Power like a weapon against his own people, erodes our decency, degrades our dignity. I dont yet know how they will tell the story of this era, but i want to tell you the story of this day. Let the record show that today justice won, that we did our job, that we kept our word, that we stood our sacred ground. Let the record show that we did not let you down. I love you. Listen to mom. Ill be home soon. Gentlemans time has expired. Gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker. Im going to reserve my time for the moment. Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from massachusetts. Im proud to yield one minute to the gentle woman from california, ms. Lee. The gentle lady is recognized for one minute. First let me say i taught my children that there are consequences if they broke the
law. I am saddened but im not shocked that we are here today considering articles of impeachment against President Trump. Im saddened, but im not shocked because of the pattern of corruption we have seen from this president. Yes, i am saddened, but im not shocked because this president has routinely shown his disregard of congress and the rule of law. The facts are not in dispute. The president abused his power, defied the Publics Trust and betrayed his Oath Of Office. He undermined our elections by corruptly soliciting foreign interference in our elections to benefit his own future reelection efforts. Then he obstructed Congress Every step of the way in an effort to cover it all up. Donald trump remains a threat to our National Security, wholly unfit to serve as president of the United States. We have an obligation to act
today to uphold the constitution, but also to show our children and grandchildren that no one is above the law. That includes the president of the United States. The gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker. I continue to reserve my time. The gentleman from massachusetts. Im happy to yield one minute to the gentle woman from massachusetts, ms. Trahan. Madam speaker, today i rise to defend our democracy. In this chamber we debate the nations most pressing issues and often reasonable people can draw different conclusions, but not today. The facts are black and white. President trump abused the power of his office for personal and political gain and then he engaged in a coverup. It is up to us to confront those facts and vote to preserve and protect our democratic republic. This is not a fight i or my colleagues sought out when we ran for congress, but it is one
we pledged when we raised our right hand and swore an oath to defend our constitution. Anything other than a vote to impeach will be read as a vote endorsing a future president without rules or consequences, an anything goes, noholdsbarred that will leave us weaker and surely undermine what the framers pass down. We owe it to future generations to transcend personal interest and Party Loyalty and vote our conscience for whats really at sake today, the sanctity of our constitution and the sanctity of our democracy. Thank you and i yield back. Gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker, i continue to reserve. Gentleman from massachusetts. Madam speaker, id like to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record october 23rd New York Times article. That objection is so ordered. At this point id like to yield one minute to the
gentleman from maryland. The gentleman is recognized for one minute. Thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise today in support of the two articles of impeachment against President Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of congress. Voting to impeach the president is a weighty decision. Its not something you reach for. Its something you are brought to, reluctantly when the evidence presented, can no longer be denied. In this sober and historic moment members of congress are called upon to uphold our Oath Of Office and our duty to the constitution. Today we answer that call. The president s actions compromise the National Security of the United States, undermine the integrity of our democratic process and betray the trust of the American People. In soliciting foreign interference, President Trump took direct aim at the heart of our democracy. The American People should decide our elections, not a foreign country. As long as the president
continues to invite foreign interference into our democracy, the integrity of the 2020 election remains at risk. The question is will congress allow the president to place his personal interest above those of his country. I urge my colleagues in the house to join me in answering that question with a resounding no because no one, not even the president of the United States is above the law. I yield back. The gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker. I continue to reserve my time. Gentleman from massachusetts. I ask unanimous consent to insert into the record october 9 Politico Magazine article entitled this is what a legitimate Anti Corruption effort in ukraine would look like which explains legitimate requests are made through the dojs office of International Affairs and pursuant to the United States mutual Legal Assistance treaty. So ordered. Id like to yield one minute to the gentle woman from
florida, ms. Castro. The president abused his power. He violated his Oath Of Office. He sought to elevate himself as a dictator, a king. But were not a monarchy. We are the United States of america. We are a republic, a democracy where the executive does not have absolute power. America was founded on a system of checks and balances. When the president withheld military aid to vulnerable ukraine and pressed for a personal favor to manufacture dirt against a political opponent, he went too far. He undermined americas National Security. He sought to sabotage our elections. He elevated his personal interests over the interests of america. Then he tried to cover up his scandalous behavior and he obstructed the investigation. He violated his Oath Of Office, but i intend to uphold mine, to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of america. The president must be impeached today. I yield back. The gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker. I continue to reserve my time. The gentleman from massachusetts. I ask unanimous consent to insert into the record december 5th boston Globe Editorial entitled impeach the president. And December 11th usa today editorial entitled impeach President Trump, too serious for the house to ignore. Without objection. At this point ill yield one woman to the gentle woman from florida, ms. Wasserman schultz. Throughout this process i listened to Career Diplomats testify in depositions and found myself contemplating the gravity of this decision. One of my daughters asked then how id make my decision about impeachment. I told her that when her future children learn about president
