will be only the third ever of a US president.

While Democrats control the House, Mr Trump's fellow Republicans hold sway in the Senate 53-47, and are all but certain to acquit him.

Mrs Pelosi said on Wednesday morning: "I'm very proud to present the managers who will bring the case, which we have great confidence in, in terms of impeaching the president and his removal."

Democrats unveil new Trump impeachment evidence
Six other managers were named: Jerrold Nadler, head of the House judiciary committee, Hakeem Jeffries of New York, Zoe Lofgren of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Val Demings of Florida and Sylvia Garcia of Texas.

During the trial, Mr Trump will be defended by White House lawyers, including Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow.

Mr Trump was impeached by the House on 18 December, on accusations of abuse of power and obstruction of congress.

He denies trying to pressure Ukraine to open an investigation into his would-be Democratic White House challenger Joe Biden.

Mr Trump has been touting unsubstantiated corruption claims about Mr Biden and his son, Hunter, who accepted a lucrative board position with a Ukrainian energy firm while his father handled American-Ukraine relations as US vice-president.

Mr Biden is one of a dozen candidates campaigning for the Democratic Party's White House nomination.

The Senate trial might still be under way in early February when Iowa and New Hampshire hold the first contests to pick the eventual Democratic presidential candidate.

In the news conference, Mrs Pelosi defended her decision to hold off submitting the impeachment articles to Congress for more than three weeks as she quarrelled with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell about the trial rules, and even fellow Democrats urged her to stop stalling.

"Time has been our friend in all of this, because it has yielded incriminating evidence, more truth into the public domain," she told reporters.

As Mrs Pelosi spoke, Mr Trump tweeted to call the process a "Con Job by the Do Nothing Democrats".

Mr McConnell has said the trial is expected to begin in earnest next Tuesday.

Who are the House managers?
Adam Schiff, 59, (California) a Harvard-educated lawyer who presided over much of the House impeachment inquiry

Jerry Nadler, 72, (New York), the judiciary committee chairman who has been an adversary of Mr Trump since the 1980s

Zoe Lofgren, 72, (California) a Capitol Hill staffer during Nixon's impeachment inquiry, she voted against President Clinton's impeachment

Hakeem Jeffries, 49, (New York), a corporate lawyer by training and chairman of the Democratic caucus

Val Demings, 62, (Florida) who was the first female police chief in Orlando. She sits on the judiciary and intelligence committees

Jason Crow, 40, (Colorado) a former Army Ranger and Afghan and Iraq wars veteran who wrested a seat from a Republican in 2018

Sylvia Garcia, 69, (Texas) a first-term congresswoman who previously served as a judge for the Houston municipal court system

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51126431
 
The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution to submit articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate for a trial.

The resolution passed largely along party lines by 228 votes to 193.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will sign a copy of the measure with the newly announced team of lawmakers who will prosecute the case against Mr Trump.

The House impeached the president last month. The Senate will decide whether to convict and remove him from office.

The Senate trial will be only the third of a US president in history.

While Democrats control the House, Mr Trump's fellow Republicans hold sway in the Senate 53-47, and are all but certain to acquit him.

It remains to be seen how the case could influence the president's campaign for re-election this November.

Mrs Pelosi, who launched the impeachment inquiry in September, said on the House floor before the vote: "We are here today to cross a very important threshold in American history."

All Republicans voted against the resolution to transmit the articles of impeachment. Only one Democrat, Collin Peterson of Minnesota, did not vote in favour.

Democrats were joined by Justin Amash of Michigan, a former Republican who left the party to become an independent.

The Republican leader in the House, Kevin McCarthy of California, said Democrats were trying to remove the president with the "weakest case". He called it a "sad saga".

Mrs Pelosi appeared earlier at a news conference with the seven "managers" who will prosecute the Democratic case against the Republican president. They will be led by Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House intelligence committee.

How will a Senate trial work?
Democrats unveil new Trump impeachment evidence
The six others are Jerrold Nadler, head of the House judiciary committee, Hakeem Jeffries of New York, Zoe Lofgren of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Val Demings of Florida and Sylvia Garcia of Texas. The seven will ceremonially walk the articles of impeachment across the Capitol to the Senate later on Wednesday.


Media captionA beginner's guide to impeachment and Trump
White House lawyers Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow have been tipped to lead the president's defence team. The Republican leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, said opening statements in the trial were expected next Tuesday.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will be sworn in to preside, and he will administer an oath to all 100 senators to deliver "impartial justice" as jurors.

During an event at the White House, Mr Trump rejected the charges as a "hoax".

The president was impeached by the House on 18 December, on accusations of abuse of power and obstruction of congress. He denies trying to pressure Ukraine's leader during a phone call on 25 July last year to open an investigation into his would-be Democratic White House challenger Joe Biden.

Mr Trump has been touting unsubstantiated corruption claims about Mr Biden and his son, Hunter, who accepted a lucrative board position with a Ukrainian energy firm while his father handled American-Ukraine relations as US vice-president.

Mr Biden is one of a dozen candidates campaigning for the Democratic Party's White House nomination.

The Senate trial could still be under way in early February when Iowa and New Hampshire hold the first contests to pick the eventual Democratic presidential candidate.

In the news conference, Mrs Pelosi defended her decision to hold off submitting the impeachment articles to Congress for more than three weeks as she quarrelled with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell about the trial rules, and even fellow Democrats urged her to stop stalling.

"Time has been our friend in all of this, because it has yielded incriminating evidence, more truth into the public domain," she told reporters.

As Mrs Pelosi spoke, Mr Trump tweeted to call the process a "Con Job by the Do Nothing Democrats".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51126431
 
An aide to Rudy Giuliani claims President Trump "knew exactly what was going on" regarding efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating former Vice-President Joe Biden and his son.

Lev Parnas, a close associate of Mr Trump's lawyer, made the comments in an interview with MSNBC.

Mr Parnas, who is facing separate criminal charges, said Mr Giuliani was never investigating corruption.

The intention was to damage a potential Democratic rival to President Trump.

The president denies the allegations.

Donald Trump was impeached in the US House of Representatives last month and is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The case was sent to the Senate on Wednesday.

Mr Parnas said that the president is lying and knew that unless there was an investigation into Mr Biden and his son Hunter, who was a director of a Ukrainian gas company, military aid would be withheld to Ukraine.

He also claimed that the investigation was about digging dirt on Mr Biden, who is seeking the Democratic nomination to challenge Donald Trump in this year's US presidential election.

Earlier this week, letters, phone records, notes and flash drives were obtained from Mr Parnas, a Ukranian - American businessman, in a bid to bolster Democrats' case against Mr Trump at the forthcoming Senate trial.

Documents show that Ukraine-born Mr Parnas was in regular contact with Mr Giuliani as well as Ukrainian officials, and suggest that Mr Parnas was directly involved in trying to have Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky look into Mr Biden.

What did Lev Parnas say?
In the interview aired on Wednesday, Mr Parnas said Mr Trump was "aware of all my movements".

"I wouldn't do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president. Why would President Zelensky's inner circle or [Interior] Minister [Arsen] Avakov or all these people or [former] President [Petro] Poroshenko meet with me?

"Who am I? They were told to meet with me. And that's the secret that they're trying to keep. I was on the ground doing their work," he added.

What new evidence was obtained from Mr Parnas?
One handwritten note from Mr Parnas states: "Get Zalensky [sic] to Annouce [sic] that the Biden case will be investigated."

Also among the new materials is a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Mr Giuliani to Mr Zelensky, in which he asks to arrange a meeting.

The letter from Mr Giuliani describes himself as "personal counsel to President Trump" and states that Mr Trump had "knowledge and consent" of Mr Giuliani's actions.

