We dont know how they were using this money is not factually true. You heard mcclk chin tok saying he had the mcclintock saying that he had the prosecutor fired. Yet those talking points are respited despite the fact theyre not based on fact. Its an important moment. I want to get your sense of the history of what were about to see. You see the members showing up, the staff, theyre showing up. The witnesses will be there. Theyll be sworn in as well. Its a moment that doesnt happen very often if american history. It doesnt and it shouldnt. Because its so important you think about the the way constitution set up our democratic structure here and were looking back right now to say what did the founded fathers envision about the country that we are now in . What did the separation of powers mean . Are there truly three coequal
branches of government or can one thumb their nose that leads to an authoritarian regime . We are looking at a very historic moment. Looking at what the power of con
This from like the ivory towers of your law school but it makes actual people in this country when the president calls you dont get to interrupt me on this time. And when you suggest that you invoke the president s son name here and try to make a joke at referencing baron trump that does not lend credibility to your argument, it makes you look mean and attacking someones family. The minor child of the president of the United States. So lets see if we could get into the facts. To all of the witnesses. If you have personal knowledge of a single Material Fact in the schiff report, please raise your hand. And let the record reflect no personal knowledge of a single fact. And you know what, that continues on the tradition we saw from adam schiff where ambassador taylor could not identify an Impeachment Offense and mr. Kent never met with the president and fiona hill never mentioned military aid and mr. Hill was not aware of any
nefarious aid and Colonel Vindman said that bribery was invoked
I thought the threat to our nation was wellarticulated earlier today by Professor Feldman when you said, if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy, we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship. My view is that a people cannot depend on the fairness of will be absolutely nothing compared to the shredding of our democracy. After the events of ukraine unfolded, the president claimed the reason he requested an investigation into his political opponent and withheld desperately needed military aid for ukraine was supposedly because he was worried about corruption. However, contrary to the president s statements, various witnesses including Vice President pence special advisor Jennifer Williams testified that the president s request was political. Take a listen. Speak of the july 20 for phone call was unusual because in contrast to other presenter because ive observed, it involved discussions would appear to be had
Elect the american president . The citizens of this country and no one else. Men and women have died on the battlefield to protect our democracy. The least we can do is show the courage to stand up tonight and do our part, to protect our democracy. With that, i yield back. The gentleman yields back. Does anyone else seek recognition on the amendment . Armstrong. Armstrong. For what purposes buzz mr. Armstrong seek recognition . Move to strike is the last word. And im going to go back to the initial language of the amendment, and particularly the removal from office and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States. So at numerous points in times during todays debate have they my Friends On The Other Side of the aisle held up a pocket constitution, waved it around. I think its interesting nobody has read from it yet, and i think there is a reason for that. But im going to read from the constitution. And if we want to talk about
article one, which
professor who was in here last week wrote a piece that he should be impeached for tweeting in 2017. that was fun. the other one was the bribery, the bribery issue. that was fun too because when you had professor carlin tried to explain it. took her five minutes to try to explain what the bribery was, and we didn t hear any more from our colleagues what bribery was. i yield back. the gentleman yields back. mr. chairman? who seeks recognition? mr. chairman? over here. mr. jeffries seeks recognition for what purpose? move to strike the last word. move to recognize. my colleague suggests we re here because we have policy disagreements with this president. we do have some policy disagreements with this president. we disagree with the fact that you passed as your signature legislative accomplishment in the last congress a jail tax