Walter Shaub on Tuesday night used a lengthy Twitter thread to attempt to make sense of the GOP-controlled Senate’s impeachment trial of President Donald Trump over the Ukraine scandal.
The former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics used 16 posts to imagine “trying to explain democracy to someone who showed up at today’s trial with no knowledge of democracy except for (President Abraham) Lincoln’s quote about a ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people.’”
Shaub served under former President Barack Obama and resigned six months into Trump’s presidency. He has since become a vocal critic of the Trump administration.
“What they witnessed might raise a few questions,” he said.
Check out the full thread here:
Imagine trying to explain democracy to someone who showed up at today’s trial with no knowledge of democracy except for Lincoln’s quote about a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” What they witnessed might raise a few questions. (Thread)
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
Q. Is the judge inexperienced?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. He’s the top judge in the country.
Q. Why doesn’t he have this thing under control?
A. Oh, well, he has no power. The Republican Senators are in charge.
Q. But they’re the ones saying there shouldn’t be any witnesses or documents.
A. Yes.
Q. It’s almost like they don’t want to uncover the truth. Shouldn’t they be objective?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. Oh yes. They take an oath pledging to be objective.
Q. - -
A. It’s tradition.
Q. It’s weird that the president’s lawyers are not even challenging the factual basis for the charges. Also, why are they shouting?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. There’s this thing called Fox News that likes to play vignettes of white guys shouting.
Q. How come the other side doesn’t already have all the documents and testimony they want?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. The top lawyer in the president’s office wrote that he wouldn’t let them have any documents or witnesses.
Q. Why don’t they get that guy down here and ask him some questions?
A. He’s right over there, but the Senate majority won’t let them ask him any questions.
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
Q. Then, what’s his job here today?
A. He’s here to argue that the other side doesn’t have enough evidence to convict.
Q. The evidence he withheld from them?
A. Yes. That evidence.
Q. But he complained that the other side didn’t give him documents.
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. Right.
Q. And they wouldn’t let his political party into the secure room he called a SCIF.
A. They were allowed in.
Q. And the people in charge of this trial didn’t mind that he said that?
A. No.
Q. Do they deny that your president asked Ukraine to investigate his political rival?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. No. That’s well established.
Q. But he just did it the one time?
A. Well, he asked China to do it too.
Q. How do you know?
A. He did it on live television.
Q. So twice?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. He also asked Russia to get emails belonging to another political rival.
Q. On live TV?
A. Yes.
Q. But they didn’t do it, right?
A. They released the emails before the election.
Q. That must have been the worst thing that could have happened to his rival.
A. Some might say it was worse that the FBI revealed it was investigating her right before the election? Turns out they never found anything warranting prosecution.
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
Q. Isn’t that the agency his friends here in the Senate say was out to get him?
A. Yes.
Q. Lucky for him he wasn’t under investigation.
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. Oh he was. And the investigation, which was taken over by the Justice Department, resulted in a lengthy report.
Q. I assume they cleared him of any wrongdoing too.
A. No. They explicitly said they couldn’t clear him.
Q. So they revealed they were investigating his rival and concealed that they were investigating him, and then he got the most votes?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. He lost by 3 million votes.
Q. - -
A. It’s complicated.
Q. And they never prosecuted him?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. The Justice Department refuses to prosecute a president.
Q. They work for him?
A. Technically, they work for a guy he picked.
Q. And that guy‘s loyal to him?
A. More so than the one he fired for not stopping the investigation of him.
Q. So if this Justice Department won’t prosecute him, who can hold him accountable?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. A majority of Senators.
Q. The ones who don’t want documents or witnesses?
A. Yes.
Q. And the American people, do they want him acquitted?
A. Surveys show a majority want him removed.
Q. But they don’t support calling witnesses?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. A majority of people do support calling witnesses.
Q. But witnesses won’t be called?
A. No.
Q. So who said that line about government of, by and for the people?
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 22, 2020
A. President Abraham Lincoln.
Q. What was his party affiliation?
A. Republican.
Q. - -
Support HuffPost
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
At HuffPost, we believe that everyone needs high-quality journalism, but we understand that not everyone can afford to pay for expensive news subscriptions. That is why we are committed to providing deeply reported, carefully fact-checked news that is freely accessible to everyone.
Whether you come to HuffPost for updates on the 2024 presidential race, hard-hitting investigations into critical issues facing our country today, or trending stories that make you laugh, we appreciate you. The truth is, news costs money to produce, and we are proud that we have never put our stories behind an expensive paywall.
Would you join us to help keep our stories free for all? Your contribution of as little as $2 will go a long way.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you’ll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.