Chief Justice John Roberts

Will Four Or More Republicans Call For Witnesses In Donald Trump Impeachment Trial?

With the Donald Trump Impeachment Trial to begin in earnest on Tuesday, January 21, the first full day of the last year of this Presidential term of office, the question arises whether at least four Republican Senators will buck their leader, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and call for witnesses to testify.

John Bolton, former National Security Adviser, is the key witness in mind, although there are others, including Mick Mulvaney (the Acting White House Chief of Staff), Attorney General William Barr, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Vice President Mike Pence, as well as lesser figures.

If even John Bolton gets to testify, it will be a victory for Democrats, but the question is whether there are Republican Senators who want to know the truth, or are just interested in backing the President, no matter what abuses of power he has engaged in.

The best estimate is that we will find the following Senators supporting testimony:

Susan Collins of Maine

Lisa Murkowski of Alaska

Mitt Romney of Utah

Lamar Alexander of Tennessee

Rob Portman of Ohio

Cory Gardner of Colorado

If only three of the above support witnesses, it would be a 50-50 tie, and the belief is that Chief Justice John Roberts could rule in such a tie situation, and would support witnesses.

But this is such an unprecedented situation, so we are guessing at what will be the ultimate decision on this matter.

The Donald Trump Impeachment Trial Begins As House Appoints Impeachment Managers, And Hands Over The Two Articles Of Impeachment To The Senate

Finally, a month after the House of Representatives adopted two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has appointed seven members of the House to be impeachment managers, and has handed over the two articles of impeachment to the Senate.

More evidence against Donald Trump has emerged, and hopefully, the Republicans in the US Senate will realize the need for new evidence to be allowed, and for witnesses to be brought before the Senate, as Chief Justice John Roberts presides, over what is now the third Presidential impeachment trial in American history.

John Roberts joins Salmon P. Chase in 1868 and William Rehnquist in 1999 in the historic stewardship over the impeachment proceedings, with the President on trial, although not in person, and with the House having impeachment managers to argue the case, and the Senate to act as a jury. All branches of the government are present in the Senate chamber as this trial commences, and lasts a few weeks, likely beyond the Iowa Caucuses on February 3 and the New Hampshire Primary on February 11.

Top Trump Aides–Pompeo, Mulvaney, Giuliani, Bolton–Should Be Required To Testify Under Oath In Impeachment Trial, Or Nancy Pelosi Should Hold Articles Of Impeachment Until Supreme Court Rules On Trump Cases By June

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is, rightfully, withholding the two impeachment articles against Donald Trump, and hopefully, will win the battle with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , requiring that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and former National Security Advisor John Bolton, all give testimony under oath in the upcoming Senate trial of impeachment.

if such does not happen, Pelosi should refuse to allow action until and when the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts rules on the various cases against Trump on taxes and other matters, to be settled by decision no later than June, the end of the Supreme Court session.

Maybe withholding action on the impeachment articles will force the Court to move up the cases for final determination sooner.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump will be driven mad by the delay, and it is just desserts since he is such an evil man, who needs to be forced out of office.

If the Supreme Court rules against Trump, as they did in 1974 against Richard Nixon and 1997 against Bill Clinton, it is possible to imagine that Trump would be forced out of office, and probably by resignation.

So Nancy Pelosi holds the cards, and should force the Senate to do what she wants, testimony by key figures in the Ukraine Scandal!

The Moment Of Reckoning For The Reputation Of Chief Justice John Roberts And His Court

The time has come for the Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Roberts and their reputations.

Will the Court rule that Donald Trump’s tax returns shall be made public, which will indicate the depth of corruption, Russian Collusion, and reality of just how wealthy Trump is? This is a group of cases which might take months to be decided, but will have the potential to repudiate Trump.

Also, Chief Justice Roberts will preside over the Donald Trump impeachment trial, and while not directly involved in the final vote, Roberts will have an impact with his rulings on procedure.

Roberts is the third Chief Justice to preside over a Presidential impeachment trial, after Salmon P. Chase over the Andrew Johnson Trial in 1868, and William Rehnquist over the Bill Clinton trial in 1999.

Roberts’ reputation is at stake in the long run of history, not only for these issues mentioned here, but for the reality that he has become, effectively, the swing vote on many cases, since Justice Anthony Kennedy left the Court 18 months ago.

It’s Official: Donald Trump Becomes 4th President To Have House Judiciary Committee Adopt Articles Of Impeachment

It is now official!

