web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News Corporation (Page 250)

Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife’s murder: ‘Enough is enough’

Fotis Dulos, the Connecticut man who had been charged in his wife’s murder, declared his innocence in a handwritten suicide note and wrote that his co-defendants had nothing to with his Jennifer Dulos’ disappearance.

“If you are reading this I am no more,” Fotis said in the neatly written letter, which was obtained by Fox News’ Laura Ingle. “I refuse to spend even an hour more in jail for something I had NOTHING to do with. Enough is enough. If it takes my head to end this, so be it.”

Dulos, 52, died Thursday after a suicide attempt. He had been in critical condition from carbon monoxide poisoning at Jacobi Medical Center in New York City. He was free on a $6 million bond at the time of his suicide. A bond hearing had been scheduled for that day, which could have sent him back to jail.

He faced murder and kidnapping charges in connection to his wife’s disappearance in May 2019. The couple had five children together ranging in age from 8 to 13 years old.

Westlake Legal Group Note Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab

KRISTIN SMART INVESTIGATION: COPS SEIZE 2 VANS BELONGING TO PRIMARY SUSPECT’S FAMILY

In the note, Dulos goes on to say that his girlfriend, Michelle Troconis, and Kent Mawhinney, a local lawyer who represented him in a civil case, had nothing to do with the disappearance of his wife, Jennifer Dulos.

Troconis and Mawhinney are both charged with conspiracy to commit murder.

“I ask the state to let them free of any such accusations,” Fotis wrote.

Investigators alleged that Jennifer Dulos was killed at her home on May 24, 2019, after she dropped the children off at school. That same day, surveillance footage showed someone in a dark hoodie riding a bike that looked like Fotis Dulos’ from childhood toward Jennifer Dulos’ New Canaan home. Surveillance video also showed someone driving Dulos’ car, leaving her house at 10:25 a.m.

Investigators also said Fotis Dulos’ DNA was discovered on the doorknob of the mudroom in Jennifer Dulos’ home, as well as in a garbage bag police recovered from a trash can in Hartford, where investigators claimed Fotis Dulos dumped evidence of his crime.

In his letter, Fotis Dulos mentioned the couple’s children.

“Please let my children know that I love them, I would do anything to be with them, but unfortunately we all have our limits,” he wrote. “The State will not rest until I rot in jail.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

His lawyer, Norm Pattis, told the Hartford Courant that he filed a motion to continue the case without his client or a body.

“Mr. Dulos insisted from day one that Ms. Troconis wasn’t involved and wanted a joint defense agreement with her. He always spoke of her with the utmost respect,” Pattis said in a statement to the newspaper.

In a court filing Thursday, Pattis said a note had been found in Fotis Dulos’ suburban home in which he “declared his innocence of the infamous and heinous crimes that the state has accused him of and claimed his lawyers have the evidence to prove it.”

Fox News’ Barnini Chakraborty contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group AP20028678718753-1 Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab   Westlake Legal Group AP20028678718753-1 Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife’s murder: ‘Enough is enough’

Fotis Dulos, the Connecticut man who had been charged in his wife’s murder, declared his innocence in a handwritten suicide note and wrote that his co-defendants had nothing to with his Jennifer Dulos’ disappearance.

“If you are reading this I am no more,” Fotis said in the neatly written letter, which was obtained by Fox News’ Laura Ingle. “I refuse to spend even an hour more in jail for something I had NOTHING to do with. Enough is enough. If it takes my head to end this, so be it.”

Dulos, 52, died Thursday after a suicide attempt. He had been in critical condition from carbon monoxide poisoning at Jacobi Medical Center in New York City. He was free on a $6 million bond at the time of his suicide. A bond hearing had been scheduled for that day, which could have sent him back to jail.

He faced murder and kidnapping charges in connection to his wife’s disappearance in May 2019. The couple had five children together ranging in age from 8 to 13 years old.

Westlake Legal Group Note Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab

KRISTIN SMART INVESTIGATION: COPS SEIZE 2 VANS BELONGING TO PRIMARY SUSPECT’S FAMILY

In the note, Dulos goes on to say that his girlfriend, Michelle Troconis, and Kent Mawhinney, a local lawyer who represented him in a civil case, had nothing to do with the disappearance of his wife, Jennifer Dulos.

Troconis and Mawhinney are both charged with conspiracy to commit murder.

“I ask the state to let them free of any such accusations,” Fotis wrote.

Investigators alleged that Jennifer Dulos was killed at her home on May 24, 2019, after she dropped the children off at school. That same day, surveillance footage showed someone in a dark hoodie riding a bike that looked like Fotis Dulos’ from childhood toward Jennifer Dulos’ New Canaan home. Surveillance video also showed someone driving Dulos’ car, leaving her house at 10:25 a.m.