trumps impeachment, they may ask, mommy, what did grandma do . I want my daughter to tell her children grandma did the right thing because in america no one is above the law. With his conduct around ukraine, President Trump corruptly abused his power for his own interests at direct odds with our National Welfare and our constitution. This president put his interests before those of this nation. Left unchecked hed do it again and has said so. The actions and on going schemes that led us to this moment are severe threats to our National Security and democracy that we cant defend or dismiss. I must fulfill my constitutional duty and vote to impeach this president. His corrupt conduct and assault on our constitution leave no other choice. I yield back. Gentleman from oklahoma. I continue to reserve my time. Gentleman from massachusetts. Madam speaker, i yield one min tout the gentleman from california. The gentleman is recognized for one minute. Thank you, madam speaker. Today the house is voting to conserve a principle, what makes america the most prosperous nation in the world is our reverence for the rule of law. Its our love of the law that protects our freedoms, private property, our families from the exercise of arbitrary power. The real threat to American Leadership in the 21st century is internal decline. We choose not to stand idly by while we see the corrupting of our body politic with an attitude that winners dont have to follow the rules. In voting to impeach, we remember lincolns address, let every american, every well wisher to its pos Sparity Swear by the blood of the revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of this country and never to tolerate their violation by other. Let it be taught in schools and seminaries and in colleges, let it be written in primary
spelling books and almanac, preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls and enforced in the courts of justice. In short, let it become the political religion of the nation. Gentleman from oklahoma. I continue to reserve. Just to advise through the chair, my friend, im waiting for an additional speaker. We reserve our time. The gentleman reserves. Gentleman from massachusetts. Madam speaker i ask june announce consent to insert December 17th Cnn article entitled fact collect, Trumps Wild Letter To Pelosi is full of false and miss lieding claims. Without objection. I yield to the gentleman from north carolina. I rise on this solemn occasion as we in the House Of Representatives exercise the power given to us by the United States constitution. The original constitution was flawed in some respects but with respect to president ial misconduct it was unmistakable. The framers knew that president s
could be corrupt or abusive with their power so impeachment was written into our organic law. Since taking office, President Trump has consistently and intentionally divided the country. Hes consistently encouraged foreign actors to interfere in our elections. Hes thumbed his nose, madam speaker, at the legislative branch. Enough is enough. We must protect our constitution, our democracy. Our vote today to prefer serious charges against President Trump and deliver the charges to the senate for trial, a place where President Trump can defend himself and attempt, if he chooses, to convince the senate and the American People that his conduct does not violate the constitution. I thank the gentleman. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you very much, madam speaker. I yield one minute to my good friend and distinguished combat veteran for our country, mr. Baird of indiana. The gentleman is recognized for one minute. Madam speaker, today marks a sad day for america. Instead of getting to work to solve the issues of our time, the House Democrats have decided to try to discredit President Trump and undo the results of the 2016 election. The facts are clear that the president did not commit any crimes, he did not break any laws and there was no quid pro quo. This has been a secretive misdirected process from the very beginning and the American People see right through it. I look forward to voting against this Impeachment Charade and getting back to work to support the efforts of President Trump to continue growing our economy, creating jobs and improving the lives of all americans. I yield back the balance of my time. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from massachusetts. I yield one minute to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. Boyle. The gentleman is recognized for one minute. Thank you. Madam speaker, this is the
fourth impeachment proceeding against an american president and the most serious. The president committed numerous crimes threatening the National Security. Ultimately the matter before us today is not a question of fact, for the evidence is undisputed. Nor is it a question of law as the constitution is clear. The heart of the matter is this. Will members of this house have the courage to choose fidelity to the constitution over loyalty to their political party. For the sake of our constitution and our country, for americans today and tomorrow, i urge all members to summon the courage to uphold the rule of law and vote yes. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. Gentleman from oklahoma. Thank you, madam speaker. I continue to reserve my time. Gentleman from massachusetts. I yield one minute to the
distinguished gentleman from missouri, mr. Clay. I rise today to hold Donald John Trump accountable for his repeated abuse of power, his deliberate obstruction of the houses constitutionally mandated oversight responsibility and his unprecedented misuse of the presidency to weaken the separation of powers and subvert our constitution by dangling 391 million in congressional aid appropriated tax dollars over the head of an embattled ally in order to coerce a fraudulent investigation into a potential political opponent. Our founders feared a lawless, amoral president would willfully put National Security at risk for his own personal gain. In 1974 republicans made it
