Being anccused of abuse of power is, in my opinion, a policy disagreement on how the president should have approached the issues that are out light there. Goes, theforeign aid issue of the 391 million of foreign aid to ukraine, is practically every bit of foreign aid the United Statess purses following the congressional appropriation is contingent on something. Or another. Common trends, whether in the ornate enactment there, is whether or not is any type of corruption that is involved in that. I think we have conceded that ukraine has been a corrupt country and that president anensky was elected on anticorruption platform and we wish it well. The fact is, i think the president would have been derelict in his duties had he held off or just given the foreign aid without trying to check on corruption. That is what was going on. As far as obstruction of congress is concerned, earlier today i talked about the fact that this article is drafted so loosely and so weakly that it arns the congress into parliamentary form of government and the consequence of that is whenever we have a majority in the house controlled by opposite parties, you will try to attempt to see the majority in the house try to impeach the president. I would like to finally say we have heard a lot about the fact that if donald trump is not impeached or removed from office, he is going to steal the 2020 election. That is one of the most outlandish predictions i have ever heard. The 2020 election is going to be looked at very closely, representatives of both of the candidates by the news media, by a lot of citizens, whether thats whether they are involved with the candidates or not. It will be harder to steal the 2020 election. After all of this has happened. What is happening here is there is an attempt to steal the 2016 election, three years after the fact. If donald trump is impeached and removed from office based on this flimsy record, based on the problems of extinction might what he writes, both in the Intelligence Committee and that will end up stealing the 2016 election. For donald trump for president of the United States and, i think that that will be something that will haunt this country for decades to come. The time to stand up for the constitution is now. The time to determine how you stand up for the constitution is by voting no on both articles of impeachment and i yield back the balance of my time. The betterment yields back the balance of his time. Struck the last word. The gentleman is recognized. Thank, you sir. I join with mr. Sensenbrenner and committing the chairman on is running this committee tonight, it has been very difficult, it has been a long day, and all of us are tired, at least i am, and the chairman has done a great job, but i totally disagree with chairman sensenbrenner in his summation of what we have before us. I think they are dead wrong in their thinking on the articles of impeachment. There are two articles. This is in no way stealing the election. If donald trump is removed from office, the election of 2016 is not nullified. Mike prince will be the president and that is no walk in the park. It is the same policies, some of them maybe even worse, maybe a little bit better ethics and morals, a little bit more civility, but as far as policies, they would be about the same. There has been a lot of discussion of what we have had here but basically this is an issue about abuse of power based on testimony of Lieutenant Colonel vindman, ambassador yovanovitch, ambassador taylor, and doctor hill. These are four independent class, acts people we should all look to, and who we all talk about is patriots, they are patriots but they are Career Foreign Service folk weve done a great job for america, are not partisan came fourth out of a sense of duty to testify and what they testified to is what happened with the ukraine withdrawal, that there was an abuse of power and that is why they came forward and to say that this whole process is corrupt is basically an affront to each of those for patriots who came forward. For those four Career Foreign Service officials, those for people who were nonpartisan. They did a service to this country. The fact is, the factor in disputed that what happened was a favor, although i would ask you for a favor, though, and mulvaney going, out get used to it. That is what politics is. Thats what happened, and then we had sondland saying, they were all in on it, it was a requirement, and you get the military aid, youve got to announce the investigation. There is nothing other than that, and weve been here, in the last few hours, they could use it as the campaign ad for, trump they had the markets up at all that kind of stuff. Snap payments are being cut drastically and poor people are going to be hurt, and they did not benefit from the trump tax scheme. A person said the two biggest mistake when he was up here were voting for the tax game and a book for the budget it came afterwards, exploding the debt, and somebody on the other side talked about how we need to be up here fighting. They have exploded the debt. They have no traditional republican philosophy whatsoever. The kurds . Scion aria. They ruined us in the middle east forever. Trump just sold him out for his friend in territory and the kurds to hell with you. And we gave syria to the russians and just yesterday trump met with the, the russian ambassador. No report i want to talk about what the white house said they talked about influence not to have influence in the next election, and trump told them, he should not try to influence our next elections elaborate said, we did not discuss the elections, that is not true. Its hard to figure out which one is lying, even when i have a very good track record so i hope we can get it finish today, past these two articles do it is important to protect our democracy, defend our support our oath, abide by our oath, support the constitution, and support our National Security, all of which have been jeopardized by donald j trump, by his self dealing with ukraine. I said earlier today that the president of ukraine was an actor and a politician. I would not say anything bad about him. A lot of actors are great. I love actors. I love politicians. I am a politician but that is why he could not say that he was under any arrest or any influence and he felt like he was being pressured. He could not say that because he is in an inferior position. It is like a battered wife with her husband around who beat her up, he cant say to the police, she cant say, he beat me up, because he is there and when the police leave he will do it again. And so, he was in a terrible position. I look forward to meeting him, i will be in ukraine in february and i think hes going to do a wonderful job, and some people over there said ukraine, in the world, it is like 120, rankings out of 180, not good, are you back the balance of my time i got blasted isis america. Gentleman yields back. I think well share those sentiments. While seeks recognition . For what purpose does mr. Chabot seek recognition . The strike last, word mister chairman. Thank you, mister chairman. I just have to respond to the gentleman who tennessee who made a couple of remarks. I will start off by saying i really like the gentleman from tennessee, mr. Cohen. Its mutual. We have worked on a number of bills, together introduced them, he is a good guy but he is flat out wrong about taxes. The tax cuts have really help this country. It is one of the main reason we are seeing the economy take off and peoples bank accounts, and their savings, accounts and their retirement accounts are so much better and more positive right now because the president and a Republican Congress passed those tax cuts without a single democratic vote, and one big difference between the two party is republicans want to cut your taxes and democrats in general, that every one of, them most of them want to raise your taxes. Just a big difference, but relative to impeachment, back in the early 1970s, i was a College Student and our nation was going through another impeachment at the time, richard nixon, and i actually voted for him, he was the first president i voted for in 1972 and obviously, he got in trouble and was going to be impeached but he resigned before. Article some people were voted to disagree committee, this committee, but then before the house took it, out he resigned from office and little did i know, and i will be very closely involved in that, one of the people on this committee, five of us were here in those days, mr. Sensenbrenner and i, on the republican side and the chairman, mr. Nadler, and miss lofgren, and ms. Jacksonlee, all five of us, mr. Sensenbrenner and i at the house manager, the prosecution case and some folks on the other side will get that opportunity and good luck, and mr. Sensenbrenner remembers henry hyde was our leader at the time and, he said, we are not going to be very welcome, when you are all over there, but he was, bill, clinton he was impeached by the house in the senate obviously did not remove him from office and i think its very likely thats what were going to see happen in this case, but back then, bill clinton put his hand on the bible, and to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and then he lied, he committed perjury and that is something that hundreds of people were in