Investigators also said Fotis Dulos’ DNA was discovered on the doorknob of the mudroom in Jennifer Dulos’ home, as well as in a garbage bag police recovered from a trash can in Hartford, where investigators claimed Fotis Dulos dumped evidence of his crime.

In his letter, Fotis Dulos mentioned the couple’s children.

“Please let my children know that I love them, I would do anything to be with them, but unfortunately we all have our limits,” he wrote. “The State will not rest until I rot in jail.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

His lawyer, Norm Pattis, told the Hartford Courant that he filed a motion to continue the case without his client or a body.

“Mr. Dulos insisted from day one that Ms. Troconis wasn’t involved and wanted a joint defense agreement with her. He always spoke of her with the utmost respect,” Pattis said in a statement to the newspaper.

In a court filing Thursday, Pattis said a note had been found in Fotis Dulos’ suburban home in which he “declared his innocence of the infamous and heinous crimes that the state has accused him of and claimed his lawyers have the evidence to prove it.”

Fox News’ Barnini Chakraborty contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group AP20028678718753-1 Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab   Westlake Legal Group AP20028678718753-1 Suicide note found from Fotis Dulos, Connecticut man charged in wife's murder: 'Enough is enough' Louis Casiano fox-news/us/us-regions/northeast/connecticut fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox-news/topic/missing-persons fox news fnc/us fnc article 85b0dfc8-6e99-5ed1-880c-9f138d2115ab

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Chief Justice John Roberts tells Schumer he won’t break ties in impeachment trial

Westlake Legal Group JusticeRoberts012220AP Chief Justice John Roberts tells Schumer he won't break ties in impeachment trial Nick Givas fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate fox-news/politics/judiciary/supreme-court fox-news/person/chuck-schumer fox news fnc/politics fnc article 9fe49ddd-aa7e-5cf8-8ca9-e949903b24ec

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts told Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Friday that he would not act as a tie-breaker if the Senate becomes deadlocked with a 50-50 split during President Trump‘s impeachment trial.

Schumer began by asking Roberts if he was aware that Chief Justice Samuel Chase cast tie-breaking votes during President Andrew Johnson’s impeachment trial in the 1860s.

“I have a parliamentary inquiry,” Schumer said. “Is the chief justice aware that in the impeachment trial of President Johnson, Chief Justice Chase, as presiding officer, cast tie-breaking votes on both March 31 and April 2, 1868?”

Roberts said he was aware of Chase’s actions but explained that the issues he sought to resolve were minor. He also said he did not believe Chase’s votes were enough to establish a firm precedent for him to act on.

“The one [vote] concerned a motion to adjourn. The other [vote] concerned a motion to close deliberations,” Roberts replied. “I do not regard those isolated episodes 150 years ago, as sufficient to support a general authority to break ties.”

SEN. RAND PAUL FUMES AFTER CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS REFUSES HIS WHISTLEBLOWER QUESTION

The George W. Bush appointee said the responsibility to resolve impeachment issues falls on the Senate because that’s what they were elected to do.

“If the members of this body, elected by the people and accountable to them, divide equally on a motion — the normal rule is that the motion fails,” he added.

“I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a different branch of government, to assert the power to change that result so that the motion would succeed.”

The Senate voted 51-49 on Friday to reject a motion to call witnesses during the trial, moving Trump one step closer to an acquittal.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The trial is expected to wrap up next week.

Westlake Legal Group JusticeRoberts012220AP Chief Justice John Roberts tells Schumer he won't break ties in impeachment trial Nick Givas fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate fox-news/politics/judiciary/supreme-court fox-news/person/chuck-schumer fox news fnc/politics fnc article 9fe49ddd-aa7e-5cf8-8ca9-e949903b24ec   Westlake Legal Group JusticeRoberts012220AP Chief Justice John Roberts tells Schumer he won't break ties in impeachment trial Nick Givas fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate fox-news/politics/judiciary/supreme-court fox-news/person/chuck-schumer fox news fnc/politics fnc article 9fe49ddd-aa7e-5cf8-8ca9-e949903b24ec

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Mike Lee on Senate vote against witnesses: We dealt with ‘articles of impeachment as they sent them to us’

Westlake Legal Group McCallumLee Mike Lee on Senate vote against witnesses: We dealt with 'articles of impeachment as they sent them to us' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate/republicans fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc f2d95550-d5cf-5071-b901-87d1bc13b07f article

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, appeared on “The Story with Martha MacCallum” Friday to react to the Senate impeachment trial vote against hearing new witnesses and defend the decision by many Republicans to move the trial along.