clear that their ultimate loyalty was not to one man but to upholding the constitution. Today the uncontested evidence shows donald trump violated his Oath Of Office. My friends on both sides of the aisle can either defend him or defend the constitution. Time has expired. I yield back. The gentleman from oklahoma continues to verve . I do, madam speaker. Gentleman from massachusetts. If i can acquire of the gentleman how many more speakers he has . Im prepared to close when my friend is. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized to close. Thank you very much, madam speaker. I yield myself the balance of my time. Recognized. Before i begin my formal remarks in closing, i want to say one thing for the record. I have Great Respect for all my friends on the other side of the aisle, and im sure theyre voting their convictions. So when i vote mine, please dont imply im doing it for my political party. Im doing it because its what i believe is right. I do believe i can defend both the president and the constitution of the United States, and i think thats exactly what i am doing. Madam speaker, i cannot oppose this rule strongly enough. The process we saw leading up to it today was a complete charade. It was a closed process, an unfair process and a rushed process. It could only have ever had one logical predetermined ending. Throughout it all, the majority trampled on Minority Rights, they refused to call witnesses with relevant firsthand knowledge. They relied on Hearsay News Reports to make their case. They denied republicans the right to hold a minority hearing day and they refused the president of the United States his Due Process Rights in the committee that was actually conducting the impeachment
process and investigating it. In the end, what was the result . Articles of impeachment based on an event that never lapd. A purported quid pro quo that did not exist. Aid that was allegedly withheld that in reality was never withheld at all. A Narrative Intent based on nothing more than fantasy. Madam speaker, we deserve better than this. Impeachment is the most Consequential Act the House Of Representatives can undertake. It must not and cannot be based on a flawed process. It cannot come at the expense of Minority Rights or due process to the accused. It cannot be based on a vendetta against the president if the majority has pursued since the day it was elected. It cannot be based on nothing more than spin and hearsay. I oppose this rule, and i oppose the flawed and unfair process. Madam speaker, its a very solemn vote that owl of us will cast. I want to end by number one thanking my good friend, the chairman of the rules committee for conducting the kind of hearing he conducted yesterday, but i also want to underscore again we are very violently opposed to the process, very strongly opposed to the rule, think this is a charade and been very unfair. So kmad madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question, no on the rule, no on the underlying measure and i yield back the balance of my time. Gentleman from massachusetts. I yield myself the remaining time. The gentleman is recognized. Madam speaker, let me thank my friend, mr. Cole, for his kind words. I respect that fact that he respects this institution. Madam speaker, let me say again what happened here. The president withheld
congressionally approved military aid to a country under siege to extract a personal political favor. Thats a cold hard fact. The question before us comes down to this. Should a president be allowed to ask a foreign nation to interfere in an American Election . I remember my First Political experience 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 remember 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 campaigns and part of losing one, too. People i thought would be great president 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 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 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, period. This isnt about siding with your team. I didnt swear an oath to defend a political party. I took an oath to uphold the constitution of the United States of america. When i vote yes on this rule and the underlying articles, my conscience will be clear. I ask all my colleagues to search their souls before casting their votes. I ask them all to stand up for our democracy, to stand up for
our constitution. Madam speaker, i urge a yes vote on the rule and previous question. I yield back the balance of my time and i prove the previous question on the resolution. The question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. All in favor say aye. Opposed no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. I would request the Yeas And Nays. Those favoring a vote by the Yeas And Nays have rise. Members will record their votes by Electronic Device pure surcht to clause nine of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution. This will be a 15minute vote. Youre watching special
coverage now on msnbc of the House Of Representatives which is about to vote on the rules of debate on the articles of impeachment, two of them after more than an hour of back and forth on the house floor so far. And after this the house will move on to debate article ii, abuse of power and obstruction of congress before a final vote some time this evening. I should point out this procedural vote is called moving the previous question and is almost always won by the Majority Party because youre basically giving the Majority Party the right to control the debate. On very rare occasions the minority wins these votes. If they ever win a procedural vote theyre controlling the floor which is a total reversal of the election just held previously. On the rule itself, the basic rule is going to be six hours of debate, evenly divided between the minority republicans and majority democrats. So that is hopeful well get a vote early this evening. If they get moving on it. There have been so more del tory