The meeting never took place as Mr Giuliani eventually cancelled his May trip to Ukraine.

What about the former US ambassador?
Some of the materials obtained show Mr Parnas and Mr Giuliani discussing the removal of Marie Yovanovitch, the then US ambassador to Ukraine.

Several of the text messages appear to suggest the former US envoy was placed under surveillance.

In Wednesday's interview, Mr Parnas claimed the only motivation to get Ms Yovanovitch removed from her post was because she was in the way of the effort to get Ukraine to announce an investigation into Joe Biden.

Mr Parnas was apparently given updates on the ambassador's location and mobile phone use by a man named Robert F Hyde.

Mr Hyde is a Republican congressional candidate in Connecticut and a Trump campaign donor.

Ms Yovanovitch is calling for an investigation into the messages.

"The notion that American citizens and others were monitoring [her] movements... is disturbing," her lawyer said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51130964
 
Ukraine says it has launched a criminal investigation into alleged illegal US surveillance of former American ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

It follows the release of text messages involving Lev Parnas, an aide to President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, that suggested Ms Yovanovitch was being spied on.

Mr Trump is accused of pressing Ukraine to investigate a political rival.

The claims, which he denies, are the subject of an impeachment trial.

Ms Yovanovitch, who was fired abruptly last May, has been a key witness in the proceedings against Mr Trump.

What led to Ukraine's investigation?
Earlier this week, letters, phone records, notes and flash drives were obtained from Mr Parnas in a bid to bolster the case by US Democrats against Mr Trump at the forthcoming Senate trial.

Mr Parnas, a Ukrainian-American businessman, is an aide to Mr Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Some of the materials show Mr Parnas and Mr Giuliani discussing the removal of Ms Yovanovitch.

Several text messages, between Mr Parnas and the Republican congressional candidate Robert Hyde, appear to suggest she was being tracked in the capital Kyiv.

Mr Parnas was apparently given updates on the ambassador's location and mobile phone use by Mr Hyde - a Republican congressional candidate in Connecticut and a Trump campaign donor.

Mr Parnas told NBC News that the only motivation to have Ms Yovanovitch removed was that she was in the way of the effort to get Ukraine to announce an investigation into former Vice-President Joe Biden.

Mr Biden is a potential Democratic rival to Mr Trump in this year's US election.

Ms Yovanovitch has called for an investigation into the messages.

"The notion that American citizens and others were monitoring [her] movements... is disturbing," her lawyer said.

What has Ukraine said?
The interior ministry said Ukraine's position was not to interfere in the internal political affairs of the US but that the texts "contain information about possible violation of Ukrainian law and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations".

It said criminal cases had been opened and US authorities had been invited to take part in the investigation.

What else did Lev Parnas say?
Mr Parnas told NBC that he went to Ukraine to put pressure on officials to investigate Mr Biden and his son, Hunter, on behalf of Mr Trump and Mr Giuliani.

He said that the president "knew exactly what was going on".

"I wouldn't do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president. Why would [Ukrainian] President Zelensky's inner circle or [Interior] Minister [Arsen] Avakov or all these people or [former] President [Petro] Poroshenko meet with me?

"Who am I? They were told to meet with me. And that's the secret that they're trying to keep. I was on the ground doing their work," he added.

Documents show that Mr Parnas was in regular contact with Mr Giuliani as well as Ukrainian officials, and suggest that Mr Parnas was directly involved in trying to have President Zelensky look into Mr Biden.

One handwritten note from Mr Parnas states: "Get Zalensky [sic] to Annouce [sic] that the Biden case will be investigated."

Image copyrightHOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE
There is also a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Mr Giuliani to Mr Zelensky, in which he asks to arrange a meeting.

Mr Parnas said President Trump "decided to" withhold military aid to increase pressure on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens' activities.

Mr Parnas also said he told a Ukrainian official that US Vice-President Mike Pence would not attend President Zelensky's inauguration unless there was an investigation into the Bidens.

Mr Trump has said he does not know Mr Parnas. Referring to photos of himself with Mr Parnas and another Giuliani associate, he said: "It's possible I have a picture with them because I have a picture with everybody."

The extent of Mr Trump's involvement in the alleged plan to undermine Mr Biden - whose son was on the board of Ukrainian gas firm Burisma - will be examined in his impeachment trial, which is due to begin next week.

He is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress but denies any wrongdoing.



https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51139939
 
The White House broke the law by withholding aid to Ukraine that had been approved by the US Congress, a government watchdog has said.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruling is a potential blow to President Donald Trump as he faces an impeachment trial in the Senate.

He is accused of freezing aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival.

Ukraine has opened a probe on separate allegations linked to the impeachment.

Why was the aid freeze illegal?
"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law," the decision by the GAO said.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)", the ruling continued.

The White House said it disagreed with the GAO's opinion, accusing the agency of trying to "insert themselves into the media's controversy of the day".

Democrats welcomed the ruling.

In a news conference on Thursday morning, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the White House "broke the law".

The ruling comes as Ukrainian authorities began a criminal investigation into whether the former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, was spied on.

The former envoy's movements were being monitored, according to letters, phone records, notes and flash drives obtained from Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American businessman.

Mr Parnas is an aide to Mr Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Some of the materials - which House Democrats are presenting as evidence in the impeachment inquiry - show Mr Parnas and Mr Giuliani discussing the removal of Ms Yovanovitch, who was fired last May for reasons that remain unclear.

Several text messages from a Republican congressional candidate, Robert Hyde, to Mr Parnas appear to suggest the ambassador was being tracked in the capital Kyiv.

Mr Parnas was given apparent updates from Mr Hyde on the ambassador's location and mobile phone.

But Mr Parnas told MSNBC on Wednesday that he did not think Mr Hyde's surveillance talk was credible.

"He was either drunk," said Mr Parnas, "or he was trying to make himself bigger than it was, so I didn't take it seriously".

Mr Parnas said Ms Yovanovitch was removed because she was in the way of a Trump-approved plan to prod Ukraine to announce an investigation into former Vice-President Joe Biden.

Mr Biden is a potential Democratic rival to Mr Trump in the White House election this November.

Ms Yovanovitch has called for an investigation into the messages, which her lawyer called "disturbing".

Mr Parnas told MSNBC that he did not think Mr Hyde's talk about surveillance was credible.

"He was either drunk," said Mr Parnas, "or he was trying to make himself bigger than it was, so I didn't take it seriously".

What else did Lev Parnas say?
Mr Parnas told NBC that he was in Ukraine to put pressure on officials to investigate Mr Biden and his son, Hunter, on behalf of Mr Trump and Mr Giuliani.

He said that President Trump "knew exactly what was going on".

"I wouldn't do anything without the consent of Rudy Giuliani or the president. Why would [Ukrainian] President Zelensky's inner circle or [Interior] Minister [Arsen] Avakov or all these people or [former] President [Petro] Poroshenko meet with me?

"Who am I? They were told to meet with me. And that's the secret that they're trying to keep. I was on the ground doing their work," he added.

Documents show that Mr Parnas was in regular contact with Mr Giuliani as well as Ukrainian officials.

The files also indicate Mr Parnas was directly involved in trying to have President Zelensky announce an investigation into Mr Biden.

One handwritten note from Mr Parnas states: "Get Zalensky [sic] to Annonce [sic] that the Biden case will be investigated."

Image copyrightHOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE
There is also a screenshot of a previously undisclosed letter from Mr Giuliani to Mr Zelensky, in which he asks to arrange a meeting.

Mr Parnas said President Trump "decided to" withhold military aid to increase pressure on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens' activities.

Mr Parnas also said he told a Ukrainian official that US Vice-President Mike Pence would not attend President Zelensky's inauguration unless there was an investigation into the Bidens.