President Donald Trump has had two articles of impeachment adopted by the House Judiciary Committee, making him the 4th President to face such a situation!

Andrew Johnson in 1868; Richard Nixon in 1974; and Bill Clinton in 1998 preceded him.

Andrew Johnson was acquitted in 1868; Bill Clinton in 1999; and Richard Nixon resigned before the entire House of Representatives could vote to impeach him, which was a certainty, and therefore the US Senate did not conduct an impeachment trial in his case.

The impeachment trial will take place in January, with Chief Justice John Roberts presiding, as previously, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase in 1868; and Chief Justice William Rehnquist did in 1999.

The Right Wing Supreme Court Seems Ready To Declare War On Abortion, Gay Rights, Gun Rights, Immigration, Separation Of Church And State, And Presidential Power

The new session of the Supreme Court has begun, and the full effect of Donald Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh will now, likely, be felt.

While it is true that Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are not “twins”, to expect any major surprises in constitutional law in this 2019-2020 term are highly unlikely, as right wing law looks in the ascendancy.

What the Court decides ends up as the law of the land, and for progressives, it does not bode well on the issues of abortion, gay rights, gun rights, immigration, separation of church and state, and the growth of Presidential power.

The fulcrum of the Court, Anthony Kennedy, is now retired for a year, and the only hope to avoid extreme right wing judgments is if Chief Justice John Roberts, who has been a surprise a few times in his views on the Court in recent years, becomes the new “swing” vote on the Court this term.

Roberts might also preside over an impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, who he, clearly, has been critical of in a number of ways, and the Court could limit Trump’s Abuse of Power, beyond Roberts presiding over an impeachment prosecution.

Since Roberts is worried about the image of “his” Court, some surprises may be in the offing, and of course, progressives will be watching the health and stability of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, now 86, having survived a third and fourth cancer, and wondering if she will be able to continue on the Court into the next Presidential term in 2021.

Is Chief Justice John Roberts On Road To Judicial Leadership Of John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, And Earl Warren?

Chief Justice John Roberts is clearly a conservative on the Supreme Court, but he is also very much aware of and concerned about the turmoil in American society, and concerned about the long term reputation of the Court, as well as his own historical image, since he has a sense of history.

So Roberts has surprised Court watchers in some of his decisions, and he has emerged as the “swing” vote on the Court, as only he can prevent the Court from going so hard to the Right that it will lose its image of being an institution that promotes fairness and equity under the Constitution.

So expect that John Roberts will become a true judicial leader on the level of John Marshall (1801-1835), Charles Evans Hughes (1930-1941), and Earl Warren (1953-1969).

These three Chief Justices, generally acknowledged as the three greatest of the 16 previous Chief Justices before Roberts came to the Court in 2005, all demonstrated courage and principle, and came into conflict with Presidents.

Marshall had to deal with the strong opposition of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, while Charles Evans Hughes had Franklin D. Roosevelt challenging the Court during the Great Depression, and Earl Warren steered the Court in a direction not always agreed with by Republicans Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon.

Now John Roberts has to deal with Donald Trump, who he has already issued a criticism, when Trump spoke of “Obama Judges”, “Bush Judges”, and “Clinton Judges”, with Roberts asserting there is no such thing as judges based on a President, but rather judges adhering to the Constitution as they see it.

This makes it quite clear to many observers that Roberts is ready to take a more moderate stand than he does typically, as he did in saving the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) in 2012.

Expect Roberts to side, if necessary, with the four “liberals” on the Court (chosen by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama), with the constitutional crisis that has clearly arisen, including trying to convince the four conservatives selected by both President Bushes and even the two Trump judges, to consider how the Court was unanimous in curbing President Richard Nixon in the Watergate Scandal 45 years ago, and Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit 22 years ago.

It is the Supreme Court that is being looked to as the ultimate government branch to rein in a President far more abusive than Richard Nixon, and to reassert separation of powers and checks and balances.

2019 Will Be The Most Significant Year Since 1968, Tumultuous And Transformative

The year 2019 will assuredly be the most tumultuous and transformative year since 1968.

The Democrats taking over the House of Representatives means full investigation of the Presidency of Donald Trump, and the likelihood of the impeachment of Donald Trump.

It might seem that Trump will survive in office, but this blogger believes he will be forced out by resignation, and a deal whereby his children and son in law will avoid prosecution, if Donald Trump agrees to resign.