tactics, who knows how it will go. I want to go to the three politicians here. I want to go to claire mccaskill, Donna Edwards and then dave jolly. The politics were watching today, i dont think theres a huge audience, but there will be later today. As people tune in, theyll say whats going on with that impeachment. They know its today. I think this audience is going to explode during the afternoon and into tonight. The question is who will the audience be . Will they be those members of the Republican Party who feel very strongly that the president should not be removed, or will it be the democrats who feel very strongly that the president must be removed or will it be the folks in the middle that are in those districts and in those states like pennsylvania and wisconsin and florida and ohio that will watch and maybe listen for the first time to some of the details that this investigation has uncovered. I wonder im not going to
be debbie downer, if you will. But do you think somebody is going to tune in . I know our audience has been growing at msnbc for the last three months, like at least a 50 hike, the last number i saw. Im sure its happening on the other side of the argument in many ways. When i go home at night at eightsomething, i watch prime time television. Most people are watching that. Theyre watching game shows, obstacle courses, people trying to jump over water or climb trees. Or watching streaming, no live television. Watching the marvelous mrs. Maisel. I agree with that. I think there will be some that will watch. I think theres an opportunity for the democrats when the trial occurs in the senate to capture more of those people who havent been paying really close attention. Frankly, a lot of americans just
want to tune this all out. If you look at the polling, chris, this issue falls way down the list in terms of what are important to people as they make up their mind who they want to be president next year. When they voted this week, in britain they made the decision, stop talking about brexit. Stop talking about it. We want to make a decision. Maybe thats it. We want this over. I think some of that is true, but i think what well see today is members are going to take their one minute or two minutes really to speak to their voters at home. Thats kind of the way members use that time. I think the thing to look for is the leadership and what nancy pelosi says and steny hoyer probably towards the end of the day as we get closer to the vote, where they will have the time on the floor to really lay out the case for the american
people. I think voters the audience will be tuned in right around sort of dinnertime hopefully. And i think that this is how democrats are going to have to make the case over the next month leading up to the senate trial. Keep in mind this period right here is a really important one for having a fair trial and for continuing to explain to the American People why it is that we find ourselves in this moment. David jolly, try to project again, because you were in the house as a republican member not long ago. Im wondering, how many in that caucus, around 200 people, a little less than 200 people, basically feel like they have to eat this one. They dont believe in this president , theyre embarrassed by him, when they get home at night they talk to their spouse and children, dont behave like this guy, but theyre going to vote nay . I actually think thats a
smaller number than i would have thought a year ago. I think republicans have come to believe that there largely is this deep state conspiracy, and on the question of impeachment, the democrats have really railroaded the president. I think republicans believe that. It shocks me to hear when a relatively measured member like tom cole says there was no quid pro quo and there are no Fact Witnesses when, in fact, Gordon Sondland testified yes, there was a quid pro quo and we were all in the loop. There were Fact Witnesses and they did say there was a quid pro quo. Theres a denial of facts on the republican side. I think what youre seeing, chris, come into shape of the republican argument is ultimately an argument that supports Donald Trumps ability to claim tonight in michigan that all this was invalid. If you look at Kevin Mccarthys earlier resolution condemning adam schiff for abuse of power and Jerrold Nadler for not following procedure, it was all around the fact that this was a show trial and the president Wasnt Afforded Due Process and neither were minority
republicans. Steve scalise, the number two republican, then offered a Point Of Order essentially saying the same thing, there were no Minority Rights, not enough witnesses, more information had to come out. This vote right now chris, im glad you pointed out, this is on the previous question, it will be followed by a second vote on the rule. Tom cole said if republicans can win this previous question and republicans take control of the process, they will demand six things Including Schiff releasing all of the intel information, Including Schiff testifying. Republicans are suggesting that this process actually becomes a substantive issue because it invalidates the entire Impeachment Process which is what donald trump wants to be able to say that this is invalid, that is a scary space to be in, unlike the contrition of a bill clinton. But its what weve come to expect in trumps Republican Party. You know the way things work, garrett, you vote party line when it comes to the previous question and the rule. You have to. Absolutely. The only way the previous question vote goes to the minority, is if majority isnt paying attention, if members caught their flight home or dont show up to vote. The rule vote is a party line vote. Yesterday on the spending bills, where you might have republicans and democrats that might all vote together on the ultimate bill, sometimes whatever the Minority Party is will vote against the rule as a matter of principle and split their vote. Neither of these votes should be particularly high drama affairs. Expect them to fall largely along party lines. Were a little ahead of schedule on the day. You can see votes trickling in. I was in the gallery for most of the last hour. This is not a particularly well attended impeachment, at least thus far on the member side. The chamber was maybe less than a quarter full. Galleries for visitors, members of the public were full, the press galleries were full. Members are largely trickling in and out throughout the course of the morning. You had a couple of motions for
