Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for U.S. Senate

Missouri U.S. Senators vote to clear Trump

By

Senator Roy Blunt addresses the Missouri House in Jefferson City on April 17, 2019 (photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

The U.S. Senate has wrapped up today the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump by voting 57-43 to acquit him. The trial required 67 guilty votes to convict Trump. Missouri U.S. Senators Roy Blunt and Josh Hawley, both Republicans, voted to clear Trump.

An article of impeachment accused Trump of provoking a violent mob of supporters that struck the U.S. Capitol on January 6. Five people died in the attack.

Blunt released the following statement after today’s vote:

“I said before this trial started that I believe the constitutional purpose for presidential impeachment is to remove a president from office, not to punish a person after they have left office. None of the arguments presented changed my view that this was an unconstitutional proceeding. Impeachment is not a tool that should be used to settle political scores against a private citizen,” says Blunt.

His vote comes after his comments on the CBS news show “Face the Nation” last month:

U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley (R) speaks to Missourinet during an interview on March 25, 2020 (file photo courtesy of Senator Hawley’s office)

“I think the president’s decisions and his actions that day and leading up to that day on this topic were clearly reckless. I said that very early in the evening on Wednesday, that this was a tragic day for the country and the president had some, had involvement in that,” he said. “My view would be what the president should do is now finish the last 10 days of his presidency. Now, my personal view is that the president touched the hot stove on Wednesday and is unlikely to touch it again.”

This week, Hawley said Democrats are trying to silence half of America.

“This kangaroo court is about trying to delegitimize half the American electorate while Americans are suffering,” said. “In the depths of a pandemic, Democrats are pursuing an unconstitutional, political vendetta.”

Hawley has been heavily criticized for leading an attempt to challenge President Joe Biden’s election victory, citing voter fraud allegations that several courts have struck down. Some people blamed him for fueling the Trump mob that took over the Capitol.

Seven Republicans voted today to convict Trump – Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

Copyright © 2021 · Missourinet

Four Missouri U.S. House members vote to give $25 billion to help keep Postal Service afloat

By

The U.S. House recently passed a bill that would give $25 billion in emergency funding to help keep the U.S. Postal Service going through the pandemic and expected surge of mail closer to the General Election. The funding level is the amount the Trump-appointed U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors recommends. Four Missouri members voted in favor of the legislation – Republicans Sam Graves and Ann Wagner and Democrats Emanuel Cleaver and Lacy Clay.

The plan would also reverse recent cost-cutting measures to slow service.

Missouri Congressman Emanuel Cleaver

The Postal Service has been struggling financially due to a decline in mail volume, the pandemic causing costs to climb, among other things. Cleaver, who represents Kansas City and several rural western Missouri counties, has been sounding the alarm for a while about the agency’s money problems. He says talks of privatizing it is an insult to the older.

“I just think that that’s almost mean spirited,” he says. “We don’t even think about the older people in our country who are not online, who still handwrite all their letters and pay their bills by writing out checks.”

Cleaver co-sponsored the bill, H.R. 8015. He tells Missourinet privatization would also hurt rural communities.

“When you privatize it, can you imagine X corporation delivering mail to a little farm outside of Orrick, where they have to drive from Kansas City to Orrick and then drive down a dirt road to put the mail in a mailbox? They are not going to do it. They are going to say it is not cost efficient – it’s cost prohibitive,” says Cleaver.

Cleaver’s district includes rural towns like Marshall, Richmond and Belton.

U.S. Rep. Sam Graves, R-Tarkio, represents 36 counties in northern Missouri (file photo courtesy of Congressman Graves’ office)

Graves, of northern Missouri, tells Missourinet affiliate KFEQ the legislation affects almost every part of his district.

“The post office is something that I’ve been looking at and working through for years,” says Graves. “I have a very rural district and a lot of senior citizens in my district that depend on postal and making sure that we keep six-day delivery out there and timely.”

Graves’ district includes Chillicothe and Memphis.

President Donald Trump has threatened to veto the bill – and Graves says he and the president don’t always agree on everything.

“This is one of those issues and that’s been the case with every president that I’ve worked with. Whether that was Bush, I didn’t agree with him on everything. Obama, I didn’t agree with him on everything. And obviously President Trump,” says Graves. “We don’t agree on everything as well and that’s part of what representation is. I have the opportunity to be very parochial with my district and I can look out for, and always have, for the interest of my district.”