jail across the country for the time and i thought i still think the president should not be above the law. He had committed a high crime of misdemeanor, very different from this case, they are not even alleging a crime in this case, there is clearly not a high crime and misdemeanor, that is why i will be voting against impeaching the president in this instance and i think the democrats have been looking for an excuse to impeach this president for a long time now. In fact, when they took over the house, one of their members filed articles of impeachment that very day and really, since inauguration day, many wanted to impeach him. In my view, this is all about politics, it is all about hurting the president in his reputation. They just like him intensely, as i mention the other day, they really low this president and they are trying to hurt his chances in the next election and it may well just the opposite, but one of my real concerns, and i mention this earlier today, i am very concerned about the democrats really lowering the bar for impeaching the president in the future. Its becoming too routine, its becoming the new normal. For 200 years in our nation we have had one impeachment, one, and 200, years andrew johnston, analysis 50 years we are on our 31 this time around, and i really am concerned that from now on, in all likelihood, we have the president of the United States and the house of representatives and they are opposite parties, you are going to end up with the base in the house of representatives pushing very hard at members to impeach that president and it is very divisive for the nation, so many other things do not get done when youre going through an impeachment. For example, opioids. About 70,000 americans lost their lives last year but we have done very little about opioids on this committee and we have jurisdiction over it. There was something about our southern border which is still like a severe, far too many people coming in illegally, this committees responsibility, but we do almost nothing there, and overall in congress, our infrastructure, roads and highways, it is crumbling, but we do very little about that so, i think the American People deserve a lot better than what they are getting from this committee or from this congress so, in any event, i want to thank the folks out there and god bless america. The gentlemans time has expired. For what purpose does mr. George seek recognition . I move to strike the last word. Gentleman is recognized. Thank you, mister chairman. Mister chairman, i want to start by agreeing with mr. Sensenbrenner, it is always the right time to defend the constitution and that is the very reason that we are here. There are two articles of impeachment, the first is abuse of power, the president of the United States abused his power by soliciting foreign interference in our election. How did he do it . He leverage lifesaving, taxpayer funded military aid that ukraine desperately needed for assistance in his Reelection Campaign and he leverage the white house meeting that he had promised to the new ukrainian president , that president zelensky desperately needed to show Vladimir Putin that the United States is going to stand with ukraine, he leverage that meeting for assistance in his Reelection Campaign. That is abuse of power. Now, my colleagues have suggested that somehow abuse of power is not a serious offense, that we should make light of the president s actions and not treated as the constitutional violation that it is. In fact, abuse of power was the principal concern of the framers of the constitution and it was clear what it meant, the exercise of official tower to obtain improper personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the National Interest. That is abuse of power. It is rooted in the president s duty, constitutional duty to faithfully execute the law, to put service over self, to put the country over his personal interests. I know for my colleagues that all four of the constitutional scholars who testified, including the republicans own witness, have confirmed that abuse of power is an Impeachable Offense. President trumps actions, in fact, exemplify the framers fears and the very reason that abuse of power is a high crime. Worse, worse than president nixon, President Trump pressured a Foreign Government to aid in his scheme. That is the abuse of power article, but there is a second article, obstruction of congress. We know that no president in history, in history has directed the entire executive branch not to cooperate with an impeachment inquiry, has told every member of the executive branch not to speak to any of the impeachment inquiry, to any of the impeachment inquiry issues. Now, the question is, when you look at the abuse of power, which is a constitutional violation, and then you look at the president s obstruction of congress, and at least to some questions i would like my colleagues to think about as we head toward this important vote, think about the people who the president has blocked from speaking. Think about mick mulvaney. Now, mick mulvaney, i can see post off, acknowledge a quid pro quo and said it happens all the time. That is abuse of power. And the president would not let him speak, that is obstruction of congress. Why wont he let him speak . But if he had to hide . Think about secretary perry, ambassador taylor described a highly irregular ukraine policy channel led by rudy giuliani, that included sondland, volker and rick perry. That contributes to the abuse of power. It violates abuse of power but it is also obstruction of congress. Why wont the president allow him to speak . What is he afraid of . Think about john bolton, fiona hill testified that bolton told her to notify and i see council about the rogue effort, he said, i am not a part of whatever drug deal sondland and mulvaney are picking up, voting in fact called giuliani a hand grenade who is going to blow everybody up. That is the abuse of power, obstruction of congress, it is clear, why wont the president let him testify . What is he hiding. And finally, john eisenberg, Lieutenant Colonel vindman could not believe what he heard on the call. He reported it to eisenberg. Now, eisenberg cant speak . What is the president is afraid he will say . That is obstruction of congress, abuse of power and obstruction of congress, to get to that is what these articles are about. We are protecting the constitution. We are protecting the American People and our elections. That is why we need to proceed with these articles of impeachment. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Reschenthaler seeks recognition. Im district last word, mister chairman. Recognize. Thank, you mister chairman. Ive been a prosecutor. I was a prosecutor in baghdad when i was in the navy, prosecuting terrorists, actually, in the iraqi court system. I was a defensive turning in the navy. I actually got to defend a navy seal against trumped up charges for the administration and i had the honor of serving as a district judge in my hometown in the south hills of pittsburgh so ive been on all sides of this courtroom and i can tell you that i would defend this case every single day and it is because the facts just arent there. Lets go through each article. Abuse of power, quid pro quo, call it whatever your focus group wants to call it, at the end of the, day you do not have the facts to make the case, you dont have the facts because the other party on your quid pro, quo the alleged quid pro quo, never felt pressure. We have a primary document, primary source of information, that is the transcript of the call, that shows there is no connection. We also have the other party, president zelensky who said at no time did the cranes feel any pressure to have an investigation. You also know that no investigation of biden ever took place. We also know that aid was given to ukraine, even if they never knew at the time. And aid came in the form of javelin missiles. Not with the Obama Administration gave, which were wellwishers and blankets so again, no case can be made for abuse of power, obstruction of congress. This is what we would describe as right, or not right, it is not right because only letters have been sent there has been no subpoena and how this works is a subpoenas issued, the executive branch exercises their executive privilege, just like obama did, and then the courts decide it. The courts have never decided this, so where is the obstruction . It does not exist. So, i would defend this case every single day. As a judge, i would dismiss this from a lack of merit. Even if the facts are viewed in a light most favorable to the democrats, you still again cannot make what we as lawyers call a prime official case. This case would be dismissed on day one in a courtroom but, i will tell you what case i would prosecute. I would prosecute shift for abuse of power any day of the week. Why . How about the fact that he subpoenaed phone records from member of congress. How will the fact that he singled it devin nunes his cell phone number and like that . How about the fact that he jumped over 8000 pages on the Judiciary Committee, 48 hours before he had a hearing in his committee. That is the abuse of power and that is why we prosecute every day of the week. Obstruction, i had to prosecute the democrats for obstruction of congress