unanimous consent that were defeated. Republicans trying to make parliamentary rules that would require members to stand at their desks and do their votes in person that way rather than through the electronic system. All of this just delays tactics at this point as we move inexorbly towards the debate at lunchtime. Its important to say why were covering this. This is the day most likely the president will be impeached. Its history in the making. We want everybody at home to get this, wherever you are, to understand how this process works. You a lot of procedural yes, sir like move the previous question, Roberts Rules of debate. You the right in the house to set the rule. Its not like in the senate where you have unlimited debate. Every time they vote on something, there has to be a vote on the rule before land to establish who gets to talk. Garrett, while youre still there, im fascinated by a
motion by liz cheney. Daughter of the former Vice President. She is very, very skilled at this. She made a motion that the members had to stand up, each one of the members on both sides of the aisle, and say where they stood on impeachment later today. It was overruled because the majority controlled by the democrats. But what was she up to . I was telling claire mccaskill, were they trying to create ads for commercial, showing a member of Congress Voting to impeach someone that they voted for in 2016. She cant use cspan footage in an ad . What was she up to, when she said you have to stand up and vote manually not through your machine . Reporter the goal was to create a Talking Point saying democrats dont want to stand up and defend their own votes here. It tells you what republicans think the politics of impeachment is right now. The republicans think democrats are trying to avoid being on the record publicly and out loud
about their votes. The simple reality here is thats not true. Votes will be recorded here regardless. Youve had members from front line districts like Elissa Slotkin who has been out on television pounding the necessity of this vote. It tells you that republicans think they will ultimately be able to use this impeachment voted against their democratic colleagues come next november and by blocking her motion here, liz clain any can stand up and say, aha, see, democrats dont want their votes done in public. Even though were all going to watch this happen on national television. Back with andrew mitchell. Im keep on how theyll use this politically. Everybody watching wants to know this. If a local affiliate can show a suburban Member Voting on the floor for impeaching the president that that district may have voted for, that could be serious stuff coming up. Well be right back about the politics of this, the constitution of this and, of course, the importance in our history of whats happening
today in washington. Well be right back. Well be ri. When you shop with wayfair,
you spend less and get way more. So you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. For small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. Shop everything home at wayfair. Com fred would do anything for his daughter get in fred even if it means being the back half of a unicorn. Fear not fred the front half washed his shirt with gain detergent. Thats the scent that puts the giddy in giddy up ahhh. The irresistible scent of gain. For a scent with even more giddy up,
try gain scent blast in detergent, Fabric Softener and scent beads. Janie, come here. Check this out. Let me see. She looks. Kind of like me. Yeah. Thats because its your grandma when she was your age. Oh wow. Thats. Thats amazing. Oh and she was on the debate team. Yeah, thats probably why youre the debate queen. Mmhmm. Ill take that. Look at that smile. I have the same dimples as her. Yeah. The same placements and everything. Unbelievable. So chantix can help you quit slow turkey. Along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. With chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, youll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. When you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. Stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood,
suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or lifethreatening allergic and skin reactions. Decrease alcohol use. Use caution driving or operating machinery. Tell your doctor if youve had Mental Health problems. The most common side effect is nausea. Talk to your doctor about chantix. The most Common Sseaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in. As little as 2 1 2 days when used at the first sign. Abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. Abreva acts on it. So you can too. Were back on this historic day. We can say that a hundred times. It really is one. Were going to see the president of the United States impeached by the House Of Representatives. There may have been onehalf of a defection by golden from maine who says hell only vote for one
of the two articles. Otherwise with the exception of Collin Peterson of michigan, the full house, thats it. Theyre going to vote. This is a strong power play among other events today, a strong power play by the Speaker Of The House who has kept everyone in line including those from moderate districts whose District Voted for trump in 2016 and might do it again. Shes held her Party Together in a way that matches up with reagan with thumb trumps amazing ability to control his party. The Republican Party is backing this president. Right down the lines are democrats are backing pelosi. This is a showdown politically as well as a constitutional event. Weve got somebody here who has been through a couple of these like i have. Andrea mitchell, thank you for joining us. Weve seen the house about to vote on the previous question, a procedural vote which a majority led by the speaker has to win. And a rule on six hours of
