The Democratic Mistake: Why Not Issuing a Subpoena for Donald Trump Further Dimmed Justice's Luster

Introduction

In the aftermath of the second impeachment trial of Donald Trump, the question arises: Did the Democrats make a critical blunder by failing to subpoena Trump? This essay examines the reasoning behind the decision, the potential benefits, and the broader implications on the democratic process and public perception.

Why No Subpoena?

The decision by the Democrats not to subpoena Donald Trump was primarily based on the belief that even if it could have swayed a few Senators that otherwise might have voted to convict, it would not have changed the overall outcome. This is a common stance among legal professionals, as part of the ethical principle that certain cases must be upheld, even if the odds are against them. The Senate managers argued that the case needed to be prosecuted at the very least to show that justice was being served, albeit under duress.

The Potential Benefits of Using Subpoena Power

However, there is a strong argument in favor of issuing subpoenas. Firstly, it would have been a powerful spectacle, putting Trump on the witness stand would have made him look twice as in contempt of the legislative process. While Senator supporters that were already disposed to vote for conviction would not have been swayed, it would have had a significant impact on those still undecided, potentially increasing the number of votes for conviction. Moreover, the public deserved to see a more comprehensive trial, exposing facts that may otherwise remain hidden. This would have adhered to the ideal of transparency and accountability that democracy is built upon.

Procedural Flexibility

The Senate could have taken steps to ensure the impeachment trial did not impede its legislative responsibilities. For instance, trial proceedings could have been scheduled in the mornings, allowing for afternoon legislative sessions. This would have shown the Senate's commitment to both processes.

The Impact on the Republican Image and Public Perception

The decision not to subpoena Trump inadvertently portrayed the Senate and the Democratic party as weak and yielding to political pressures. Trump's non-compliance with the subpoena highlighted the perceived sham in the trial, further damaging the public's perception of the democratic process. This is particularly damaging in the wake of the January 6, 2021, insurrection, which was a stark reminder of the dangerous discourse and actions surrounding the former President.

Conclusion

While the ultimate outcome of the second impeachment trial for Donald Trump remained unchanged, the decision not to subpoena him was a significant misstep. It undermined the principle of transparency and accountability, diminished public trust in the legislative process, and allowed the Republican image to take another hit. Had the Democrats taken a more aggressive stance, using subpoena power to compel Trump to testify, it might have shown a stronger commitment to justice and acted as a warning to those who seek to undermine the democratic process. In future legal proceedings, this lesson should not be forgotten, and the principles of transparency and accountability must remain at the forefront.