“It’s not as if they’re going to go away one way or another as a result of this. Nor is it the case that they wouldn’t be able to bring official charges if they wanted to and then perhaps secure a 33-day delay after passing subsequent articles of impeachment,” Lee said of the Democrats. “We’ve got to deal, however, with the articles of impeachment as they sent them to us, in addition to having some inadequacies in and of themselves. There is no genuine issue of material fact as to the evidence in this case, there’s no reason to call additional witnesses.”

DEMS WORK TO DRAW OUT IMPEACHMENT FINALE, POTENTIALLY PUSHING FINAL VOTE INTO NEXT WEEK

Republicans in the Senate secured enough votes Friday evening to reject Democratic efforts to extend the trial, paving the way for the widely expected acquittal of President Trump next week on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress over his dealings with Ukraine.

Later on Friday evening, Senate Republicans voted down four amendments offered by Democrats to call former National Security Adviser John Bolton and acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, among others.

The final vote will come Wednesday, two days after the Iowa caucuses and the day after Trump delivers the State of the Union address in the House chamber.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

MacCallum asked Lee about the claim from the Trump administration that it had found classified information while reviewing the manuscript of Bolton’s forthcoming book, a claim denied by Bolton’s attorney.

“If there’s classified information in the book — which we have every reason to believe might well be the case because of the fact that it’s under review — and if they have disclosed that to a third party, there could be some very significant implications for whoever leaked it,” Lee said. “That would be a problem. Now, I don’t know whether that would be John Bolton himself, whether it would be somebody connected to his author. I really have no idea. But if there’s classified material in there, particularly if it’s classified at the top-secret level, that would be a problem.”

Fox News’ Alex Pappas and Tyler Olson contributed to this article.

Westlake Legal Group McCallumLee Mike Lee on Senate vote against witnesses: We dealt with 'articles of impeachment as they sent them to us' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate/republicans fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc f2d95550-d5cf-5071-b901-87d1bc13b07f article   Westlake Legal Group McCallumLee Mike Lee on Senate vote against witnesses: We dealt with 'articles of impeachment as they sent them to us' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/senate/republicans fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc f2d95550-d5cf-5071-b901-87d1bc13b07f article

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Administration Restricts Entry Into U.S. From China

Westlake Legal Group 31CHINA-TRAVEL-HFO-facebookJumbo Trump Administration Restricts Entry Into U.S. From China United States Politics and Government United States Economy United Airlines Quarantines International Trade and World Market Hubei Province (China) Fauci, Anthony S Delta Air Lines Inc Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) China American Airlines Airlines and Airplanes

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration will put into place temporary travel restrictions that will bar entry into the United States by any foreign national who has traveled to China in the past 14 days, administration officials announced on Friday.

The temporary restrictions, a reaction to the novel coronavirus that was deemed a public health emergency by the World Health Organization, will be put into place at 5 p.m. Sunday, Feb. 2. The United States on Friday also declared the coronavirus, which has sickened more than 9,700 people in Asia and has spread to the United States and 20 other countries, a public heath emergency.

The action will restrict all foreign nationals who have been to China — other than immediate family members of American citizens and permanent residents — from entering the United States.

In addition, officials said, any American citizen returning to the United States from the Hubei Province in China will be subject to up to 14 days of mandatory quarantine, and any American citizen returning to the country who has visited the rest of mainland China within the past 14 days will undergo proactive entry health screening at selective ports of entry, as well as 14 days of self-quarantine.

Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak, is in Hubei.

Administration officials did not say how long the “temporary” measures would be in place.

But they said the United States will also funnel all flights from China to just a few airports, including John F. Kennedy International Airport, Chicago’s O’Hare, Los Angeles International Airport and San Francisco International Airport.

The travel restrictions were announced Friday by Alex Azar, the health secretary, who declared that the coronavirus posed “a public health emergency in the United States.”

Mr. Azar and other members of an administration task force assembled to address the virus sought to play down public fears about an outbreak“The risk at this time to the American public is low,” said Robert R. Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “This is a serious health situation in China, but I want to emphasize the risk to the American public currently is low. Our goal is to do all we can do to keep it that way.”

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said the actions were being taken because there were “a lot of unknowns” surrounding the virus and its transmission path. Unlike influenza, which is fairly predictable in terms of infection and mortality, Dr. Fauci said there was not the same certainty about the transmission rate and path of the coronavirus.

“The number of cases have steeply inclined with every day,” Dr. Fauci said.

