Jason Crow Among House Impeachment Managers

13 thoughts on “Jason Crow Among House Impeachment Managers”

1. This is yuge and bigley for Crow.

    

   Log in to Reply

   1. I give up.  How does this benefit "Colorado in general? "

      Log in to Reply

      1. We just said it was a big deal for Colorado, which it is.

         Log in to Reply

         1. How is it a big deal for Colorado?  Are we that starved for attention?

            Log in to Reply

            1. A member of our delegation is playing a key role in something historical. How is that NOT a big deal?

               Log in to Reply

               1. It is a big deal for jason.   But somehow, I don't see it affecting an onion farmer in the San Luis Valley very much.

                  Log in to Reply

                  1. Those might be tears of joy??

                     Log in to Reply

         2. Not to mention the 180 degree difference from Jason's defeated opponent, Mike Coffman.

            Log in to Reply

      2. Hmm, I remember when there was a big hubbub about Jason Crow's non-endorsement of Nancy Pelosi for House Speaker.  Now she picks him to be one of 7 House Managers.  Yet more evidence of Jason Crow's political skills.

         Log in to Reply

2. I was a bit surprised by this, thinking that Rep. Neguse had done a great job in the hearings. But Crow makes sense; he's got the experience in a courtroom and the military NatSec creds to fill in a gap on the team. Most of this is still going to be kabuki theater, but having a solid legal team will matter to Chief Justice Roberts presiding over the thing – and maybe to one or more head-in-the-sand Senators who have tried to avoid hearing the facts so far.

   Log in to Reply

   1. If the Senate does not allow calling of witnesses, then perhaps with his national security background, and court room experience, he could speak to the late-breaking information regarding Trump and Giuliani's misdeeds — effectively testifying the evidence into the record, since as "prosecutors" they are basically just giving speeches anyway.

      Log in to Reply

      1. The Parnas stuff, and hopefully some of the FOIA material, have been added to the document list for the impeachment being transmitted. It would be nice to know what rules they have to play by…

         Log in to Reply

         1. Here is an excerpt from the New York Times summary of the process:

            Once they are under oath, senators’ first order of business will be wrangling over rules and procedures that dictate the structure of the trial, including whether and when witnesses can be called and documents admitted into evidence. The outcome will set the tone for the coming weeks.

            Only a simple majority, 51 senators, must agree to set these terms, so Republicans, who hold the Senate majority, come in with a clear advantage.

            During President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1999, senators came together in the Old Senate Chamber to agree on a set of rules to get the trial underway that both sides could support. The rules passed 100 to 0.

            This time will be far more partisan. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, has said he has the votes to push through a rules package based on the one that governed Mr. Clinton’s. But he has yet to show anyone a copy, and Democrats have promised to propose amendments in protest, meaning the debate could get messy.

            Democrats and Republicans have competing objectives and several thorny questions to resolve, including how they should handle some senators’ desire to hear from witnesses and collect new evidence, how much time to allow each side to make its case and when to allow senators to move to dismiss the charges.

            Either in that resolution or separately, the Senate must also send a summons notifying Mr. Trump of the impeachment articles and asking for his formal reply.

            Opening arguments by the House and White House could last for days.

            The House managers and White House defense lawyers will most likely have a few days to draw up motions and written legal briefs on their respective arguments to put before the Senate. This will be their first chance to make their cases to senators, and the public.

            Once all the briefs are in, likely sometime next week, the trial will begin in earnest. The House managers will most likely have a day or more to present the facts of the Ukraine case and their arguments for why Mr. Trump ought to be removed from office.

            Mr. Trump’s defense lawyers will probably be given the same amount of time to present a defense. Because they chose not to mount a defense in the House in the run-up to Mr. Trump’s impeachment, it will be the first time the president’s team has explicitly responded to the House’s allegations and its first opportunity to make a formal argument for why he should remain in office.

            Senators then have a couple days or so to question both sides. Though the questions are made in writing, the managers and lawyers respond out loud for the whole chamber to hear.

            I think the new information can be introduced as part of the Democratic prosecutor’s presentation.  Unless Trump’s lawyers plan to simply say “Defense rests”, they will by necessity be introducing “new” evidence not part of the House impeachment proceedings.  So it would only be natural that the Democrats can do so as well.

            Log in to Reply