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
states senators in august the aid was probably going to be released long before there was any notion about a whistleblower or anything else. senator johnson from wisconsin has testified to that effect. and again, with all due respect, i mean the last administration for four years didn t provide any military assistance to ukraine. the idea that 55 days was somehow life and death in this situation, particularly during a period of transition from one government to another, you know, it just pretty thin to impeach the president of the united states on. mr. chairman, you know, with all due respect to my friends here, who i admire both and who i think have been very helpful in their testimony and is always straight and forthright, my view chairman schiff ought to be the person answering questions in front of the rules question. it s his report. i don t blame the president for passing on the opportunity not to go before the judiciary for