to. Why the fact that i had a motion to subpoena the whistleblower. The whistleblower who, by the way, you can appoint any statute, there is no statute that gives that whistleblower the right to be anonymous, does not exist matter what you say. I had a motion is gonna, the whistleblower, two weeks, ago that motion was denied and i never got my subpoena never got my past subpoena it was done in a partisan fashion. So that was the obstruction, i would prosecute that every single day. Folks, that is a legal analysis. This is nothing more than a political hit job, thanks, and i are yield the remainder of my time. The gentleman yields back. For what purposes miss candlestick recognition . A move to strike the last word. Ladies recognized. You know, i want to reiterate, this is not a boat disagreement with the president s policies or personality, or even his tweets. Were not judging the president himself. Or judging his actions. And i understand he ran this to disrupt the government, the problem as he went further. By abusing his power, he endangered our elections and our National Security, here remains an ongoing threat to both. He has shown a pattern of inviting foreign interference in our election and trying to cover it up twice. He is threatening to do it again so, we have heard a lot of loose talk about what evidence we have or dont have. There is plenty of direct evidence of the president s wrongdoing including, for, example this july 25th call record but she said to the ukrainian president , i want you to do as a, favor though and then proceeded to request investigations into his political rival in a debunked Conspiracy Theory that the senate and all of our National Security services have rejected. We have the testimony of his appointees, ambassador sondland and volker about the may 23rd meeting which the president said to them, talk to rudy. We have testimony of three firsthand witnesses to the july 25th call, two of whom promptly reported the call to their superiors and to legal counsel. We had the testimony of david holmes, who overheard the president asked ambassador sondland whether president zelensky was going to, quote, do the investigation. We have the president many public statements, including his october 3rd statement that ukraine and china should investigate his political rival. Even though minority counsel mr. Castor admitted there was direct evidence he said we had some direct evidence on certain things and we had direct evidence on the may 23rd meeting, and sondland given direct evidence, and quote, the second hand accounts are also extensively corroborated. For example, ambassador taylor mr. Morrison both testify during as number seven phone call with ambassador sondland, President Trump said there was no quid pro quo for that president zelensky had to go to the microphone and announce investigations. And im giving with one hand taking away with the other. Ambassador sondland testified he had no reason to dispute ambassador taylor mr. Morrisons testimony about this conversation. There is also circumstantial evidence. There was no contemporaneous explanation given to the president s decision to withhold military aid that had bipartisan support from congress. That did not come until after the articles of impeachment were filed and the uniform consensus of the state department, the Defense Department and white house witnesses is that the aid should have been released. Given these, facts the only logical explanation as ambassador sondland concluded was that, like the white house meeting, the aid was being used to leverage pressure on the president zelensky. At the end of the day, the evidence is overwhelming and indisputable. President trumps personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, pushed ukraine to investigate his political rival and a debunked Conspiracy Theory. His efforts had nothing to do with u. S. Policy and were taken on the president s behalf and without the president s knowledge. President trump directed u. S. Officials and president himself to work with mr. Giuliani. President trump ordered the Critical Military aid for ukraine be withheld. Ukrainian officials were informed the aid would not be released unless president zelensky publicly announcing an investigation and President Trump refused to release the aid until his Pressure Campaign on the ukraine was exposed. President trump refused to arrange a meeting with president zelensky. A President Trumps agents advised ukrainian officials at the white house meeting would be scheduled only after president zelensky committed to the investigations. President trump ignored the Anti Corruption talking points prepared for his calls, President Trump asked president zelensky directly to investigate President Trumps chief political rival, and President Trump stonewalled congress is investigation. You know, i dont know what more you can ask for here. Weve got admissions from the president. Weve got corroboration from people he has appointed, the only thing you can do is take your head in the sand if you are not willing to see what happened here, and with that i would yield to my colleague from florida. Is she here . Okay. Oh, thank you. Two seconds. I will wait for the next year old. Sorry. The time for the gentlelady has expired, for what purpose is mr. Armstrongs recognition . I move to strike last word. The gentlemans. Recognized for weeks my, democratic colleagues talked about quid pro quo, and bribery, but they had a problem. These things will never change. There was no pressure. But president zelensky and President Trump said there was no pressure, no victim, no the aid was released and there was no investigation. You know what else . There was no whistle blower, there was no adam schiff so we are left with abuse of power and obstruction of justice and impeachment is either a solemn constitutional affair, which this is absolutely not, or whatever the majority wanted to be, which this absolutely is. If you cannot prove any of it i guess youre going to use all of it so, why not expand all the way back to where this thing all started, bob mueller. Right in the bottom of article two of this impeachment is the language, these actions were consistent with President Trumps previous efforts to undermine United States government destinations and foreign interference in United States elections. This is nothing more than a legislative driveby or probably more accurate, i majorities attempt to return to the scene of a non crime, but i guess, after two years, 19 lawyers, 40 agents, 500 warrants, 2800 subpoenas, 30 million dollars, there is simply no way they can leave it out so, here is just a reminder, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. Mueller report, page two. This started the day President Trump won the election. This has been a foregone conclusion since the day the democrats won back the majority. This was never about facts or fairness so here we are, where we were always going to be, on a purely partisan impeachment that is destined to fail in the senate and with that i yield back. The gentleman yields back. For what purpose dismissal often seek recognition . The strike last. Where the general it is recognized. You know, i have listened carefully to this very long debate this evening and throughout the last two weeks, and i think it is important to look back to the founders and the foundation of what it is that we are doing here. The founders knew that the powers given to the president i needed to have the capacity to be curved in the place in the case of abuse. The framers of the constitution consciously adopted a particular phrase from the english practice to help define the constitutional grounds for removal. The content of the phrase, high crimes and misdemeanors, for the framers, is to be related to what the framers new on the whole about the english practice. The broad sweep of english constitutional history and the vital role impeachment had played in the elimination of royal prerogatives and the control of abuses of ministerial and judicial power. Now, when youre coming to private affairs in ordinary criminal law, it is possible in advance to define what it is you cannot do. You cannot steal that money. You cannot hit that person. But when you are talking about the abuse of president ial power, you cant always specifically define what a bad actor in the white house might do, and therefore, you have the term a high crimes and misdemeanors and you have the abuse of president ial power. It is important to note that in the second article of impeachment, there was an article for abuse of power, which principally address president nixons use of power, including the powers vested solely in the president to aid his political allies, harm his political opponents, gained improper personal political advantages. He used his power, and this is a quote, it was undertaken for his personal political advantage and not the furtherance of any Valid National political objective. He his president ial powers and again, this is a quote, were seriously incompatible with our system of Constitutional Government and warranted removal from office. We have a situation similar here, but i want to address the issue raised by my colleague from ohio because i do agree that there can be a tendency in the country these days to immediately think well, i dont like that, lets