The pressure on Trump will grow, and his health will likely get worse, and while it might seem that he will not give in and resign, the same thought 45 years ago about Richard Nixon, this blogger’s belief that he will leave office by mid year is strongly held.

If he leaves office no later than June 20, 2019, then Trump will have served exactly 29 months, matching the exact term of President Warren G. Harding from 1921-1923, which is the 4th shortest term of any President in American history.

The likelihood of a President Mike Pence is strong, but he would face party opposition from a number of Republican potential challengers, including John Kasich, Jeff Flake, or Bob Corker, all of whom will not be in public office in 2019.

Also, the likelihood of growing conflict between Chief Justice John Roberts and President Trump will become part of the story of the end of the Trump Presidency.

And Nancy Pelosi, the best Speaker of the House since Thomas “Tip” O’Neill (1977-1987), will play a major role in the events transpiring next year.

And also expect a major battle between the “old timers” (Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders), as well as between them and a new generation of leadership much more diverse, for the Presidential Election Of 2020, including Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Julian Castro, Eric Garcetti, and Chris Murphy, among other Democratic contenders.

The Struggle Of Donald Trump With Chief Justice John Roberts More Dangerous Than Earlier Challenges Of Presidents To Supreme Court Chief Justices

Donald Trump has challenged Chief Justice John Roberts and the Supreme Court, just as he has challenged every other institution of government, but Chief Justice John Roberts seems well prepared to deal with Trump, if and when he gets out of hand.

It is certainly a dangerous struggle, as Donald Trump has an authoritarian bent unlike any earlier President, but it seems clear that Roberts is ready to do what must be done to keep the President within the Constitution.

Earlier in history, there were major confrontations of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson with Chief Justice John Marshall; Abraham Lincoln with Chief Justice Roger Taney; Franklin D. Roosevelt with Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes; Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon with Chief Justice Earl Warren; Richard Nixon with Chief Justice Warren Burger; and Barack Obama with Chief Justice John Roberts.

But Trump has demanded that the court system favor him in all of his executive orders, and other executive actions, but the Court has refused to back him on a regular basis, leading Trump to say that there are Clinton Judges, Obama Judges, and Bush Judges, but Roberts responding that there are no such descriptions, as all are dedicated to the rule of law, a true rebuke of the President.

On a recent executive order to deny asylum automatically to those who seek it, the Court ruled 5-4 against it, with Roberts joining the four Democratic appointments on the Court, and he has earlier upheld ObamaCare in 2012, and at other times, has sided against conservatives.

It is clear that Roberts sees the Supreme Court as “his Court”, and is concerned about the reputation of the Court long term, so one can be assured that if a case comes up against Trump trying to grab too much power, that he will, likely vote against him, as the entire Court, including three Nixon appointees, voted against him in US V. Nixon of 1974, and when the Court, including two Clinton appointees unanimously voted against Clinton in the Clinton V. Jones Case of 1997.

Presidents In Conflict With The Judiciary Are Nothing New Historically, But Trump Could Be The Biggest Threat Yet To Our Constitutional System

The conflict of President Donald Trump with the judiciary is not the first time there has been a challenge from a President to the judicial branch.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had regular conflict with Chief Justice John Marshall and the federal courts in the first third of the 19th century.

Abraham Lincoln had vehement disagreements with Chief Justice Roger Taney in the era of the Civil War.

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson both found the Supreme Court as standing in the way of progressive reform in the early 20th century.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was so frustrated by a conservative Supreme Court negating important legislation of the New Deal in the mid 1930s, that he proposed the idea of adding six new Justices to the Court in 1937. This came to be known as the “Court Packing” plan, and was soundly defeated, including by members of his own Democratic Party.

Richard Nixon had issues with the rulings of the Earl Warren Court before he was President, and the continued Warren influence on the Court under his successor, Warren Burger. And, Nixon was stopped dead in his tracks in US. V. Nixon in 1974, forcing him to hand over the Watergate Tapes to the Special Prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, leading him to resign the Presidency in August 1974.

Barack Obama was critical of the John Roberts Court on its conservative decisions early on in his Presidency in 2010.

And now, Donald Trump has unleashed what many consider the strongest challenge to the whole federal judiciary, alarming many constitutional experts as far more dangerous and threatening to the checks and balances of the Constitution and the separation of powers.

It is clear that Trump has declared war on the judiciary, but it could be that the Roberts Court will smack back at him when cases regarding his abuse of power make it to the Court, so Trump may be “hoist by hid own petard”, and regret the attacks he has made on the whole court system.