Impeachment Trial Day 4: Democrats to spotlight what they say is Trump's obstruction of Congress

THIS IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT I THINK THEY WIN ON THAT POINT, I THINK REPUBLICANS DON'T HAVE A GOOD POINT ABOUT THERE NEEDING TO BE A STATUTORY CRIME, THAT IS NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT, ALAN DERSHOWITZ, NOT SHARED BY CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS AND I THINK IT WILL FAIL

>> I WILL LOOK AT YESTERDAY EXACTLY, ADAM SCHIFF, ONE OF THE HOUSE MANAGERS, LET'S LISTEN IN >> HELLO, EVERYONE I WANT TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AND ANSWER A COUPLE QUESTIONS YESTERDAY, WE LAID OUT THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND THE FACTS THAT APPLIED ABOUT LAW, CONCERNING ARTICLE 1, THE PRESIDENT'S ABUSE OF POWER, ABUSE OF OFFICE TO FORCE UKRAINE INTO HELPING HIM CHEAT IN THE NEXT ELECTION WE ARE GOING TO CONCLUDE THAT SECTION ON ARTICLE 1, WE WILL CONCLUDE EARLY THIS AFTERNOON, THE CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF WHY THOSE ACTIONS, BETRAYING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY WOULD VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND REQUIRE HIS REMOVAL

WE WILL THEN GO INTO ARTICLE 2, THE OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS ARTICLE AND LAY OUT HOW THE CONSTITUTION, THE FACTS COMPEL HIS CONVICTION AND REMOVAL FROM OFFICE AND THEN WE WILL HAVE OUR CONCLUSION FOR THE DAY TOMORROW, WE EXPECT THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM WILL BEGIN THEIR PRESENTATION WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT WILL GO I DO WANT TO ADDRESS ONE ISSUE THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM HAS BEEN PUSHING OUT, NOT IN THE SENATE CHAMBER BUT EVIDENTLY EVERYWHERE ELSE, THAT IS THEIR LAST REFUGE, THE LAST REFUGE OF THE REPUBLICAN, NOT THE REPUBLICAN, OF THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM EFFORT TO CONCEAL THE EVIDENCE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

THAT IS THIS CLAIM OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE NOW, WE URGED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TRIAL, ANY ISSUES BE RESOLVED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TRIAL THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM WISHED TO PUSH THAT OFF AS DID SENATOR McCONNELL SO LATER IN THE PROCESS, THEY COULD SAY IF WE WERE TO ENTERTAIN THE QUESTIONS NOW, IT WOULD TAKE TOO LONG THAT IS NONSENSE THIS IS NOT A TRIAL OVER A SPEEDING TICKET OR SHOPLIFTING, THIS IS AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

THESE WITNESSES HAVE IMPORTANT FIRST-HAND TESTIMONY TO OFFER THE HOUSE WISHES TO CALL THEM IN THE NAME OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OVERWHELMINGLY WANT TO HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY UNLIKE IN THE HOUSE, WHERE THE PRESIDENT COULD PLAY ROPE A DOPE IN THE COURTS FOR YEARS, THAT IS NOT AN OPTION FOR THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM HERE AND IT GIVES NO REFUGE TO PEOPLE THAT WANT TO HIDE BEHIND EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO AVOID THE TRUTH COMING OUT WE HAVE A VERY CAPABLE JUSTICE SITTING IN THE SENATE CHAMBER, EMPOWERED BY THE SENATE RULES, TO DECIDE ISSUES OF EVIDENCE AND PRIVILEGE SO, IF ANY OF THESE WITNESSES HAVE A CLAIM THEY WISH TO MAKE OR THE PRESIDENT ON THEIR BEHALF, WE HAVE A JUSTICE THAT CAN MAKE THOSE DETERMINATIONS AND WE TRUST THE CHIEF JUSTICE CAN DO SO

THE SENATE WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO OVERRULE THE JUSTICE BUT WHAT THEY FEAR WITH THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM, THEY FEAR THE JUSTICE WILL IN FACT APPLY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO THAT NARROW CATEGORY WHERE IT MAY APPLY HERE, THAT CATEGORY MAY BE NOWHERE AT ALL BECAUSE YOU CANNOT USE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO HIDE WRONGDOING OR CRIMINALITY OR IMPEACHABLE MISCONDUCT THAT IS EXACTLY THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY SEEK TO USE IT FINALLY, THEY HAVE WITHHELD HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF DOCUMENTS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE

SEVERAL OF THE WITNESSES WE SEEK TO CALL HAVE NO CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE THIS IS MERELY THE LATEST CAMOUFLAGE AND MERELY THE LATEST EFFORT TO OBSTRUCT CONGRESS IN ITS INVESTIGATION AND NOW TO OBSTRUCT THE SENATE IN TRIAL AND I'M HAPPY TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE QUESTIONS >> Reporter: WE REVIEWED AUDIO THAT APPEARS TO SHOW THE PRESIDENT AT A DINNER IN 2018 SPEAKING ABOUT AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH SAINT TAKE HER OUT YOUR REACTION? >> I SAW THAT NEWSPAPER REPORT AND I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH BACKGROUND TO GIVE YOU A RESPONSE AT THIS TIME PLAINLY, IF THE PRESIDENT AT THE URGING OF GIULIANI OR PARNAS , IF THIS IS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF HIS INVOLVEMENT IN THAT EFFORT TO SMEAR HER, IT WOULD CERTAINLY CORROBORATE MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE HEARD

I'M NOT IN POSITION YET TO ANALYZE THAT NOT HAVING LOOKED AT IT YES >> Reporter: WHAT WOULD THE ARGUMENT TODAY BE THE QUESTION OF SETTING THE PRECEDENT FUTURE CONGRESSES WOULD NOT WANT THE PRESIDENT TO BEHAVE THE SAME WAY BLOCKING SUBPOENAS AND WITNESSES? >> IT IS VERY IMPORTANT, VERY GOOD QUESTION FOR ME TO END ON IT IS VITAL IN TWO RESPECTS FIRST, ON ARTICLE 1, IF WE ARE PREPARED TO SAY A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN WITHHOLD MILITARY AID FROM AN ALLY, WITHHOLD OFFICIAL ACTS LIKE THE WHITE HOUSE MEETING IN ORDER TO COERCE OR EXTORT, HELP CHEAT IN THE NEXT ELECTION, IT IS JUST OPEN TERRITORY FOR ANY PRESIDENT THAT COMES IN THE FUTURE AND OPEN INVITATION FOR THIS PRESIDENT TO CONTINUE AS HE HAS SHOWN EVERY WILLINGNESS TO DO, EFFORTS TO SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE ON OUR ELECTION

AMERICANS SHOULD DECIDE AMEICAN ELECTIONS THE PRECEDENT SET WOULD BE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE IN TERMS OF THE OBSTRUCTION, THE PRECEDENT WOULD BE EQUALLY HAVE A SITTING TO OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT WOULD MEAN THE IMPEACHMENT POWER IS ESSENTIALLY A NULLITY, IT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE THE PRESIDENT CAN DELAY IT INTO NONEXISTENCE

THIS GOES NOT JUST TO IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATIONS, IF THE SENATE GOES ALONG WITH THE PRESIDENT'S OBSTRUCTION , IT WILL IN EVERY WAY IMPEDED THE HOUSE, IMPEDE THE SENATE IN ITS OWN RESPONSIBILITIES WHAT PRESIDENT WOULD FEEL COMPELLED TO ANSWER ANY SEEN THE SENATE SUBPOENA IN THE FUTURE IF THEY SAY WE WILL FIGHT ALL SUBPOENAS? IF THIS CONGRESS WERE TO RATIFY THAT KIND OF MISCONDUCT? THANK YOU >> WE JUST HEARD FROM ADAM SCHIFF, ONE OF THE HOUSE MANAGERS TALKING ABOUT MOVING AHEAD I WANT TO TURN TO OUR ESTEEMED PANEL HERE, REBECCA ROIPHE , WE HAD A HEATED DISCUSSION AS SCHIFF WAS TALKING ABOUT EVIDENCE PRESENTED, HOUSE VERSUS THE SENATE WALK US THROUGH THE ARGUMENT ABOUT MOVING THIS FORWARD TO THE SENATE

>> WHAT ADAM SCHIFF IS SAYING, WE COULD NOT OF DONE IT IN THE HOUSE, WE COULD NOT HAVE DONE IT BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO GO, THE WHITE HOUSE WAS STONEWALLING, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE COURTS, IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN MONTHS AND MONTHS WHICH WOULD BRING US PAST THE ELECTION IF IT BRINGS US PAST THE ELECTION, THE CURRENT DANGER IS OVER WHAT THE REAL CONCERN IS, THIS IS A PRESIDENT THAT HAS WELCOMED INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTIONS AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO AND DO SO IN A WAY THAT WILL AFFECT THIS PARTICULAR UPCOMING ELECTION >> YOU ARE SAYING THE SENATE IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE? >> THE SENATE IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE CHIEF JUSTICE IS PRESIDING IF THE CHIEF JUSTICE WERE TO ISSUE AN ORDER FOR EVIDENCE, IT WOULD NOT BE EIGHT PROTRACTED COURTROOM FIGHT