Mr Trump has said he does not know Mr Parnas. Referring to photos of himself with Mr Parnas and another Giuliani associate, he said: "It's possible I have a picture with them because I have a picture with everybody."

Mr Trump's has touted unsubstantiated corruption allegations against Mr Biden and his son, Hunter, who held a lucrative board position with Ukrainian gas firm Burisma while his father was US vice-president overseeing American-Ukrainian relations.

The matter will be examined in Mr Trump's impeachment trial, which is due to begin in earnest next week in the US Senate.

He is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress but denies any wrongdoing.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51139939
 
The 100 lawmakers of the US Senate were sworn in on Thursday as jurors for the impending impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts administered the oath to the senators to "do impartial justice".

In the coming weeks, the senators will decide whether Mr Trump should be removed from office over charges brought by the House of Representatives.

The trial is scheduled to begin on 21 January.

Justice Roberts asked the senators, "Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald John Trump, President of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and the laws, so help you God?"

The lawmakers responded with "I do" before each signing in a book that they took the oath. Republican senate leader Mitch McConnell then adjourned the pre-trial proceedings and announced the trial would begin at 13:00 EST (18:00 GMT) on Tuesday.

Mr Trump is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He has denied wrongdoing and branded the case against him as a "hoax".

What happened on Thursday?
The Senate proceedings began with the sergeant at arms calling "hear ye, hear ye". The articles of impeachment were then read out on the floor of the chamber by Democratic congressman and lead prosecutor Adam Schiff.

Mr Schiff is one of seven impeachment managers who will make the case against the president. He said no president had ever sought to impede an impeachment investigation so thoroughly.

Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the senate, again called for new witnesses and documents to be permitted in the trial. "The gravity of these charges is self-evident. The House of Representatives have accused the president of trying to shake down a foreign leader for personal gain," Mr Schumer said.

Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican who is facing a tough re-election bid this year, was seen wiping away tears from her face as the charges were read.

Democrats allege the president withheld $391m (£299m) in military aid in order to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden. Mr Trump is the third US president to be impeached. The previous two - Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton - were not removed from office.

A two-thirds majority in the Senate is required to oust a president. As Mr Trump's Republicans control the senate, he is widely expected to be acquitted. His defence team has not been formally announced, but White House lawyers Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow have been tipped to lead it.

The House voted on Wednesday to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate, with the 228-193 vote split mostly along party lines.

The trial is likely to still be under way next month when Iowa and New Hampshire hold the first party votes to pick the eventual Democratic presidential candidate who will take on President Trump in November's election. Three of the candidates - Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar - are US senators and will have to drastically scale down campaigning to attend the trial.

Two other leading contenders, Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg, plan to capitalise on their rivals' diversion by blitzing Iowa in the last few days before the crucial 3 February vote in that state.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51140930
 
US President Donald Trump's defence team in his Senate trial will include special prosecutors from President Bill Clinton's impeachment.

He will be represented by Ken Starr and Robert Ray, who investigated Mr Clinton, and Alan Dershowitz, whose past clients include OJ Simpson.

White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Mr Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow will lead the team, US media report.

Opening statements in the Senate trial are expected next week.

Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi has also reportedly been asked to join the team.

Mr Starr, Mr Ray and Mr Dershowitz will have speaking roles in the trial, according to Politico.

Mr Dershowitz told CBS News, the BBC's US partner, that he had spoken with the president on Wednesday about the case.

"I agreed to do it as an independent constitutional scholar," Mr Dershowitz, a retired Harvard University law professor, said. "I take no position on the politics - just on the Constitution."

He added he was "very, very concerned" about the precedent this impeachment could establish.

"It could weaken the presidency and weaponise impeachment as a partisan tactic."

Mr Dershowitz and Mr Starr both represented disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein during his 2008 abuse trial.

Axios reported that some White House officials did not want Mr Dershowitz to join the team given his ties to Mr Epstein.

Mr Starr was the US Department of Justice independent counsel who investigated the Whitewater affair, a scandal-plagued mid-1980s land venture in Arkansas involving Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The inquiry ultimately uncovered unrelated evidence that Mr Clinton had been having an affair with a White House intern, Monica Lewinsky.

The investigation culminated in the Democratic president's impeachment by the US House of Representatives in 1998. Mr Clinton was eventually acquitted by the Senate.

Mr Ray succeeded Mr Starr as the independent counsel.

Ms Lewinsky tweeted shortly after Mr Trump's team was announced: "This is definitely an 'are you kidding me?' kinda day", though she inserted an expletive.

Mr Trump was impeached by the US House of Representatives last month on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Democrats have accused him of withholding millions in military aid to Ukraine to pressure them into investigating his political rival, former Vice-President Joe Biden.

Mr Trump has denied these claims, calling the impeachment proceedings a partisan "hoax".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51154812
 
US President Donald Trump's legal team has given its first formal response to the impeachment charges against him, describing the case as a "dangerous attack" on democracy.

The document said the impeachment articles failed to allege any crime and were a "brazen" attempt to interfere with the 2020 presidential elections.

The response came as the Democrats filed their brief for the proceedings.

Opening statements in the trial will begin next week.

Mr Trump is the third US president in history to face an impeachment trial. He is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He has denied wrongdoing and branded the case against him as a "hoax".

The House, controlled by opposition Democrats, impeached the president last month. The Senate, controlled by Mr Trump's Republican Party, will decide whether to convict and remove him from office.

In their brief filed earlier on Saturday, House Democrats laid out their arguments for why Mr Trump should be removed from office.

They said the president had "abandoned his oath to faithfully execute the laws and betrayed his public trust", and called his conduct the "worst nightmare" of the country's founding fathers.

What did Trump's lawyers say?
The six-page response outlines the defence the president's legal team expects to use in the upcoming impeachment trial.

The team, led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Mr Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow, said they were challenging the impeachment on both procedural and constitutional grounds, claiming that the president did nothing wrong and had not been treated fairly.

Their filing said the articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats were a "dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president."

"This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away," it added.

Mr Trump and his legal team said the impeachment charges failed to allege "any crime or violation of law" and were "the result of a lawless process that violated basic due process and fundamental fairness".

The lawyers said Mr Trump "categorically and unequivocally" denies all allegations.

The filing on Saturday came a day after Mr Trump finalised his defence team, which includes special prosecutors from former President Bill Clinton's impeachment.

What did the Democrats say?
In their own 111-page filing on Saturday, Democratic lawmakers leading the case against Mr Trump summarised arguments made during weeks of testimony in the impeachment investigation last year.

They said the president should be convicted and removed from office "to avoid serious and long term damage to our democratic values and the nation's security."

"The case against the president of the United States is simple, the facts are indisputable, and the evidence is overwhelming," they said.

"The only remaining question is whether the members of the Senate will accept and carry out the responsibility placed on them by the Framers of our Constitution and their constitutional Oaths," they added.

What exactly is Trump accused of doing?
President Trump is accused of pressuring Ukraine to dig up damaging information on one of his main Democratic challengers for the presidency in 2020, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

Hunter worked for a Ukrainian company when Joe Biden was US vice-president.

The president is accused of dangling two things as bargaining chips to Ukraine - withholding $400m of military aid to Ukraine that had already been allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for Ukraine's president.

Democrats say this amounts to an abuse of presidential power.

Mr Trump is also accused of obstructing Congress by refusing to co-operate with the congressional inquiry.

The US president was impeached last month, opening the way for a Senate trial.

A two-thirds majority of 67 votes in the 100-seat Senate is required to convict and oust Mr Trump. But because there are only 47 Democrats (and 53 Republicans), the president is widely expected to be cleared.

In the unlikely event of Mr Trump being found guilty, he would be removed from office and Vice-President Mike Pence would be sworn in as president.

