I believe these documents are also of great importance to making sure senators have the information necessary to make a fully informed decision this terribly weighty decision. The house has built a very strong case against the president. Maybe thats why Leader Mcconnell doesnt seem to want witnesses, at least not agree to them now. Maybe thats why the president is afraid because the house case is so strong that they dont want witnesses that might corroborate it. The evidence the house put together includes public testimony given under oath by numerous senior officials appointed by President Trump. These are trump appointees were calling, not some partisan democrat but some republican senators have said that while the charges are serious, they
havent seen enough evidence to make a decision. Thats one of the reasons ive proposed subpoenas for these witnesses and documents all directly relevant from officials who have yet to testify under oath during any stage of the house process. Senators who oppose this plan will have to explain why less evidence is better than more evidence. Again, let me say that. To every senator in this room, democrat and republican, senators who oppose this plan will have to explain why less evidence is better than more evidence, and theyre going to have to explain that position to a public that is understandably skeptical when they see an administration suppressing evidence and blocking senior officials from telling the truth about what they know. Let me repeat this washington abc poll. Just this morning, i read about it in the paper this morning. 71 of americans believe the president should allow his top aides to testify in a potential senate trial. 72 of independents and 64 of republicans, 64 of republicans think that President Trump should allow his top aides to testify in a potential senate trial. 7 out of 10 americans. The American People have a wisdom that seems to be lacking with some of my colleagues, that a trial without witnesses is not a trial. Its a rush to judgment. Its a sham trial. The American People understand that a trial without relevant documents is not a fair trial. Again, a desire not to not for sunlight but for darkness, to conceal facts that may well
be very relevant. The American People understand if youre trying to conceal evidence and block testimony, its probably not because the evidence is going to help your case. Its because youre trying to cover something up. Mr. President trump, President Trump, are you worried about what these witnesses would say . If youre not worried, let them come forward, and if you are worried, we ought to hear from them. I havent heard, again, the leader went on for 15, 20 minutes, the republican leader, without giving a single argument for why these witnesses shouldnt testify or these documents shouldnt be produced unless the president has something to hide. In the coming weeks, every senator will have a choice. Do they want a fair, honest trial that examines all the
facts . Or do they want a trial that doesnt let all the facts come out. We will have votes. During this proceeding should the house send it to us after voting for it, when they send it to us, we will have votes on whether these people should testify and whether these documents should be made public and part of the trial, and the American People will be watching. They will be watching. Who is for an open and fair trial . Who is for hiding fact s, relevant facts, immediate facts . Who is for covering up . I expect to discuss this proposal for a fair trial with Leader Mcconnell, but each individual senator will have both the power and the responsibility to help shape what an Impeachment Trial looks
like. In federalist 65, Alexander Hamilton wondered, quote, where else than in the senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified or sufficiently independent to serve as a court of impeachment . What other body would be likely to feel confidence enough to preserve unawed and uninfluenced the necessary impartiality . My colleagues, Leader Mcconnell, are you and Alexander Hamiltons words unawed and uninfluenced to produce the necessary impartiality, or will you participate in a coverup . Can we live up to hamiltons fine words with dignity, independence, confidence to preserve the necessary impartiality to conduct a fair trial . That question should weigh
heavily upon every single senator. Mr. President , i yield the floor. All right, hello, everyone, im kate bolduan, thank you so much for joining me at this hour. What youve been watching is the top democrat in the senate, senator Chuck Schumer speaking about impeachment, of course, making his case defending his proposal that he laid out just this week to request witnesses when the senate trial begins into the impeachment of President Trump. And this comes just moments after the Top Republican in the senate, senator Majority Leader Mitch Mcconnell took to the floor and essentially flatly rejected that proposal, at least at this stage, when he made remarks on the floor as well. That is in the senate. The procedure, the machinations
of how thats going to play out, thats what were looking at right there, though both men say they are going to sit down at some point and still have that discussion while they let these fights play out in public as well. Thats in the senate. We keep our eyes there, but we also keep our eyes very specifically in the house today as well because today is the final step before the House Of Representatives vote to impeach President Trump, something that has only happened twice before in American History. Right now the final hearing, you see that on your screen, the final hearing to essentially set up the Rules Of Engagement for the historic floor vote is about to get underway. Its called the house rules committee. With few exceptions, all bills that are voted on in the house goes through this committee before heading to the floor for a vote. Was one part wonky, another parpart in the weeds. The committee today decides the terms and conditions under which