PRESUMABLY, THOSE WITNESSES WOULD COME IN, THE DOCUMENTS WOULD COME IN AND THE TRIAL WOULD PROCEED >> THIS IS WHERE REPUBLICANS SAY THE DEMOCRATS ARE GAMING THE SYSTEM, THIS IS WHAT THE ARGUMENT HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN ABOUT IT WAS SUCH A CLEAR PRESENT DANGER, THEY HAD TO REMOVE THE PRESIDENT IMMEDIATELY, THEY HAD TO RUSH THIS OVER AND THEY WAIT A MONTH BEFORE THEY DECIDE TO SEND THE ARTICLES OVER TO THE SENATE THIS SENSE OF URGENCY THEY HAVE BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT THE FOUR MONTHS TO GO TO COURT LIKE REPUBLICANS WERE SAYING EVEN JONATHAN TURLEY MAKE THE POINT, WHY DON'T YOU LET THE PROCESS MOVE THROUGH THE COURTS THE WAY TRADITIONALLY IT HAS IN IMPEACHMENT INSTEAD OF ACCELERATING IT TO GAME THE SYSTEM FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES BECAUSE IT IS ABOUT THE 2020 ELECTION

IT IS NOT SO MUCH — >> IT IS NOT GAMING THE SYSTEM FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES >> HOW IS IT NOT? THE ARGUMENT IS THEY MOVE IT TO THE SENATE >> THE REPUBLICANS ARE SAYING THIS IS GAMING THE SYSTEM WHEREAS DEMOCRATS WHO ARE ON THE HOUSE SIDE ARE SAYING WE ARE NOT GAMING THE SYSTEM, THIS IS AN EMERGENCY IT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF ASAP >> WE WILL MADE A MONTH

>> NO, I THINK TO ME WITH THE INTERESTING THING IS, THERE IS A POINT THE DEMOCRATS BELIEVED THE REPUBLICANS DON'T PICK THE DEMOCRATS BELIEVE THIS IS EMANATE DANGER IF WE DON'T GET HIM BEFORE, DO THIS, CARRY IT OUT BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION, THE NEXT ELECTION COULD SERIOUSLY BE CORRECTED I THINK REPUBLICANS, EVEN THOSE REPUBLICANS WHO BELIEVE SOME OF THIS HAPPENED DON'T THINK THERE IS AN ACTUAL THREAT THEY THINK IT IS LIKE TRUMP BEING TRUMP >> OUR SYSTEM IS TOO STRONG, NONE OF IT WILL AFFECT THE ELECTION

SURE, IT IS NOT GREAT BUT IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE ELECTION WHAT IS YOUR EMERGENCY? IF IT IS NOT REALLY THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE IT IS REALLY BECAUSE YOU'RE SCARED ABOUT THE ELECTION, IF WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT, IT IS GAMING THE SYSTEM THIS IS HOW IT ENDED YESTERDAY >> BY THE WAY, I WANT TO SAY THIS IS HOW IMPEACHMENT, THE HEARING ENDED YESTERDAY WITH IMPEACHMENT MANAGER AND HAS INTELLIGENCE MANAGER, ADAM SCHIFF SPECIFICALLY INVOKING RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE I WANT TO PLAY THAT

>> LET'S SAY THEY START BLATANTLY INTERFERING IN OUR ELECTION AGAIN TO HELP DONALD TRUMP CAN YOU HAVE THE LEAST BIT OF CONFIDENCE THAT DONALD TRUMP WILL STAND UP TO THEM AND PROTECT OUR NATIONAL INTEREST OVER HIS OWN PERSONAL INTEREST? YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T WHICH MAKES HIM DANGEROUS DANGEROUS TO THIS COUNTRY YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T

>> INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION HERE, REBECCA, IF YOU BELIEVE THERE IS AN IMMINENT THREAT HERE AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE IMPEACHMENT OF THE PRESIDENT, WHAT ARE THE LEGAL PARAMETERS ON HOW QUICKLY YOU CAN MOVE ON THIS? >> WELL, IN TERMS OF THE EVIDENCE, I MEAN, HERE WE ARE, WE ARE IN A POLITICAL BATTLE, THAT IS THE THING IF THE DEMOCRATS CAN CONVINCE THOSE FOUR REPUBLICANS TO VOTE TO SEE EVIDENCE, YOU CAN MOVE QUITE QUICKLY IN A SENATE TRIAL ONCE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ISSUES THAT ORDER, THE EVIDENCE WILL COME IN >> CHUCK SCHUMER EARLIER TODAY WHEN ASKED ABOUT THIS SAID YES, THERE MAY BE SOME LITIGATION, SOME OF THE WITNESSES MAY CONTEST IT, GIVEN IT DOES HAVE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS' SIGNATURE ON IT, IT WOULD MOVE VERY QUICKLY >> YES, MUCH MORE QUICKLY

THE THING IS, INSTEAD OF BEING ABOUT EVERYTHING, WE ARE SAYING EVERYTHING IS COVERED BY THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WHICH IS WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN THE HOUSE, HERE I THINK THEY WILL BE FORCED TO SAY, WE THINK THIS REALLY CONCERNS NATIONAL SECURITY THE CHIEF JUSTICE WILL NOT STAND FOR ALL OF THIS IS COVERED BY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IT IS NOT A VIABLE CLAIM >> I WILL TURN TO ANITA, WE KNOW THE PRESIDENT IS GROWING ANTSY, HE WANTS TO HEAR HIS DEFENSE WHICH IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN TOMORROW HE IS NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT, HE IS TWEETING, I WILL QUOTE HERE, AFTER BEING UNBELIEVABLY UNFAIRLY IN THE HOUSE, IT LOOKS LIKE MY LAWYERS WILL BE FORCED TO START ON SATURDAY WHICH IS CALLED DEATH VALLEY IN TV

I WANT TO SAY, I WORK ON SATURDAYS IN TELEVISION, I DID NOT REALIZE IT WAS DEATH VALLEY THE PRESIDENT NEARLY ANGRY OVER THIS SATURDAY IMPACT HE HAS AN AUDIENCE, WE HAVE SPORTS ON SATURDAY AS WELL WHAT IS THE TRUMP LEGAL TEAM STRATEGY AND DO THEY FEEL THE PRESSURE THE PRESIDENT WILL BE WATCHING? >> I THINK THEY FELT THE PRESSURE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, THEY KNOW THAT ABOUT THIS PRESIDENT, HE MADE IT VERY CLEAR OVER THREE YEARS INCLUDING THE LAST FEW MONTHS DURING IMPEACHMENT HE IS VERY COGNIZANT OF HOW IT LOOKS ON TV, HOW IT WILL PLAY ON TV REMEMBER, THIS IS A PRESIDENT WE HAD HEARD WAS RECONSIDERING SOME OF THE PEOPLE ON HIS DEFENSE TEAM BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE TV EXPERIENCE

HE FEELS VERY PLEASED WITH HOW PAT CIPPOLONE, THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL HAS BEEN DOING THERE WERE RESERVATIONS, THEY WERE THINKING OF PUTTING REPUBLICAN HOUSE MEMBERS ON THE TEAM, NOT REALLY TO BE THE LAWYERS BUT TO CONVEY THAT MESSAGE THEY ARE PARTICIPATING YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT SURPRISING I WOULD SAY, BUT WE WILL SEE THEM SUPPLEMENT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN ON SATURDAY AND MONDAY DEPENDING HOW LONG THEY GO WITH PEOPLE ON TV, WITH SURROGATES ON TV ON SUNDAY AND ON THE SHOWS OVER THE WEEKEND I THINK WE SHOULD EXPECT HIM TO TALK, HIM TO TWEET AND OTHER PEOPLE TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE FOR HIM

>> SPEAKING OF REPUBLICANS, I WILL TAKE YOU BACK TO CONGRESS WHERE WE HAVE — >> WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE REST OF THE STORY OUT I KNOW SOME ARE READY FOR THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS TO BE DONE AND YOU WILL HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND I WAS WATCHING CNN EARLIER, THEIR ANXIOUS TO FACT CHECK EVERY SINGLE LAST WORD WITH REGARD TO THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL WHEN YOU LISTEN TO JASON CROW TALKING ABOUT MARK SANDY, ASKING WHY THERE IS A HOLD ON AID, THE ANSWER, HE DID NOT GET ONE, HE DOES NOT COMPLETE THE THOUGHT WERE THE CLOSED-DOOR DEPOSITION WERE MARK SANDY FROM OMB SAID HE GOT AN ANSWER AND THE ANSWER WAS THE PRESIDENT IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE COUNTRY PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE GORDON SONDLAND, THEY SAID GORDON SONDLAND TESTIFIED THERE WAS A QUID PRO QUO AND MAKE NO REFERENCE TO THE FACT GORDON SONDLAND SAID IT WAS A PRESUMPTION, IT WAS HEARSAY, HE DID NOT SPEAK TO ANYONE ON THE PLANET THERE WAS A QUID PRO QUO, WHEN HE SPOKE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE ONLY CONVERSATION THEY HAD ABOUT THE PRESIDENT SPECIFICALLY SAID NO QUID PRO QUO LAST EXAMPLE, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TESTIFYING ABOUT SEPTEMBER 1 WARSAW MEETING BETWEEN AMBASSADOR SONDLAND AND ENTRCE YEAR, BETWEEN PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND VICE PRESIDENT PENCE, THAT WAS THIRDHAND HEARSAY