The administration’s announcement came as major air carriers said they were suspending flights between the United States and mainland China.

Administration officials said the president’s action did not constitute a travel ban, since immediate family members of American citizens and permanent residents would still be allowed into the country.

“There is no travel ban,” said Joel Szabat, an assistant secretary at the Department of Transportation.

Administration officials have been debating internally over the past few days about whether instituting travel restrictions would be seen as an alarmist reaction to a virus that so far has affected only a handful of people in the United States. And Mr. Trump had expressed concerns about the economic impact of any restriction or ban, according to people familiar with his thinking.

Members of the National Security Council had argued in favor of the travel restrictions, given the rapid spread of the virus and a backlog in testing at the C.D.C.

Despite the administration’s efforts to minimize the actions they announced, lawmakers in Congress who had been pushing Mr. Trump to impose a travel ban said the measures announced on Friday were significant and had their full support.

“By imposing temporary travel restrictions on China, the president has taken decisive action to protect Americans against the Wuhan coronavirus,” said Republican Senator Tom Cotton, from Arkansas, who has been aggressively pushing the administration to impose a targeted travel ban.

The American airline industry separately took steps to restrict travel between the United States and China. The announcement by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines that direct air service would be halted for months sent shocks through the stock market and rattled industries that depend on the flow of goods and people between the world’s largest economies.

The airlines’ move underscored the seriousness of the health crisis, fanning new fears about a worldwide economic downturn and contributing to growing unease about how widely, deeply and quickly the virus might spread.

Mr. Azar said the administration was not trying to raise alarms but that Americans should view its actions as a sign that their government was “taking responsible steps to protect them.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Republicans Block Impeachment Witnesses, Clearing Path for Trump Acquittal

WASHINGTON — The Senate brought President Trump to the brink of acquittal on Friday of charges that he abused his power and obstructed Congress, as Republicans voted to block consideration of new witnesses and documents in his impeachment trial and shut down a final push by Democrats to bolster their case for the president’s removal.

In a nearly party-line vote after a bitter debate, Democrats failed to win support from the four Republicans they needed. With Mr. Trump’s acquittal virtually certain, the president’s allies rallied to his defense, even as some conceded he was guilty of the central allegations against him.

The Democrats’ push for more witnesses and documents failed 49 to 51, with only two Republicans joining Democrats in favor. A vote on the verdict is planned for Wednesday.

As they approached the final stage of the third presidential impeachment proceeding in United States history, Democrats condemned the witness vote and said it would render Mr. Trump’s trial illegitimate and his acquittal meaningless.

“America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to its responsibilities, when the Senate turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial,” said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader. “If the president is acquitted, with no witnesses, no documents, the acquittal will have no value because Americans will know that this trial was not a real trial.”

Even as they prepared to vote against removing him, several Republicans broke with Mr. Trump’s repeated assertions that he had done nothing wrong, saying they believed he had committed the main offense of which he was accused: withholding nearly $400 million in military aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals.

Still, those Republicans said, they were unwilling to remove a president fewer than 10 months before he is to face voters.

“If you are persuaded that he did it, why do you need more witnesses?” said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, a critical swing vote on the issue whose late decision to oppose considering new evidence all but sealed Mr. Trump’s swift acquittal. “The country is not going to accept being told that they can’t elect the president they want to elect in the week the election starts by a majority for a merely inappropriate telephone call or action.”

“You don’t apply capital punishment for every offense,” Mr. Alexander added.

The vote signaled the end of a saga that has consumed Washington and threatened Mr. Trump’s hold on the presidency for the past five months, since the emergence in September of an anonymous whistle-blower complaint accusing him of using the levers of government to push Ukraine to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election.

Senators laid the groundwork for rendering their verdict on Wednesday afternoon, with plans to recess the trial for the weekend and return Monday for closing arguments. The timetable will rob Mr. Trump of the opportunity to use his State of the Union address, scheduled for Tuesday night, to boast about his acquittal, a prospect he has relished for several weeks. Instead, he will become only the second president to deliver the speech, before a joint session of Congress, during his own impeachment trial.

At the White House, Mr. Trump raged against a process he has dismissed from the start as a “witch hunt” and a “hoax,” preparing to make his defiance in the face of Democrats’ attempts to remove him a centerpiece of his re-election campaign.

“No matter what you give to the Democrats, in the end, they will NEVER be satisfied,” the president wrote Friday night on Twitter. “In the House, they gave us NOTHING!”

The outcome of the vote, however, was not in doubt. It would take a two-thirds majority — 67 senators — to convict Mr. Trump and remove him from office.