the Impeachment Charges will be considered on the floor. How long the debate will be, allowing or much more likely r forbidding members to offer changes to the articles of impeachment before they vote when they get to the floor. This moment in history is about to start. The big wild card at this moment, i will say, though, is there are no timing restrictions for how long lawmakers in this hearing are going to be able to talk, so youre not going to hear the thing that youve gotten so used to hearing oaf the past few weeks which is the gentlemans time has expired, the gentlewomans time has expired, not this time. Im going to leave that to you to guess whether lawmakers are going to go longer or shorter. Manu raju on the hill, one of the few people who loves watching rules Committee Hearings and does so in his spare time. What are folks going to be seeing here . Reporter yeah, you explained it very well, kate. What it is going to be, the
members of this committee are going to ask questions. On the democratic side jamie raskin whos taking place of the jerry nadler. Nad lettler had a family emergeo attend to. Also, doug collins, Top Republican on the committee will be pushing back giving the republican the argument, each of the members of the committee can ask questions to these witnesses. But we know what the outcome is going to be. Theyre going to set the parameters for the floor debate, and that floor debate will occur tomorrow on that historic vote in which the president will get impeached on two counts one on obstruction of congress, the other on abuse of power. Already as we saw Chuck Schumer say, were seeing the debate play out on the next step, the senate trial, how exactly that would play out, and indicatdemo that i have talked to are making it clear they plan to force the vote notion on the familiar of the floor of the senate to compel these witnesses to come forward. Something they were allowed to do. One top democratic senator dick
durbin told me theres no senate trial that will show that the white house in his view has no one who will defend him. But say to me that the president and his team can find no witness who will exonerate him from his statements and conduct that led to this impeachment. If he has a witness, if he has a document, for goodness sakes, why wouldnt he produce it. What were saying is the trial gives him that opportunity to bring his witnesses forward. Well, i would hope that the senators of both parties will insist before any trial begins to have the documentary evidence, and i think every senators going to have to answer the question do they want to see the documents . Do you want to see the facts or are they just going to try to sweep this under the rug. Reporter the last point by adam schiff is that demand for those documents that have been blocked by the white house. Part of Chuck Schumers demand for moving forward on this Impeachment Trial, he wants not just four witnesses who were blocked by the white house but all those documents to be produced as well. But republicans as you heard Mitch Mcconnell say just this morning, they are not going for schumers proposal, but ultimately The Big Question will be whether there will be any defectors in the ranks that could force change at all on the floor of the senate. Thats something well have to watch play out in the days ahead. A lot of youve been asking the question as well as the cnn team on the hill of these potentially kind of republicans that might break ranks, if you want to say that, and would vote with democrat on some of these procedures. Youve been asking them over and over again, a lot of them not tipping their hand at all at what they would like to see. You caught up with mitt romney. What did mitt romney tell you . He didnt want to talk about it all. I asked him do you want to hear from mick mulvaney. Do you want to hear from john bolton. He said i have a Point Of View on this but im not going to express my Point Of View until i have more conversations with my colleagues. So he clearly wants to he
doesnt want to tip his hand one way or the other. Hes hearing from other senators as well like Susan Collins of maine, another potentially swing vote here. She says that she wants to have the leadership negotiate how to move forward on this. She said shes a juror, she does not want to talk about it. Lamar alexander, another republican who is retiring, someone who could be a swing vote on this Witness Testimony as well saying that he wants the leadership to cut a deal. So these senators are keeping their cards very close. Well see if any of them break ranks or if they side with their leadership, kate. Yeah, a lot of pressure externally and internally for sure going on in the senate right now. Manus going to stick close. Were keeping our eye on that hearing room that you can see right there. Thats the rules committee hearing, a touch more cozy than the vast ways and Means Committee room that weve been watching those public hearings play out in weeks prior. Doug collins taking his position, the Ranking Member on the house Judiciary Committee. He will be making his case as
manu laid out. This is about to get underway. Well be right back with cnns special coverage of another moment in history. Everything your trip needs, for everyone you love. Expedia. Male anchor . An update on the cat who captured our hearts. Female anchor how often should you clean your fridge . Stay tuned to find out. Male anchor beats the odds at the box office to become a rare nonfranchise hit. You can give help and hope to those in need. She keeps us centered. Love you. Introducing the center of me collection. Because every your love keeps me centered begins with kay. Billions of problems. Dry mouth . Parched mouth . Cotton mouth . Theres a therabreath for you. Therabreath oral rinse and lozenges. Help relieve dry mouth using natural enzymes to soothe and moisturize. So you can. Breathe easy, theres therabreath at walmart. Iclimate is the number 1ove priority. Sage. I would declare a State Of Emergency on day 1. Congress has never passed an important climate bill, ever. This is a problem that continues to get worse. Ive spent a decade fighting and beating oil companies. Stopping pipelines. Stopping fossil fuel plants, ensuring clean energy across the country. How are we going to pull this country together . We take on the biggest challenge in history, we save the world and do it together. Little things can be a big deal. Psoriasis, thats why theres otezla. Otezla is not a cream. Its a pill that treats Plaque Psoriasis differently. With otezla, 75 clearer skin is achievable. Dont use if youre allergic to otezla. Its unfortunate that we have to be here today, but the actions of the president of the United States make that necessary. President trump withheld Con Fwre Congressionally approved aid to ukraine, a partner under siege. Not to fight corruption but to extract a personal political favor. President trump refused to meet with ukraines president in the white house until he completed this scheme all the while leaders in russia, the very nation holding a large part of ukraine hostage, the very nation that interfered with our elections in 2016 had yet another meeting in the Oval Office Just last week. These are not my opinions. These are uncontested facts. We have listened to the hearings. We have read the transcripts, and its clear that this