IT WAS MORRISON TELLING TAYLOR SONDLAND TOLD TAYLOR SONDLAND OVERHEARD ZELENSKY TELL PENCE WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO CHECK OUT, THERE WAS A TIME MAGAZINE STORY ON DECEMBER 10, DECEMBER 4, ANDRE YEAR GAVE AN INTERVIEW FIRST-HAND ACCOUNTS CONTRADICTING AMBASSADOR SONDLAND I'M GIVING YOU EXAMPLES, I'M URGING YOU, CHALLENGING YOU TO GO THROUGH WHAT IS BEING SAID BY THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT COMPLETING THOUGHTS THEY ARE TRYING TO CONNECT DOTS THAT ARE NOT CONNECTED, THEY RELY ON PRESUMPTIONS, LIES, AND HEARSAY THE FREE SHOT THEY ARE GETTING THROUGH THIS, THROUGH MANY IN THE MEDIA IS GREATLY UNFORTUNATE TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WHO IS BEING DECEIVED

I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CALL THEM OUT FOR THE ALL THE OBVIOUS LIES AND MISSTATEMENTS AND HALF TRUTHS >> I WILL SABER QUICKLY, 16 HOURS OF TALKING DOES NOT CHANGE THE FUNDAMENTAL FACTS WHICH ARE ON THE PRESIDENT'S SIDE, EIGHT MORE HOURS DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS MS STEFANO TALKED ABOUT, THEY WILL TALK ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS, I THOUGHT THAT THE STATEMENT WAS THAT OUR COLLEAGUE MR RATCLIFFE MADE ON THE DEBATE ON THE HOUSE FLOOR WHEN HE SAID OBSTRUCTION TO CONGRESS IS WHAT THE FOUNDERS CALLED SEPARATION OF POWER WE WILL HEAR MORE TODAY, IT WILL NOT, WILL NEVER CHANGE THE FOUR FUNDAMENTAL FACTS ALWAYS ON THE PRESIDENT'S SIDE AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND

WILL TAKE QUESTIONS NOW >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> WE HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM JIM JORDAN AND LEE ZELDIN, FOLKS HELPING PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH HIS TRIAL TEAM THERE I WILL BRING THE PANEL IN I WANT YOU TO REACT >> I THINK IT IS A PREVIEW OF WHAT WE WILL SEE ON THE SENATE FLOOR BY THE WHITE HOUSE DEFENSE COUNSEL

THE CHALLENGES, WILL THEY USE THE MEDIA CLIPS OUT THERE, ALL OF THE HOURS AND HOURS OF TESTIMONY AS WELL AS PROLIFIC AS THE HOUSE MANAGERS THE THING THAT REALLY STRUCK ME ABOUT THIS WHOLE PROCEEDING IS THE NUMBER OF VIDEO CLIPS THE HOUSE MANAGERS HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO THEY ARE USING THEM VERY WELL, TOSSING THEM, SOUNDBITES, RENA, YOU ARE SKILLED AT DOING THIS, IT IS A TOUGH THING TO DO AND THEY ARE DOING IT WITH EASE THE QUESTION, WILL THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL USE THOSE VIDEO CLIPS AND NUMBER TWO, CREATE THE NARRATIVE WITH THE STORY THEY WANT WITH THE VIDEOS THEY HAVE >> YOU'RE NOT IN, REBECCA

>> YEAH, ONE THING I HAVE TO SAY, THIS WAS PRETTY EFFECTIVE THIS IS HEARSAY, IT IS NOT DIRECT EVIDENCE I'M WONDERING GIVEN THE CONTEXT OF THE DEMOCRATS TRYING TO GET THIS DIRECT EVIDENCE WHETHER IT WILL FLY BECAUSE YOU REALLY HAVE THIS CONFLICT WITH THE DEMOCRATS SAY THE DIRECT EVIDENCE, WE KNOW IT IS OUT THERE BOLTON SAYS I WANT TO TALK AND HE WAS THERE, LET HIM SPEAK IS THAT DEFENSE EFFECTIVE ANYMORE? MAYBE >> MAY BE WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS SAY LOOK AT ALL THE PRESUMPTIONS HERE

WHY DIDN'T YOU FOLLOW-UP TALKING TO BOLTON, GO THROUGH THE COURTS? THAT APPEALS TO SOMEBODY LIKE LISA MURKOWSKI WHO HAS BEEN CRITICAL OF THAT POINT BECAUSE SHE IS ONE OF THE FOREIGN MODERATES DEMOCRATS WILL NEED TO MOVE ON TO GET SOME WITNESSES AND SOME DOCUMENT EVIDENCE LET'S SEE HOW WELL THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DOES WITH THAT >> I HAVE BEEN TEXTING HILL STAFFERS I KNOW ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, IS INTERESTING, BOTH SAY THE SAME THING RIGHT NOW, REPUBLICANS SHOULD BE WORRIED BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY DON'T KNOW WITH THE LEV PARNAS AUDIO TAPE COMING OUT NOW, IT IS EVEN MORE SO, THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT IS SIX MONTHS, EIGHT MONTHS, 10 MONTHS FROM NOW RIGHT BEFORE THE ELECTION, INFORMATION DROPPING BUT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED AND THEY ACQUITTED, THAT VOTE WOULD BE DEVASTATING

>> I WANT TO WEIGH IN, CONTROL ROOM SENT ME THIS, SENATOR TED CRUZ MOMENTS AGO SAID REPORTED, DIRECT QUOTE, IF ADDITIONAL WITNESSES ARE CALLED, WE WILL SEE HUNTER BIDEN TESTIFIED IN THE US SENATE >> RIGHT I WOULD TELL YOU PRIVATELY, MANY REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THEY ARE TRY TO GET THOSE WITNESSES AND ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT IS A STARK STATEMENT TO MAKE

THAT IS HOW THEY SEE IT, LAST DITCH EFFORT, PUSH BACK AND SAY IT SHOULD'VE TAKEN PLACE IN THE HOUSE THIS IS WHERE THE SENATE I THINK VERY MUCH WHAT MOLLY IS TALKING ABOUT, WHY DIDN'T THEY TAKE THE TIME? YOU CAN SAY THE SENSE OF URGENCY, WE CAN MAKE THOSE POINTS IF THEY ARE SITTING THERE LISTENING TO THAT, WHY DIDN'T YOU HAVE A BIGGER CONSENSUS ON THE VOTE OF ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT? ONLY BIPARTISANSHIP YOU HAD WAS DEMOCRATS VOTING WITH REPUBLICANS AGAINST THE ARTICLES IF THEY DID NOT BUILD THAT CONSENSUS SUPPORT IN THE HOUSE THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE, IF THEY WANTED THE MOMENTUM TO REALLY MOVE THIS FORWARD AND OPEN THOSE DOORS FOR MORE EVIDENCE, THEY WOULD HAVE MADE THE ARGUMENT YOU DID IT IN THE HOUSE SIDE THAT IS WHERE THIS GETS STUCK

>> REMEMBER, THE MUELLER REPORT, BEFORE THE MUELLER REPORT CAME OUT, REPUBLICANS ANTICIPATED MUELLER VERSUS 12 WEEKS OF A PARTISAN COMMITTEE THAT CAME FORWARD WITH THESE ARTICLES AND JUST STACKS OF EVIDENCE OF PAPER BUT THAT IS THE DISTINCTION IT'S NOT THAT THIRD PARTY THAT HAS COME FORWARD BRINGING THE CONSENSUS TOGETHER AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE PARTISAN >> I WANT TO TURN TO ANITA WHO IS COVERING PRESIDENT TRUMP, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE STRATEGY, HAS THE PRESIDENT WAITED ABOUT HUNTER BIDEN AND JOE BIDEN AND DOES THE WHITE HOUSE DEFENSE TEAM BELIEVE THIS IS SOMETHING THEY WANT TO BRING UP AND GO DOWN THAT ROAD >> YOU WILL SEE THE REPUBLICANS CRINGE EVERY TIME THE PRESIDENT TALKS OFF MESSAGE HE HAS BACK A FEW WEEKS AGO WANTED WITNESSES TO THE POINT THAT THE MORE THE MERRIER