go to impeachment, and that is frankly prevalent since the clinton impeachment. Lying under oath is a crime. Lying about sex is a shame. But neither one involves the use of president ial powers. And the use of impeachment in that instance really in an improper way, was never the abuse of president ial power. I think it put in the public mind this is a tool to be used for disagreements about policy. Nothing could be further from the truth. I voted against the iraq war, but the congress voted and some people thought we should have articles of impeachment about that. No, that did not undercut the constitutional order. Congress voted. It was a mistake, but it was the president of the congress together, it was not the president usurping the powers of another branch of government. Here, we have a situation that is so obvious, if you look at the facts, how it is just inconceivable the things ive heard today, they are just stunning to me, that you could reach a conclusion as defense counsel here, drastic grasping at straws. The president has used his president ial power, to gain a personal benefit to the detriment to the interests of the United States. It was an abuse of power that harm us and it is ongoing. It is a threat to the constitutional order. It meets the definition of high crimes and misdemeanors. It is abuse of president ial power and it is our responsibility to use the tool that our founders gave us in the constitution to preserve that constitutional order. We must impeach. I yield back. The gentlelady years back. Six recognition. For what purpose is mr. Gohmert seek recognition . To strike the last word. The gentleman is recognized. Just a quick comment, comments about president clintons actions, when you lie under oath its perjury, its a crime, and i understand the comet that he was not acting in his official capacity, i would, say back to the me too movement, if they took that position, having sex with an employee that is that much younger when youre president of the United States, that is not in his official capacity but no matter how long they spent tonight, tomorrow, it does not make up for the fact that we do not have that witnesses. This reminds me historically of the trial osaka it is. You know, when he got convicted by the jury of 500 people, why . Because he was arrogant. Want to try donald trump for being arrogant . Fine, i am sure you have a lot of republicans but with you on that. He has a lot to be arrogant about, but that is not a crime. It is not a high crime for sure, it is certainly not a misdemeanor. It is bothersome to people, some people like it, but that is not what impeachment is supposed to be about, and to have had a trial, what you hear say, gossip monitoring witnesses there were, come into a star chamber and secreted testimony so people cant see them, cant hear them, but we have adam schiff putting together in a big report and we received a report, with not much time to review it but that is all we need. We dont even get to hear from the prepare of the report, i get to cross examine him. This is a stolen ask tight proceeding. That is the way it worked under stolen. You did not get defined it with a fact witness is because usually there were not any, just like here, so you have people come and give appearance, you imperious that we were well, educated that is fine, and if you are ever not sure about being good at, go to law school, you are trained to do, that so that when you hate a person like three witnesses obviously to donald trump, you can come in a misrepresent facts, and base your opinions on, them just great. And look at this, the starter before mueller. Carter page had work for the cia and what did they do they prefer that, lie to the fisa court and say oh, he has worked with russians, misrepresent who he is and what he did and what a patriot he was and then get a warrant and then he goes, on they lie about it, and wear this all come from, it came from Hillary Clintons campaign, the Democratic National campaign, the committee, and they hired fusion gps, they hired a foreigner to affect our election, and they worked with australian and italians and they, actually Christopher Steele admitted that those people giving the information may be, russian may have been ukrainian, it would be nice to know, but the majority doesnt want to get there, and the very week we find out how bad this travesty was, the top people in the fbi and the department of justice perverted justice, because they didnt like got him i got elected. Everything they, could they used all these foreign resources to try to change the outcome of this 2016 election and when they did not work, then they came forward with impeachment it was, oh lets project what we did on donald trump, but it turned out he didnt do that, and even mueller and weisman, as much as he hated trump, they could not find anything so we have got the russian collusion, we had a drop victories, and nowhere, but obstruction of justice . Well, it is not obstruction of justice when you know youre innocent and you know the department of justice is trying to set you up and youre trying to expose the truth. No, it was others who were obstructing the trudeau justice. Vindman, per heaven sake, you set that guy up as a hero, he is no hero. He was mad that trump did not do what he told him. For those who believe in praying for this country, pray for mercy, we cant afford justice so the country ends. I yield back. For what purposes mascara siesta the recognition . I moved a straight loss. Word ladies recognized. Mister chairman, five more minutes. Five more minutes and a very long, long day, but when you look at what the other side is presented in defense of the president , what do we get . Nada. Nothing. None of your will defend the president s actions because quite simply you cannot defend the indefensible. You just cant. Even if you like him and support his actions, you just will not defend what he did. It is really quite simple. It is not complicated at all. He offered official acts in exchange for a political favor. He is a clear and present danger to do it again. He ignored the power of the people and he will do it again. It is really just that simple, the president is an imminent threat, you should as pattern of conduct, he has made clear that he will continue to abuse his power, corrupt the 2020 elections. We must act with a sense of urgency to protect our democracy and defend our constitution. In the clinton case, the house voted to impeach 72 days after he authorized an inquiry. It has been 94 days since congress launched its investigation into the president s dealings with ukraine. Impeachment is a decision such as a grand jury or prosecutor makes. We have seen more than enough evidence here to charge and move to trial in the senate. It is a president who is abusing his power. What is not fair is the president s refusal to participate in this inquiry for the sole purpose of hiding the facts from the American People. Federal courts have ruled that congress has a constitutional right to obtain documents and testimony from the Trump Administration. One federal court said that the president the president obstruction is a farce and he is openly stonewalling it i agree. He is the first president to engage in walltowall stonewalling and in some respects, an outright coverup of his own behavior. He has refused to comply with all of the congressional subpoenas that had been issued to try to uncover the truth about his misconduct. And act that no other citizen can do without consequence. As hes been stated before, even president nixon shared documents and allowed current and former aides to testify as part of the impeachment process. The Committee Still recommended article of impeachment against him for obstruction. Last night, i reminded him that all of this is really about preserving and protecting our democracy, for the little boys and girls across this nation so that they will know about what it means to make a promise, and to make a pledge, and to keep it, because democracy is a gift that each generation gives to the next and that is why we have to take action we have to move forward and impeach the president. With that, mister, chairman i will yield the remainder of my time to my colleague from florida, miss powell. Thank, you miss garcia. I just wanted to answer to what mr. Chabot said earlier and clarify that i along with so many of my colleagues, so many of us that you see sitting on this guy, as we did not come here to impeach the president of the United States. We came to Lower Health Care costs and that is exactly what we did today. We voted on hr three today to lower Prescription Drug prices. They say, let the American People decide. Well that is why last week we voted on the Voting Rights Amendment Act which many of my republican colleagues voted against. Let americans decide, yes that is exactly why we are here because we dont want russia, ukraine or china, making the decision for us in our american government. This president has committed the highest crime by abusing the power of his office, inviting foreign interference in our elections and that is why we are here today. Please dont confuse americans with false claims and pushing debunked conspiracy theories. We are here to tell the American People the truth. I yield back. General idiot spoke. Who seeks recognition . For