众议院弹劾调查将于下周秘密进行，首次成为公众关注的焦点。但参议员们周四表示，他们不打算观看公开听证会，听证会将听取现任和正式官员对乌克兰丑闻的证词。
上院近十几名成员——共和党人和民主党人——告诉记者新闻周刊他们将出于多种原因退出公开诉讼，其中大多数原因是时间不够。其他人说他们还没有做出最后决定，或者他们不想“偏见”他们的观点。
参议员将担任陪审员，并最终决定唐纳德·特朗普总统在未来几个月内对众议院可能指控他的任何弹劾条款是否有罪。但是基于他们拒绝观看公开诉讼，参议员们表示他们不相信证人的证词在他们作为弹劾陪审员的角色中是至关重要的。
“我不会答应坐在我的办公室里看这些听证会，”林赛·格雷厄姆参议员说新闻周刊。“我认为整件事是个笑话。我下定决心了。”
特别是，共和党人不观看的计划与他们最近几周对众议院秘密调查的抱怨直接矛盾。众议院的调查是通过远离公众视线的国会大厦的一个安全房间进行的。他们要求公众对这一过程有所了解，并严厉批评了众议院情报委员会主席亚当·希夫领导调查的方式。
“很难了解众议院正在发生的事情，因为他们有选择地泄露不同的文件，”琼尼·恩斯特参议员说。“很难理解他们在做什么。”
然而，当被提示她是否会在下周观看公开听证会时，恩斯特回应道:“我也有自己的工作要做。”
三名向弹劾调查人员私下作证的证人将于下周在两天内公开作证:美国驻乌克兰最高外交官威廉·泰勒；乔治·肯特，国务院负责乌克兰政策的副助理国务卿；和前美国驻乌克兰大使玛丽·约瓦诺维奇。在他们的证词中，泰勒将特朗普与一个交换条件捆绑在一起因为在向乌克兰施压调查拜登夫妇的同时拒绝军事援助，肯特对鲁迪·朱利安尼的角色表示担忧特朗普的私人律师，在美国-乌克兰政策和约瓦诺维奇详细描述了朱利安尼和特朗普周围的其他人向总统散布有关她的虚假信息，据称这导致她被驱逐出大使职位。
“我认为整个过程与我们过去所做的不一致。这是假的。它是由政治人物驱动的。对付总统的最好方法是投票箱，”格雷厄姆说。"我认为这是房子里的一堆垃圾."
10月27日，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在DC华盛顿白宫外交接待室发表讲话时，参议员林赛·格雷厄姆正在聆听。
参议院司法委员会主席表示，泰勒的证词“对我没有任何影响”，引用了这位外交官证词的一部分，他在证词中表示，他对特朗普参与交换的“明确理解”是基于另一个人——美国驻欧盟大使戈登·桑德兰(Gordon Sondland)提供的信息。
北卡罗莱纳州的共和党参议员理查德·伯尔、田纳西州的拉马尔·亚历山大、佛罗里达州的马尔科·卢比奥、怀俄明州的约翰·巴拉索、田纳西州的玛莎·布莱克本、路易斯安那州的约翰·肯尼迪和阿拉斯加州的莉萨·穆尔科斯基都表示，他们也可能太忙而无法收听。
“我可能会相当忙，”布莱克本说，而伯尔回答说他有“一份日常工作”。两者都很难做到。如果有任何价值，我们会挑选出来。”肯尼迪说他对听证会的关注“取决于我的日程安排”。我要试试。”
共和党参议院领导成员巴拉索说，一名工作人员可能会照看他。
参议员理查·谢尔比是目前仅有的18名参议员之一，也是克林顿弹劾案审判的参众两院议员，他微笑着说，观看公开证词可能“损害我的观点”尽管他有能力第一次在公共场合听取证人的证词，参议院拨款委员会主席说他“不想看到这些，那一点也不会影响我。”
谢尔比谈到克林顿弹劾案时说:“我一直在等待参议院收到的证据。”。“我认为这是一个严肃的步骤。这不应该是马戏团。”
但不仅仅是参议院共和党人说他们不会观看下周的会议，民主党人也是如此。
“我不知道我的时间表是否允许，”参议员鲍勃·梅嫩德斯(新泽西州)说。“我们在这里有很多行动，所以很明显，归根结底，不管弹劾的最终条款是什么，如果有的话，然后是支持这些条款的证据。这是事实探索者的最终问题。”
梅嫩德斯说，如果我不做任何其他工作，他可以收听
蒂姆·凯恩参议员和麦克·班尼参议员也是2020年的总统候选人，他们说他们还没有做出最后决定，因为他们还没有考虑这个问题。
“我甚至没想过。凯恩说，下周之前我还有几英里路要走。他详细说明说，他“可能”会有一只员工手表。他还强调说，他犹豫不决并不是因为他相信证词对于参议员作为陪审员的角色来说并不重要。“好的一面是，我阅读速度很快，当我不坐着看的时候，我通常可以更快地吸收更多的信息。”
SENATORS SAY THEY'LL TUNE OUT NEXT WEEK'S PUBLIC IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS: 'THIS IS A BUNCH OF CRAP'
The House's impeachment inquiry will emerge from behind closed doors next week to be cast in the public spotlight for the first time. But senators said Thursday they have no plans to watch the public hearings that will feature testimony about the Ukraine scandal from current and formal officials.
