The "Trial"

If 45*'s not guilty, we'd see Bolton and Pompeo and Mulvaney and dozens of other witnesses standing in line waiting to testify, and ready to tell all.

And the courier services in DC would be busting their humps delivering mountains of exculpatory documentation.

To be fair, the simple fact that those witnesses and that documentary evidence aren't forthcoming does not necessarily mean he's guilty, but c'mon.

And his claim that he's just trying to protect the integrity of the office of the presidency in the best interests of future presidents and for the good of the nation?

cuz we all know:

George Conway & Neal Katyal in WaPo:

How can one conduct a “trial” without knowing this evidence? As lawyers, we have never heard of a trial without witnesses. Both past impeachment trials of presidents featured witnesses — including 41 in the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson. And the lack of witnesses is particularly striking given the shell game Trump and his Republican colleagues have played. In the House, Trump prevented executive branch employees from testifying, but said some of them would be able to testify in the Senate. Now that we are in the Senate, Republicans say these folks should have testified in the House. Lewis Carroll would be pleased.