Number of significant procedural protections where the president even on the house side, as you know the role of the house is to act as the grand jury and the prosecutor and the actual trial takes place over in the senate, but still, we had significant procedural protections we invited the president and his counsel to attend, we provided the president s counsel the opportunity to cross examine witnesses and object to the admissibility of testimony, and we provided the president s counsel it make presentation of evidence before the full Judiciary Committee including the chance to call witnesses. The president chose not to avail himself of any of those opportunities. It reminds me the president Blockading Witnesses saying you dont have enough people with direct firsthand evidence. First of all, were those rights provided only in Judiciary Committee. Youre not the Principle Committee of impeachment. Youre sort of the final stop. Did the president get those
rights in the Intelligence Commi
political careers may be defined how they vote get a chance to lay their hands on the articles. despite all of what we ve seen here, it s been two committees who have handled the articles in open committee when all of the members in the house will have their tenures defined how they vote and what they say on the floor tomorrow. eugene, what stood out to everything you ve been listening to, other than the fact it s not just the rules they re discussing, they seem to be rel relitigating some of the things we ve heard in the intel committee and going to hear on the house floor tomorrow. also known as confusing us. very much that point. very fascinating to see lawmakers from both sides of the aisle constantly reep enforce the arguments they ve been making since the conversations began and that s in part because there are many voters who perhaps are just tuning in at this point and really want to make the case for why they will vote the way they will, how they
what was clearly going to be perfunctory and provide woed dressing of legitimacy to this process. to claim that he was given meaningful or consistent opportunity treated anywhere like previous administrations i don t think holds up when denied an opportunity to participate where the principle action is and given the last minute thing. i will yield back my time and thank both of our distinguished members former and current of the rules committee for coming up here and providing us their insight and testimony. it s great to work with both of you and i appreciate your service to your districts and to the congress and to the country. yield back. so i want to thank the gentleman for his questioning. i said i would be liberal with the time. you were. you re going to make me into a conservative by the end of this hearing. let me just do a couple things
he was there. but i would just say that, you know, that this notion that somehow that the minority has the super power ability to be able to not only name the witnesses, but set the day and to be able to slow down progress on any bill, if that were the case, having been in the minority eight years, we would have used it to stop most of the agenda that my republican friends have put forward. so i put again, i will make that letter available to anybody who is interested. mr. chairman, i have a question. i was you made a statement and i m not sure if how you were wording it, i was never promised by mr. nad her he would work with us on a minority hearing day from now to infinity. he said no, we re not having it. he did not. my understanding is he said that in committee. maybe i m wrong, but we can find
dirt on his political opponent to help him in the upcoming 2020 election. he engaged in a systemic pattern of denying any documents of any cooperation with congress. that is obstruction of congress. mr. collins, you kept on something something i agree with, the clock and calendar is important. you know, from my vantage point and from the way i look at what has happened here it is important because i believe as mr. ras kin stated at the beginning of his testimony there was a crime in progress. we have an election in less than a year. and the president is openly trying to encourage foreign interference in that election. i mean that is a that should shock everybody not only in this committee, in the chamber, all throughout this country. it is just wrong. it is so wrong. and so we will continue this hearing. we just had votes and we will