Mediaboss Marketing

President Trump this month celebrated the confirmation of his 200th lifetime appointment to the federal bench, outpacing his predecessor by dozens through three-and-a-half years.

Campaign supporters of Mr. Trump and Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader, have been urged to buy T-shirts saluting the two men as Back-to-Back Supreme Court Champs, their faces rendered in white silhouette with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh etched on the sleeves.

And four years after the battle over a court vacancy helped deliver Mr. Trump to the White House, the president hopes to keep his job by playing the hits: He has pledged to produce an updated roster of would-be justices to galvanize the right before November, warning that his Democratic opponent, Joseph R. Biden Jr., would nominate a radical lefty as a slate of major cases returns the judiciary to the political fore.

Based on decisions being rendered now, this list is more important than ever before, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. VOTE 2020!

That message arrived well before the courts latest ruling to disappoint conservatives on Monday: a 5-4 decision striking down a law restricting abortions in Louisiana.

By their own account, Democrats have long found themselves outmaneuvered in electoral fights over the courts. Exit polls from 2016 showed Mr. Trump winning by double digits among those who called the Supreme Court the most important factor in their vote.

Most memorably, Mr. Trump made the novel choice to publish a list of prospective nominees, shaped by leaders from conservative groups like the Federalist Society, supplying specificity (at least on this subject) from a candidate prone to ideological shape-shifting.

It gave certainty to people who didnt know the president and I was one of them, said Penny Nance, the chief executive of Concerned Women for America, a conservative Christian group. It was probably the No. 1 issue when we looked at the polling of what brought conservatives to the voting booth in 2016. I think it will be a top-of-mind issue, certainly, in 2020.

Trailing in the polls amid overlapping national crises that he has strained to corral, Mr. Trump seems even more likely to place the courts, an area of unambiguous conservative triumph, at the center of his case for re-election.

Whether Democrats can harness their own enthusiasm on this score is at once uncertain and potentially critical to election fortunes this fall, both in the presidential race and several competitive Senate contests where the Republican incumbents Supreme Court votes might figure prominently. (In Maine, Senator Susan Collinss support for Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh in 2018 attracted wide-scale scrutiny and millions of dollars in donations against her before she had an official opponent.)

Recent years have produced no shortage of seminal moments to mobilize Democrats around matters of the judiciary: the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh; the non-confirmation of Judge Merrick B. Garland; the Supreme Courts refusal in April to extend the deadline for absentee voting in Wisconsin during a pandemic.

Still, some in the party sense an asymmetry in how urgently many Democratic voters think about the courts.

I do think it has picked up in visibility, but I dont think it moves millions to the polls in the way that it really should, said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware and a close Biden ally. Thats the challenge that remains before us.

Progressives have suggested that Mr. Biden, the former vice president, could prompt excitement by releasing his own list of preferred judges. Some activists have urged him to embrace a proposal to expand the size of the Supreme Court.

Mr. Biden has done neither, though he has promised to nominate a black woman to the court and said that the judiciary was the single most important reason that his wife, Jill, wanted him to run in 2020.

John Anzalone, a pollster and adviser for Mr. Biden, said that much of the modern Democratic electorate plainly grasped the significance of the courts. A Suffolk University/USA Today poll in April found that Democrats were slightly more likely than Republicans to call the Supreme Court one of the most important issues affecting their vote.

I do think that women college-educated women, suburban women are without a doubt a much bigger part of our coalition, Mr. Anzalone said. And theyre much more awake to the ramifications of replacing a Ruth Bader Ginsburg. That is real.

Democrats had been bracing for possible disappointment in the Louisiana abortion case, among other decisions pending before the end of this court term.

But two high-profile rulings had already come as a pleasant surprise to them: one holding that a landmark civil rights law protects L.G.B.T.Q. employees from workplace discrimination and another preventing Mr. Trump from immediately proceeding with plans to end a program shielding young immigrants from deportation.

While welcoming the outcomes, activists have advised Democrats to beware a conservative majority bearing gifts.

The courts not evil 100 percent of the time, Meagan Hatcher-Mays, the director of democracy policy at Indivisible, said before Mondays decision. But theyre evil, like, 94 percent of the time.