BUT MITCH McCONNELL AND OTHER SENATE REPUBLICAN LEADERS AND HIS COUNSEL HAVE CONVINCED HIM METS NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO GO THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE WITNESSES, THEY WANT IT TO BE QUICK, LESS PAINFUL OR HIM HE HAS COME AROUND THAT BUT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE HE WILL TWEET OR COMMENT ABOUT HOW I WISH THERE — DO THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN GET IN AND GET OUT? >> PEOPLE CLOSE TO THE TEAM TOLD US AT THE WHITE HOUSE THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY DON'T NEED TO TAKE UP THE ENTIRE 24 HOURS THEY HAVE I DO EXPECT THEY WILL TAKE SOME TIME AND THEY NEED TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE FACTS BUT THAT THEY WOULDN'T TAKE UP ALL THE TIME, THEY SAID THE FACTS ARE ON THEIR SIDE AND THEY DON'T FEEL THEY NEED THAT ENTIRE TIME WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS >> THE TEAM HAS WALKED IN WITH GREAT CONFIDENCE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE PUTTING FORWARD THEIR CASE, BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO ADVISORS AND PRIVATE, ARE THE EQUALLY AS CONFIDENT? WHAT ARE THE MOST AFRAID OF

>> THEY ARE CONFIDENT IN THE VOTE, THE ACTUAL BOOK, THEY FEEL THE PRESIDENT WILL BE ACQUITTED, I THINK WE ALL THINK THAT THEY STILL ARE, EVEN IN THESE LAST COUPLE DAYS WHEN I HAVE ASKED ABOUT WITNESSES, THAT IS REALLY THE KEY OF Q QUESTIONING THEY ARE 50-50, THEY DON'T KNOW HOW IT WILL GO THERE IS A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AND YOU HAVE SEEN THESE MODERATE REPUBLICANS THAT YOU MENTIONED, THEY ARE NOT REALLY STAYING WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE SAID BEFORE, WHICH IS THEY ARE OPEN TO THE IDEA, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE REPORTED LAMAR ALEXANDER IS THE LINCHPIN, WILL HE BE THE FOURTH PERSON? THEY DON'T KNOW, THEY FEEL IT COULD GO EITHER WAY BUT THEY FEEL VERY STRONG, CONFIDENT AND MITCH McCONNELL AND HOW HE WORKS, HIS CAUCUS AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE PUT TRUST IN HIM AND THAT HE WON'T GET IT WITHOUT WITNESSES

>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE, IT'S NOT THE THAT MUCH >> FOUR VOTES, THAT'S WHY YOU HERE SOME SENATORS COME OUT AND SAY MAKE NO MISTAKE THIS IS NOT ENTIRELY ABOUT GETTING PRESIDENT TRUMP , REMOVING HIM FROM OFFICE THIS IS ABOUT THE SENATE MAJORITY IN 2020 AND THEY SAID TODAY THIS IS ABOUT SUSAN COLLINS, THOM TILLIS, MARTHA McSALLY, CORY GARDNER, REPUBLICANS WHO ARE UP FOR ELECTION THIS YEAR AND PURPLE STATES AND ALL EYES ARE FOCUSED ON THEM AND THIS IS ABOUT CHUCK SCHUMER MAKING HIMSELF THE MAJORITY LEADER OF THE SENATE AND TAKE THAT FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH BUT THE REPUBLICANS WHO ARE UP FOR REELECTION, THERE'S A LOT OF FOCUS ON THEM AND THEY ARE GETTING CALLS IN THEIR OFFICES SO THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY WILL MOVE FORWARD

>> NOT IN SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERATION WE HAVE 20 SECONDS LEFT, I WANT TO GET YOUR TAKE ON WHAT YOU WILL BE WATCHING THIS AFTERNOON? >> I AM WATCHING FOR HOW THEY PRESENT THE EVIDENCE, THE TWO MESSAGES THEY ARE TRYING TO SEND, MORE EVIDENCE AND CONNECTING THE DOTS AND SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE ALREADY >> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US WE WILL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW AND MONITOR ALL THE ACTIVITY THAT YOU SEE RIGHT HERE ON CAPITOL HILL THEY ARE ABOUT TO START MOMENTS FROM NOW, THE HOUSE MANAGERS WILL RESUME ARGUMENTS AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP

I WANT TO TAKE YOU TO A CBS NEWS SPECIAL REPORT, I AM REENA NINAN HERE WITH CBSN IN NEW YORK >>> I AM NORAH O'DONNELL IN WASHINGTON, TODAY IS THE LAST AND FINAL CHANCE FOR HOUSE MANAGERS TO MAKE THEIR CASE, NOT ONLY TO THE US SENATE BUT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THEY HAVE SEVEN HOURS AND 53 MINUTES LEFT IN ORDER TO HOLD THE STAGE IN THE U

S SENATE BEFORE BEING TURNED OVER TO REPUBLICANS I WANT TO LOOK INSIDE THE CAPITAL AS WE WILL SEE A NUMBER OF SENATORS ARRIVE IN THE SENATE CHAMBER THE HOUSE MANAGERS ARE TRYING TO CONVINCE SENATORS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE THEY WILL BE WRAPPING UP THEIR ARGUMENTS TODAY AND TALKING ABOUT ARTICLE 2 OF THE CONSTITUTION

EXCUSE ME ARTICLE 2 OF THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT, THAT IS WHAT IS THE FOCUS TODAY, I WANT TO BRING IN NANCY CORDIS WHO IS ON CAPITOL HILL, NANCY? REMAX >> Reporter: SENATORS IN PARTICULAR SHOULD BE VERY TROUBLED BY THE FACTS BEHIND ARTICLE 2 BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH THE WHOLESALE OBSTRUCTION OF A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION CONGRESS HAS THE PREROGATIVE TO OVERSEE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SO THEY WILL ARGUE THAT EVEN PRESIDENT NIXON AND PRESIDENT CLINTON DIDN'T TRY TO OBSTRUCT CONGRESS'S ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE THE WAY THAT THIS PRESIDENT DID WHEN THE HOUSE STARTED LOOKING INTO HIS EFFORTS TO PRESSURE UKRAINE ALL DOCUMENTS TONIGHT THE WHITE HOUSE TRIED TO BLOCK EVERY SINGLE WITNESS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION, FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT, THE PENTAGON, FROM TESTIFYING BEFORE THE HOUSE AND THEY ARE GOING TO SAY THAT HE IS MORE THAN GUILTY OF OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS WHAT WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS HAVE ARGUED IN THE PAST IS THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS SIMPLY LOOKING OUT FOR HIS OWN EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND THAT SOME OF THESE WITNESSES HAD IMMUNITY, BLANKETED IMMUNITY I DIDN'T HAVE TO TESTIFY ABOUT ANYTHING

DEMOCRATS SAY THAT IS NOT THE CASE THAT IS NOT THE LAW, THAT IS THE ARGUMENT THEY WILL MAKE TODAY >> NANCY, THIS MORNING SENATOR SCHUMER, THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER SAID THEY HAVE A SHOT AT CALLING WITNESSES, HAS SOMETHING CHANGED? >> ALL THE SENATORS HAVE SEEN THE POLLING WE HAVE SEEN THAT SHOWS EVEN REPUBLICAN VOTERS SEEM TO OVERWHELMINGLY WANT TO HEAR FROM WITNESSES IN THIS TRIAL, WITH THE VERY LEAST THAT HAS FORED REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO SAY THEY ARE OPEN TO THE IDEA, THAT THEY HAVEN'T MADE UP THEIR MINDS YET EVEN A PRIVATELY OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP IS REALLY HARDENING AGAINST THE IDEA OF CALLING WITNESSES BECAUSE THEY FEAR THAT COULD CAUSE THIS TRIAL TO DRAG OUT FOR WEEKS IF NOT MONTHS ESPECIALLY IF THE WHITE HOUSE TRIES ONCE AGAIN TO BLOCK THOSE WITNESSES FROM TESTIFYING >> NANCY, STANDBY I WANT TO BRING AN HOUR PANEL, MARGARET BRENNAN, JAMAL SIMMONS AND KIM WHALEY, JONATHAN TURLEY, WELCOME ALL OF YOU

GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE ON THE FINAL DAY FOR THE DEMOCRATS, TOMORROW THE REPUBLICANS WILL MAKE THEIR CASE WHICH THE PRESIDENT SAID TODAY IS THE DEATH VALLEY OF TELEVISION ON SATURDAY MORNING BUT THE REPUBLICANS WILL HAVE THEIR SHOP BECAUSE THEY GET THREE DAYS >> THEY WILL GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME, YES FROM 10:00 AM FROM THE PRESIDENT BEING CONCERNED ABOUT TV RATINGS AND HE SAYS IN TWEETS BUT THE URGING TO REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN PUT THIS ON FAST- FORWARD, GET THIS DONE QUICKLY AND BY CONTINUING ON SATURDAY AS LEADERS SCHEDULED IT, ALLOWS THEM TO KEEP THIS THING ON THAT TIMELINE

WERE POTENTIALLY IF WE DON'T SEE THAT VOTE APPROVING WITNESSES YOU COULD HAVE THIS WRAPPED UP BY THE STATE OF THE UNION THE BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY IF WE GET THE VOTE APPROVING WITNESSES, THE TIMETABLE IS COMPLETELY CHANGING >> YESTERDAY WAS ABOUT ARTICLE 1, ABUSE OF POWER, TODAY ARTICLE 2 OBSTRUCTION, OF CONGRESS