president acted in a way that not only violates the public trust, he jeopardized our National Security, and he undermined our democracy. He acted in a way that rises to the level of impeachment. That is why we are considering hres 755 today, a Resolution Impeaching donald trump president of the United States for High Crimes And Misdemeanors. Congress has no other choice but to act with urgency. When i think back to the founders of this nation, they were particularly concerned about foreign interference in our elections. They understood that allowing outside forces to decide american campaigns would cause the fundamentals of our democracy to crumble, but the evidence shows that exactly what President Trump did, not only allowed but solicited foreign interference all to help him win his reelection campaign. What shocks me, quite frankly about so many of my republican friends is their inability to
acknowledge that President Trump acted improperly. It seems the only republican members willing to admit the president did something wrong have either already retired or announced plans they intend to retire at the end of this congress. I get it, its hard to criticize a president of your own party, but that shouldnt you know, but that shouldnt matter here. I admired president clinton when he was president of the United States, and i still do today, but when this house impeached him, which i didnt agree with, i went to the house floor and i said i thought what president clinton did was wrong because moments like this call for more than just reflexive partisanship. They require honesty, and they require courage. Are any republicans today willing to muster the strength to say that what this president did was wrong . Now, let me say again what happened here. The president withheld congressionally approved military aid to a country under siege to on strakt a personal
political favor. He did no do this as a matter of u. S. Policy, he did this for his own benefit. That is wrong, and if that is not impeachable conduct, i dont know what is. Ive heard some on the other side suggest this process is about overturning an election. That is absurd. This is about President Trump using his office to try and rig the next election. Now, think about that. We like to say that every vote matters, that every vote counts. We learned in grade school about all the people who fought and died for that right. It is a sacred thing. You know, i remember as a middle schooler in 1972 leaving leaflets at the homes of potential voters urging them to support George Mcgovern for president. No relation, by the way. I thought he had a great last name, and he was dedicated to ending the war in vietnam and
feeding the hungry and helping the poor. I remember even to this day what an honor it was to ask people to support him, even though i was too young to vote myself, and what a privilege it was later in life to ask voters for their support in my own campaigns. Ive been part of winning campaig campaigns, and identify beve bf losing ones too. People i thought would be great president s like Senator Mcgovern were never given that chance. Make no mistake, i was disappointed but i accepted it. I would take losing an election any day of the week when the American People render that verdict, but i will never and i mean i will never be okay if other nations decide our leaders for us. And the president of the United States is rolling out the welcome mat for that kind of foreign interference to not act would set a dangerous precedent, not just for this president but for every future president. The evidence is as clear as it
is overwhelming, and this administration hasnt handed over a single subpoenaed document to refute it, not one. Now its up to us to decide whether the United States is still a nation where no one is above the law or whether america is allowed to become a land run by those who act more like kings or queens, as if the law doesnt apply to them. Its no secret that President Trump has a penchant fordictato. Hes complimented vladimir putin, lauded president erdogan, fell in love with kim jongun. I can go on and on and on, and maybe the president is jealous that they can do whatever they want. These dictators are the antithesis of What America Stands for, and every day we let President Trump act like the law doesnt apply to him, we move a
little closer to them. Now, Benjamin Franklin left the Constitutional Convention and said the founders have created a republic, if you can keep it. There are no guarantees. Our system of government will persist only if we fight for it, and the simple question for us is this. Are we willing to fight for this democracy . I expect well have a lot of debate here today. I hope everyone searches their conscien conscience. To my republican friends, imagine any democratic president sitting in the oval office, president obama, president clinton, any of them. Would your answer here still be the same . No one should be allowed to use the powers of the presidency to undermine our elections or cheat in a Campaign No Matter who it is and no matter what their party. We all took an oath, not to defend a Political Party but to uphold the constitution of the United States. History is testing us. We cant control what the senate will do, but each of us can decide whether we pass that test, whether we defend our democracy and whether we uphold our oath. Today will put a process in place to consider these arabtics on the house floor. When i cast my vote in favor, my conscience will be clear. We take up a lot of contentious matters up here in the rules committee, and often we are on different sides of many issues, but he leads with integrity, and he cares deeply about this house. There will be passionate disagreement here today, but i have no doubt we will continue Working Together In The Future and side by side on this committee to better this institution. And let me also state for the record that Chairman Nadler is unable to be here today because of a family medical emergency, and we are all keeping him and his family in our thoughts and prayers. Testifying instead today is