Such successes can, paradoxically, register as something of a narrative complication for those arguing that the court is stacked against the left.

Brian Fallon, the executive director of Demand Justice, a progressive group, suggested that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. understood as much and was steering the court accordingly.

These rulings are enough to convince a lot of people on the left that they should continue to play within the system and not offend sitting federal judges by calling them out as overly political, he said. In some sense, that is the exact game that Roberts is playing: to side with the liberals in just enough cases so the public misses the larger trend of this courts rightward swerve.

The chief justice has nonetheless angered many Republicans who appraise his tenure as a failure, recalling him siding with the courts liberal wing in cases challenging core provisions of the Affordable Care Act. In the abortion ruling on Monday, he voted with the liberal justices but did not adopt their reasoning, saying that deference to precedent compelled him instead.

Some critics of Chief Justice Roberts hold high office: Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesnt like me? Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter this month.

Conservatives say that, if anything, the Roberts era has demonstrated the need for Mr. Trump to fill vacancies for another four years.

Frustration with the chief justice and concern about the direction the courts were going was part of what galvanized conservatives in the first place to elect someone like Trump, said Carrie Severino, president of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network.

By prizing courage in addition to credentials, Ms. Severino said, Mr. Trumps approach is almost designed to avoid a future John Roberts, whom she accused of operating with politics in mind in some ways echoing the charge of his progressive skeptics.

She also joined some liberal counterparts in calling for Mr. Biden to release a list of potential nominees.

Many Biden supporters see little need for that step because, unlike Mr. Trump in 2016, the former vice president has an exhaustive record on judicial affairs, including an extended tenure as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Those close to Mr. Biden are rarely eager to dwell on the treatment of Anita Hill before his committee at the confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas. But others cite his work to defeat the nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork in 1987 as a towering feat for Democrats and a turning point for a chamber that had previously been disinclined to reject a nominee for primarily ideological reasons.

I dont think theres ever been any president assuming Bidens elected who knows as much about or has been as involved in shaping the Supreme Court as Joe Biden, said Mark Gitenstein, who led Mr. Bidens Judiciary Committee staff during the Bork fight.

And those who have doubted Mr. Biden in 2020, he added, were hardly the first.

The irony of the Bork fight is its not unlike what youre seeing now, Mr. Gitenstein said. People totally underestimated Biden.

Giovanni Russonello contributed reporting.

See the rest here:
Trump Is Running on the Courts Again. Should Biden Do the Same? - The New York Times

Polls, betting odds and pundits are all pointing toward a substantial victory for Joe BidenJoe BidenThe Hill's Campaign Report: Biden chips away at Trump's fundraising advantage The Memo: Trump grows weak as clock ticks down Nina Turner addresses Biden's search for a running mate MORE.TheNew York Timespoll showed Biden leading President TrumpDonald John TrumpSecret Service members who helped organize Pence Arizona trip test positive for COVID-19: report Trump administration planning pandemic office at the State Department: report Iran releases photo of damaged nuclear fuel production site: report MORE by a staggering 50 percent 36 percent, a 14-point margin.The Real Clear Politics polling averages show a 9-point lead for Biden.He leads Trump even more among women voters. TheTimespoll also indicated strong leads in critical swing states Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Arizona and North Carolina, ranging from 6 to 11 points.These results point to an overwhelming Electoral College victory.

If the present polling holds up through election day, such a powerful victory in the presidential race would almost certainly fuel victories down-ballot.Key Senate races in Maine, North Carolina, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa and Montana all appear to be trending in the Democratic direction. All of this suggests Democrats gaining control of the Senate.

Democrats are feeling bullish about a surge to a victory, gaining the White House and the Senate while retaining the House of Representatives.This has triggered talk of eliminating the legislative filibuster in the Senate.The argument made is that even if Democrats win, the 60-vote requirement to end debate in the Senate will prohibit the passage of the progressive agenda.

I believe using a newly minted majority to steamroll the minority would be extremely short-sighted, even if initially successful.