A simple majority of senators - 51 - could also vote to end the trial should they wish.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51165024
 
US President Donald Trump's legal team has issued its first formal response to the impeachment charges against him, describing them as a "dangerous attack" on democracy.

The document said the impeachment articles failed to allege any crime and were a "brazen" attempt to interfere with the 2020 presidential elections.

The response came as the Democrats filed their brief for the proceedings.

Opening statements in the trial will begin next week.

Mr Trump is only the third US president in history to face an impeachment trial. He is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He has denied wrongdoing and branded the case against him as a "hoax".

The House of Representatives, controlled by the Democrats, impeached the president last month. The Senate, controlled by Mr Trump's Republican Party, will decide whether to convict and remove him from office.

A two-thirds majority of 67 votes in the 100-seat Senate is required to convict and oust Mr Trump. But because there are only 47 Democrats (and 53 Republicans), the president is widely expected to be cleared.

In their brief filed earlier on Saturday, House Democrats laid out their arguments for why Mr Trump should be removed from office.

They said the president had "abandoned his oath to faithfully execute the laws and betrayed his public trust", and called his conduct the "worst nightmare" of the country's founding fathers.

What did Trump's lawyers say?
The six-page response outlines the defence the president's legal team expects to use in the upcoming impeachment trial.

The team, led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Mr Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow, said they were challenging the impeachment on both procedural and constitutional grounds, claiming that the president did nothing wrong and had not been treated fairly.

Their filing said the articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats were a "dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president."

"This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away," it added.

Mr Trump and his legal team said the impeachment charges failed to allege "any crime or violation of law" and were "the result of a lawless process that violated basic due process and fundamental fairness".

The lawyers said Mr Trump "categorically and unequivocally" denies all allegations.

The filing on Saturday came a day after Mr Trump finalised his defence team, which includes special prosecutors from former President Bill Clinton's impeachment.

What did the Democrats say?
In their own 111-page filing on Saturday, Democratic lawmakers leading the case against Mr Trump summarised arguments made during weeks of testimony in the impeachment investigation last year.

They said the president should be convicted and removed from office "to avoid serious and long term damage to our democratic values and the nation's security."

"The case against the president of the United States is simple, the facts are indisputable, and the evidence is overwhelming," they said.

"The only remaining question is whether the members of the Senate will accept and carry out the responsibility placed on them by the Framers of our Constitution and their constitutional Oaths," they added.

What exactly is Trump accused of doing?
President Trump is accused of pressuring Ukraine to dig up damaging information on one of his main Democratic challengers for the presidency in 2020, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

Hunter worked for a Ukrainian company when Joe Biden was US vice-president.

The president is accused of dangling two things as bargaining chips to Ukraine - withholding $400m of military aid to Ukraine that had already been allocated by Congress, and a White House meeting for Ukraine's president.

Democrats say this amounts to an abuse of presidential power.

Mr Trump is also accused of obstructing Congress by refusing to co-operate with the congressional inquiry.

The US president was impeached last month, opening the way for a Senate trial.

In the unlikely event of Mr Trump being found guilty, he would be removed from office and Vice-President Mike Pence would be sworn in as president.

A simple majority of senators - 51 - could also vote to end the trial should they wish

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51165024
 
The White House has unveiled its legal defence as the Senate prepares for the start of Donald Trump's impeachment trial on Tuesday.

The US president's team argue that the Democrats have wrongly identified abuse of power as an impeachable offence, and that the impeachment process itself has been "irredeemably flawed".

They will also say there is no evidence to support the claims that the president threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine until it announced an investigation into Joe Biden's son.

Mr Trump's team say Democrats "do not have a single witness who claims, based on direct knowledge, that the resident ever actually imposed such a condition".

Sky's US correspondent Cordelia Lynch has been speaking to one of the president's lawyers to find out why they are confident he doesn't have a case to answer.

He advised the defence team in American football star OJ Simpson's murder trial and represented convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein - a man he told me he now regrets ever having met.

A vocal minority has been calling for Trump's impeachment since he took office

'I don't feel like I'm being impeached'
The Harvard law professor is currently gearing up for another big case - as a member of Donald Trump's legal team at the president's Senate impeachment trial.

Professor Dershowitz says he's putting aside his personal politics, but he and his wife needed some persuading from the president himself.

"My wife had great reluctance and in the end President Trump spoke to my wife and my wife made the argument why I shouldn't do it," he said.

"We've had to think this through very hard as a family. I'm a liberal Democrat. I voted against President Trump."

Articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump are being delivered to the Senate

Moment articles of impeachment handed to US Senate
His argument, he says, is based solely on the constitution.

He believes neither abuse of power nor obstruction of congress represent impeachable offences because there was no crime committed and only a court, not congress, should have the right to decide whether a president should release documents and make witnesses available.

"The two articles of impeachment don't satisfy the constitutional criteria," he says.

"The constitutional criteria are treason - nobody has alleged that he's committed treason; bribery - although there has been discussion of bribery, he wasn't charged with that; or other 'high crimes and misdemeanours'.

"I interpret other high crimes and misdemeanours to require criminal conduct."

He isn't talking taking a stance on whether or not Mr Trump has acted improperly. He acknowledges there are many things people believe he has done wrong.

The defence lawyer concedes that, in theory, a president asking a foreign power to investigate a rival is wrong.

His argument is much narrower than that though.

It rests solely on what he believes America's forefathers meant and intended when they wrote the constitution and "the law distinguishes between a sin and crime," he says.

So will he let his reality TV-loving client embrace the stage and add his two-pennies-worth? Not if he can avoid it.

"All of my clients want to testify all the time," he explains.

"They want to tell their story. But it's far better to let the prosecution, in this case the House, make their case and then let it be rebutted."

He doesn't believe Mr Trump is a weak witness, just that the president would end up filling in the gaps and good prosecutors can lay dangerous perjury traps.

He's open to other witnesses taking the stand but if Lev Parnas, an associate of Rudy Giuliani who claims the president knew all about the Ukraine pressure campaign, gets a chance to talk, then Republicans should be able to call Hunter Biden.

Ultimately, he adds, "it's up to the chief justice."

At Mr Dershowitz's home, he's turning to English treatise for inspiration, pouring over Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England.

He dictates sections from it over the phone as he works on what he will say in front of the Senate.

US President Donald Trump was able to poke fun at his impending impeachment trial.

They're trying to impeach the son of a ***** - Trump
He knows it needs to be clear and concise and he hopes the American public will understand his "role in all this" is conditional not partisan.

It is another test of his legal skills and another example of how he is willing to represent divisive characters.

I ask him why he's drawn to them.

"I grew up in Brooklyn as a street kid following the Holocaust," he responds.

"Many of my family died in the Holocaust. I want to live in a country where everybody is always defended."

He says the last thing the president told him was "good luck," something he insists you always need.

But barring a last-minute mutiny, Republicans have already made up their mind - it is highly likely they will acquit President Trump, and there is every chance he will politically benefit from this whole process.

The longer this impeachment process goes on, the more turned off voters appear to be.

https://news.sky.com/story/trump-im...sin-and-crime-says-presidents-lawyer-11913688
 
For only the third time in history, an American president is facing an impeachment trial, with hearings set to start on Tuesday at 13:00 (18:00 GMT).

Such a trial could, in theory, lead to President Donald Trump being removed from office. That outcome would be a huge shock - we'll explain why later - but the very fact a president is facing trial is significant.

Here are seven questions and answers that will help you understand the trial.

1) What is impeachment?
Put simply, it's a process that allows senior figures in government to hold other officials (like judges, the president and cabinet members) to account if they're suspected of committing offences while in office.

Those offences can include "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanours".

After someone is impeached, they then go on trial in the Senate, the members of which will decide whether they are guilty or not. It's a political trial not a criminal one.