WE HEARD REPUBLICAN SENATOR CORNYN SAY THIS MORNING THIS, IF WE BRING WITNESSES OR DON'T VOTE ON WITNESSES, IT COULD GET TIED UP IN THE COURTS FOR MONTHS HOW MUCH WILL THAT COME UP TODAY? >> WILL COME UP IN THE SENSE OF NO GIVE-AND-TAKE BUT THIS IS THE CASE OF THE HOUSE MANAGERS IT'S ARTICLE 2 THAT REALLY RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE HOW STRATEGY AND RUSHING THE VOTE BY CHRISTMAS, NOT TRYING TO COMPEL WITNESSES LIKE BOLTON, NOT GIVING JOHN BOLTON A SUBPOENA SO THEY WILL BE PLAYING TO A FAIRLY HOSTILE HOUSE ON ARTICLE TWO BECAUSE OF HOW THEY HANDLE THE INVESTIGATION I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THEY ARE NOT TRYING TO CLOSE FOR VERDICT BUT CLOSE FOR WITNESSES

THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE A STRONG ENOUGH ARGUMENT THAT THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO PUSH MODERATE REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO VOTE FOR WITNESSES >> THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT, THIS IS THE CASE ABOUT MORE INFORMATION, WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THESE WITNESSES, WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THIS TO BE LITIGATED IN THE COURTS >> THAT IS A LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT, IN TERMS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE HOUSE AND WE BOTH MADE THAT ON THE OTHER HAND THE PRESIDENT IS TAKING THE POSITION IN THE DC

CIRCUIT THAT THERE IS NO STANDING TO ACTUALLY INVOKE THE FEDERAL COURTS, WE ARE SEEING ACROSS THE BOARD, THE PRESIDENT HEDGE, THIS IS ANOTHER MOMENT AND I THINK THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE CHIEF JUSTICE WILL BE INVOKED TO MAKE SOME OF THESE DECISIONS AND NOT HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE DISTRICT COURT'S ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT SEPARATELY UNDER ARTICLE 3 HIS AUTHORITY IS UNDER ARTICLE 1 OF THE CONSTITUTION ARGUABLY HE HAS INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY, THE RULES GIVE HIM A AUTHORITY TO RULE AND IF I WERE ON THE DEMOCRATIC TEAM I WOULD ENDORSE THEM TO AT LEAST MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHETHER HE WILL MAKE A DECISION >> I JUST WANT TO QUESTION ONE THING, AND THE LAST TRIAL WHEN HE WAS ASKED WHAT HE DID HE SAID I DID NOTHING IN PARTICULAR BUT I DID IT WELL AND THAT'S GENERALLY THE APPROACH OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE

>> WE HAVE BOTH SIDES HERE ON THAT >> BARRY BLACK IS LEADING THE DAILY PRAYER AND THERE WILL BE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, I WANT TO BRING IN JAMAL, YOU HEARD NANCY SAY THOSE SENATORS ARE AWARE OF THE NUMBERS OUT THERE, THAT SUGGEST A MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, THE MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS FAVOR ADDITIONAL WITNESSES >> I WANT TO SAY FOR THE RECORD, SATURDAY MORNING AS MY 2-YEAR-OLD THEY WERE TIME OF WEEK BECAUSE HE GETS ELMO YES, SENATORS ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS BECAUSE I THINK THEY ARE LOOKING AT WHAT IS HAPPENING OUT IN THE COUNTRY I AM NOT SURE THEY WILL BE MOVED BY WHAT'S HAPPENING, THEY HAVE ALL SEEMED TO BE IN THE DEATH PACT TOGETHER TO HOLD STUDY

THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT DEMOCRATS AND LEADERSHIP, PRESSING TOO HARD ON WITNESSES MAY NOT BE THE SMARTEST THING BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WHAT THOSE WITNESSES MAY SAY WHEN THEY SHOW UP THEY HAVEN'T BEEN OPPOSED BUT THEY NEED THEIR DOCUMENTS THAT IS WHAT THEY REALLY WANT TO GET THOSE DOCUMENT SUBPOENAS THEY WILL PROBABLY NOT GET THAT AND THEY WILL BE LEFT OUT WITHOUT HAVING ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO KEEP GOING FORWARD

>> LET'S LISTEN IN TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE >> IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION THE JOURNAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE TRIAL ARE APPROVED TODAY HEARING NO OBJECTIONS, SO ORDERED THE SERGEANT AT ARMS WILL MAKE THE PROCLAMATION >> HEAR YOU, HEAR YE, HEAR YOU, ALL PERSONS COMMENDED TO KEEP SILENT ON PAIN OF IMPRISONMENT WHILE THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES IS SITTING AT A TRIAL OF THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT EXHIBITED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AGAINST ARNOLD ON TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

>> THE MAJORITY LEADER IS RECOGNIZED >> FOR ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES, INFORMATION ABOUT SCHEDULING, TODAY WE WILL PLAN TO TAKE SHORT BREAKS EVERY 2 TO 3 HOURS AND ACCOMMODATE A 30 MINUTE RECESS FOR DINNER ASSUMING IT IS NEEDED UNTIL THE HOUSE MANAGERS HAVE FINISHED THEIR OPENING PRESENTATION FOR SCHEDULING PURPOSE WE HAVE ORGANIZED TOMORROW'S SESSION TO CONVENE AT 10:00 A

M AND RUN FOR SEVERAL HOURS AS A PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL BEGINS THEIR PRESENTATION >> PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE RESOLUTION 483 THE MANAGERS FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAVE SEVEN HOURS AND 83 MINUTES REMAINING TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION OF THEIR CASE THE SENATE WILL NOW HERE YOU >> MR

CHIEF JUSTICE, SENATORS, DISTINGUISHED COUNSEL OF THE PRESIDENT, I WANT TO SAY GOOD MORNING BUT GOOD AFTERNOON I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A BRIEF ORIENTATION TO THE ARGUMENT YOU WILL HEAR TODAY WE WILL BEGIN WITH JASON CROW WHO WAS TALKING ABOUT THE CONDITIONALITY OF THE MILITARY ASSISTANCE, THIS IS THE LETTER PART, ALTHOUGH NOT THE END OF THE ARGUMENTATION ON THE APPLICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF LAW AS IT RESPECTS ARTICLE 1, THE ABUSE OF POWER I WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION AFTER MR CROW AND SOON THEREAFTER WE WILL CONCLUDE THE PRESENTATION ON ARTICLE 1 WE WILL THEN BEGIN THE PRESENTATION ON ARTICLE 2 ONCE AGAIN, APPLYING THE CONSTITUTION AND LAW TO THE FACTS ON THE PRESIDENT OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

WE WILL THEN HAVE SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO THE PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL AND THAT IS WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT FOR THE DAY AND WITH THAT I WILL NOW YIELD TO MR CROW OF COLORADO >> IT AFTERNOON I WOKE UP AND WALKED TO MY LOCAL COFFEE SHOP WHERE UNLIKE MY ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE MR JEFFRIES FROM NEW YORK, NOBODY COMPLAINED TO ME ABOUT COLORADO BASEBALL

I CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THIS IS ONLY A NEW YORK YANKEES PROBLEM AS MR SCHIFF MENTIONED WE TALKED LAST NIGHT ABOUT THE JULY 25th CALL, THE MULTIPLE OFFICIALS WHO HAVE CONFIRMED THE INTENT OF THE PRESIDENT AND ONE OF WITHHOLDING A IN TERMS OF WHAT HAPPENED AROUND THE IT WAS LIFTED AND WE KNOW THAT IT WAS LIFTED ULTIMATELY SEPTEMBER 11th BUT IT WASN'T LIFTED FOR ANY LEGITIMATE REASON

IT WAS ONLY LIFTED BECAUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD GOTTEN CAUGHT LET'S GO THROUGH HOW WE KNOW THAT ON AUGUST 26th THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WAS SENT TO THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND PUBLIC REPORTS INDICATE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS TOLD ABOUT THE COMPLAINT BY WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL PAT CIPOLLONE ON SEPTEMBER 5th THE SCHEME BECAME PUBLIC

AN EDITORIAL IN THE WASHINGTON POST ON THAT DAY FOR THE FIRST TIME PUBLICLY EXPLICITLY LINKED THE MILITARY AID HOLD IN THE INVESTIGATION THOUGHT PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTED KEEP IN MIND, PUBLIC SCRUTINY OF THE PRESIDENT TOLD INCREASED EXPONENTIALLY AFTER THIS BECAME PUBLIC AND THIS IS WHERE THINGS START MOVING FAST A FEW DAYS LATER ON SEPTEMBER 9th THE HOUSE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEES PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED THEIR INVESTIGATION OF THE PRESIDENT'S CONDUCT IN UKRAINE THE LIEUTENANT COLONEL TESTIFIED THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND OTHERS AT THE WHITE HOUSE LEARNED ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION WHEN IT WAS ANNOUNCED AND A COLLEAGUE OF HIS SAID IT MIGHT HAVE THE EFFECT OF RELEASE THEY HAD