what purposes mr. Mcclintock street recognition . District last. Where the gentlemans. Recognized ive lost track of the number of newspapers that event of the record in these proceedings but i think it is a telling commentary on the quality of the case that this committee is relying on to support the exercise of one of the most profound actions we can take. I think it underscores the dereliction of duty of a Judiciary Committee drafting articles of impeachment without a single fact hearing. Virtually the entire record is the schiff report and newspaper clippings. I will remind the committee yesterday, this week, mr. Schiffs report on vice abuse was categorically completely contradicted by the inspector generals report. Mr. Schiffs work is not exactly what you can call the Gold Standard of accuracy, reliability or incisive analysis a newspaper clippings, with all due respect, are not exactly a Solid Foundation that can support our wielding such power. We should be made of stern or staff. A matter so momentous as this should be considered thoroughly and dispassionately unfairly. Mister chairman, to substitute our judgment for that of the American People by nullifying a National Election is a very weighty matter. To go and do that you have a record of fact that no reasonable person can deny. One set of reports are adam schiff a newspaper scrapbook as the foundation of impeachment, i predict will crumble and disintegrate before the senate finishes its consideration. Abuse of power is exactly the vague and expensive ground that the founders considered as maladministration and rejected in favor of the narrow ground of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The lawful exercise of the president s Constitutional Authority is not impeachable, at the moment we make it so, the president becomes a servant of congress, and the separation of powers which is protected our freedom for nearly two and a half centuries, will be greatly diminished, and similarly, the president s assertion of long established boundaries that maintain the separation of powers is also not impeachable. Once we make it so, we also clearly diminish the separation of powers. The overall political hyperbole that we have heard over and over through these hearings, not to warn us that we are straying into partisan motives which must never animate the impeachment power of congress. Public opinion has not coalesced around this act, which should also alert us to the danger that by proceeding we would further divide and alienate the American People, and rolling out into the political waters of this nation. We failed to find any law the president has very little. If you could, issue clearly articulate that and support it with a legally admissible evidence and put it in the articles. Otherwise, your case is simply a disagreement decision the president is authorized to make and again, this is a matter that our constitutional reserves to the voters and not to the congress support of the witnesses requested by the minority, you have blinded the committee to the beginning of the whole story. If you are truly confident in your case, or should have nothing to fear from what a full airing of testimony could offer. The most chilling observation i have heard is, we can do this because we are not restricted like the department of justice is well, the same rights of due process, the same fatalities of the constitution are required of us. The impeachment and do johnston, congress made many of the same mistakes that we are making tonight. I would urge my colleagues to carefully consider how history is judge them, and how it will judge us. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. For what purpose does ms. Jayapal seek recognition . I moved to strike last word. The lady is recognized. Thank you, mister chairman, we just continued to hear the same excuses for the president s behavior and this is such a grave moment that were in, were talking about the highest constitutional crimes, abuse of power and obstruction of congress and so let me once again review with the facts. First, my republican colleagues have said that this is about corruption, that all the President Trumps agencies, all of advisers, everyone unanimously told him that ukraine had passed all the Anti Corruption benchmarks. The department of defense said that ukraine had passed their review on Anti Corruption benchmarks, i know for the corruption policies were needed. President Trumps Administration cut programs designed to fight corruption in ukraine and President Trump was given talking points by the National Security council that specifically said, say these things about corruption, but guess what happened on those calls in april in july . President trump did not mention corruption. He did not use the talking points that he was given. The only two names that he mentioned on the july 25th call, joe and hunter biden. Second, the republicans suggested that this was all about President Trumps concerns with burden sharing with our allies. But that was not true. Mr. Homes testified that burden sharing was not a problem. Europe was actually contributing four times as much money as the United States did and ambassador sondland testified that he was never asked to go to the European Union and ask for more money and remember mr. Sondland is President Trumps ambassador to the European Union. What was ambassador sondland told to communicate to ukraine by President Trump . He was told to say that resumption would likely not occur unless president zelensky announced the investigation, specifically, he said the quote, unless zelensky went announced this investigation, there would be a stalemate over the aid. And what were those investigations . 2016 election interference and burisma meaning, the bidens so, finally, left with nothing else to argue in defense of the president , the republicans have raised one more thing which is that President Trump had a legitimate reason, somehow a legitimate reason to investigate Vice President biden but once again that makes no sense. And makes no sense because the facts are that that investigation, that issue of biden and burisma went back to 2015 and President Trump released aid in 2017 in 2018, so clearly did not have a problem with the issues the 2015 because he had two opportunities to release aid and he did but something changed in 2019 and the only thing that change was Vice President biden suddenly started being present trump in the polls so, the evidence is clear, President Trump said do us a favor, though, and who is the us . Well, he told us. He told us exactly what he meant by us. He told president zelensky that us, deal with rudy giuliani. President trumps personal attorney, who knows, and this is a, quote very much knows what is going on. President trump couldve gone through official channels what he, wanted if this investigation was obscene actually legitimate. He couldve asked the department to initiate investigation into the bidens and burisma, but he did not do that. At the department of justice said that he did not do that. He never asked him to do an investigation or even talk to ukraine. Instead, President Trump asked his personal attorney because us was not about america. This was not about official policy. This was about what was right for our country. This was not about putting america first. Every witness testified that as well. This was personal. It was all for President Trumps personal political gain. This was to benefit trumps own Reelection Campaign, and that is why he at his personal attorney to, the sea abuses power, he abused the powers of the people interested to him. He abused the office and he placed our safety, millions of dollars of taxpayer money, all at risk for his own personal political election and that is the one thing the president cannot do. He cannot use our, money the powers of the office that we entrusted to him, we the people, not for us but for himself. That is the greatest abuse of power and this president has left us no choice but to impeach him. I yield back. The gentlelady yields back. For what purpose of mistrust recognition . The strike last. Where german is. Recognize this morning i began by aligning our portable today. Most of us are attorneys in this committee and in this case were also called the surface finders of fact. We are supposed to carefully and objectively analyze the claims, not against our personal preferences, but against the record of evidence. Another we have done, that for the past 12 hours, its time to summarize our case. At the end of the day, now literally the end of the day, there are just too short articles to disappear resolution they brought before us, abuse of power and obstruction of justice and on the first, the democrats know there is your direct evidence in the record of these proceedings to show the President Trump engaged in any scheme of any kind, as they have alleged, or that he intended in his dealings with ukraine to influence the 2020 election. All they have brought today is based on hearsay, speculation and conjecture. The truth is there is not a single fact witness to provide testimony to support their paper thin case which is precisely why we have been giving no opportunity for the fact witnesses for a minority hearing. What the evidence does show is that President Trump holds a deepseated, genuine reasonable