The president has insisted that he did nothing wrong, calling his telephone conversation with the president of Ukraine “perfect” and the impeachment inquiry a “sham.” For months, he has demanded that his allies deliver nothing less than an absolute defense of his actions. But even as they were poised to acquit him, several Republicans said that was not so.

Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, said that “some of the president’s actions in this case — including asking a foreign country to investigate a potential political opponent and the delay of aid to Ukraine — were wrong and inappropriate.”

Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who challenged Mr. Trump for the Republican nomination in 2016, suggested that he did not necessarily consider the president innocent, either.

“Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office,” he said. “I will not vote to remove the president because doing so would inflict extraordinary and potentially irreparable damage to our already divided nation.”

Video

transcript

Impeachment Trial Highlights: A Showdown Over Calling Witnesses

Senators rejected a call for additional witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, dealing a fatal blow to efforts by Democrats to bring about new evidence.

“Mr. Blunt?” “No.” “No.” “Mr. Booker?” “Yes.” “Aye.” “Mr. Boozman?” “No.” “No.” “Are there any senators in the chamber wishing to change his or her vote? If not, the yeas are 49, the nays are 51. The motion is not agreed to.” “This will set a new precedent. This will be cited in impeachment trials from this point to the end of history. The documents the president is hiding will come out. The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories. And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance.” “There is a way to decide right up front in some quick way whether there’s really a triable issue, whether you really need to go to all the trouble of calling in new witnesses and having more evidence in something like that.” “It’s not just about hearing from witnesses. You need documents. The documents don’t lie.” “The question here before this body is, what do you want your place in history to be? Do you want your place in history to be, let’s hear the truth? Or that we don’t want to hear it?” “You did hear evidence. You heard evidence from 13 different witnesses, 192 video clips, and as my colleague the deputy White House counsel said, over 28,000 pages of documents.”

Westlake Legal Group 31dc-mcconnell-videoSixteenByNine3000 Republicans Block Impeachment Witnesses, Clearing Path for Trump Acquittal United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Senate Schumer, Charles E Schiff, Adam B Republican Party Presidential Election of 2020 impeachment Democratic Party Collins, Susan M Alexander, Lamar

Senators rejected a call for additional witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, dealing a fatal blow to efforts by Democrats to bring about new evidence.CreditCredit…Erin Schaff/The New York Times

Reflecting the depth of the country’s divisions, both sides were already looking past the trial to begin framing the fight over Mr. Trump’s conduct ahead of the November election, starting on Monday, when the Iowa caucuses will be held, marking the first voting in a contest that will deliver the final verdict on his fitness for office.

With the threat of conviction removed, Mr. Trump enters the election season as the first impeached president in modern history to face the voters for re-election, and damaged by the revelations about his conduct. But his expected acquittal is also likely to leave the president emboldened and more determined than ever to stoke voters’ anger and grievances, arguing that Democrats, unelected bureaucrats and the mainstream news media have targeted him because of their disdain for his core supporters, and that his fight for political survival is theirs as well.

“I don’t think he acted improperly,” said Senator Kevin Cramer, Republican of North Dakota. “For three-plus years, Democrats have been trying to parse every one of his words, add their traditional view and find themselves often perplexed. Part of the problem is that most of America likes the straight talk and occasionally forgives if he doesn’t say exactly the right thing.”

Democrats, too, planned to capitalize on the battle scars from the impeachment fight to target Republicans, appealing to voters to punish them for refusing to press for a more thorough trial and ultimately sticking with Mr. Trump despite evidence of his misdeeds. But they faced the risks of a potential backlash by voters to a process that highlighted deep partisan divisions.

After resisting impeachment for months, Speaker Nancy Pelosi embraced it after the Ukraine allegations last fall. In doing so, she calculated that her party could not fail to act against a president whose actions they saw as clearly beyond the pale. But she confronted what she knew to be an unmovable reality in the Senate, where Democrats were certain to fall far short of removing him.

Republicans in the Senate made a wager of their own that it was better to withstand the short-term criticisms of Democrats and potentially constituents to quickly put the trial behind them than, rather than allow the proceeding to stretch on risking damaging new revelations. In doing so, they are strapping their political fate to that of a polarizing president who enjoys unparalleled loyalty among conservative voters.

The Republican victory was sealed just moments after the debate was gaveled open on Friday when Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, issued a statement saying that a vote for additional witnesses would only extend what she called a “partisan” impeachment, even as she lamented that the Senate trial had not been fair and Congress had failed its obligation to the country. Her announcement followed a similar one by Mr. Alexander.