Congressman Raskin, he is not only a valued member of this committee but also the judiciary and oversights committee. In addition, Congressman Raskin is a constitutional law professor, so he has a very comprehensive and unique understanding of what were talking about here today. And i appreciate him stepping in and testifying this morning. I also want to welcome back Ranking Member collins, a former member of the rules committee, someone who i dont often agree with but someone who i respect nonetheless and appreciate all of his contributions to this institution. Having said that, i now will turn this over to our Ranking Member mr. Cole for any remarks he wishes to make. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Let me begin by reciprocating that personal and professional respect for you and the other members of this committee as well. Because i do think very highly of each and every person on this committee, and particularly of you mr. Chairman, but this is a
day where were going to disg o disagree and disagree very strongly. It is as you reference, mr. Chairman, a sad day, a sad day for me personally, for the rules committee, for the institution of the house, and for the American People. Were meeting today on a rule for considering articles of impeachment against a sitting president of the United States on the floor of the House Of Representatives. This is not the result of a fair process and certainly not a bipartisan one. Sadly the democrats Impeachment Inquiry has been flawed and partisan from day one, so i guess it should come as no surprise that democrats preordained outcome is also flawed and partisan. Seven weeks ago when this committee met to consider a resolution to guide the process for the democrats unprecedented Impeachment Inquiry, i warned that they were treading on shaky ground with their unfair and closed process reflecting how
things have played out since then reaffirms my earlier judgment that this flawed process was crafted to ensure a partisan preordained result. Unfortunately, this entire process was tarnished further by the speed with which my democratic colleagues on the judiciary and intelligence committees have rushed to deliver their predetermined judgment. To impeach the president for something, anything, whether there are stones left unturned or where theres any proof at all. Theres no way this can or should be viewed as legitimate, certainly in the not by republi whose Minority Rights have been trampled every step of the way, and certainly not by the American People observing this disastrous political show scene by scene. As ive said before, unlike any Impeachment Proceedings in modern history, the partisan process prescribed and pursued by democrats is truly unprecedented, and it contradicts Speaker Pelosis own
words. Back in march of this year, she said, quote, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless theres something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan i dont think we should go down that path because it divides the country, unquote. The keyword in that quote is bipartisan. Indeed during the nixon and clinton impeachments, the process for even opening the inquiry was considered on a bipartisan basis. Back then both sides treated the process with the seriousness it deserved, Negotiating And Finding Agreement across the aisle to ensure fairness and due process for all involved in the inquiries, but thats not the case today. Instead democrats have pushed forward using a partisan process that limited the president s right to due process, prevented the minority from exercising their rights and charged ahead toward a vote to impeach the
president whether the evidence is there or not. I suppose i shouldnt be surprised by any of this. Democrats in the house vsh pushing to impeach President Trump since before he was even sworn in. In December Of 2017 when a current democratic member of the house forced a vote on impeachment resolution, 58 democrats voted then to impeach t President Trump even without an investigation, without any evidence to point to, and those numbers have only grown since then to the point where the majority is now pushin forward with a final vote on Impeachment Heedless of where it takes the krr country and regardless of whether they have proven their case. Mr. Chairman, it didnt have to be this way. When she became entrusted with the gavel over this house in congress, Speaker Pelosi assured us all she would not move forward with impeachment unless it was bipartisan, and unless there was a clear consensus in
the country. Neither of those two commissions are present here. Indeed, the latest real clear politics average of polls on impeachment shows the country evenly split with 46. 5 of americans in favor of impeachment and 46. 5 against. That is hardly what i would call a National Consensus in favor of impeaching President Trump. When half of americans are telling you that what youre doing is wrong, you should listen. I think this is especially the case given how close we are to the next election. In 11 months, the American People are going to vote on the next president of the United States. Why then are we plunkiging the country sba thinto this kind of turmoil and this kind of trauma now when the voters themselves will resolve the matter one way or another less than a year from today. All it does achieve is make the Political Polarization and
divisions in our country even worse. That makes no sense to me. We may be moving forward with a vote, i certainly do not believe the majoritys proven its case or convinced the American People that the weeks of wasted time was worth it. And personally i believe the articles themselves are unwarranted. The majority is seeking to remove the president over something that didnt happen, the alleged Kwid Liququid pro q the president of ukraine. Never mind that the foreign aid went to ukraine as it was supposed to, and never mind that no investigations were required for the ukraine to get the aid, and never mind that the two participants in the famous conversation, President Trump and president zelensky said nothing inappropriate happened. According to the majority, however, a quid pro quo that never existed is an appropriate basis for removing the president from office. Even though the majority has not proven its case, and even though