Graves says in this election, it’s unfortunate that the Postal Service has become political.

Missouri Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler and Congressmen Billy Long, Blaine Luetkemeyer and Jason Smith all voted against the plan.

It is expected to have an uphill battle in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, has said the delivery of mail-in ballots was a “nonexistent problem.”

Copyright © 2020 · Missourinet

Missouri’s Hawley wants to hear from Biden and Schiff, if Senate calls witnesses (AUDIO)

By

The U.S. Senate is expected to hold an up-or-down vote Friday afternoon in Washington, on whether to call witnesses in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.

U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley’s official portrait (2020 photo courtesy of Senator Hawley’s office)

U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley (R), who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke to Missourinet’s Ashley Byrd on Thursday about the impeachment trial, and about Friday’s big day on Capitol Hill.

Hawley opposes hearing testimony from former national security adviser John Bolton.

“I don’t see any reason to hear from John Bolton, my view is this: I don’t think we need to hear from any of these people,” Hawley says. “We already have all of the House’s evidence in the record before us, that includes 17 witnesses and their testimony from the House.”

Hawley will vote against calling witnesses, in Friday’s vote. However, he says if the Senate calls witnesses, he has motions ready to call former Vice President Joe Biden (D) and his son, Hunter.

“I’ve consistently said I think for months now that if the Senate does call witnesses, I absolutely want to hear from Hunter Biden. And not just Hunter Biden, I want to hear from Joe Biden, I think he’s absolutely relevant,” says Hawley.

Hawley also wants to hear from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-California, saying he wants to know what Schiff told the whistleblower.

Senate Democrats want to hear from Bolton, on the allegation that President Trump withheld military aid to pressure Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son.

Hawley says President Trump did not commit bribery nor extortion, adding that nothing Bolton says will change that.

As for Chairman Schiff, he tweeted late Thursday: “The President’s lawyers argue on the Senate floor that he can withhold aid, coerce an ally, and try to cheat in an election, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Our Founders would be aghast.”

Hawley also says the president has not been given the same rights that previous presidents have been given, in impeachment trials. He says President Trump was not given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.

“And it’s the first impeachment of a president in our history that alleges zero criminal or unlawful conduct, zero,” Hawley says.

He says the president was not given the ability to participate in depositions.

Senator Hawley says the Senate will hear four hours of arguments on Friday, before the afternoon vote.

Hawley says the Senate has already heard more than 50 hours of arguments, and that he’s been taking notes in multiple notebooks. He says he’s looking forward to voting on Friday.

Missouri’s two U.S. Senators, Hawley and Roy Blunt, are Republicans.

U.S. Rep. Lacy Clay, D-St. Louis, tweeted Thursday night with a hashtag #TrumpIsGuilty. Congressman Clay, who was elected in 2000, is one of the deans of Missouri’s congressional delegation. U.S. Rep. Sam Graves, R-Tarkio, is the other.

Click here to listen to the full six-minute interview between Missourinet’s Ashley Byrd and U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, which was recorded on January 30, 2020:

Copyright © 2020 · Missourinet

Missouri Rep. Smith: Senators running for president are not impartial jurors

By

If the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump reaches the U.S. Senate, Missouri Congressman Jason Smith asks that some senators step back from voting.

Eighth District Republican Jason Smith filed a resolution to require senators who are running for office to recuse themselves.

“To be an impartial juror, that means you cannot have your mind made up; you have to listen to the facts. And I can tell out right now there are five members of the United States Senate who are all presidential candidates who have stood on national TV saying that they would vote right now to impeach the President of the United States. Those aren’t impartial jurors,” he told Missourinet.

Smith has introduced House Resolution 774, which would compel the U.S. Senate to amend its Rules of Procedure and Practice When Sitting on Impeachment Trials.

Congressman Smith has also written a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, calling for the change. More than two dozen members of Congress have signed the letter.

He says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is “not giving the president his due process and fairness.”

“When you look at the Constitution, the Vice-President of the United States has to recuse himself from presiding over the Senate because of the conflict of interest. He’s next in line for president if the impeachment happens. Well, every senator has to take an oath of office during the impeachment process that they will be impartial jurors, basically. To be an impartial juror, that means you can’t have your mind made up; you have to listen to the facts.”

Smith calls the impeachment hearings “a sham” and says Speaker Pelosi is “abusing her power.”