debate that has to be agreed upon so we can get out of here tonight. The history of this, even if its a Preordained Conclusion as we can see both parties sticking together, going to be a party line vote, whenever it does happen tonight, but the history and the solemnity of this is really over powers because this is an impeachment of a president of the United States. One measure is despite all the support the president enjoys from his base, his party, his senators and house members, he is furious by all reports from our teams at the white house. Hes certainly angry. You certainly saw this in this letter he wrote, the sixpage letter with the help of stephen miller, one of his toughest domestic policy advisers, the language, the exclamation points, the personal attacks against the Speaker Of The House, that was all displayed. That is the anger. Youll hear many of the same lines in his rally tonight. Its going to be a pointcounter point. The seriousness of this as it is being taken by the democrats as well reflected symbolically perhaps in the colors being worn or the lack of colors being worn. The Women Members choosing to wear dark colors. Nancy pelosi is a woman, a person of primary colors. You see it. If shes not wearing white, shes wearing bright colors, certainly always well appointed, beautifully arrayed, if you will. Shes wearing black today. That is a symbolic expression of how somberly theyre taking this. Its sacramental. Purely. You can talk about the politics of it. No question that nancy pelosi came to this reluctantly, she was telling members dont use the i word, dont say
impeachment. Liz cheney is a rising star in the republican firmament. Shes ranked third in leadership already, having just come to the house not too many years before. She has a big choice right now, an open senate seat in wyoming. Two senators from wyoming, only one house member. She has extraordinary opportunities in both chambers. Her parents were both members of the house. Her father, of course, was a Cabinet Secretary in two administrations and then a Vice President after serving two terms under George Herbert walker bush as defense secretary. They coauthored a book Kings Of The Hill about how important the house was. Theres a lot of debate going on right now in the cheney world as to what direction she should take. She could be a future speaker in some republicanled house if she stays. Thats a great choice to make in your life, between u. S. Senate and Speaker Of The House. Democratic congressman raja chris more think joins us from illinois. Thank you. Were trying to get a sense of the moment out there. Every day the last several weeks ive been reminded of the first story i covered, the o. J. Simil simpson trial. There you had marcia clark and chris darden trying to keep the focus on the double murder, on the horror of this, these people were killed. The defense was brilliant. The defense changed the topic completely to what do you think of the lapd, what is their reputation to you . Somebody said a moment ago the democrats reputation to the congress isnt so high either. If youre a republican, chase t change the topic to what do you think of these characters impeaching our president . Most of the conversation this morning from the republican side, from the other side from
you, has been how unfair this process is. Do you trust the democrats to run a fair process . Do you trust lapd to be fair . It seems like a Johnnie Cochran defense of the president , intentional or not. Are they winning or losing that argument . Thats not what constituents calling into my office are saying, that theyre winning the argument. They disagree. They think the Impeachment Inquiry began properly, the proceedings were conducted fairly. You saw the witnesses in open hearings. The republicans were allowed to question them at length about any topic practically and they did. They handled themselves well and their testimony was compelling. Indeed, riveting and showed without a doubt that theres serious overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the president. How do you think its going in terms of that middle of the country that may not watch our kinds of programs in the evening, may not watch during
the day as the news is progressing who basically have other things on their mind and maybe much more important to their families. It seems like a very difficult. You had a big break about three months ago when the whistleblower came out and you got the call records. Then it jumped up at a quantum leap from 25, 30 up to 50. Then the dial stopped moving. How do you get it moving in the next several january is the trial. Today is the impeachment. Sure. Youre right. I think people are much more focused on the holidays and what presents to get for whom right now. But on the other hand, once the trial begins, were going to be in a Different Forum altogether. The Chief Justice of the United States is going to be presiding. He will be able to dispose of motions much quicker than going through the court process. Hopefully Chuck Schumer and Mitch Mcconnell will arrive at a fair process, one that allows for witnesses to come forward and testify, people like Mick Mulvaney and john bolton and
others. That being said, we have to conduct ourselves with the solemnity and dignity that that process requires as well and bring credit to the house. I feel more people will be tuning in then as well. If you were the senate under Chuck Schumer, would you agree to a compromise . Would you say we want to get john bolton, we want Mick Mulvaney, so well give you the bidens . Its how politics works. You cant just ask for what you want and expect to get it. What are you willing to bargain here with . Sure. Perhaps there might be a narrow list of witnesses that should come forward. But the bidens are not being impeached. This is something that repeatedly comes up, as you know. And this is not something thats jermaine thats what you say and i may agree with you. The republicans want to get them. They want to get them. This morning they moved the resolution this morning against adam schiff and jerry nadler. You say thats not germane. It is to them. They want to get the democrats. Sure. But they also want to potentially impeach adam schiff. That should not be the subject of this impeachment trial. I think the American People do want a fair process. Do you think the vote today on the democratic side will be pretty much unanimous . Who do you see as defectors or people not voting aye on both counts, both articles . I really dont know, chris. Tonight i think the leadership has made it very clear that people should vote their conscience. I have not been whipped. Nobody i know of has been whipped on that particular vote. Its that serious and that weighty. Always great to have you on the show, congressman. Thank you for coming on the program right now. Were watching right now the House Of Representatives engaged