2) What is Mr Trump accused of?
He's facing two articles of impeachment, or charges.

Firstly, he's accused of seeking help from Ukraine's government to help himself get re-elected this November. He's alleged to have held back millions of dollars of military aid to Ukraine and dangled a proposed White House meeting with Ukraine's president, both as bargaining chips.

In exchange, witnesses say he wanted Ukraine to publicly announce an investigation into Joe Biden, the man who's leading the Democratic race to challenge him in the election. Polls suggest Mr Biden would beat him if chosen as the Democratic candidate.

Secondly, after the White House refused to allow staff to testify at the first impeachment hearings last year, Democrats accused Mr Trump of obstructing Congress (the part of the US government that writes and brings in laws, and which was investigating him).

Mr Trump has denied any wrongdoing and his legal team say the "flimsy" charges are a "dangerous perversion of the Constitution".

It's worth emphasising that this has nothing to do with the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US election, and into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia. That ended with no further action against Mr Trump himself.

3) Why is there a trial?
This is what led us to this moment:

August 2019: A whistleblower made allegations against President Trump
October - December: An investigation took place, with hearings in the House of Representatives (controlled by Mr Trump's Democratic rivals)
December: Democratic leaders from the House voted to impeach Mr Trump
January 2020: The case was passed up to the Senate (controlled by Mr Trump's Republicans), where the trial will take place

4) What does a Senate trial involve?
The US Constitution is a bit vague when it comes to the specifics of managing impeachment. But there are general rules based largely on the impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson in 1868. In that case, he just about kept his job.

The only other president to face an impeachment trial was Bill Clinton in 1999. He too survived.

Why only two articles of impeachment?
Two people are deciding how the trial will be conducted: Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the Senate, and his Democratic counterpart, Chuck Schumer.

They'll both have to agree guidelines for evidence, witnesses, duration and arguments. But because the Republicans control the Senate, Mr McConnell has the final say over the format of the trial. Senators will vote on the rules of the trial on Tuesday.

A few rules have already been laid out: there is to be no live tweeting from the chamber, and no outside reading material should be brought in. Senators are also not allowed to speak to those sitting near them while the case is being heard.

Senators will hear from both sides - prosecutors from the House of Representatives and lawyers from the White House - as well as from any witnesses. After that, senators will be given a full day to deliberate before they vote on whether to convict Mr Trump.

A two-thirds majority of 67 votes in the 100-seat Senate is required to convict and oust Mr Trump. But because there are only 47 Democrats (and 53 Republicans) in the Senate, the president is widely expected to be cleared.

In the unlikely event of Mr Trump being found guilty, he would be removed from office and Vice-President Mike Pence would be sworn in as president.

A simple majority of senators - 51 - could also vote to end the trial should they wish.

5) Who are the main players?
Each senator, including Mr McConnell, has delivered an oath promising to deliver "impartial justice" during the trial. But Mr McConnell - the most senior Republican in the Senate - last month said "I'm not an impartial juror" and has also said he and his party are working hand-in-hand with the White House.

"Everything I do during this, I'm co-ordinating with the White House counsel," he told Fox News, to the fury of senior Democrats.

He won't be presiding over the trial - that job has gone to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, although the 100 senators will ultimately act as both judge and jury. Justice Roberts is there to make sure the trial sticks to the predetermined rules.

A group of seven Democrats will act as impeachment managers - essentially prosecutors for the House, who will present its case for impeachment to the Senate. They include Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, both frequent targets of Mr Trump's anger.

President Trump's defence team will include special prosecutors from President Bill Clinton's impeachment - Ken Starr and Robert Ray.

Alan Dershowitz, whose past clients include OJ Simpson, is also part of the team which will be led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Mr Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50813696
 
Impeachment Trial begins....

Donald Trump is only the third US president in history to face an impeachment trial
The trial is taking place in the Senate, with strict rules in place
In opening remarks, Republican Mitch McConnell defends his proposed format
But top Democrat Charles Schumer says a trial needs witnesses to be fair
'A trial without evidence is not a trial, it's a cover-up,' he said
The Republicans control the Senate, which will vote later on McConnell's trial format
Mr Trump is accused of seeking help from Ukraine to get himself re-elected, and of obstructing Congress
He calls the investigation a "hoax" and a "witch-hunt"
 
The US Senate has rejected repeated Democratic attempts to secure new evidence in President Donald Trump's impeachment as his trial began.

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell meanwhile backed off on a plan to fast-track the hearings after coming under pressure from fellow Republicans.

Democrats said this would have been no less than a cover-up.

Mr Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstructing the congressional inquiry. He denies wrongdoing.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Tuesday, Mr Trump dismissed the accusations against him as "just a hoax".

Senators have taken oaths to act as impartial jurors, hearing arguments for six hours a day, six days a week in a trial presided over by the US Chief Justice, John Roberts.

It is only the third time in US history that a president is facing an impeachment trial and it is unclear how long it will last.

Mr Trump was impeached last month by the Democratic-led House of Representatives.

But the Senate, which is controlled by his fellow Republicans, is not expected to convict the president and remove him from office.

How were Democrats blocked?
By party-line votes of 53-47, the Senate rejected three Democratic bids on Tuesday to obtain documents and evidence in the impeachment trial.

Senators blocked a motion from Democratic leader Chuck Schumer to subpoena White House files related to Mr Trump's dealings with Ukraine.

They also rejected follow-up motions demanding a subpoena of records and documents from the state department and White House budget office.

In his opening statement, Adam Schiff, the House Democrat leading the impeachment case, said most Americans "do not believe there will be a fair trial".

"They don't believe the Senate will be impartial," he added. "They believe the result is pre-cooked."

The president's legal team had earlier demanded he be immediately acquitted, calling the trial "a dangerous perversion of the constitution".

How did Mitch McConnell come under pressure?
Backed by the president's lawyers, Mr McConnell had initially planned to condense the opening arguments from three days to two.

But after a meeting with senators, including some Republicans, Mr McConnell agreed on Tuesday to three days for opening arguments.

The senators had expressed concern about how middle-of-the-night sessions would look to US voters.

White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, the president's lead lawyer, said: "It's a fair process. There is absolutely no case."

Several more days of procedural tangles are expected.

Democrats want current and former Trump administration officials such as ex-National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify.

But Republicans are postponing debate over witnesses and documents until later in the trial.

What are the charges?
First, the president is accused of seeking help from Ukraine's government to help himself get re-elected in November.

It is claimed that, during a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, he held back military aid as he sought an anti-corruption investigation into Democratic White House candidate Joe Biden, whose son, Hunter, held a board position with a Ukrainian energy firm, Burisma.

The second allegation is that, by refusing to allow White House staff to testify at the impeachment hearings last year, Mr Trump obstructed Congress.

The Senate is hearing the case as the Democratic-led House voted to impeach Mr Trump on 18 December.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51194446
 
US Democrats have ruled out a "witness swap" with Republicans in President Donald Trump's impeachment trial.

Lawmakers who are seeking to remove the president from office hope to hear testimony from his former National Security Adviser John Bolton.

But Democrats refused any deal to allow the son of former US Vice-President Joe Biden to be called as a witness.

Mr Trump is accused of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He strongly denies any wrongdoing.

Democrats accuse him of using US military aid as a bargaining chip in an attempt to prod Ukraine into announcing an investigation to discredit his would-be Democratic White House challenger, Mr Biden.

Mr Trump has been touting corruption claims against Mr Biden, whose son Hunter held a lucrative board position with a Ukrainian gas firm while his father was US vice-president and in charge of American-Ukrainian relations.

Attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, Mr Trump jokingly warned he might confront Democrats by coming to "sit right in the front row and stare at their corrupt faces".