AND ON THE SAME DAY THE COMMITTEE LEARNS OF THE ADMINISTRATION WITHHELD THE COMPLAINT FROM CONGRESS THE SCHEME WAS UNRAVELING AND WHAT HAPPENS TWO DAYS LATER? PRESIDENT TRUMP RELEASED THE MILITARY AID HE ONLY RELEASED IT AFTER HE GOT CAUGHT BUT THERE'S ANOTHER REASON WE KNOW THE PRESIDENT LIFTED AID ONLY BECAUSE HE GOT CAUGHT

THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION THE TESTIMONY OF ALL THE WITNESSES CONFIRMED THAT THEY TESTIFY THEY WERE NOT PROVIDED ANY REASON FOR LIFTING THE HOLD LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN SAID NOTHING ON THE GROUND HAD CHANGED AND MARK SANDY OF THE OMB COULD ALSO CONFIRM THAT AND AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TESTIFIED THAT I WAS NOT TOLD THE REASON WHY THE HOLD WAS LIFTED

LET ME TAKE A MOMENT TO ADDRESS ANOTHER DEFENSE I EXPECT YOU WILL HEAR THAT THE AIDE WAS RELEASED IN THE INVESTIGATIONS, THEREFORE NO HARM NO FOUL, RIGHT? THIS DEFENSE WOULD BE LAUGHABLE IF THIS ISSUE WASN'T SO SERIOUS FIRST I HAVE SPOKEN OVER THE PAST THREE DAYS ABOUT THE REAL CONSEQUENCES OF INSERTING POLITICS INTO MATTERS OF WAR REAL PEOPLE, REAL LIVES AT STAKE, EVERY DAY, EVERY HOUR MATTERS SO NO, THE DELAY WAS NOT MEANINGLESS

JUST ASKED THE UKRAINIAN SITTING IN THE TRENCHES RIGHT NOW AND TO THIS DAY THEY ARE STILL WAITING ON $18 MILLION OF AID THAT HASN'T REACHED THEM JENNIFER WILLIAMS WHO ATTENDED THE WARSAW MEETING WITH VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE DESPISED — DESCRIBED PRESIDENT ZELENSKY'S ACTION DURING THE TIME >> HE EMPHASIZED THAT THE MILITARY ASSISTANCE, THE SECURITY ASSISTANCE WAS NOT JUST IMPORTANT TO ASSIST UKRAINE AND FIGHTING A WAR AGAINST RUSSIA BUT THAT IT WAS ALSO SYMBOLIC IN NATURE WHAT DID YOU UNDERSTAND HIM TO MEAN BY THAT? >> PRESIDENT ZELENSKY EXPLAINED EQUALLY WITH THE FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL VALUE OF THE ASSISTANCE , THAT IT WAS THE SYMBOLIC NATURE OF THE ASSISTANCE THAT REALLY WAS THE SHOW OF YOUR SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE AND FOR UKRAINE'S SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY VERY MUCH SO TO THE VICE PRESIDENT TO UNDERSCORE THE NEED FOR THE SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO BE RELEASED

>> AND THAT IF THE UNITED STATES WAS HOLDING THE SECURITY ASSISTANCE, IS IT ALSO TRUE THAT NOT RUSSIA COULD SEE THAT AS A SIGN OF WEAKENING US SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT? >> I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT THE PRESIDENT WAS INDICATING, THAT ANY SIGNAL OR SIGN THAT US APPROACH SUPPORT WAS WAVERING COULD BE CONSTRUED BY RUSSIA AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO STRENGTHEN THEIR OWN HAND

>> THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POINT, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ATTORNEYS TRY TO ARGUE NO HARM, NO FOUL THE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE WAS IMPORTANT TO UKRAINE, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT BUT THEY IT WAS EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT AS A SIGNAL TO RUSSIA OF OUR SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE AND REGARDLESS OF THE IT WAS RELEASED, THE FACT THAT THE HOLD BECAME PUBLIC SENT A CLEAR SIGNAL TO RUSSIA THAT SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE WAS WAVERING AND RUSSIA WAS WATCHING VERY CLOSELY

FOR ANY SIGN OF WEAKNESS, THE DAMAGE WAS DONE ANY POSSIBLE DOUBT ABOUT WHETHER THE IT WAS LINKED TO THE INVESTIGATIONS HAS BEEN ERASED BY THE PRESIDENT'S OWN CHIEF OF STAFF WE HAVE SEEN THIS VIDEO BEFORE DURING THE TRIAL BUT THERE'S A GOOD REASON FOR THIS IT'S A COMPLETED MISSION ON NATIONAL TV THAT THE MILITARY AID WAS CONDITIONED ON UKRAINE HELPING THE PRESIDENTS POLITICAL CAMPAIGN HERE ONCE AGAIN, IS WHAT HE SAID

>> DID HE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE PAST THAT THE CORRUPTION RELATED TO THE DNC SERVER, ABSOLUTELY BUT THAT'S IT AND THAT IS WHY WE HOLD UP THE MONEY >> WHEN PRESSED HE HAD JUST CONFESSED TO THE VERY QUID PRO QUO THE PRESIDENT HAD DENIED, MULVANEY DOUBLED DOWN >> TO BE CLEAR YOU DESCRIBED" CROW QUID PRO QUO >> WE DO THAT ALL THE TIME

WITH FOREIGN-POLICY IF YOU READ THE NEWS REPORTS AND YOU BELIEVE THEM, WHAT DID McKINLEY SAY? HE SAID YESTERDAY HE WAS REALLY UPSET WITH THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE IN FOREIGN-POLICY THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS HE WAS UPSET AND I HAVE NEWS FOR EVERYBODY, GET OVER IT THERE WILL BE POLITICAL INFLUENCE

>> REMEMBER AT THE TIME HE MADE THESE STATEMENTS, HE WAS BOTH AHEAD OF OMB AND THE ACTING CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE WHITE HOUSE HE KNEW ABOUT ALL THE LEGAL CONCERNS, HE KNEW ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S SO-CALLED DRUG DEAL AS THE INVESTOR CALLED IT HE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE OVAL OFFICE AND HOW THEY IMPLEMENTED THE PRESIDENT ILLEGAL ORDER TO HOLD THE AIDE MULVANEY CONFIRMED WHY THE PRESIDENT ORDERED THE WHOLE, NOT TO DEVELOP FURTHER POLICY TO COUNTER RUSSIAN AGGRESSION, NOT TO CONVINCE THE UKRAINIANS TO CONVINCE ANTICORRUPTION REFORMS AND NOT TO PRESSURE ALLIES TO GIVE MORE TO UKRAINE SINCE WE WON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE PRESIDENTS RESPONSE

YOU WILL NOTICE I AM SURE THAT THEY WILL IGNORE SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THE EVIDENCE WHILE TRYING TO CHERRY PICK INDIVIDUAL STATEMENTS HERE AND THERE TO MANUFACTURE DEFENSES BUT DON'T BE FOOLED ONE DEFENSE YOU MAY HERE IS THAT THE AIDE WAS HELD UP TO ALLOW FOR POLICY REVIEW THIS IS WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION TOLD THE GAO BUT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THE OPPOSITE

THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THE ADMINISTRATION DID NOT CONDUCT A REVIEW AT ANY TIME AFTER THE PRESIDENT ORDERED THE HOLD LAURA COOPER WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY REVIEW OF THE FUNDING CONDUCTED BY DOD IN JULY, AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER AND SIMILARLY GEORGE CAN TESTIFIED THE STATE DEPARTMENT DID NOT CONDUCT AND WAS NEVER ASKED TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF FUNDING ADMINISTRATED BY THE FUNDING APARTMENT ON MAY 23rd, THEY ANTICORRUPTION REVIEW WAS COMPLETE AND DOD CERTIFIED UKRAINE COMPLIED WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND THAT THE REMAINING HALF OF THE IT SHOULD E RELEASED THIS WAS CONFIRMED BY THE JUNE 18th PRESS RELEASE ANNOUNCING THE RELEASE OR ANNOUNCING THE FUNDING

AND DO YOU REMEMBER THE FICTITIOUS INTERAGENCY REVIEW PROCESS? THAT WAS MADE UP, TOO SO NO REVIEW WAS NECESSARY BECAUSE IT HAD ALREADY BEEN DONE NEXT, THE PRESIDENTS COUNCIL KEEPS SAYING, THIS WAS ABOUT CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS NOT CONCERNED WITH FIGHTING CORRUPTION IT'S DIFFICULT TO EVEN SAY THAT WITH A STRAIGHT FACE

THE PRESIDENT NEVER MENTIONED CORRUPTION ON EITHER CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY LET'S GO THROUGH THE EVIDENCE AS WE JUST DISCUSSED DOD HAD ALREADY COMPLETED A REVIEW AND CONCLUDED UKRAINE HAD QUOTE, MADE SUFFICIENT PROGRESS IN MEETING DEFENSE REFORM AND ANTICORRUPTION GOALS CONSISTENT WITH THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THE FUNDS AND IN FACT MARKED SANDY WHO WAS NOT AT THE MEETING BUT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THE HOLD HAD NEVER HEARD CORRUPTION IS A REASON FOR THE HOLD AND ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS HE HAD SIMILAR TO THE ANTICORRUPTION ARGUMENT THERE ARE SIMPLY NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE AFTER- THE-FACT ARGUMENT HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT ENSURING

