How does the House impeachment managers' request for Trump to testify at trial play out? (Started to explain this just now with @brikeilarcnn but, understandably, had to yield the floor to the President of the United States).
THREAD:
THREAD:
1) Today's document is technically an informal request for Trump's testimony. We're in the "polite invitation" phase.
2) Trump has two choices: (A) "Ok, I'll testify," or (B) "No thanks."
(A) would be absolutely reckless. No decent lawyer would ever let him testify. He'll either perjure himself or incriminate himself. It's one of the few ways he could get convicted.
So (B) seems likely.
(A) would be absolutely reckless. No decent lawyer would ever let him testify. He'll either perjure himself or incriminate himself. It's one of the few ways he could get convicted.
So (B) seems likely.
3) In that case, if Trump declines the invitation to testify, it's now back to House impeachment managers, and things get more serious.
4) House impeachment managers can either accept Trump's refusal and move on without his testimony (and draw an "adverse inference" -- meaning "we'll assume the worst about what you would have said").
5) Or House impeachment managers can seek to issue a subpoena. This would come down to a majority vote of the Senate, which is currently in Democratic control.
The Senate would then vote either to issue or not issue a subpoena.
The Senate would then vote either to issue or not issue a subpoena.
6) If the Senate votes not to issue a subpoena, that's that.
If the Senate does issue a subpoena, then Trump might challenge it in court. He has zero legal basis for that, but it would create a messy delay. Managers must be ready for this legal fight, very quickly if necessary.
If the Senate does issue a subpoena, then Trump might challenge it in court. He has zero legal basis for that, but it would create a messy delay. Managers must be ready for this legal fight, very quickly if necessary.
7) Ultimately a subpoena, if issued, very likely will stand in the courts.
If that happens, then Trump can either (A) testify (same problems and risks as above), or (B) take the Fifth -- invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
If that happens, then Trump can either (A) testify (same problems and risks as above), or (B) take the Fifth -- invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
8) Trump (or anybody) does have the right to take the Fifth in Congress. Others have before (Oliver North, famously).
Of course, it looks horrible, and Trump himself has said that only guilty people and mobsters take the Fifth. But he does have that legal right.
Of course, it looks horrible, and Trump himself has said that only guilty people and mobsters take the Fifth. But he does have that legal right.
9) Or Trump might simply defy -- ignore -- a subpoena. That could lead to contempt of Congress or obstruction of Congress charges. Ordinarily, that would be additional grounds for impeachment but that seems unlikely given where we are.
10) Bottom line: the House impeachment managers have taken aggressive action here and have put Trump in an awfully difficult spot. There are several routes for him to wriggle out of testifying, but all of those push the limits of the law and look terrible politically.
11) For all Trump's bold claims over the years, one thing he has steadfastly avoided throughout his term in office: testifying under oath. He dodged it during Mueller and Ukraine. He likes to make his views known to the world, but not so much while under oath. Stay tuned.
END
END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