theres no basis for impeachment, theyre still moving forward today. What i Cannot Discern is a legitimate reason why. Why the majority is moving forward when the process is so partisan, why they are moving forward when the American People are not with them. Why they are moving forward when they havent proven their case, and why they are moving forward when there is no basis for impeachment. Why . Why put the country through all this . It makes even less sense to me when we consider the realities of the United States senate. We already know that the votes to convict and remove the president from office simply arent there. Bluntly put, this is a matter that congress as a whole cannot resolve on its own. Yet the majority is plunging forward regardless of the needless drama or the damage to the institution and to the country knowing full well that the end of the day the president will remain in office, and for
what . Scoring political points with their partys base . Again, mr. Chairman, this does not make any sense to me. We didnt need to go this route. We didnt need to push forward on a partisan impeachment process that had only one possible result, but were here anyway regardless of the damage it does to the institution and regardless of how much further it divides the country. As i said at the Beginning Plflt Cha mr. Chairman, this is a sad day for all of us, but it is especially sad for me knowing this day was inevitable, preordained from the start, no matter what happened, no matter where the investigations led, the democratic majority in the House Of Representatives was pushing since the day they took over to impeach President Trump. The facts dont warrant that, mr. Chairman. And the process is unworthy of the outcome. The president should not be
impeached and i urge all members both here in the rules committee and tomorrow on the house floor to vote no. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, and i appreciate your comments. Obviously we have strong disagreements, and i just one technic technical point id like to make. None of us in this house have had an opportunity to vote on impeachment. The resolution that the gentleman refers to was some of us opposed tabling it because we thought it should go to committee where it could be appropriately evaluated, and thats what this process has achieved, the relevant committees have done their work and investigated the claims of wrongdoing by the president , and now the Judiciary Committee has recommended articles of impeachment. So the first time anybody in this house will get an opportunity to vote on impeachment will be tomorrow. Having said that, i want to welcome both of our witnesses and mr. Raskin, we will begin with you. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Good morning chairman mcgovern, good morning Ranking Member cole, good morning to all of our distinguished colleagues on the house rules committee, and good morning to my friend mr. Collins. It is my solemn responsibility this morning to present for your consideration House Resolution 755 and the accompanies House Judiciary Report concerning the impeachment of donald john trump, president of the United States for High Crimes And Misdemeanors committed against the people of the United States. Im appearing as you said, mr. Chairman, this morning in place of Chairman Nadler who could not be with us. I am sure i speak for all the members of both the Judiciary Committee and the rules committee in sending strength, love, and prayers to Chairman Nadlers wife joyce and all of our hopes for a speedy recovery. The Judiciary Committee along with the other committees, which investigated President Trumps offenses, the Permanent Select Committee on intelligence, the committee on foreign affairs, and the committee on oversight
and reform bring these articles with a solemn purpose and a heavy heart, but in active faith with the constitutional oaths of office that we have all sworn. The investigating committees conducted 100 hours of Deposition Testimony with 17 sworn witnesses and 30 hours of public testimony with 12 witnesses. The Judiciary Committee is now in possession of overwhelming evidence that the president of the United States has committed High Crimes And Misdemeanors, violated his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of the president of the United States and to the best of his ability preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States and violated his constitutional duty to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. We present two articles of impeachment supported by hundreds of pages of detailed evidence in meticulous analysis. The evidence and analysis lead inescapably to the conclusions embodied in these articles of
impeachment. First, President Trump has committed the high crime and misdemeanor of abuse of office. He abused the awesome powers of the presidency by using his office to corruptly demand that a Foreign Government interfere in our american president ial election in order to promote his own Political Campaign in 2020. He corruptly conditioned the release of 391 million in Foreign Security assistance that he held back from the Ukrainian Government along with a long hope for white house president ial meeting, he conditioned those on ukrainian president zelenskys agreement to go public with two statements. One statement was announcing a criminal investigation into former Vice President joe biden, a leading president ial candidate and rival of the president. The other statement was announcing an investigation that would rehabilitate a discredited prorussian Conspiracy Theory by showing that it was ukraine and
not putins russia that tried to disrupt the last american president ial election in 2016. This scheme to corrupt an american president ial election subordinated the democratic sovereignty of the people to the private political ambitions of one man, the president himself. It immediately placed the National Security interests of the United States of america at risk, and it continues to em plo broil the nation in our government in conflict. Second, after this Corrupt Scheme came to light, and numerous Public Servants with not only of key events surfaced to testify in our Committee Investigations about the president s actions, President Trump directed the wholesale categorical and indiscriminate obstruction of this congressional Impeachment Investigation. He did so by ordering a blockade of administration witnesses, by trying to muzzle and intimidate witness who is did come forward,