Nearly a dozen members of the upper chamber—Republicans and Democrats—told Newsweekthey will tune out the public proceedings for multiple reasons, most of whom cited a lack of time. Others said they've yet to make a final decision or that they wouldn't want to "prejudice" their view.
Senators will act as jurors and ultimately decide whether President Donald Trump is guilty or innocent of any articles of impeachment the House is likely to charge him with in the coming months. But based on their declination to watch the public proceedings, senators indicated they don't believe the witnesses' testimonies are pivotal in their role as impeachment jurors.
"I'm not gonna promise to sit in my office and watch these hearings," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Newsweek. "I think the whole thing's a joke. I made up my mind."
In particular, Republicans' plans not to watch is in direct contradiction to their gripes in recent weeks about the secretiveness in which the House's inquiry has been conducted via a secure room of the Capitol away from the public eye. They've demanded that the process play out in the public's view and have chastised the way House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) has led the investigation.
"It is really hard to follow what's going on in the House because they're selectively leaking out different documents," said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA). "It's hard to follow what they're doing."
However, when prompted if she'll watch the public hearings next week, Ernst responded: "I have my own work to get done, too."
Three witnesses who gave private depositions to impeachment investigators are slated to testify in public next week over the course of two days: top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine William Taylor; George Kent, the State Department's deputy assistant secretary handling Ukraine policy; and former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. In their testimonies, Taylor tied Trump to a quid pro quo for withholding military aid while pressuring Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, Kent raised concerns about the role of Rudy Giuliani, Trump's personal attorney, in U.S.-Ukraine policy and Yovanovitch detailed how Giuliani and others around Trump sowed disinformation about her to the president, which allegedly caused her to be ousted as ambassador.
"I think the whole process is out of line from what we've done in the past. It's a sham. It's been driven by political people. The best way to deal with a president is at the ballot box," Graham said. "I think this is a bunch of crap in the house."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) listens as U.S. President Donald Trump makes a statement in the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House October 27 in Washington, DC.
The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman said Taylor's testimony "has nothing of consequence to me," citing the portion of the diplomat's testimony in which he stated his "clear understanding" of Trump engaging in a quid pro quo was based on information derived from another person, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.
GOP Senators Richard Burr of North Carolina, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Marco Rubio of Florida, John Barrasso of Wyoming, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska all said that they would also likely be too busy to tune in.
"I'm probably going to be fairly busy," Blackburn said, while Burr replied that he has "a day job. Pretty tough to do both of them. If there's any value, we'll pick it out." Kennedy said his attention to the hearings "depends on my schedule. I'm going to try."
Barrasso, a member of Republican Senate leadership, said a staff member might watch for him.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), one of just 18 current senators who were also members of the chamber under the Clinton impeachment trial, said with a smile that viewing the public testimonies could "prejudice my view." Despite his ability to hear from witnesses in the public light for the first time, the Senate Appropriations Committee chairman said he "wouldn't want to see that, that wouldn't affect me at all."
"I waited to hear the evidence that came before the Senate," Shelby said of the Clinton impeachment trial. "I think it's a serious step. It shouldn't be a circus."
But it's not just Senate Republicans who said they won't watch next week's proceedings: It's Democrats, too.
"I don't know whether my schedule will permit it," said Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ). "We got a lot of action going on here, so obviously, at the end of the day, it will be the—whatever is the ultimate articles of impeachment, should there be any, and then the evidence that will be considered in support of them. That's the ultimate question for the trier of fact."
Menendez said he would be able to tune in "if I don't do any other work."
Sens. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Michael Bennet (D-CO), who is also a 2020 presidential candidate, said they've yet to make a final decision because the question had not crossed their minds.
"I hadn't even thought about it. I got miles to go before next week," Kaine said, who elaborated that he'll "probably" have a staffer watch. He also emphasized that his indecision was not due to a belief the testimonies were unimportant for senators' roles as jurors. "The nice thing is, I read so fast I can usually absorb a lot more information a lot faster when I'm not sitting and watching."