You will hear the battle cry, If we dont do it, the Republicans will when they get the Senate back.Weve heard this before.It rings particularly hollow because Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnell'Comrade' Trump gets 'endorsement' from Putin in new mock ad by Lincoln Project ACLU calls on Congress to approve COVID-19 testing for immigrants Carville repeats prediction that Trump will drop out of race MORE (R-Ky.) and his Republican majority did not do so during the first two years of the Trump administration.Trump repeatedly demanded the end to the filibuster. On Twitter, he wrote, If Republican Senate doesnt get rid of the Filibuster Rule & go to a simple majority, which the Dems would do, they are just wasting time!McConnell and the Republicans, who have denied little else to Trump, refused.

One might think that Democrats would have learned from having eviscerated the filibuster for judicial nominations.In 2013, they used a parliamentary slight of hand that we now call the nuclear option to sweep away the 60-vote requirement.If they are honest, Democrats will admit that this has been a terrible disaster. McConnell has fast-tracked 200 federal judges through the confirmation process, including 53 in the powerful circuit courts.

In the words of Mark Twain,Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.Any Democrat tempted to destroy the legislative filibuster, should consider the cost of giving a future GOP majority the power to realize a right-wing agenda and control the federal budget without any input from the minority.

Joe Biden knows this.During the debate in 2005, then-Senator Biden argued, We should make no mistake. This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab by the majority party to eliminate one of the procedural mechanisms designed for the express purpose of guaranteeing individual rights, and they would undermine the protections of a minority point of view in the heat of majority excess Quite frankly, it is the ultimate act of unfairness to alter the unique responsibility of the Senate and to do so by breaking the very rules of the Senate.He went on to say, At its core, the filibuster is not about stopping a nominee or a bill, it is about compromise and moderation It does not mean I get my way. It means you may have to compromise. You may have to see my side of the argument. That is what it is about, engendering compromise and moderation.

In 2012, when my book,Defending the Filibuster: The Soul of the Senatewas published, then Vice President Biden in a personal handwritten note wrote, It should be required reading for this session of the Senate. Great job.

Some Democrats have opposed eliminating the legislative filibuster, including a few who regret their vote to eliminate the filibuster on judicial nominations. For example, Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy KlobucharThe Hill's Coronavirus Report: Rep. Rodney Davis says most important thing White House can do on COVID-19 is give consistent messaging; US new cases surpass 50k for first time The Hill's Coronavirus Report: Stagwell President Mark Penn says Trump is losing on fighting the virus; Fauci says U.S. 'going in the wrong direction' in fight against virus Hillicon Valley: Facebook takes down 'boogaloo' network after pressure | Election security measure pulled from Senate bill | FCC officially designating Huawei, ZTE as threats MORE (D-Minn.) on NBCs Meet the Press said,I don't think we should've made that change, when we look back at it.

A bipartisan group of 61 senators wrote a letter to the leadership (31 Democrats signed) in 2017 stating, [W]e are united in our determination to preserve the ability of members to engage in extended debate when bills are on the Senate floor.

If Democrats do sweep to power in November, they will face an historic moment.Hopefully, Biden and his Congressional majorities will seek to use that moment wisely and reach out for greater consensus with independents and moderate Republicans.

Lasting major legislation like Social Security, Medicare, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, Medicare prescription drugs, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act and many others were accomplished with large Congressional majorities.This has contributed to the staying power of these public policies.

Eliminating the filibuster would take us in precisely the wrong direction.

Richard A. Arenbergis Director of the Taubman Institute for American Politics and Policy and avisiting professorat Brown University. He is a former senior aide toSens. Paul Tsongas (D-Mass.),Carl Levin(D-Mich.) and Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-Maine)for 34years. He is the author of the award-winning "Congressional Procedure: A Practical Guide to the Legislative Process in the U.S. Congress" and co-author of Defending the Filibuster: The Soul of theSenate.You can follow him on Twitter@richarenberg

Read the rest here:
Democrats: A moment in history, use it wisely | TheHill - The Hill

In a June 30 editorial, the BDN Editorial Board wrote about me that she knows how the political process works and where to apply needed pressure to get the right outcome. It adds that she supports Medicare for all, the Green New Deal and significant police reforms. The editorial concludes that for progressive Democrats, she is a solid second choice, or perhaps even a top choice.

Thank you for the compliments. But I have to admit, Im not sure why the editorial board would consider me a solid second choice for progressive Democrats. Why would a progressive Democrat give a first-place vote to the candidate who does not support Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, when a candidate who does is on the ballot? I would consider myself a solid first choice for progressive Democrats.