in what we consider throat clearing, a term used earlier this morning. Theyre getting ready for the big action, six hours of real debate on whether this president should be impeached. Hopefully that debate will focus on the heart of the matter and not the collateral issues the republican members have been trying to raise. However, im not confident of that. Maya, im watching your hand rise there. I think im watching a president ial debate. Hands in the air. Go ahead. I agree. I keep going back to this point, you used the analogy, chris, of the o. J. Simpson trial. It is a good one in this case in the sense that in the o. J. Simpson trial, there was a defense and the defense was raised. It was a defense that did challenge the evidence, because remember that moment with the glove, and if it doesnt fit, you must acquit. Im saying the glove didnt fit. But they also had evidence that suggested the fbi had been
biased and had undermined the credibility of the physical evidence. I think this is why its such an historic moment, but the notion about what does it even mean to have enough to impeach a president . In other words, what the democrats are saying is we have all this evidence including the very words of the president , including Gordon Sondland who says it was a quid pro quo. And Mick Mulvaney. And Mick Mulvaney in his Press Conference saying get over it, we do this all the time. You didnt even have that kind of evidence what is the republican response if you can en capsulize it . Heidi said it really well earlier. Theyre saying lets even ignore a conversation about evidence and say process was unfair, process was unfair, process was unfair. What they should be doing, if
they were acting as a defense lawyer, what Johnnie Cochran did which is to say im going to take this on frontally. Im going to say, no, this is not impeachable because there is no unfortunate fisht evidence because the president was allowed to go after corruption. Of course, do i think theres evidence that makes that not a credible defense . Yes. But to the American Public its a much more credible position than refusing think about this. One of the things the republicans kept saying over and over again this morning was you wont give us witnesses, you wont give us Fact Witnesses. It ignores there were Fact Witnesses like gore dont sondland or david holmes who heard the president s voice say did we get the investigations. They, themselves, have never raised one complaint about the president refusing all documents that are relevant to even the question of whether or not he honestly cared about corruption
in ukraine. That should be a concern to the American Public when they keep saying its adam schiff rather than Mick Mulvaney. I think its fascinating we have a case like this, a criminal case where everyone, if you sit them down, would agree on the facts, that there was a conversation. It actually happened. We have the sheet on it. Weve goat pretty much a transcript, it did happen and its wrong. Everything else is what side are you on . What side are you on. Chuck. A simpson analogy by the way, i can back it up my way. I think it was the testimony of that Police Officer that was caught speaking in racist language. He was the guy that found the glove and that unraveled the whole thing. Detective mark furman if i recall correctly. The analogy to any criminal trial only gets you so far because the jurors are actually quite different here. Jurors in the criminal case, the simpson case, pick a case, promised to put anything they might know about anything, if they know too much they cant even sit on the jury. Theyre sworn to listen to the facts and come in at trial. Jurors here are completely different. Devin nunes was a participant in this escapade. Right. The jurors in a criminal case, by the way, dont run for anything. They go back to their lives as accountants or plumbers or Airline Pilots or whatever it is they did before they were sworn to sit on a jury. So i think it only gets you so far. Its a fair analogy but it has its limitations. Republicans have a talent for keeping the focus on what people hate because trumps great strength, he seems to hate the same people that his voters hate like immigrants. Thats how he succeeds. Nobody loves the guy. Youre asking an important question that tees up any debate in the senate trial because even if they dont call witnesses, there is still going to be this trial of the president , this incredibly important and dramatic event. Theres three defenses weve heard, chris. The first was, we didnt do it, just the total denial that has been shredded by a lot of the testimony. The second was, we did something else, we were trying to fix corruption in ukraine, Donald Trumps long Standing Interest in helping solve other countries domestic local corruption issues, something he has done literally nowhere, ever. So its not that credible. The sarcasm doesnt work on television. Is that right . Im still learning from you as i go. We have to put subscript, hes being sarcastic. Youre right. Thats the second one. The third is the full mulvaney, we did it, get over it, we do it all the time. It is a testament to the legal
malpractice at the white house that three different defenses you can land on any one. Chuck and the senator was a prosecutor as well, weve all seen lawyers put out defenses. But if you Dont Land On One in time for the public, youre only left with the politics, chris, which is your side saying well believe whatever you say. As a question for susan collins, mitt romney, ben sasse in the senate, what do you want to cosign if their own defenses fact chemicck themselves . You make an announcement like Mitch Mcconnell did the other day. This is not a courtroom, this is not a factfinding mission, this is not about truth or untruth. This is a simple roll call as to what party youre in. I remember pat moynihan who i still worship, i still do, his memory. He didnt like clinton, he didnt like either clinton to be honest with you. He went into that trial and said, this is a partisan vote, i will play the game everybody
