Trump’s defense turned into a perfect argument for having John Bolton testify as they claimed not to know how to get into Trump’s head.
Trump lawyer Patrick Philbin argued, “The second point that I wanted to make is that — how do we tell under the house manager standard what an illicit motive is when there’s illicit motive? How are we supposed to get proof of what’s inside the president’s head? Of course, motive is inherently difficult to prove where you’re talking about, they conceded they’re talking about perfectly lawful actions on their face within the constitutional authority of the president, but want to make it impeachable, if it is the wrong idea inside the president’s head, and they explain in the House Judiciary Committee report that the way we’ll tell if the president had the wrong motive is we’ll compare what he did to what staffers in the executive branch said he ought to do.”
— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 28, 2020
A really great way to figure out what Trump’s motive is would be to call witnesses who have first-hand knowledge of what the president said to them. A witness like John Bolton who the president explained his motive to, would be a great start.
Trump’s lawyers are making a fantastic argument for having John Bolton testify.
Instead of creating doubt and deniability, Trump’s argument is backfiring and making an ironclad case for why witnesses like John Bolton must testify.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Mr. Easley is the founder/managing editor and Senior White House and Congressional correspondent for PoliticusUSA.Jason has a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science. His graduate work focused on public policy, with a specialization in social reform movements.
Awards and Professional Memberships
Member of the Society of Professional Journalists and The American Political Science Association