Two Republicans senators — Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine — broke ranks with their party and voted with Democrats in their demand for additional testimony from witnesses.

Ms. Murkowski did not indicate how she would vote on the final articles of impeachment, which she denounced as “rushed and flawed” by the House. But she offered an unusually sharp rebuke of the institution in which she serves, appearing to cast blame on both parties and both chambers of Congress for letting excessive partisanship overtake a solemn responsibility, even as she sided with her own party.

“Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate,” she said in a statement Friday morning. “I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything.”

“It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed,” she added

Speaking from the well of the Senate, the Democratic House managers made a final, urgent appeal for additional witnesses during their two-hour presentation on Friday, warning senators that a refusal to hear new evidence would ensure that Mr. Trump is never held accountable even as it undermines the nation’s democratic order and the public’s faith in the institutions of government.

Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the lead House manager, seized on a New York Times report published in the hours before the vote to hammer home his point. The story revealed that Mr. Trump had asked John R. Bolton, his former national security adviser, last may to assist in his pressure campaign on Ukraine.

“The facts will come — out in all of their horror, they will come out,” Mr. Schiff said. “The witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories,” he said. “And we will be asked why we didn’t want to hear that information when we had the chance. What answer shall we give if we do not pursue the truth now?”

Mr. Trump’s defense team vigorously argued in the opposite direction, alternately telling senators they already had all the evidence they needed to dismiss thee charged before them and warning that calling new witnesses would set a dangerous precedent of its own by validating a rushed and incomplete case presented by the House.

“The Senate is not here to do the investigatory work that the House didn’t do,” said Patrick Philbin, the deputy White House counsel.

Reporting was contributed by Carl Hulse, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, Catie Edmondson, Emily Cochrane and Patricia Mazzei.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Once Skeptical, Senate Republicans Are All In on Trump

Westlake Legal Group 31dc-tot-1-facebookJumbo Once Skeptical, Senate Republicans Are All In on Trump Trump, Donald J Senate Republican Party Presidential Election of 2020 Murkowski, Lisa McSally, Martha Graham, Lindsey Flake, Jeffrey L Elections, Senate Cruz, Ted Clinton, Bill Blackburn, Marsha

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s control of Senate Republicans is nearly complete.

In their almost unanimous vote on Friday to bar new impeachment trial witnesses, they once again raised one of the big questions in Washington over the past three years: Will Senate Republicans ever step in against the president and say enough?

Although many Senate Republicans have long expressed serious reservations about Mr. Trump’s character and conduct in office — and some went so far as to say the Democrats had successfully made their case against him — little daylight is visible now. In pressing inexorably toward their preordained vote of acquittal, Senate Republicans made it clear they see their fortunes and futures intertwined with the president’s, and are not willing to rock the 2020 boat.

“Their party is a cult of personality at this point,” said Senator Christopher S. Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut.

Senators who normally are jealous guardians of their power over federal spending seemed to brush aside Mr. Trump’s attempt to hold up military aid that Congress had allocated to Ukraine, an ally fighting Russian aggression on its eastern border. Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign to leverage that aid in return for investigations of his political rivals is at the heart of the impeachment trial.

The transformation of the Senate can be seen in the way Trump-like tactics have seeped in over recent days. Senator Martha McSally, the Arizona Republican appointed to replace John McCain, called a CNN reporter a “liberal hack” after he posed a routine question — a break with civil press relations of the past. She then immediately started raising campaign money off it.

Senator Kelly Loeffler of Georgia, the newest member of the Senate through her recent appointment, attacked Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, her fellow Republican, on Twitter for trying to “appease the left” by backing the idea of witnesses.

Her clear aim was to curry favor with Mr. Trump and she may well have scored a success. But it was hard to imagine a freshly minted senator of the past arriving in Washington and almost immediately questioning the motives and views of a more senior senator who was also the former presidential nominee of her own party — after making significant campaign contributions to him in the past.

It is worth noting that Ms. Loeffler was appointed to fill the seat of the ailing Johnny Isakson, a Republican known for his bipartisan approach in the Senate and his love and respect for the institution. And Ms. McSally represents a distinct contrast with Mr. McCain, a frequent subject of criticism from the president and a man who closed out his career by depriving Mr. Trump of his campaign promise to repeal the Obama administration’s new health care law.

The departures of Mr. McCain and Mr. Isakson are just part of the steady loss of members willing to go their own way when it comes to the president. Outgoing senators are often replaced by much more conservative successors who have attached themselves to the president. It was lost on no member of the Senate that Jeff Flake of Arizona was essentially driven out for his willingness to find public fault with the president.