But what about the Democratic voters who do not consider themselves progressive, but who really want to win in November? I believe I should be their first choice vote as well, and heres why.

First of all, we both can beat Sen. Susan Collins. A poll shared by BDN columnists on May 28 shows that Sara Gideon and I both would beat Collins in the fall.

Second, I am a more efficient campaigner. As of April 1, Gideon had spent more than $10 million in this primary to reach her lead over Collins. I had spent less than $400,000 to reach my lead. I do not owe any big donors anything. I know how to run a grassroots campaign.

Third, this is not just any election year. Voters are hungry for change. The deadly virus, unemployment, racism, climate warming, personal debt, have all reached a critical state. The country needs solutions as big as the problems confronting us.

I call this our Social Security moment. Social Security was an idea that was around for decades, but it only came into law when the Great Depression struck, and voters and politicians recognized that something had to be done about seniors falling into poverty.

This year tens of millions of Americans lost their health insurance when they lost their jobs in the spring. It was never a good idea to tie health insurance to having a job. But this year made it absolutely clear. Universal health insurance, Medicare for All, which has been debated since the days of President Harry Truman, is now supported by a majority of Americans.

This year, your vote is not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. Its about who is with the people, and who is with the monied interests. I am with the people. I ask for your first place vote in the ranked-choice election for Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate on July 14.

Betsy Sweet of Hallowell is a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate.

See the article here:
Why I should be the first choice for Democrats in the US Senate race - Bangor Daily News

Friday, June 26, 2020 6:10 a.m. EDT by Thomson Reuters

By Michael Martina and John Whitesides

(Reuters) - Quintez Brown took to the streets in Kentucky to join many Americans in protesting against racial injustice after the death of George Floyd, a Black man in police custody last month.

The 19-year-old student at the University of Louisville, who is Black, also texted voters in support of Charles Booker, a Black Democratic state lawmaker running for the U.S. Senate.

"The protests showed the importance of having someone in a political office who can actually advocate for us and make a change," Brown said, adding it was his first time working on a political campaign.

The uprising after Floyd's death under the knee of a white police officer on May 25 has helped fuel a groundswell of political energy, spurring new voter registrations, record turnout in Georgia and Kentucky primaries and a string of victories for a younger generation of candidates of color in Tuesday's elections.

Democrats hope the enthusiasm can be sustained until the Nov. 3 general election, when former Vice President Joe Biden will challenge Republican President Donald Trump in a race that could hinge on the turnout of voters of color and young people.

Biden, whose foundering campaign was rescued by mostly older Black voters in South Carolina's primary in February, wants their strong support against Trump. It will be crucial in battleground states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, particularly after the first dip in Black voter turnout in 20 years contributed to Democrat Hillary Clinton's loss to Trump in 2016.

Biden also hopes to boost turnout among young voters, who often participate at lower rates than other ages. In 2016, voters between 18 and 29 had a turnout of just 46%, compared to 71% for those 65 years and older, Census figures show. That figure dropped from 2008's historic election, when younger voters had a 51% turnout.

"There is not a part of the Democratic electorate that is not activated right now. And that energy is going to spill over into the general election," said Matt Erwin, a Kentucky-based Democratic strategist.

Some groups that work to register voters have seen signs of that energy. Voto Latino, which looks to boost turnout for young Hispanics, said it has registered 94,513 voters so far in June, compared to 10,548 voters in May. About 78% of new registrants were between the ages of 18 and 34, the group said.

Rock the Vote, which works to boost the political power of young people, said it had more than 183,000 new registrations so far in June. Four years ago this month, it had fewer than 35,000.

Jesse Moore, a Rock the Vote board member, said a new generation of voters is asking about their district attorneys and police chiefs.

"People are jaded about the presidency, but the changes they are demanding are almost completely driven by local officials," Moore said.

Whether that energy will transform into Biden support remains to be seen. He is considering a Black running mate and has backed police reforms, including a ban on chokeholds.