and by refusing to produce even a single subpoenaed document. In the history of the republic, no president other than this one has ever claimed and exercised the unilateral right and power to thwart and defeat a house president ial Impeachment Inquiry. Yet, that would have been the final and unavoidable result of the president s outrageous defiance of congress had 17 brave witnesses not come forward in the face of the president s threats and testified about the Ukraine Shakedown and its scandalous effects on our National Security, our democracy, and our constitutional system of government. But make no mistake, while this investigation was saved by the kur courage and Old Fashioned patriotism of witnesses like ambassador william taylor, ambassador marie yovanovitch,
lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, and dr. Fiona hill, the president s aggressive and unprecedented resistance to congressional subpoenas for witnesses and documents is blatantly and dangerously unconstitutional. If accepted and normalized now, it will undermine perhaps for all time the congressional Impeachment Power its, which is the peoples last instrument of constitutional selfdefense against a sitting president who behaves like a king and tramples the rule of law. By obstructing an Impeachment Inquiry with impunity, the president will have the power to actively destroy the peoples final check on his own corrupt misconduct and abuse of power. The framers insisted that we have impeachment in the constitution precisely to protect ourselves from a president becoming a tyrant and a despot, and we cannot, and we will not allow the Impeachment Power its to be destroyed. These articles charge that President Trump is engaged in systematic abuse of his powers, obstructed congress, and realized the worst fears of the framers by subordinating our National Security and dragging foreign powers into american politics to corrupt our elections all for the greater cause of his own personal gain and ambition. Article i section 4 of the constitution provides that the President Shall be impeached for treason, bribery and other High Crimes And Misdemeanors. This is the essential check that the peoples representatives maintain over the executive branch. As our constitutional expert witnesses testified, the framers sought to capture a broad range of president ial misconduct and wrongdoing through this provision, but the commanding and comprehensive impulse for including Impeachment Power in the constitution was to prevent the president s abuse of power, which the framers saw as the
very essence of impeachable conduct. In federalist number 65, hamilton wrote that impeachable offenses are defined by abuse of some public trust. From the federalist papers and the records of the Constitutional Convention and the ratifying conventions, we find that the framers feared principally three kinds of betrayal of office, by abuse of power. Abuse of power, by exploiting Public Office for private, political, or financial gain, number one. Number two, abuse of power by betraying the National Interests in the public trust through entanglement with Foreign Governments, and number three, abuse of power by corrupting democratic elections and denying people the proper agency and selfgovernment. According to the framers, any one of these violations of the public trust would be enough to justify president ial impeachment for abuse of power. However, President Trumps conduct has realized all three
of the framers worst fears of president ial abuse of power. Never before in American History has an Impeachment Investigation crystalized in findings of conduct that implicate all of the major reasons that the framers built impeachment into our constitution. Mr. Chairman the conduct we set before you today is not some kind of surprising aberration or deviation in the president s behavior for which he is remo e remorseful. On the contrary, the president is completely unrepentant and defiantly declares his behavior perfect, indeed absolutely perfect. He says Article Ii Of The Constitution gives him the power to do whatever he wants, conveniently forgetting article ii which gives us the power to check his misconduct with the instrument of impeachment. We believe this conduct is impeachable and should never take place again under our constitutional system. He believes his conduct is
perfect and we know therefore that it will take place again and againme. Our Report Points out that this pattern of showing spectacular disrespect for the rule of law by inviting and welcoming foreign powers into our elections was in plain view in the 2016 president ial election. America remembers when then candidate donald trump uttered the imperish bli infamous word, russia, if youre listening, i hope youre able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. And just five hours later, russian agents moved to hack his political opponents computers as part of their continuing effort to upend the 2016 president ial campaign. As identified by the justice department, the Trump Campaign had more than 100 contacts with russian operatives over the course of that campaign and up in of th none of them were red by the Trump Campaign to Law Enforcement or National Security agencies. Moreover, during the special
counsel investigation into the sweeping and systematic Russian Campaign to subvert our election, President Trump engaged in another Systematic Campaign of obstruction of the investigative process to obscure his own involvement. Mr. President , mr. Chairman, we present you not just with high crimes and misdemeanor, but a constitutional crime in progress up to this very minute. Mayor giuliani, the president s private lawyer fresh from his overseas travel looking to rehabilitate once again the discredited Conspiracy Theories at the heart of the president s defense admitted that he participated directly in the Smear Campaign to oust ambassador yovanovitch from her job according to the new yorker magazine, giuliani said i believed that i needed yovanovitch out of the way. She was going to make the investigations difficult for everybody, and here, of course, mr. Giuliani refers to the president s sought after investigations into joe biden