The impeachment trial in the US Senate could end next week, but Mr Trump's fellow Republicans control the chamber and are unlikely to oust him.

Democrats want to call Mr Bolton, who referred to the White House's alleged political pressure on Ukraine as a "drug deal", according to previous witness testimony in the House of Representatives.

But the former national security adviser has said he will not consider testifying unless served with a legal summons known as a subpoena.

Mr Trump's Republican allies have argued Hunter Biden should also be ordered to appear before the impeachment trial.

But Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the top Democrat in the Senate, told reporters during a break in the trial on Wednesday: "That trade is not on the table."

"This isn't like some fantasy football trade," he told reporters. "Trials aren't trades for witnesses."

Joe Biden said on Wednesday in Osage, Iowa, where he is campaigning for the White House that he would not offer himself up in any witness trade.

"We're not going to turn it into a farce or political theatre," Mr Biden said. "I want no part of that."

Defending his son, Mr Biden added: "There's no body that's indicated there's a single solitary thing he did that was inappropriate or wrong - other than the appearance. It looked bad that he was there."

Mr Biden said last year that if elected president, no-one in his family would hold a job or have a business relationship with a foreign corporation.

The Trump impeachment story explained
Trump impeachment - your questions answered

House Democrats have up to three days to make their case as they present their arguments in the Trump impeachment trial in the Senate.

Mr Trump's defence team will have three days after that for a rebuttal.

On Wednesday, the lead Democratic prosecutor, California congressman Adam Schiff, urged Republicans to vote to remove Mr Trump from office to "protect our democracy".

Mr Schiff, who is chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, warned that senators would "also undermine our global standing" if they do not oust the president.

The first day of the trial dragged on till the early hours of Wednesday morning as the senators debated a flurry of incremental motions.

Much of the evidence being laid out is a rehash of testimony already presented exhaustively in the House of Representatives, which voted to impeach Mr Trump last month.

Under arcane rules, senators are forbidden to drink coffee on the chamber floor and are only allowed water and milk.

Several members of the chamber have been spotted dozing during the proceedings.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51214457
 
US senators have been accused of falling asleep, playing games and breaking other rules during President Donald Trump's impeachment trial.

Jim Risch and Jim Inhofe are among members who have apparently nodded off during the lengthy hearings.

Crossword puzzles, fidget spinners and at least one paper airplane have been spotted with senators.

The trial has heard that Mr Trump's alleged abuse of power threatens American democracy.

The senators are acting as the jury to decide whether the president should be removed from office.

The upper chamber of US Congress prides itself as a hallowed sanctum of decorum.

But some of its members - Republican and Democrat alike - have this week been accused by US media of acting like bored schoolchildren.

The rules call for senators to remain seated during the impeachment trial.

But at least nine Democrats and 22 Republicans left their seats at various times on Thursday, according to Reuters news agency.

They included Democratic White House hopefuls Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bennet.

Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, defended herself on Thursday after she was spotted reading a book in the chamber.

She tweeted that the tome - How Trump Haters Are Breaking America, by Kim Strassel - "provides good insights into today's proceedings".

"Busy mamas are the best at multi-tasking," she added. "Try it."

Mr Risch, a Republican who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was seen this week slumped motionless with his eyes closed at his desk during the hearings.

A spokesman for the Idaho senator denied he had been asleep, telling the Wall Street Journal he was just listening closely "with his eyes closed or cast down".

Mr Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, was spotted on Wednesday by an NBC reporter appearing to briefly doze off before he was nudged by Senator Todd Young, an Indiana Republican who sits next to him.

Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, was observed leaning on his right arm with his hand covering his eyes for 20 minutes.

On Thursday, Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, handed out fidget spinners, a children's toy, to fellow senators to help them while away the hours in the chamber.

"I saw somebody grab up a few of them, so they must have some real anxiety going along with this," said Mike Braun, an Indiana Republican. He said he did not require one of the gizmos.

Phones, laptops and tablets are a regular accessory during normal Senate hearings, but all electronics have been banned in the chamber for this trial, leaving many restless.

Pat Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, was heard drawling "my precious" as he retrieved his phone from the cubby outside the chamber.

Some senators have apparently found a way around the strict rules by wearing smart watches.

Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, reportedly worked on a crossword puzzle and made a paper airplane as Democratic prosecutors laid out their case on Wednesday.

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic front-runner for the 2020 White House nomination, was spotted by an ABC News reporter playing an unspecified game on paper.

Talking is banned on the floor during arguments and senators are daily admonished by the Senate sergeant-at-arms to remain silent during proceedings "on pain of imprisonment".

But on Wednesday, two Republicans - Tim Scott of South Carolina and Ben Sasse of Nebraska - threw caution to the wind and began whispering after hours of passing notes to each other.

There are also strict rules against food, but senators have been spotted munching chocolate and chewing gum.

Press access to the chamber has been heavily restricted during the Senate trial, meaning there are fewer cameras to catch senators' unguarded moments.

But other senators have appeared to pay close attention to the trial with some diligently taking notes.

Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, was observed scribbling away with what appeared to be a quill pen.

Mr Trump is only the third president ever to be impeached, but he is unlikely to be convicted in a chamber that is controlled by his fellow Republicans.

Before Thursday's arguments began, some Republican senators said they had heard nothing new in Democratic prosecutors' arguments and had already made up their mind to clear the president. A two-thirds majority votes is required to remove Mr Trump from office.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51231047
 
Kellyanne Conway reacts to Trump recording discussing ambassador: "It's not evidence at all"

From CNN's Betsy Klein

Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway was asked today about an ABC report about audio of the President discussing then-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch in 2018.

Audio obtained by ABC News appears to include President Trump speaking to a small group — which included indicted Rudy Giuliani associates Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — and telling them to "get rid" of Yovanovitch and "take her out."

Conway referred reporters to press secretary Stephanie Grisham’s statement, but went on to say, “Every president has the right to have whomever they want on their staff, in their cabinet, as an ambassador. So I think that the people are in a lather about that today, respectfully, because the Lev Parnas credibility and legitimacy and celebrity was immediate from most of you and now it’s like, oh wait, here’s some evidence of that. It’s not evidence at all.”

She continued: “We’ve always maintained he can have whichever staff, we serve at his pleasure, Cabinet, ambassadors, that he would like. How that anything you’re describing is a high crime or misdemeanor that leads to an impeachable offense and remove the democratically-elected President eight months before the next election is a puzzle to me.”

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-impeachment-trial-01-24-20/index.html
 
Lawyers representing President Donald Trump are due to begin their defence of the US leader in his impeachment trial on Saturday.

The defence begins after Democrats wrapped up their presentation in the case for his removal on Friday.

Democratic congressmen who serve as prosecutors in the trial have laid out meticulous evidence over three days that they said proved Mr Trump had abused his power and obstructed Congress.

They alleged that he pressured Ukraine to dig up political dirt on Joe Biden, a domestic rival, and that he sought to hide the evidence from Congress, another impeachable offence.

President Trump and senior Republicans claim Mr Biden and his son Hunter were involved in a corrupt business scheme in Ukraine.

Here's what happened this week, and what we can expect to see in the coming days, with the help of the BBC's Anthony Zurcher.

How the prosecution case unfolded
Proceedings began on Tuesday with a tussle between Democrats and Republicans over the rules of the trial.

Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed a tight two-day limit for opening arguments by both sides, before extending it to three after protests from Democrats.

Mr McConnell delayed until next week debate over motions from Democrats to allow new witnesses to be called and fresh evidence submitted.

Democratic congressman Adam Schiff, the head of seven impeachment managers who serve as prosecutors, opened oral arguments to a packed Senate chamber on Wednesday.