“The first impeachment vote we had in the House happened in December of 2017. That was a year and a half before the Ukraine telephone call that everyone has seen the transcript of. Nancy Pelosi is only doing what her left-wing squad in the House of Representatives has pushed her that far.”

President Trump says the impeachment effort is bogus and has declined to participate in the current phase of House impeachment hearings.  He has refused to cooperate or allow cabinet witnesses or documents to be released.

U.S. Senate Democrats split on proposals to handle military sexual assaults (VIDEO)

By

A rift has formed between U.S. Senate Democrats over the best way to improve the military’s handling of sexual assault cases.

Senators Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri), Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire) and Jon Tester (D-Montana) are joined by retired military women who support Sen. Ayotte's proposals for the handling of military sexual assaults. (photo courtesy: the office of Senator McCaskill)

Senators Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri), Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire) and Jon Tester (D-Montana) are joined by retired military women who support the Armed Services Committee’s proposals for the handling of military sexual assaults. (photo courtesy: the office of Senator McCaskill)

Military unit commanders have the say in whether prosecution of soldiers under their command for serious crimes, proceeds. One proposal from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) would give that final decision to Judge Advocate General attorneys.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) backs proposals that she helped write,  in a defense bill approved last month by the Senate Armed Services Committee. Those make other changes but keep the decision whether to proceed with prosecution with commanders.

McCaskill says it will better serve victims in several ways, including affording greater protection to victims from retaliation.

“If you’ve been victimized and you go back in the unit, do you think it’s more likely you’re going to get retaliation if a bunch of outside lawyers have said to go forward or if the commander has said to go forward? A level of protection comes to the victim because the commander has said, ‘We’re going to get to the bottom of this.'”

McCaskill also refutes arguments made by backers of Gillibrand’s proposal that countries using systems that hers would mirror would see more reporting and prosecution of assaults.

“None of the nations that have changed their systems have had an increase in reporting. The data does not support that position. Secondly we know that literally dozens and dozens and dozens of cases just in the last two years, prosecutors turned down the cases and commanders said, ‘Go ahead.’ We know that if prosecutors are the last say, that we will have fewer prosecutions.”

Several retired military women joined Senator McCaskill at a media conference to offer their support for the proposals.

Retired Army Judge Advocate Lisa Schenck

Retired Army Judge Advocate Lisa Schenck

Retired Army Judge Advocate Lisa Schenck says those proposals would empower victims, including through the requirement that a Special Victims’ Counsel be provided to offer legal advice and assistance to service members who are victims of sexual assault by a member of the U.S. military.

“They need to go to their attorney, their counsel, and they need to be told where they can report. There are nine other places to report aside from the chain of command in the Army … the other thing they need to be told is, they can initiate the court-martial process themselves by preferring charges … they don’t have to wait for the JAG office, they don’t have to wait for the commander, and that’s what that victim counsel is going to tell them.”

Both plans have bipartisan backing.

McCaskill’s position has earned her criticism from some former supporters, including a Navy veteran who was raped in 1986, campaigned for McCaskill last year and now has been featured in a half-page ad in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch calling McCaskill’s approach misguided.

The Armed Service Committee’s proposals would still strip commanders of authority to dismiss court-martial convictions for most offenses and require that any case in which a commander overrules the advice of a Staff Judge Advocate to proceed to court-martial be referred to the civilian Service Secretary for a final decision.

Other changes they would make are:

· Make it a punishable offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice to retaliate against a victim who reports a criminal offense

· Require a commander, when serving as a convening authority in a military court-martial, to provide written justification for any modifications made to a sentence

· Require a commander, when serving as a convening authority in a military court-martial, to receive input from the victim before arriving at any decision during clemency proceedings

· Require that a person found guilty of an offense of rape, sexual assault, forcible sodomy, or an attempt to commit any of those offenses receive a punishment that includes, at a minimum, a dismissal or dishonorable discharge

· Eliminate the five-year statute of limitations for sexual assault and sexual assault of a child

· Ensure the military has the authority to move an individual accused of sexual assault from a unit to protect a victim from unwanted contact with their alleged attacker, while sustaining a victim’s right to request expedited transfer

· Provide for study of the military’s ability to create a database of information regarding those accused by victims in restricted military reports-meaning the victim chooses to not have the information given to law enforcement, commanders, or others to facilitate potential prosecution-such that serial offenders might be identified and victims might be encouraged to make unrestricted reports that allow for prosecutions in those cases