Bob Corker of Tennessee, the former Republican senator who spoke up against Mr. Trump on occasion and drew the president’s ire, decided not to seek another term in 2018 and has been replaced by Senator Marsha Blackburn, a conservative former House member who has been biting in her criticism of the impeachment trial and the presentation by House Democrats.

“It’s time to end this impeachment farce and get back to work for the American people,” Ms. Blackburn said this week on Twitter.

The shift has not been lost on former senators of both parties who are watching with dismay as the impeachment trial unfolds with a marked partisanship at odds from the trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999, when lawmakers found a way to work out their disagreements over the shape of the trial.

“Not long ago, senators of both major parties always worked to accommodate fellow colleagues with different points of view to arrive at outcomes that would best serve the nation’s interests,” John Warner, a former senator from Virginia, said in a statement. Mr. Warner, who saw himself as a protector of the institution, said he worried that a trial without witnesses would do “lasting damage to the Senate, and to our fragile national consensus.”

Over the years, senators saw themselves as power centers of their own, rising above the House and able to show more independence because of their six-year terms and wider statewide representation. Early on, that sensibility was reflected in their arms-length approach to Mr. Trump when he was still a candidate. Many senators had little to no previous relationship with him.

During the primary campaign, two prominent Republican senators challenging him — Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Ted Cruz of Texas — frequently raised alarm over the prospect of Mr. Trump in the White House. Mr. Cruz even shied away from endorsing him at the party’s nominating convention. Both paid a price in Twitter abuse from the president, and both are now among his most ardent defenders.

After Mr. Trump’s election, other senators — in private and public settings — said they were concerned about the president’s fitness for office and his Twitter rants against his critics and rivals. Senators split on a few issues and did not show the same fierce loyalty of Republican House members.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, who has exhibited an independent streak, confronted the president in the White House in 2017 over his attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, saying she was sent to Washington to represent her constituents and not toe the party line. She followed that up with a vote against Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Mr. Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

But on Friday, as Ms. Murkowski cast an important vote against calling witnesses, she sounded a few Trumpian notes in lashing into Democrats for what she saw as a partisan show.

“It has also become clear some of my colleagues intend to further politicize this process, and drag the Supreme Court into the fray, while attacking the chief justice,” she said, referring to repeated efforts by Democrats to have Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., rule in favor of witnesses and to a question from Senator Elizabeth Warren that was critical of the chief justice. “I will not stand for nor support that effort. We have already degraded this institution for partisan political benefit, and I will not enable those who wish to pull down another.”

Republicans in tough re-election fights — Ms. McSally, Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado and Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa, among others — are of the view that they need Mr. Trump, and his supporters in their states, to win.

Democrats say they now fear that Mr. Trump, emboldened by his expected Senate acquittal, will be even less restrained exerting his authority. They aren’t counting on Senate Republicans to do much about it.

Trump on Trial is a continuing series of articles offering reporting, analysis and impressions of the Senate impeachment proceedings.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Amy Klobuchar reacts to vote against witnesses in Senate impeachment trial

Westlake Legal Group BaierKlobuchar Amy Klobuchar reacts to vote against witnesses in Senate impeachment trial Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/special-report fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/person/amy-klobuchar fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc article 5371f73f-d377-5190-ae28-81589537db62

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., appeared on “Special Report with Bret Baier” Friday to react to the 51-49 vote against calling witnesses during the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump.

“I really thought we should have witnesses, and you could see [Sen.] Mitt Romney [R-Utah] has been outspoken about this for quite a while,” Klobuchar said. “I think the reason is this: the truth is going to come out and people could vote the way they want on impeachment.”

DEMS WORK TO DRAW OUT IMPEACHMENT FINALE, POTENTIALLY PUSHING FINAL VOTE INTO NEXT WEEK

“And I really believe with the [John] Bolton revelations that have come out, it’s not going to be five years from now that we know what happened in those rooms,” Klobuchar added. “It’s going to probably be five days from now or five weeks from now. And I think it is better to get testimony under oath and then people can make decisions.”

Hours after Klobuchar spoke to Fox News, the Senate voted to approve a framework laid out by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that set closing arguments in the case for Monday and a vote on the final verdict for Wednesday.

“I would like to do whatever… it takes to get a fair trial for the people of America,” Klobuchar said. “And we are just awaiting word on what we work out here.”

Baier asked Klobuchar whether she and the other senators running for president who have been stuck in Washington during the impeachment trial had the urge to rejoin the campaign trail, a question Klobuchar dismissed.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“That just can’t be my motivating force, Bret. I’ve got to bet that the people in Iowa understand that I’m doing my job. I’m in the arena,” Klobuchar said. “You know, other people can say, I don’t want to look at what’s going on there. I’ve got to do my job and get to the truth.”