Mr Schiff said the president's actions were exactly what the founding fathers feared when they came up with impeachment - "a remedy as powerful as the evil it was meant to combat", Mr Schiff said.


Media captionA beginner's guide to impeachment and Trump
The impeachment managers walked the senators through testimony gathered during depositions and committee hearings last year, from government officials, that they say points to a scheme by Mr Trump and his advisers to lean on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.

The managers interspersed their oral arguments with audio and video tape, using the president's own words - including a now-infamous call with the president of Ukraine - in their effort to portray him as guilty.

They directly addressed the claims against the Bidens - a purposeful attempt to get on the front foot ahead of the president's defence.

Representative Hakeem Jefferies, an impeachment manager, eschewed the founding fathers, choosing instead to quote the late Brooklyn rapper Notorious BIG.

"And if you don't know, now you know," he said - a famous line from the song. He stood next to a picture of the rapper mounted on an easel - a first for the Senate chamber.

Trump impeachment trial: All you need to know
Who's who in the Trump-Ukraine story?
On Friday, the managers tackled the obstruction of Congress charge.

The managers argued that Mr Trump's refusal to allow certain members of his administration to answer questions from the House of Representatives was akin to hiding information from a grand jury investigation.

Anthony's take on prosecution:
The Democrats were determined to squeeze every drop out of the opportunity they were afforded. Republican senators, who had to sit through the marathon sessions - Schiff, alone, would speak for hours at a time - criticised the presentation as repetitive, but repetitive was the point.

For three days the Democratic case against the president, broadcast during the daytime on US network television and gavel-to-gavel on cable news networks, was ubiquitous. It was unavoidable.

It may not be nearly enough to convince the requisite number of Republican senators, but the uninterrupted fusillade was as much geared toward public opinion as it was towards the people in the Capitol.

What will the defence say?
The president's defence team is expected to focus on their accusations about the Bidens.

Responding to the impeachment managers' case, Republican senators and members of the defence team said on Thursday that the Democrats had essentially invited them to do so.

"What I don't understand is that, for the last five hours, it's been a lot about Joe Biden," said Jay Sekulow, the president's personal lawyer. "They kind of opened the door for that response."

"Today the House Democrats - perhaps unintentionally - they threw Joe Biden under the bus," said Ted Cruz, Republican senator from Texas.

The Republicans will have the same amount of time to present their case as the Democrats did - 24 hours over three days. Then they will again tussle over whether to introduce new witnesses.

The defence submitted far less documentary evidence ahead of the trial - just seven pages of broad arguments, compared to the Democrats' more than 100 pages of detailed evidence.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51229748
 
Summary from today:

The third impeachment trial in US history continued as Trump's lawyers launched their defence
They wrapped up after two hours and have now adjourned to continue on Monday
They began by accusing the Democrats of wanting to undo the 2016 election
"They have the burden of proof and they have not come close to meeting it," said Pat Cipollone
House Democrats have already presented their case for Trump's removal from office
He is accused of seeking help from Ukraine to help get himself re-elected and of obstructing Congress
He has dismissed the probe as a "hoax" and a "witch-hunt"

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-51243762
 
President Trump's lawyers have begun defending him at his impeachment trial, accusing Democrats of seeking to overturn the result of the 2016 election.

"The president did absolutely nothing wrong," White House Counsel Pat Cipollone said.

Mr Trump's defence will last three days and follows the Democrats' prosecution case which ended on Friday.

The president faces two charges linked to his dealings with Ukraine.

The charges, or articles of impeachment, accuse him of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

He is alleged to have withheld military aid to pressure the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, into starting a corruption investigation into Mr Trump's political rival, Democrat Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

Democrats also accuse Mr Trump of making a visit by Mr Zelensky to the White House contingent on an investigation.

Mr Trump is charged with obstructing Congress by failing to co-operate with the House of Representatives impeachment inquiry.

The president dismisses the accusations as a witch-hunt.

What else did the defence say?
The trial in the Senate will decide if Mr Trump should be removed from office. This is unlikely as the Republicans control the Senate and any such move would need a two-thirds majority.

Echoing a line heard from many Republicans, Mr Cipollone said Democrats were "asking you not only to overturn the results of the last election... they're asking you to remove President Trump from the ballot in the election that's occurring in approximately nine months."

"They are asking you to do something very, very consequential and, I would submit to you ... very, very dangerous," he said.

Much of the abuse of power charge centres on a phone call in July between Mr Trump and Mr Zelenksy.

Trump defence lawyer Mike Purpura insisted there was no quid pro quo - as asserted by the Democrats.

"Zelenksy felt no pressure. President Zelensky says he felt no pressure. The House managers tell you they know better," he said.

Adam Schiff, the Democrat chair of the House Intelligence Committee wrapped up the prosecution on Friday, warning that Mr Trump would commit abuse of power again if allowed to remain in office.

In a sometimes emotional address, he said: "You can't trust this president to do what's right for this country."

"If you find him guilty, you must find that he should be removed."

Where does the trial go from here?
Saturday's session was unexpectedly short - two hours. The second day of defence arguments resumes on Monday at 13:00 local time (18:00 GMT) allowing for a short weekend break.

Next week will also see senators return to the thorny issue of allowing new witnesses to be called and fresh evidence submitted.

The Republicans oppose hearing more testimony as they push for a quick trial.

But the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, told reporters after Saturday's hearing that Mr Trump's defence team had inadvertently "made a really compelling case for why the Senate should call witnesses and documents".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51251395
 
President Donald Trump in 2018 ordered the removal of the US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, according to a video made public on Saturday.

In the tape, Mr Trump can be heard saying "Get rid of her!" at a dinner with a group of donors in Washington.

Ms Yovanovitch, who was recalled from her post in May 2019, has testified in Mr Trump's impeachment inquiry.

The footage from April 2018 was provided by an attorney of Lev Parnas, a US businessman who was at the dinner.

Mr Trump has maintained that he does not know Mr Parnas, who worked for the president's personal lawyer Rudolph Giuliani.

The businessman, who is a Republican party donor, says he went to Ukraine to pressure officials on behalf of the president and Mr Giuliani.

President Trump has so far made no public comment on the emergence of the video recording.

On Saturday, his lawyers began defending him at his impeachment trial in the Senate, accusing Democrats of seeking to overturn the result of the 2016 election.

The Republican president faces two charges: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Mr Trump is alleged to have withheld military aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into starting a corruption investigation into Mr Trump's political rival, Democrat Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

President Trump has repeatedly branded the impeachment proceedings a "witch hunt".

What's in the video tape?
The recording was made during a dinner at the Trump International Hotel in Washington on 30 April 2018.

It was shot on the mobile phone of Igor Fruman, a US businessman and former Giuliani associate.

Both Mr Fruman and Mr Parnas were last year charged with violations of campaign finance laws.

On the tape, Mr Parnas at one point is heard describing the US ambassador in Ukraine as "the biggest problem there".

Without naming Ms Yovanovitch, Mr Parnas said: "She's basically walking around telling everybody, 'Wait, he's going to get impeached, just wait.'"

Mr Trump is then heard reacting shortly afterwards, saying: "Get rid of her. Get her out tomorrow. I don't care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. OK? Do it."

The president appeared not to have known the ambassador personally at the time, as he asked for the envoy's name.

Why was Marie Yovanovitch fired?
The 33-year veteran of the foreign service was recalled as the American ambassador to Kyiv in May 2019 for reasons that remain murky.

She testified that her anti-corruption efforts had incurred the ire of influential Ukrainians who sought to remove her.

Ms Yovanovitch said she was shocked that her enemies appeared to find allies in the Trump administration, including the president's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

The former envoy's supporters say she was also smeared by US conservative media voices.

In her testimony to the impeachment inquiry, Ms Yovanovitch said the allegation she was disloyal to Mr Trump was false.