skepticism of ukraine, into its history of pervasive corruption. His administration saw proof that newly elected president zelensky was a true reformer. President trump wanted to ensure that american taxpayer funded Security Assistance would not be squandered overseas by what is reported to be the third most corrupt nation in the world. Trump, in discussions were never about what will happen in 2020 but what already happened in 2016. The democrats a second claim is that President Trump obstructed justice by simply doing what virtually every of the president in the modern era has also done, to assert a legitimate executive privilege and legal immunity to avoid subpoenas issued to various white house officials. There is simply no evidence of any Impeachable Offense here anymore and if they had not promised and because the liberal base by christmas, the democrats could and should have simply gone a few blocks away to the federal court to get an order compelling the ex document information is subpoenaed but that is what has always been done in the past but they did not have time for that here because they are trying to be their own arbiter, completely reckless and machiavellian timeline to take down a president they loathe. The real abuse of power here is on the part of the house democrats, who is fiercely pursue this impeachment 20 times pastor, faster than the peter investigation of bill clinton to reach the predetermine political outcome. Along the way, they have steam rolled over a constitutionally guaranteed new process, previously sacrosanct house rules of the federal rules of civil procedure. They have ignored exculpatory evidence, intimidated witnesses, restricted republican lines of questioning, denied defense witnesses and evolve into the president s counsel, restricted republican review of evidence, denied minority hearing and violate the proper minority notice of fairness at every single stage. The founders of this quarter country warned against a single party impeachment for good reason. They fear that it would bitterly and perhaps radically divide our nation. Our chairman, mr. , nadler gave a speech about that 20 years ago when he was imposing opposing the impeachment bill clinton. The obvious truth is that our liberal colleagues have vowed to impeach President Trumps the day of his election. The reason they changed at least half a dozen time over the last few years they could ever make any traction or any facts to justify those various conspiracy theories, as the next election in 2020 is wrong so close now and their candidates for president are terribly week, they obviously but somewhere at the liberal high command several days ago i can business policy to pull the trigger. The problem, is they have done that no hearing so the basement, could not cover a single top to justify the latest Conspiracy Theory about ukraine. So, what to do . Left with no choice, to desperately create a totally fraudulent, unprecedented process to try to remove donald trump. The results are whatever and witnesses testify as, quote the shores proceeding with the thinnest evidence you are tomorrow as ever used to impeach the president. Im a constitutional attorney by profession i have actually enjoyed the four minutes of real intellectual debate we had on the contours of article two section four but every High School Students student at home could be displaying what is expressing required to impeach a president. You need treason, bribery, or high crime or misdemeanor. None of that exists here and Everybody Knows it. Those High School Students at home no it. Our constituents know it and in their heart of hearts even our friends on the other side of the room tonight. My good friend mr. Cohen said in his closing a few moments ago that he is proud to be a politician but i would say with all sincerity, this moment does not call for politicians. The weight of history is upon us here in this moment cause for statesman. This impeachment is going to fail and the democrats are gonna justly pay a heavy political price for it. The pandoras box be open today, that is a real tragedy of the vote we are about to take. God help us. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. I moved strict last word. Ladies recognize. A little while ago, when michael is in the south of the aisle was saying that the president was not the reason that aid was withheld was because the president wanted to investigate corruption. The idea that the most corrupt president we have seen in recent history withheld military aid because he was concerned about corruption, is ludicrous. As my colleagues have pointed out, both cause the President Trump had with president zelensky, trump never mention corruption. The parliament of defense vetted giving him the aid and said that it was okay. Once upon a time President Trump love his generals. This time he ignored them. Members of congress authorize the aid and lobby the white house to release the aid. Staff from the office of management and budget resigned because they were worried about what was going on and why the aid was withheld and worried about what the president was doing and they believe that withholding the aid was wrong. Trump even cut funding for programs to deal with corruption in countries like ukraine, so amanda so concerned about corruption also has interesting friends. He has bromances with some of the worlds most corrupt leaders, meters from saudi arabia, turkey, he had the president erdogan from turkey just a few weeks ago at the white house but we know is number one path is president putin so all of the president s men all the men around him that were indicted arrested incarcerated, my mother used to say that if you lay down with dogs, dont be surprised if you get up with louise. The man who claimed he wanted to clean up the swamp created his own swap and he is drowning in it now. I do have to say, though, that i have empathy for my republican colleagues because i dont believe that they have a choice. They have to defend the president and they do not step out of line because if they do, they will suffer the consequences. A few of my republican colleagues earlier did try to say that they did not believe that the president s conduct was appropriate and they got slapped quickly. The president said his conduct . He said, the call was absolutely perfect and so now you do not see any of them saying or questioning whether his behavior was appropriate. You have to fall in line and not only do you have to fall in line, you have to praise him constantly, like those famous press conferences weve seen in the oval office where they, won by one, go around the table and talk about their praise for him. It makes me feel like a meeting that would take place in north korea, where you have to praise dear leader so, you have to fall in line because the entire reason was corruption, but i know that you know better. You have to say that he did nothing wrong. One of my colleagues said that we are lowering the bar with impeachment, i believe that we have lowered the bar on the presidency. It is so sad to see my colleagues who i believe no its better. They are not able to say it. They know that the man is corrupt. When it comes to impeachment, there is no higher crime than for the president to use, in the power of his office, to corrupt our elections. We will move to impeach President Trump because of the abuse of power, self dealing, the betrayal of National Security in the service of foreign interests, and the corruption of our elections that undermine our democratic system. So, if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle cannot bring themselves to do what is right and impeach the president , they know is a threat to our elections, that they know is a threat to our standing in the world, then we will have to do it and we will have to move to impeach. I yield now to representative jacksonlee. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. My conclusion is very remarks or simply this. To my friends on the other side of the, aisle to the americans who have listened to the soldiers everywhere who wear uniforms, i have no exit, i have no dislike of anyone who voted for anyone in 2016. I think issue an insult that one suggests the work of this committee is about it its like for those who voted for President Trump. President trump is before this committee and articles of impeachment for his own behavior. For his desire to do with public monies and a public position, a private matter, in a political matter, and that is to get dirt on his 2020 potential opponent. In honoring and defending the constitution, we defended honor ourselves. For that reason, as an indicted body for articles of impeachment, will get the opportunity for the congress to sign on President Trumps ultimate result, i stand the constitution and for justice. I yield back. For what purposes mr. Swalwell seek recognition . I move to strike the last. Where the gentleman is recognized. Pull me once, shame on you. For me twice, shame on me. If we allow the president to the United States to begin, abuse his office for his own personal gain, and shame on all of us, shame on our constitution. We know hes going to do that again because on june 12th this year he told george stephanopoulos, for this phone call, that president zelensky happen, but if he could again received from a Foreign