else is playing. Bobby byrd did the same thing, he didnt like the clintons but it was a partisan thing and thats how he voted. But saying weve got to take the original text, we have to live by the original text, and i dont think the framers expected impeachment to be a partisan exercise. I think the framers clearly thought what was their intent . The Original Intent was this was a process where there would be some oversight of the Administrative Branch by the legislative branch. They were the guardian class. They werent regular people. Correct. When you said that nancy pelosi had gotten everybody in line, that was a little bit like fingernails on a blackboard to me because when people used to accuse me of doing whatever Chuck Schumer said, i was like, no, no, no. I think what these moderates actually did, they united. Not everybody was for impeachment until trumps behavior. Trumps behavior how did they know when to go, then . Because his behavior became public. He was openly and blatantly asking foreign governments to interfere with our elections. When he did that, there was no turning back. And the evidence is clear on its face, and i think thats what brought the moderates in line. I think understanding what would move them and a suburbanite, the educated people around philly, i know them, they read the times, though keey k. They may not have reached the Dancing In The Stars zone regular people out there but they certainly got to the print people. If you can have Television Help print do the job that print does so well, then Everybody Knows the facts. Its rather thrilling. It hasnt reached enough people. Joining me right now is nbc
white house correspondent peter alexander, congresswoman from michigan elise slotkin, of course, youve been all over the place, congresswoman. Lets go, peter. Were joining by the congresswoman, Elissa Slotkin is here on a historic day. Youre one of those investments from a trump district, he won it in 2016 by seven points, you won it in 2017 by three points. You said you will vote yes on impeachment. Any reservations on that decision on this day . No, offreservations. I went through a pretty methodical process, just like i was trained to do as a cia officer, to come to this collectio conclusion. I didnt come to it lightly. I feel in my bones its the right thing to do. It clearly was controversial in my district, i knew that. My hope is that voters in my district understand that even if they dont agree with the
decision, they see that i struggled through it and that independently a decision based on my Oath Of Office and my integrity. Hopefully they want representatives that reflect that. You said this past weekend when you spoke to constituents that you felt this was the right decision in your bones. What is it about your decision that made you say this is the way i must vote . Certainly given my National Security background, the cia and the pentagon, this very basic idea that the president of the United States reached out to a foreign leader and asked for help in an investigation of a rival, for his own personal gain. Because ive worked the National Security council under president bush and under president obama. Ive sat in those phone calls. Of course president s use the leverage of the United States to get countries to do what they want. But this was different because it was for his personal gain. We cannot allow the presidency to be used that way and we cannot allow an invitation to go out for foreigners to intervene in our political process. Thats what the founders were worried about. So i felt very, very firmly in my decision because we have to set down a marker that thats not okay. The president has made clear not just in his tweets but the sixpage screed he sent to House Speaker nancy pelosi yesterday that democrats will pay a political price for this decision. Are you going to pay a political price for this vote . I might. I might. And i went into that with eyes open, right . But i still really have immense faith in the michigan voters. I believe that they want representatives with integrity, who will fight for them. And thats what i feel like im doing. And it has been literally the greatest honor of my life to represent this district. I never thought i would be in elected office. This was not on my path. And i want to keep doing it. I hope and trust the voters will see fit to make a decision next year. Later today well see what will be a dramatic and remarkable split screen, just as the vote is likely taking place here to impeach the president , just the third time thats occurred in history, the president himself will be taking the stage not far from your
district. Yeah. Hell be in battle creek, michigan tonight, not alone, side by side with the Vice President of the United States. What do you make of that moment back home and the way this is playing, his arrival there tonight . Obviously michigan is a swing state and its competitive. For me, im glad that people are paying attention to michigan. We are an important place in this election. So it just makes sense he would show up there. I always hope whenever a leader like a president goes out, that he remembers that his job is to promote unity and not separate people. And so i hope that he goes in with that theme. But thats not always his style. But i think im not surprised that hes in michigan today. Republicans that ive spoken to today say this is not a stain on the president s legacy but its a stain on the legacy of the democrats. How do you react to that . I just disagree. I cordially disagree. For me, i have to look myself in the mirror, right . When it comes to protecting and defending the constitution, when it comes to defending our Democratic Institutions so that no foreigners get to muck around there, putting a marker down that this is not all right, today its a republican president reaching out to a ukrainian leadership, tomorrow it could be a democratic leadership reaching out to china for just a small cyber attack. Its not okay. I feel strongly. Congresswoman slotkin, we appreciate your time. Chris, putting principle before politics as we await the hitting vote this evening. Thank you so much, peter and congresswoman. Right now the clerk is reading articles of impeachment. Bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors in his conduct in the office of president of the United States, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to 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 in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, donald j