and the remnants of the discredited Conspiracy Theory pushed by russia as propaganda that it was ukraine and not russia that interfered in the 2016 american president ial election. Given that an unrepentant president considers his behavior perfect, given that he thinks the constitution empowers him to do whatever he wants, given that he and his team are still awaiting president zelenskys statement about investigating joe biden, given that he has already invited china to perform an investigation of its own, we can only ask what the 2020 election will be like or indeed what any future election in america will be like if we just let this misconduct go and authorize and license president s to coerce, cajole, pressure and entice foreign powers to enter our Election Campaigns on behalf of the president , who will be invited in next. The president s continuing course of conduct constitutes a
Clear And Present Danger to democracy in america. We cannot allow this misconduct to pass. It would be a sellout of our constitution, our foreign policy, our National Security, and our democracy. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you very much, mr. Colli collins. Welcome back to the rules committee. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Its good to see you. And mr. Cole as well, members who ive spent many hours in this room with. You know, the chairman made a statement about my friend here mr. Raskin, and he is a fine attorney and its been amazing to me throughout this year how the Judiciary Committee has sidelined fine attorneys like himself into not asking questions, into not being a part of the process. Its been really interesting to watch because hes actually a good one, and as you said, hes a good constitutional attorney. Im not a constitutional attorney. Im a pastor and an attorney from north georgia, but i believe that you take another
look at this, and you can apply constitutional lenses we all set through those glasses, but its a common sense lens. Its a common sense lens. Mr. Cole made a comment in his opening statements. He said it doesnt make sense. Yeah, it does. It makes perfect sense. Look at the pattern. You know, the only thing that is that is a Clear And Present Danger right now in this room is the pattern of attack and abuse of rules and decisions to get at this president that started over three years ago really the night he was elected. And i said the other day in the committee here and i thought about having the means and the motive and the opportunity, the opportunity for this day occurred last november when we lost the majority. It occurred. Because theyd already talked about it for years prior, and so now we just bring it forward, and we try a lot of Different Things to get there, and well talk about that im sure as the time goes on today, and look, we
can have plenty of time to talk about the articles and the very vague articles that we did. Its pretty interesting if you read the report from the majority, theres a lot of discussion about crimes, but they couldnt find it in themselves to charge one. Again, common sense. Articles and when you think about impeachment, youre thinking about impeaching a president in particular for crimes. Youre thinking about youre and this majority has tried so hard to be like clinton and nixon and failed so miserably, but every time we try, we try once again except the one thing when it came down to the very end, the one thing they couldnt do is actually find a crime. They talk about it a bunch. If you read their read the majoritys report. It is wellwritten. It is some of the best work youll see frankly in that the problem here is a Majority Bent on finding something for this president. So, mr. Cole, its not a surprise, in fact, its a sad
day not only for the rules committee but for the Judiciary Committee. Its telling that the articles of impeachment, to show you how partisan this is, and really this concerning part that i see, and mr. Mcgovern is a friend and we disagree probably on a lot of things with this glass half empty. Thats fine, thats what were supposed to do. But to find ways to actually work together, we have worked together. The question i have here, though, is, as the speaker said this is supposed to be overwhelming and bipartisan and the American People understand it, then why are we in the rules committee today . With clinton it was a uc strike to the fore. We didnt have to come to the rules committee because both sides could see there was something to be discussed, and thats not true here. So the rules committee is somewhere i have spent many hours and many of us in this group have discussed many things. But this should not be one of them. You know, its interesting, and i hear a lot today and ive heard already from mr. Raskin and the chairman today about the founders. When youre in an impeachment, you pick the founders if you like this partisan or the other partisan. But they dont want to mention the very thing were here for. I think it was 65, it was hamilton, when he said this. He said the founders warned against a vague, openended charge because it could be applied in a partisan fashion against a president. He called partisan impeachment regulated by the comparative strength of parties than the real demonstration of innocence or guilt, the greatest danger. In addition, the founders explicitly excluded the return because they didnt want the whims of congress. So there will be a tenure to the pleasure of the senate. I would say it will be a tenure to the pleasure of the house. When we look at the discussions here, there are many things i want to talk about, but the first thing i want to do is when i talk about how we get to a certain place, proper process leads to proper results and weve not had any of that in this process. Ive always said and ive said it many times in our discussions lately is that this is all about a clock and a calendar. It has been for a while. Since january its been about a clock and a calendar. Why do i say that . Because we had to get to it by the end of the year because if we waited until next year, it would be too close to elections theyre trying to interfere with. Yes, theyre trying to interfere with the 2020 election by beginning this process and moving forward. The clock and the calendar know no masters except themselves. You see, our Committee Held it