President Trump has said that the diplomat "didn't want to hang my picture in the embassy" in Kyiv.

Trump says envoy Marie Yovanovitch refused to hang his photo
"She said bad things about me, she wouldn't defend me, and I have the right to change the ambassador," Mr Trump told Fox News.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51254653
 
Democrats have renewed their demand for US President Donald Trump's former National Security Adviser John Bolton to be called to testify in the president's impeachment trial.

The call comes following reports that Mr Bolton made claims in an unpublished book that Mr Trump wanted to freeze aid to Ukraine unless it investigated his political rival, Democrat Joe Biden.

It could undermine Mr Trump's defence.

The impeachment trial will resume in the US Senate later on Monday.

Mr Trump told reporters last week that he did not want Mr Bolton to testify.

The president is alleged to have withheld military aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into starting a corruption investigation into Mr Biden, and his son Hunter.

President Trump has repeatedly branded the impeachment proceedings a "witch hunt".

What do the new reports allege?
On Sunday, the New York Times cited excerpts from an unpublished book by Mr Bolton.

They included claims that Mr Trump told a then-top aide in August that he wanted to withhold $391 million security aid to Ukraine until officials there assisted with probes into Democrats, including Mr Biden.

If true, such a claim would undermine the main argument of Mr Trump's defence team that there was no "quid pro quo" which offered aid in return for investigating Mr Biden.

"Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President's defence," House impeachment manager Adam Schiff tweeted.

"If the trial is to be fair, Senators must insist that Mr Bolton be called as a witness, and provide his notes and other documents."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that Republicans' refusal to call Mr Bolton and others is "now even more indefensible".

There has been no comment from Mr Bolton's lawyers, nor from the White House.

The president has previously said he does not want Mr Bolton to testify on the grounds of national security.

The latest reports come after a video made public on Saturday showed Mr Trump ordering the removal of the US ambassador to Ukraine in 2018.

With Republicans holding a 53-47 majority in the Senate, it is unlikely that the president will be removed from office.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51260220
 
Impeachment trial: Trump defence wraps up amid Bolton bombshell

Donald Trump's defence team concluded its oral arguments in the US Senate impeachment trial on Tuesday, setting the stage for two days of questioning.

The closing arguments came amid a bombshell report that former national security adviser John Bolton implicates President Trump in his new book.

Mr Bolton reportedly writes that Mr Trump directly withheld security aid to Ukraine for his own political benefit.

The report added weight to the Democratic Party's call for witnesses.

The president's Republican Party has tried to resist calls for witnesses to testify, largely out of concern over what Mr Bolton might say. Four Republicans would need to side with Democrats in a vote on whether new testimony will be heard.

US media outlets reported on Tuesday that Mitch McConnell, the most senior Republican, had told his senators during a closed-door meeting that following the Bolton reports the party did not have the votes to hold off witnesses.

But Mr McConnell and his leadership team were reportedly confident of pressuring enough Republican senators by the end of the week to win a vote.

Defence rests
The president's defence wrapped up its arguments early on Tuesday, having used around half of its allotted 24 hours over three days. Their approach was a contrast with that of the Democrats, who used all of their allotted time to present a detailed case against the president.

Jay Sekulow, the president's personal lawyer, said: "The bar for impeachment cannot be set this low. Danger, danger, danger. These articles must be rejected. The Constitution requires it. Justice demands it."

White House counsel Pat Cipollone concluded by calling on senators to "end of the era of impeachment for good".

President Trump was impeached on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He is accused of withholding $391m (£300m) in military aid, in an attempt to pressure Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce a corruption investigation into Mr Trump's Democratic political rival, Joe Biden.

Mr Trump denies the allegations against him, and Republicans have argued that no first-hand witnesses have so far connected the president to a scheme to withhold aid for political benefit.

The significance of the apparent revelations from Mr Bolton, first reported by the New York Times, is that they would undermine that argument. He reportedly says in his forthcoming book that he was instructed directly by the president to withhold the aid in order to pressure Ukraine.

Mr Trump told reporters last week that he did not want Mr Bolton to testify, citing national security issues.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51284334
 
Today should be fun: the two teams will answer questions from Senators.
 
US Democrats have been dealt a major blow in their efforts to call witnesses at President Trump's impeachment trial.

They needed four Republicans to vote with them to allow witness testimony, but one of the few wavering senators said he would not support the measure.

Lamar Alexander said there was no need for more evidence to prove Mr Trump had not committed an impeachable offence.

The announcement paves the way for the possible acquittal of the president by the Senate as early as Friday.

The Democrats had especially wanted to call the former National Security Adviser, John Bolton, who reportedly said Mr Trump told him directly that he was withholding US military aid to Ukraine until it agreed to investigate his rival, Joe Biden.

What did Lamar Alexander say?
In a statement late on Thursday after a long question-and-answer session at the Senate, Mr Alexander from Tennessee said the Democrats had proven that Mr Trump's actions were "inappropriate".

But the 79-year-old said: "There is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution's high bar for an impeachable offence."

He added: "The question then is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did. I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday."

Democrats were hoping that four Republican senators - Mr Alexander as well as Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins - would enable them to reach the 51 votes necessary to call witnesses. On Thursday, Ms Collins joined Mr Romney by saying she would also vote for more witnesses.

Mr Alexander's announcement is a sign that Republicans will be able to block the move and put an end to Mr Trump trial with his expected acquittal. A two-thirds majority in the Senate is required to remove him from office, and Republicans hold a 53-47 majority.

Each side is expected to present closing arguments in Friday's session, before the Senate votes on hearing witnesses. If the vote were to end in a tie, it would mean that the motion had failed unless US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is presiding over the trial, decided to break it, which is unlikely.

Why is Bolton so important?
A bombshell report in the New York Times earlier this week said that Mr Bolton had written in his upcoming book that the president told him directly that military aid was being withheld from Ukraine in exchange for dirt on a Democratic political rival - the key impeachment charge against the president.

The report reinvigorated Democrats' attempts to call new witnesses to the trial, and simultaneously energised Republican efforts to push the process through without anyone being called.

If the reports about Mr Bolton were true, and he testified to that effect, he would be the first witness in the process to directly link the president to an alleged quid pro quo with Ukraine and an abuse of presidential power.

Mr Trump's lawyer expanded their defence in the Senate earlier this week to suggest that anything a president does in service of his own re-election, believing that to be in the public interest, cannot be impeachable. The tactic shocked Republicans and Democrats alike.

The White House pushed back against the publication of Mr Bolton's book, citing security concerns. The National Security Council alleged that the book had "top secret" details that must be removed, a claim Mr Bolton rejects.

Mr Bolton's lawyer Charles Cooper responded to the NSC letter last week by saying the book contained nothing classified top secret.

"We do not believe that any of that information could reasonably be considered classified," Mr Cooper wrote in an email to the White House on 24 January, the Washington Post reported.

Mr Cooper also said he had asked for an expedited review of a chapter about Ukraine, adding that Mr Bolton was "preparing" for the possibility he could be called to testify in the trial.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51320848
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
[VIDEOS] Donald Trump blasts Volodymyr Zelensky as 'disrespectful' in public blow-up at White House
3 4 5
Replies
364
Views
4K
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
BouncerGuy
Tulsi Gabbard - Donald Trump’s choice to lead National Intelligence
2
Replies
104
Views
2K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
Stewie
Donald Trump's war on Harvard University
Replies
19
Views
432
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Donald Trump's national security team's chat app leak stuns Washington
Replies
2
Views
105
sweep_shot
sweep_shot
FearlessRoar
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
Donald Trump wins the election to become the 47th President of the United States, securing his second term in office [Post Updated #199]
3 4 5
Replies
330
Views
8K
hassan918
hassan918
Back
Top