· Express the Sense of the Senate that commanding officers are responsible for a command climate that appropriately handles sexual assault, that failure of a commanding officer to maintain such a command climate is an appropriate basis for relief of their command position, and that command climate should be a consideration in a commander’s performance evaluation

· Remove the past performance and character of an accused from those factors that may be considered by a commander, when serving as a military courts-martial convening authority, in deciding whether to refer a case to court-martial

· Provide that in sexual assault cases in which a Staff Judge Advocate and a Commander, when serving as a military courts-martial convening authority, agree that a case should not proceed to court-martial, the next higher military commander also review this determination

See the media conference, courtesy of the office of Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire):

Former Senate candidate Brunner calls political system ‘broken’

By

After losing in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, St. Louis businessman John Brunner says he’s learned the deck is stacked against political newcomers.

Former U.S. Senate candidate John Brunner.

Former U.S. Senate candidate John Brunner.

Brunner is still busy in politics, but his focus now is on supporting others. He says there are people like state lawmakers, people who lost in the last election and those looking at getting into politics that need inspiration and guidance, which he believes he can offer.

But, he calls the political system “broken,” saying it works against the success of anyone but career politicians.

“It takes so many resources to be able to run an effective campaign, so if you are not full-time in politics spending a whole career building your name I.D., using other people’s money campaign after campaign after campaign, you’re locked out. On the other reverse, you find people who start in politics, spend their entire career and they leave multi-millionaires. That’s wrong as well.”

Still, Brunner says he believes people with backgrounds outside of politics need to get involved in their government.

“At any level, you’re going to have to find people that are willing to get involved and get engaged and see how you can help them, but I tell you … the money hurdle is very difficult and it makes me sick that that’s what’s preventing a lot of good people from getting involved in public office.”

Brunner lost the Republican nomination for Senate to Todd Akin, who went on to lose the Senate seat to incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill. Brunner doesn’t say whether he thinks Akin’s controversial comments, including some about abortion, played a role in that outcome.

“I go back to the fundamentals. You have to be organized, you have to have a team, you have to pull people together and regrettably we didn’t have the organization and support in terms of our ability to get the ball across the goal line, and I think a lot of people have recognized that we can’t beat each other up in primaries if we plan to have any kind of victory in the general election.”

Brunner says he doesn’t know if he’ll run for anything again.

Akin on late-race polls, campaign finances and messages

By

Congressman Todd Akin says he’s not concerned by polls early this week that showed him trailing Sarah Steelman and John Brunner in the GOP Senate race.

Congressman and U.S. Senate hopeful Todd Akin contines a tour of the state today in St. Louis.

Akin says he’s been through campaigns before, and he doesn’t trust the results of polls that come out this close to an election.

“Part of it’s because, who can predict the people that are going to be … whatever, 100 degrees August 7? That are gonna be at the polls? I think it’s very hard to know. So the polling data is traditionally very tricky at this time, plus you’ve got people putting the last of their money into advertising and other kinds of campaign activities.”

Akin says he believes the race for the seat of Senator Claire McCaskill is still close between the three frontrunners.

“The fact that we’ve had Huckabee supporting us has been very strong for us … and I think the fact that I have a proven record and people know what they’re getting with me, and the fact that I was willing to vote against my own party in some very high-profile votes indicate that I’m trying to put principle first.”

Akin’s campaign has focused much of its attention on its message in recent weeks, and accuses his opponents of turning to negative attack ads. “We don’t really think that running other Republicans down to build yourself up is really a very honest or good way to do things, and so we’ve rejected that and decided that we’re going to talk just about what’s positive and where we need to be going as a nation.”

Akin says his campaign has surpassed those of his opponents in grassroots efforts and message, but financially it’s been more of a challenge.

“I’ve raised more money five quarters running than my two opponents, but both of them have received … one has written himself seven million dollars, so he’s trying to buy the race, and the other one has gotten some very big contributions in the super PACs, so it’s like one or two people giving big, big blocks of money.”

Of the endorsement of Steelman by former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Akin says it could cost him votes. “Sarah Palin has tended to endorse women around the country and so it doesn’t surprise us that she might jump into this race … She’s not very predictable a lot of times where she jumps or who she jumps but it seems like there is a pattern that she’s very much more of the sort of the feminist side of jumping into … the women running in various races.”