“I just don’t think that people are going to hold that against me,” Klobuchar added. “I think my experience passing over a hundred bills by working across the aisle more than anyone in the Senate running for president, I think that’s going to matter.”

Fox News’ Alex Pappas and Marisa Schultz contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group BaierKlobuchar Amy Klobuchar reacts to vote against witnesses in Senate impeachment trial Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/special-report fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/person/amy-klobuchar fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc article 5371f73f-d377-5190-ae28-81589537db62   Westlake Legal Group BaierKlobuchar Amy Klobuchar reacts to vote against witnesses in Senate impeachment trial Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/special-report fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/person/amy-klobuchar fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc article 5371f73f-d377-5190-ae28-81589537db62

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Senate Sets The Stage For Trump’s Acquittal Next Week

Westlake Legal Group 5e34cbd0220000520023d630 Senate Sets The Stage For Trump’s Acquittal Next Week

WASHINGTON ― The Senate will continue the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump into next week even though the final result is all but certain. The president, in spite of members of both parties saying he improperly pressured a foreign government to investigate a political rival, is set to be acquitted Wednesday.

Republicans hoped to move to a quick acquittal after successfully blocking witnesses and other evidence from his trial on Friday. In that vote, nearly every Republican opposed allowing witness testimony, making it the first U.S. presidential impeachment trial to include no witnesses.

But Democrats pushed to prolong the trial in order to allow time for both the House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team to give closing arguments, as was the case in Bill Clinton’s 1999 impeachment trial, and to allow all senators an opportunity to speak on the floor. That phase of the trial will begin Monday morning and end by 4 p.m. EST Wednesday, when the Senate will vote on whether to remove Trump from office and adjourn as a court of impeachment.

The terms of the deal mean that Trump will deliver his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, before he is likely acquitted. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) reportedly called Trump before he signed off on the agreement, according to CNN

Meanwhile, the senators running for the Democratic presidential nomination ― Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Michael Bennet of Colorado ― will get a reprieve and be able to return to the campaign trail in Iowa ahead of the state’s crucial caucuses that begin on Monday.

Before the Senate adjourned on Friday, however, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) succeeded in forcing Republicans to vote on amendments to include witnesses and documents one last time, including the testimony of former national security adviser John Bolton. Bolton essentially confirmed the House case against Trump ― that the president withheld aid to Ukraine in order to pressure its government to open investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. 

Only two Republicans defected on the vote to subpoena Bolton: Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah. 

Schumer also got a final answer on a matter that observers have been wondering about for months: Should there be a 50-50 vote on witnesses, would Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is presiding over the Senate trial, break it? The answer was no.

“I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a different branch of government, to assert the power to change that result so that the motion would succeed,” Roberts said in response to a question from Schumer. 

A vote by Roberts would not have been unprecedented: The chief justice in the 1868 trial of President Andrew Johnson was allowed to cast a tie-breaking vote on two procedural motions. But Roberts said he disagreed that he was bound by that precedent.

“I do not regard those isolated episodes 150 years ago as sufficient to support a general authority to break ties,” Roberts said. 

The biggest remaining question in Trump’s impeachment trial remains the matter of how each senator intends to vote on the two impeachment articles against him: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The potential swing votes on the Republican side include Collins, Romney and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. 

Among Democrats, red-state Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Doug Jones of Alabama and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona are seen as possible votes to acquit.

“I take my oath seriously about impartiality. I have not made a decision yet,” Manchin said earlier this week when asked if he had decided to acquit or convict the president on either charge against him.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Pelosi calls senators who voted against trial witnesses ‘accomplices to the President’s cover-up’

Westlake Legal Group NJMd5ydjJDBWTqe22xVP8r3oljbrg7G7B1UWBkBgqEU Pelosi calls senators who voted against trial witnesses 'accomplices to the President's cover-up' r/politics

All Republicans need to be voted OUT.

Honestly it’s come to that point, and Dems would be smart to start actively moving the Overton window in that direction. Once Republicans are rightfully slammed by blue wave after blue wave, and as demographics continue to evolve, we may get to the point where Repubs they basically can’t get into office anymore and the party is effectively placed on life support.

Then once Dems have been in power for a while and we have universal healthcare, automatic voter registration, anti-gerrymandering laws, ranked choice voting, paper ballots, and an improved education system – the kinds of policies that provide a solid foundation for an engaged, informed, fully empowered citizenry – we can start splitting up into new parties with various focuses and philosophies. Biden and AOC being in the same party is nuts.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com