first hearing on november 4, literally the day after schiff released his public report. The chairman also set a deadline of december 6 for republicans and the president to request additional witnesses. But it wasnt until saturday, the day after the deadline, that chairman schiff transmitted 8,000 pages of material to the Judiciary Committee and we still havent gotten everything, not that it matters to the majority. For institutionalists, this should bother you. You can still go ahead and vote for your yes tomorrow and vote for yes today and do that, but it should matter for this institution that while i was in georgia, i received a call from my staff saying they just released 8,000 documents on thumb drives, some that were going to be kept in a secure holding. When i asked the chairman about these documents, where are they going to be used, he said, were not going to read them, either. We dont have a chance to go through them, were just going to go ahead and do what were doing. Thats from my chairman who i love dearly, weve done a lot of things together, but in a hearing of this magnitude, how can anyone, republican or democrat, go back and look at their constituents in the sdpas s face and say, we looked at all the evidence . No, we cherrypicked the evidence because there are still things not released. There is a special i. G. Report that has not been released. Whether its good or bad is irrelevant. When youre talking about impeaching a president , shouldnt the underlying evidence sent to the Judiciary Committee actually matter . Again, it Doesnt Take Constitutional Experts Coming in and telling us about it, it takes common sense to know that you dont impeach somebody without at least making all the evidence proper. Thats what happens when youre the tyranny of a clock and a calendar. Nothing else matters. When it comes to that day and
youre supposed to give that gift, if you dont have anything, i bet you go out and buy the first thing you get. This is what was happening, the clock was running out, so they found a phone call they didnt like. They didnt like this administration, they didnt like what the president did. They tried to show that there was pressure, all the things outlined in their report, but On The Last Day of christmas shopping, they found something and said, we can do it. But no crimes. None in the articles. Abuse of power in which anyone can make up anything they want to and call it abuse of power. But in the report they document bribery and extortion and all these other things which they cant put in the articles. Then the obstruction of justice, again, its sort of interesting what i just read, chairman schiff transferred on a saturday 8,000 pages of what we were supposed to be working at for the next hearing. We submitted our list of witnesses to nadler before we submitted it before schiff sent us any more evidence. Last monday we had a hearing so
schiffs staff and nadlers could tell us what it means to be impeached. He made a reference to ken starr, but for those who at least opened a history book, ken starr came and testified and took questions from everyone, including the white house counsel. On monday the chairman directed all of our witnesses out of hand. And on tuesday, The Morning After the presentation of the articles were unveiled think about this. No factual based witnesses. We had a bunch of law professors, one for us. By the way, i did ask for another one. Didnt get it. No reasoning. We just we want back we were in Impeachment Hearings and we went back to the normal 31 ratio. I asked for one more and basically didnt get it. It was an interesting conversation between the chairman and i. Didnt get it. Then got our witness list. Summarily dismissed. We got our information dumped to us right before were having to
have hearings, after we had to turn in our witness list. Judge, i dont think this would apply in any regular, normal court proceeding. I know this is not. Before anyone wants to tweet anything, were not in a court. I know that. Were in a kangaroo court, it feels like, in this place. Were more Alice In Wonderland than we are House Of Representatives. Because whether you agree he needs to be impeached or not, do you not think there needs to be a model, a process and rights . All of this is true. The rules completely aside, the minority healing day broken. Deprocessed rights for the accused in impeachment, kpleelt out the window. The authorization for this whole thing, the chairman could have used it to run a fair process. Unfortunately, we didnt. The problem comes down today that there are several things im going to leave you with, mr. Chairman. After all thats been said, all thats been talked about and all that was written in that wonderful report, there are four things that will never change. Both the president and president zelensky said there was no pressure. It shows no inconsistency in aid. The only thing they ever quote is his opening statement. They dont like to quote when he was actually questioned when he said, well, yeah, i presumed that. Then mr. Yermak said we didnt have any condition about aid. That just came out the other day. It definitely wasnt in the call transcript. When the president spoke, ukraine did not open investigations, didnt get a meeting and still got their aid. What did we see last week and the past two weeks . We saw mr. Zelensky, president zelensky, pillared in our community. Hes either a pathological liar, according to the majority, or hes so weak he shouldnt be governing that country. We actually did that to a world leader in our committee. These are the types of things that bother many of us. This is also about a clock and a calendar, too. We have a few hours. Well talk about it. But i do warn my majority friends, and i do consider you friends, the clock and the calendar are terrible masters and they lead to awful results. And yes, there will be a day of reckoning. The calendar and the clock will continue. But what you do here and how we have trashed the process in getting here will live on. And it will affect everything weve come forth. So whatever you may gain will be shortlived because the clock and the calendar also recognize common sense, which has not been used in this proceeding. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you very much. I want to thank both of you for your opening statements. Mr. Collins, you raised the issue of why were here in the rules committee today, and let me just state for the record that, as you know, the