Government as he did corruption, he would do it again. On july 20, for bob mueller testified to our committee. He said that the president could be tracked with up to ten times for obstruction of justice but the department of justice prevents him from doing that. The next day, the president did it again. Every prosecutor when they are assigned a case will open up the file in the first thing we all do is we look at the rap sheet. Was this an aberration, or was this a pattern of conduct that the person engages in . It is not just prosecutors who look or use a rap sheet, we all do in our everyday lives. If youre a Small Business owner youre hiring and employ and find out that they had multiple deaths in their past from their employer, you probably would not hire them. If you are apparent looking for a night out in hiring a babysitter and multiple references said the babysitter is always late, you would not ask that person to watch your kids. And if you are going to a restaurant or an anniversary that saw multiple bad health reviews, you would not go to that restaurant. The president does not just have bad reviews, he has really bad prior conduct, serious priors, he is a repeat offender, crimes against our constitution and yes, crimes that one day may be prosecuted statutory. He has abused his power in the past. He is abusing his power right now. And he will abuse it tomorrow. We have a department of justice who will continue to protect him. Unfortunately, the American People have a congress i can say he is not above the law and we are not helpless in holding him accountable. I know youll to the gentleman from ohio. I thank the gentleman. We have heard a lot of explanations but why are here tonight, we do not like the policies, who do not like the president , but one thing we have not heard, the real reason were here tonight is the conduct of the president , the grave misconduct, and so i just want to give very quickly the evidence that was presented and call records, emails hundreds of press statements and tweets, that the president had been engaged on a personal basis on rudy and his, lawyer investigating ukraine, the president zelensky, sensitive about ukraine being taken seriously, not really as an interest as ambassador sondland said, david holmes testified under oath, i was surprised that it was so concrete, a demand that president zelensky personally commit to a specific investigation of President Trumps political rival on cable news and the evidence go on and on of the president s effort to use the enormous powers of his office to betray the National Interest and cheat in the election in 2020 and use hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to attempt to achieve that objective. Her founders talked a bit of piece of power because they recognize the power of the presidency was enormous. There was a danger to the president would use that power not for the public good, but for his own personal political or financial advantage. So, they created articles of impeachment, a final check against abuse of power, no one is here because we want to do this, we are here because we have no choice. We are not acting out of hate, we are acting out of love of our country, and love of our democracy. When generations look back on this moment, they will, ask what did we do to preserve our democracy . The only thing we can do to preserve that is to hold this president accountable because if we dont, they will ask us why we failed to preserve the greatest democracy on earth, that has been an example to the world. In this moment, we have to find the courage to ensure we can answer that question for all future generations and not be part of an effort to undermine the greatest democracy known to man. So, i urge my colleagues tonight, we must approve these articles of impeachment so we can make it clear that nobody in this country and the greatest country of the world is above the law, even the most powerful person present in the United States and with that, i yield back. To determine your back. For what purpose does Mister Jeffrey seek recognition . Im with the trick last. Word recognized. The record is clear, donald trump abused his power by soliciting foreign interference in the 2020 election, and thereby undermining the integrity of the democracy as well as our National Security. My republican colleagues to spend all day arguing process. That is what you do when you cannot defend the indefensible. You argue process. Well, here is a process concerning but you might reflect upon. Earlier today, Mitch Mcconnell gave some indication as to how a possible trial in the senate may work. And this is what senator mcconnell said. I am going to coordinate with the president s lawyers so there wont be any difference between us and how to do this. In other words, the jury, senate republicans, are going to coordinate with the defendant, donald trump, on how exactly the Kangaroo Court is going to be run. I submit to you respectfully that is a process concern. That the American People should be worried about. Now america is a resilient nation we have been through minutes of turmoil before. Weve always come through, we are resilient nation, and lincoln said we are in the heart of the civil, war america is the last, vast hope on earth. Fdr, said on the eve of the second world war, democracy is not dying. Reagan said in the midst of the cold war, america is a shining city on a hill. What exactly will history say about us . Will we put principle over party . Will we put the constitution above corruption . Will we put democracy over demagoguery . What exactly will history say about us . I yield now to my distinguished colleague from the great state of texas, this mrs. Escobar. Thank, you mister chairman, im going to speak directly to the American People once again and im going to ask but they bypass the republican talking points that weve heard over and over and over again, especially for those americans who have been listening and watching all day, and instead go directly to the evidence yourself. Over 100 hours of testimony, testimony by some of americas greatest patriots, over 250 text messages, Mick Mulvaneys own words, mr. Mulvaney is the president s chief of staff and finally, the president s own words, his own words inviting Russia Ukraine and china into our election. The republican colleagues that we have on this committee claim there is not enough evidence, review it for yourself and as to obstruction we have given a number of examples about obstruction but we have a living example that was released just tonight. Actually, before i talk about that example, if my colleagues, my republican colleagues think that the president is so free from wrongdoing, i would ask them to join us in a calling on President Trump to release it all. Release the witnesses, release documents, let the American Public make up their own minds, let them see it all. Call on transparency, join us, but they will not, because the obstruction is convenient, tonight, there was a victory. The center for Public Integrity sued federal court for documents related to the ukraine scandal and this is what they got. They won in court, but what they got were heavily redacted documents. Why . Because, the president does not want these documents to see the light of day. I ask for unanimous consent, chairman, to enter these documents no objection along with the article, Trump Administration resist ukraine disclosures ordered by court. The time of the gentlelady has expired. For what purposes the Ranking Member mr. Collins seek recognition . To strike the last word. Denim is recognized. Thank you, mister, chairman we are coming to the end here, it is amazing to me, especially from hearing from one of the on either side of the aisle, mr. Jeffries, make a statement that said that the only thing that we had to offer was a process argument all day. I mean, he may have had to come in and out, and i am not sure, for the most part, for all of our ill tell you i think its part of what im about to 12 hours ours is that please the aid was, released there is nothing done, and that was an argument, we have dont want to hear a process the ages release there is argument, we had nothing going and was no argument we have a process argument a lot to do with where we are at right, now but the facts we want to do is where we are at right now are being but the facts are being taken home taken home and rebuffed, and rebuffed, every single hour every single hour of this of this day since day since not a father 9 00. It is it is amazing amazing to me to me that that as as we look we look forward forward, and going and going forward, it forward it has to be has to be said, said this is this is basically basically a concern in part concerning for many of us for many of us is is the focus the focus on on impeachment impeachment. But he could not but he could not make, make it as one by it as one my politics mr. Colleagues, mr. Griffin said, quid pro quo is griffin said quick work was not on the not something we all use values but but bribery is regret is something somebody something somebody understands, understands extortion is what somebody extortion is what something understands understands, or doing something doing something, we have that will be in the tech we never told you didnt speak a little snow is on the air if they were if