Biden was also criticized during the Democratic primary campaign for his role as a U.S. senator in writing the 1994 crime bill, which critics say led to high incarceration rates that unfairly hit minorities, and some activists have pushed him to offer a broader criminal justice plan in the wake of the protests. [nL1N2DL1HD]

"Up-ballot candidates can benefit from this energy and movement, but only if they alignthemselves with what the movement has demanded - bold change," said Victoria Burton-Harris, a Black Democrat who is running for prosecutor in Wayne County, Michigan, an important battleground state.

Still, Democrats are hopeful that rising political activism from young and minority voters will help Biden. According to a June 10-16 Reuters/Ipsos poll, Biden led Trump by 58 percentage points among African Americans, 23 points among Hispanics, and 20 points among people between 18-34 years of age. Nationally, he had a 13-point lead over Trump, the poll showed.

"I think they are looking for someone who is going to hear them, but also who is going to exhibit the leadership they want at this moment. We would argue thats Joe Biden," said Symone Sanders, a senior Biden campaign adviser.

Courtney Parella, a Trump campaign spokeswoman, said Biden was "trying to avoid an examination of his nearly five-decade long political career, a record that undoubtably failed to support minority communities and is now failing to defend our men and women in blue."

RECORD TURNOUT

Democrats have been heartened by strong turnout in Georgia's June 9 elections, where the party broke the primary record set in 2008 despite a host of problems with voting machines, fewer polling places and long lines.

Kentucky's elections on Tuesday also set a primary turnout record, helped by a competitive race between Booker and well-funded establishment favorite Amy McGrath for the right to challenge Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell in November. The race is too close to call with absentee ballots pending.

A wave of other young candidates of color have scored primary victories this year. In New York, Jamaal Bowman, a Black school principal running in his first political campaign, beat 31-year veteran Democratic Representative Eliot Engel on Tuesday. [nL1N2E12YD]

"People finally understand that if we want to change the laws, we have to change the lawmakers," said Quentin James, founder of the Collective PAC, a group working for the election of progressive Black officials.

Jecorey Arthur, 28, a Black musician and educator running for the Louisville Metro Council, said when he announced his campaign late last year he was told "don't talk about race so much, people aren't ready to have that conversation."

A few months later, once the street protests for racial justice began, he heard a different tune.

"It was like the alarm was going off and you couldn't press snooze no matter what," Arthur said. "I went from beating that racial justice drum by myself to being in a marching band."

(Editing by Soyoung Kim and Aurora Ellis)

Continued here:
Young Americans turn out to protest. Democrats hope they will vote, too - WHTC News

Asked if he was worried about a political backlash if Democrats go too far, particularly over pursuing Barr's impeachment, Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia said: "Yes, I am. I'm cognizant of that possibility, so politics does come into play."

Pelosi has shown caution this year, despite calls to move ahead with more aggressive investigations. After establishing a select panel with the broad power to investigate the US response to the coronavirus pandemic, the committee has instead focused on how federal dollars have been spent, rather than Trump's initial response to the crisis, which a number of Democrats want to probe.

Despite calls by House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff and others to establish a select committee, like the 9/11 Commission, to investigate the US coronavirus response, Pelosi has yet to put such legislation on the floor. And while some House Democrats want to hold White House officials and others in contempt for defying subpoenas during the impeachment probe last year, Pelosi has not gone down that road.

Yet Democrats say more and more issues that require investigation continue to fall in their lap. The bombshells from former national security adviser John Bolton's book have sparked a renewed round of calls for his testimony before Congress.

"We haven't made any decisions on it, but I think we should hear any evidence he has of the President's wrongdoing. And we need to take care to protect the country," Schiff told CNN on Thursday referring to Bolton's testimony.

And the Supreme Court is soon set to rule on the case it heard last month where House Democrats are seeking a trove of Trump's financial documents, which if successful, could provide Democrats with a whole new set of investigative lines to pursue.

"I don't think we have enough time, and that's probably a futile distraction given the abject surrender of constitutional duty in the Senate," Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat told CNN, adding that he hoped the House would instead censure Barr.

'Solve our problems by going to the polls'

"Barr is a mess who's disgraced the Department of Justice," Pelosi said. "He is contemptible, there's no question about that. But at this point, let's solve our problems by going to the polls and voting on Election Day."