THAT IS OTHER COUNTRIES ALSO CONTRIBUTING TO UKRAINE I IMAGINE THE PRESIDENT MAY CITE THE EMAIL AND JUNE ABOUT WHAT OTHER COUNTRIES PROVIDED TO UKRAINE, THE REFERENCE OTHER COUNTRIES CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE JULY 25th CALL AND TESTIMONY FROM SANDY ABOUT A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES GET TO UKRAINE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT TIES THE CONCERN TO HIS DECISION TO HOLD THE FUNDING FIRST, LET'S LOOK AT THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES TO UKRAINE THERE IS A SLIDE IN FRONT OF YOU

IT SHOWS OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTED TO UKRAINE SINCE 2014 AND THE EUROPEAN UNION HAS GIVEN FAR MORE THAN THE US THE EU IS THE SINGLE LARGEST DONOR TO UKRAINE HAVING PROVIDED OVER 16 BILLION IN GRANTS AND LOANS THE PRESIDENT'S ASSERTION OTHER COUNTRIES DID NOT SUPPORT UKRAINE IS MERITLESS

AND THERE ARE OTHER REASONS, TOO AFTER DOD AND I WON'T BE RESPONDED TO THE PRESIDENTS REQUEST, PRESUMABLY WITH SOME OF THE INFORMATION WE PROVIDED YOU SHOWING EUROPE GIVES A LOT TO UKRAINE, NO ONE MENTIONED BURDEN SHARING AS A REASON FOR THE HOLD TO ANY OF THE 17 WITNESSES WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT SON LYNN, WHOSE PORTFOLIO IS THE EU, NOT UKRAINE, TESTIFIED HE WAS NEVER ASKED TO SPEAK TO THAT YOU OR EU MEMBER COUNTRIES ABOUT PROVIDING MORE AID TO UKRAINE AND IF PRESIDENT TRUMP WERE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, HE WOULD'VE BEEN THE PERFECT GUY TO HANDLE IT BECAUSE HE WAS OUR AMBASSADOR BUT IT NEVER HAPPENED

AND HOW COULD IT? SOMEONE HIMSELF KNEW THE AIDE WAS LINKED TO THE INVESTIGATIONS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF HAD TOLD HIM IT WASN'T UNTIL THE PRESIDENT SCHEMED AGAIN TO UNRAVEL AFTER THE WHITE HOUSE LEARNED OF THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT AND AFTER POLITICAL PUBLICLY REVEALED THE EXISTENCE OF THE HOLD THAT THE ISSUE OF BURDEN SHARING CAME UP AGAIN IF THE PRESIDENTS CONCERN WERE GENUINELY ABOUT BURDEN SHARING, HE NEVER MADE ANY PUBLIC STATEMENTS ABOUT IT, NEVER ORDERED A REVIEW OF BURDEN SHARING AND NEVER ORDERED HIS OFFICIALS TO PUSH YOU TO INCREASE CONTRIBUTIONS AND THEN HE RELEASED THE AIDE WITHOUT ANY CHANGES IN EUROPE'S CONTRIBUTIONS THIS LAST POINT IS IMPORTANT

YOU KNOW THE PRESIDENT PURPORTED CONCERN RINGS HOLLOW BECAUSE THE IT WAS RELEASED AFTER THE PRESIDENT GOT CAUGHT NOT BECAUSE THAT YOU OR ANY EUROPEAN COUNTRY MADE ANY NEW CONTRIBUTIONS AS LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN TESTIFIED THE FACTS ON THE GROUND HAD NOT CHANGED FINALLY, YOU MAY HEAR THE PRESIDENTS COUNCIL SAY UKRAINE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE HOLD UNTIL AUGUST 28th LONG AFTER THE HOLD WAS IMPLEMENTED

THEY COULD NOT HAVE FELT PRESSURE THIS MAKES NO SENSE FIRST THEY FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS LONG BEFORE AUGUST 20th MULTIPLE WITNESSES TESTIFY THE UKRAINIANS SHOWED IMPRESSIVE DIPLOMATIC TRADE CRAFT AND LEARNED QUICKLY ABOUT THE HOLD AND THEY WOULD KNOW

VIDEO RADEE RELEASE WAS ANNOUNCED IN JUNE AND US AGENCIES KNEW ABOUT IT IN JULY SO IT SHOULD BE NO SURPRISE THAT THE FIRST INQUIRIES ABOUT THE AIDE WERE ON JULY 25th, THE SAME DAY AS THE CALL

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF EXTORTION LASTS TWO WEEKS OR TWO MONTHS IT'S STILL EXTORTION AND UKRAINE FOR THE PRESSURE OTHER UKRAINIAN OFFICIALS ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERNS THAT THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT WAS BEING SINGLED OUT AND PENALIZED AND THEY WERE BY PRESIDENT TRUMP

AND YOU KNOW HOW ELSE YOU KNOW THEY FELT THE PRESSURE? FROM THE HOLD? BECAUSE PRESIDENT ZELENSKY FINALLY RELENTED AND WAS PLANNING TO DO THE CNN INTERVIEW ULTIMATELY AROUND THE TIME OF PRESIDENT ZELENSKY'S CONVERSATION WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP , THE SUBJECT OF THE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT I URGE ALL SENATORS TO LOOK AT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY CANCELED THE CNN INTERVIEW THE DAMAGE WAS DONE THE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR, THE QUESTION FOR YOU IS IF IT'S OKAY FOR THE PRESIDENT TO WITHHOLD TAXPAYER MONEY, AID FOR ALLIES, FRIENDS THAT WERE

FOR A PERSONAL, POLITICAL BENEFIT WHETHER IT'S OKAY FOR THE PRESIDENT TO SACRIFICE OUR NATIONAL SECURITY FOR HIS OWN ELECTION IT'S NOT OKAY TO ME, IT'S NOT OKAY WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND IT SHOULD NOT BE OKAY TO ANY OF YOU >> MR G STENOSIS, DISTINGUISH MEMBERS OF THE SENATE, THE PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL, WE HAVE GATHERED HERE NOT AS DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS, NOT AS THE LEFT OR THE RIGHT, NOT AS PROGRESSIVES OR CONSERVATIVES BUT AS AMERICANS

DOING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY, DURING THIS MOMENT OF PRESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND AS HOUSE MANAGERS WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR COURTESY, YOUR ATTENTIVENESS AND YOUR HOSPITALITY AT THE HEART OF ARTICLE 2, OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS IS A SIMPLE, TROUBLING REALITY PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO CHEAT, HE GOT CAUGHT AND THEN HE WORKED HARD TO COVER IT UP THE PRESIDENT TRIED TO CHEAT, HE GOT CAUGHT AND THEN HE WORKED HARD TO COVER IT UP

PATRICK HENRY, ONE OF THE NATION'S GREAT PATRIOTS ONCE SAID THE LIBERTIES OF THE PEOPLE NEVER WERE NOR LEVEL WILL BE SECURE WHEN THE TRANSACTIONS OF THEIR RULERS MAY BE CONCEALED FROM THEM LET'S NOW ADDRESS THE EFFORT BY PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS TEAM TO COVER UP HIS WRONGDOING BY JULY OF 2019, WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS WERE AWARE OF SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT BY PRESIDENT TRUMP REGARDING UKRAINE BUT INSTEAD OF HALTING THE PRESIDENT'S CORRUPT SCHEME, THEY WORKED OVERTIME TO CONCEAL IT FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF THE PRESIDENTS WRONGDOING MOUNTAIN, WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS DOUBLED THEIR EFFORTS TO KEEP THE INFORMATION OF THE PRESIDENTS MONTHS MISCONDUCT BUT OFFICIALS INCLUDING SECRETARY OF STATE POMPEO, THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOHN BOLTON TRIED TO CONVINCE THE PRESIDENT TO LIFT THE HOLD ON THE SECURITY ASSISTACE THEY FAILED PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS DETERMINED TO CARRY OUT HIS CORRUPT SCHEME THE MILITARY AND SECURITY AID WAS ONLY RELEASED ON SEPTEMBER 11th AFTER THE HOLD BECAME PUBLIC

AFTER THE HOUSE LAUNCHED AN INVESTIGATION AND AFTER CONGRESS LEARNED ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF A WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT THE SECURITY AID WAS ONLY RELEASED BECAUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS CAUGHT RED HANDED THE ACTIONS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIGH-LEVEL WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS ALLOWED HIS ABUSE OF POWER TO CONTINUE BEYOND THE WATCHFUL EYE OF CONGRESS AND MOST IMPORTANTLY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH, ON JULY 10th THE AMBASSADOR TOLD THE UKRAINIANS AND OTHER US OFFICIALS THAT HE HAD A DEAL WITH ACTING CHIEF OF STAFF MICK MULVANEY TO SCHEDULE A WHITE HOUSE MEETING, PRESIDENT ZELINSKI WANTED IF THE NEW UKRAINIAN LEADER COMMITTED TO THE PHONY INVESTIGATION THOUGHT PRESIDENT TRUMP THOUGHT