they were so so assured that they had assure they had that all his crimes done all these crimes, but you but you can get cant, that is the that is the biggest biggest flaw we are floor we are having having right now right now. I know we i do we still have to saw this little bit of debate left, slow it up to be left but that is the issue but that is the, issue you cannot put them in, there and the who have said that you want to defend actions right, away we are defending the president actions, i want to do that right now for someone to say but we have again is not list what we have is oclock and calendar impeachment. One of the things that has assured me most, of my work with this chairman now in the minority or majority, both ways, and it is amazing to me how little we have gotten in this. I wrote six letters to this chairman about how we are going to conduct what has become the short rubberstamp region of impeachment which we have tonight in the Judiciary Committee. I received an answer to none of those letters except one. Just the other, night when it was rejected, not a chance to we have any of our witnesses, so, in some way, i turn back on the democrats, what were you scared . What are you afraid of that they might actually say . Because we just summarily rejected them for my question, to be, honest what are you afraid of . Some of which had already been called. We are understanding the fact we have now become a committee that unfortunately mueller the chairman said over 20 years, ago we have except the facts from other places and not check on ourselves, we have regurgitated follow, talked about other peoples work but not had a chance to look at it ourselves. We are the rubble stamp. This is no longer the Judiciary Committee that actually is a factor witness interrogator, it is a rubber stamp which someone else, particularly mr. Schiff, has told, us and that is sad because that is not what this committee is about. I have watched the last two congress is, my friends, who are now in the majority, are in the minority, make passionate arguments for hours at a time, very, little nothing including the rules of the committee, we went home, seven or eight hours from the rules the committee, passionate, i understand what that committee is about, but can you tell me honestly for the majoritys perspective that you almost been less hours percentage wise on impeachment than actually doing anything remotely related to the hearing as he did in a minority when youre arguing about the rules of the committee and the oversight . That should tell you a lot about what this is about. Because we are spending more time in arguments about things that really at the end of the day they were not needed but we are spending less time percentage wise arguing about what you would call the highest of all powers that youre doing and honoring the constitution. I think it is just not congruent with what youre doing. The other problem i have is, this will be never, ending in just a few, weeks we have the senate finishes up wherever they do and we are back to this again, and i know that because adam schiff told me. So i know this because mr. Green told me, so they will impeach him over and over again, i guess im waiting for the Committee Hearing schedule and february to see what we are investigating next. I guess that will dominate. But the two most, one most disturbing thing i said to the end of the day, if you cant make that president zelensky felt, threatened you can attack present zelensky, i cannot believe just in the last little bit here he was actually called a better life. President zelensky called a battered wife, the absolute destruction, in comparison to a battered wife is just amazing but this is what we stoop in his committee, at this time, during this important moment, on this impeachment debacle. I yield back. Move to strike the last word thank you so much mister chairman just. A couple of things i want to clear up right off the bat. I feel compelled to say that a lieutenant Alexander Vindman is a hero. Because he received the purple heart for sustaining injuries in iraq. And i am extremely proud of him for his courage on and off the battlefield. Secondly you can say this one more time, the Intelligence Committee did not subpoena the phone records of any member of congress or any member of the press. Abuse of power has been defined as official misconduct, commission often unlawful activity, done in an official capacity which affects the performance of official duties. President trump thought an announcement of political investigations in return for performing to official act. Number one, he conditioned release of vital military assistance in ukraine on president zelenskys public announcement of the investigations. Now imagine if there was a mayor who withheld critical dollars from the police chief to fight terrorism until that chief went to a microphone and simply announced an investigation of the mayors political opponent. I do not believe any can immunity anywhere we would allow that. Number to, the president conditioned ahead of state meeting at the white house on ukraine publicly announcing the investigations and finally, President Trump acted corruptly throughout this course of conduct because he offered to perform these official acts in exchange for a private political benefit rather than because it was in the countrys interest. This last element the, president acting corruptly, is perhaps its the most important act. It bears repeating because it explains why this article is structured as an abuse of power. It has been suggested that its as simple as we hate the president. I dont hate the president. I attended President Trumps inauguration i. Wanted to be there to watch a peaceful transfer of power. I felt it was my duty before coming to congress i provided dignitary protection for republican and democratic president s. And i always considered it an honor. But President Trump, with all that has been said, with all the excuses that we have heard today, President Trump used his office to serve himself. To serve his private benefit. And by sueing doing so, he jeopardized americas National Security interests and the integrity of our precious elections, every vote should count. And went all out to completely obstruct any investigation into his wrongdoing. Yes, weve heard it many times. Yes, the president was duly elected by the American People. We know that. And we take it very seriously. I want my vote to count. And everybody, i believe, who make their way to the polls, want their vote to count. But are you suggesting that the American People will allow the president to do anything that he wants to do anytime anyplace, anywhere . To my republican colleagues, i reject where you are willing to settle for. We have a responsibility to hold the president accountable. And i plan on doing my constitutional duty. He shall be held accountable and. With that mister chairman, i yield back. Gentlelady yields back. If there are no further amendments we have concluded debate. The question occurs on the amendment to the substitute. All those in favor respond by saying i. Those no. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. To be clear, the ice have it the amendment the nature of the substitute is agreed to. Be clear to vote the Committee Just took is not a vote on the final passage of the article. It is a procedural vote which proceeds for final passage of each of the articles. It has been a long two days of consideration of these articles and it is now very late at night. I want to members on both sides of the aisle to think about what has happened over these past few days and to search their conscience is before we cast their final voice. Therefore the committee will now stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 10 am, at which point i will move to divide the question so that each office may have the opportunity to cast up or down vote on each of the articles of impeachment on and until history beyond judge. Richard sherman. There is no you have just blown up scheduled for everyone. You chose not to consult the Ranking Member on the schedule issue of this magnitude. So typical. This is the Kangaroo Court is that we are talking about. More stolen ask to an unbelievable degree. Stubbornness. Dont have a dictator. Its good to hear about. That unbelievable. Injury rain everywhere is now there was no discussion. No discussion about times we would vote tonight. To do that right there shows that chairman nadler us integrity is zero. They have nothing taken upper anywhere other than the Kangaroo Court. It has made this committee irrelevant. This chairman has made himself irrelevant. That was the most bush league play i have ever seen in my life. It is want to get it back on the cameras because it is after 11 00. Nt they can other people they dont think that enough people are watching. They have nothing they can move on. Anyway in america, this just shows the American People why this is wrong. They should show this. This president has been attacked for three years. Course after a to david two day debate, they approved the articles of impeachment. Abuse of power and obstruction of congress. The articles of impeachment had to the full house for consideration. Here is the 10 minute session comprised of two votes
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.