Still, the issue has sparked a debate within the party. Rep. Steve Cohen, an outspoken Tennessee Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, called for Barr to be impeached at Wednesday's hearing, accusing him of "reigning terror on the rule of law."

House Democrats charge that Barr has committed a litany of offenses: distorting the Mueller report, intervening in the cases of Trump associates Stone and Michael Flynn, meddling in antitrust investigations, firing the US attorney for the Southern District of New York and participating in the forceful removal of peaceful protestors outside the White House.

But unlike last year's months-long fight within House Democratic Caucus that ultimately led to the impeachment of Trump, the current debate over pursuing Barr's removal from office doesn't fall along ideological lines.

"As much as I personally would love to begin impeachment proceedings, we also know that the Senate just doesn't have the political will to do what's necessary despite the facts that are looking at them squarely in the face," said Rep. Veronica Escobar, a Texas Democrat. "But that doesn't mean we don't investigate thoroughly, which is what we're doing now."

Still, some freshman Democrats who were slow to come around to impeachment of Trump in 2019 told CNN they are open to impeachment of Barr.

Trump's impeachment looms over oversight debate

In 2019, Democrats debated for months over how to handle the calls for Trump's impeachment. Liberal Democrats on the Judiciary Committee pressed Pelosi to open an impeachment inquiry over allegations in the Mueller report, but she resisted those calls, siding with the freshmen in her caucus from districts Trump won in 2016.

Democrats acknowledged this week that trying to remove Barr from office could have political ramifications, even as some said it might be necessary.

"Impeachment is a political remedy, but it's also one that is necessary from time to time to save our republic from grave damage," said Johnson, the Georgia Democrat who sits on the Judiciary Committee.

Nadler's comments over the past week on impeachment Barr were reflective of Democrats' internal struggle. On Sunday, Nadler said on CNN's "State of the Union" that impeaching the attorney general would be a "waste of time."

But after a hearing Wednesday where two DOJ prosecutors accused Barr of politicizing investigations and Stone's sentencing, Nadler said he was now open to the possibility.

"We're looking into that, we may very well," Nadler said. Asked why his view had changed, Nadler added: "I think the weight of the evidence and of what's happened leads to that conclusion."

As Wednesday's hearing got underway, the Justice Department announced that Barr would testify before the House Judiciary Committee at the end of July, giving Democrats angry with Barr the chance to confront him. Barr has yet to testify before the panel since his confirmation in February 2019.

"Certainly, more fact finding might generate that kind of response. But we want to give General Barr his opportunity to testify and frankly respond to these charges," Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat, said when asked if Barr should be impeached.

Republicans have dismissed the calls for Barr's impeachment, accusing Democrats of trying to score political points. "I think the Democrats have a big problem -- it's the judges agree with Bill Barr," said Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, a reference to an appeals court ordering Flynn's charges dismissed Wednesday and the court giving Stone a sentence below what the prosecutors on the case had recommended.

Barr spokeswoman Kerri Kupec dismissed the calls for Barr's impeachment as "a political thing" in a "Fox and Friends" interview Thursday.

Before Pelosi's comments Thursday, Democratic leaders expressed skepticism about going forward with impeachment of Barr.

"I can't imagine that we're going to move forward on impeachment," Rep. Karen Bass, the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus and a Judiciary Committee member, said Wednesday. "If we impeach him, we want to impeach him because we want him to be gone, and that's clearly not going to happen."

But Democrats are still angry that Bolton spurned them during the impeachment inquiry, only to turn around and accuse them of "impeachment malpractice" by focusing just on Ukraine. Plus, there's still concern that Bolton will defy a subpoena and force Democrats to go to court should they seek his testimony.

Democrats have a host of other oversight issues they're pursuing, from accusations of political favoritism in the response to the coronavirus pandemic to the deployment of the National Guard and federal law enforcement in reaction to the protests over the past month.

And Democrats say even if they don't impeach Barr, they still can hold additional hearings to hold him accountable.

"I'm not sure it's a useful exercise of time," Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat in House leadership, said of impeachment. "But we absolutely have to continue these hearings to bring to light the conduct of the attorney general. We have an election right around the corner and the American people have a right to know it."

Read more from the original source:
House Democrats caution about going too far with Trump probes as 2020 prospects brighten - CNN