AS YOU HAVE SEEN IN TESTIMONY SHOWN DURING THIS TRIAL, FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL OFFICIALS, DR FIONA HELL AND LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN IMMEDIATELY REPORTED THIS INFORMATION TO JOHN EISENBERG THE LEGAL ADVISOR FOR THE NATIONAL SECUITY COUNCIL AND THE DEPUTY COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT ACCORDING TO DR HILL MR

EISENBERG TOLD HER HE WAS ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT JULY 10th MEETING ON THE SCREEN AS DR HILL'S DESK DEPOSITION TESTIMONY WHICH SHE EXPLAINS HIS REACTION SAYING I MEAN, HE WASN'T AWARE THAT THE AMBASSADOR WAS RUNNING AROUND DOING A LOT OF THESE MEETINGS AND INDEPENDENTLY, WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE AMBASSADOR SAID HE WAS MEETING WITH GIULIANI AND HE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT

AND HE SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW-UP ON THIS MR EISENBERG WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND SAID HE WOULD FOLLOW-UP ON THIS DR

HILL FURTHER TESTIFIED THAT HE FOLLOWED UP WITH HIS BOSS, THE DISTINGUISHED WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL PATS A BLOWN, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT LOCKED MR EISENBERG FROM TESTIFYING IN THE HOUSE, WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT IF ANYTHING HE OR PATS A BLOWN DID IN RESPONSE TO THIS DEEPLY TROUBLING INFORMATION WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EFFORT TO CHEAT CONTINUED WITH RECKLESS ABANDON BY FAILING TO PUT THE BRAKES ON THE WRONGDOING AFTER THE JULY 10th MEETING, EVEN AFTER THEY WERE NOTIFIED BY CONCERNED NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIALS, THE WHITE HOUSE ATTORNEYS ALLOWED IT TO CONTINUE

UNCHECKED RIGHT AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT THE JULY TENT MEETINGS TOOK PLACE AT THE WHITE HOUSE, THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET BEGAN EXECUTING PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ILLEGAL ORDER TO WITHHOLD ALL SECURITY ASSISTANCE FROM UKRAINE ON JULY 12th ROBERT BLAIR COMMUNICATED THE HOLD TO THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, RUSSELL VAUGHN ON JULY 18th THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET OFFICIAL COMMUNICATED THE HOLD TWO OTHER EXECUTIVE BRANCH AGENCIES INCLUDING THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND A WEEK LATER ON JULY 25th, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD HIS IMPERFECT TELEPHONE CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY

AND DIRECTLY PRESSURED UKRAINIAN LEADER TO COMMENCE PHONY POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS AS PART OF HIS EFFORT TO CHEAT AND SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2020 ELECTION THE JULY 25th CALL MARKED AN IMPORTANT TURNING POINT IF THERE WAS ANY QUESTION AMONG SENIOR WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS AND ATTORNEYS ABOUT WHETHER PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE UKRAINE SCHEME AS OPPOSED TO JUST A ROGUE OPERATION BEING LED BY RUDY GIULIANI OR SOME OTHER UNDERLINGS, AFTER JULY 25th, THERE CAN BE NO MISTAKE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WAS UNDOUBTEDLY CALLING THE SHOTS AFTER THE COMPLICITY OF WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS WITH RESPECT TO THE COVER-UP, OF THE PRESIDENTS MISCONDUCT INTENSIFIED

IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CALL, BOTH LIEUTENANT COLONEL AND HIS DIRECT SUPERVISOR TIM MORRISON REPORTED CONCERNS ABOUT THE CALL TO MR EISENBERG AND HIS DEPUTY, MICHAEL ELLIS IN FACT, WITHIN AN HOUR, AFTER JULY 25th CALL, THE LIEUTENANT COLONEL RETURNED AGAIN A SECOND TIME TO MR EISENBERG AND REPORTED HIS CONCERNS >> I WAS CONCERNED BY THE CALL

WHAT I HEARD WAS INAPPROPRIATE I REPORTED MY CONCERNS TO MR EISENBERG IT IS IMPROPER FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO DEMAND A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATE A US

CITIZEN AND A POLITICAL OPPONENT I WAS ALSO CLEAR THAT IF UKRAINE PURSUED THE INVESTIGATION IT WAS ALSO CLEAR IF UKRAINE PROCEEDED, IT WOULD BE INTERPRETED AS A PARTISAN PLAY THIS WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY CEASE SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE AND ADVANCE RUSSIA'S STRATEGIC ADVANCEMENTS IN THE REGION I WANT TO EMPHASIZE WHEN I RECORD MY CONCERNS ON JULY 10th RETURNING TO THE AMBASSADOR, ON JULY 25th RELATED TO THE PRESIDENT I DID SO OUT OF A SENSE OF DUTY I REPORTED MY CONCERNS AND OFFICIAL CHANNELS TO THE PROPER AUTHORITY AND THE CHAIN OF COMMAND

MY INTENT WAS TO RAISE CONCERNS BECAUSE THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD BE SITTING HERE TESTIFYING IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ABOUT MY ACTIONS WHEN I REPORTED MY CONCERNS MY ONLY THOUGHT WAS TO ACT PROPERLY AND CARRY OUT MY DUTY >> TIMOTHY MORRISON, THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR EUROPE AND RUSSIA ALSO REPORTED THE CALL TO MR

EISENBERG AND ASKED HIM TO REVIEW THE CALL WHICH HE FEARED WOULD BE DAMAGING IF LEAKED >> SHORTLY AFTER YOU HEARD THE JULY 25th CALL, YOU TESTIFIED YOU ALERTED THE LEGAL ADVISOR JOHN EISENBERG PRETTY MUCH RIGHT AWAY, IS THAT RIGHT? >> CORRECT >> YOU INDICATED IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT AT LEAST FROM YOUR DEPOSITION THAT YOU WENT TO MR EISENBERG OUT OF CONCERN OUT OF THE POTENTIAL POLITICAL FALLOUT IF THE CALL RECORD BECAME PUBLIC AND NOT BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS ILLEGAL, AS THAT RIGHT? >> CORRECT

>> BUT YOU WOULD AGREE RIGHT THAT ASKING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INVESTIGATE ADMIT DOMESTIC POLITICAL RIVAL IS — IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT IS NOT WHAT WE RECOMMENDED THE PRESIDENT DISCUSS >> JULY 25th CALL WAS AT LEAST THE SECOND TIME THAT NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL OFFICIALS REPORTED CONCERNS ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PRESSURE CAMPAIGN TWO WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS THE SECOND TIME WHO NOW CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THE GRAVITY OF THE ONGOING MISCONDUCT

BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT BLOCKED MR EISENBERG FROM TESTIFYING WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION RECORD IS SILENT AS TO WHAT IF ANY ACTIONS HE OR THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TOOK TO ADDRESS PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BRAZEN MISCONDUCT AND ABUSE OF POWER WE DO KNOW HOWEVER THAT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HOLD THE SCHEME, WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS FACILITATED IT BY TAKING AFFIRMATIVE STEPS TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S MISCONDUCT FOR EXAMPLE, AFTER LIEUTENANT COLONEL AND MR

MORRISON REPORTED THEIR CONCERNS RELATED TO THE JULY 25th CALL, TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL LAWYERS, THEY TRIED TO BURY THE CALL SUMMARY THEY TRIED TO BURY IT LIEUTENANT COLONEL TESTIFIED THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL LAWYERS BELIEVED IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE CALL SUMMARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE LEAKS AND TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE TRANSCRIPT

ACCORDING TO THE LIEUTENANT COLONEL MR EISENBERG GAVE THE GO AHEAD TO RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE CALL SUMMARY MR MORRISON TESTIFIED THAT HE LEARNED IN LATE AUGUST AFTER HE RAISED CONCERNS THAT THE CALL RECORD MIGHT LEAK AND POLITICALLY DAMAGE THE PRESIDENT THAT THE CALL SUMMARY HAVE BEEN PLACED ON A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SERVER

THE CALL RECORD WAS PLACED ON THE SERVER THAT IS RESERVED FOR AMERICA'S MOST SENSITIVE NATIONAL SECURITY SECRETS AND COVERT OPERATIONS NOT ROUTINE CALLS WITH FOREIGN LEADERS APPARENTLY MR

EISENBERG CLAIMED THAT BURYING THE CALL TRANSCRIPT ON A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED SERVER, WAS A MISTAKE >> AND A SECOND MEETING WITH MR EISENBERG, WHAT DID YOU RECOMMEND THAT HE DO TO PREVENT THE CALL RECORD FROM LEAKING? >> I RECOMMENDED WE RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE PACKAGE >> HAD YOU EVER ASKED THE ADVISOR TO RESTRICT ACCESS BEFORE? >> NO >> DID YOU SPEAK TO YOUR SUPERVISOR BEFORE YOU WANT TO SPEAK WITH JOHN EISENBERG? >> NO

>> DID YOU LEARN THE CALL RECORD HAD BEEN PUT IN A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED SYSTEM? >> I DID >> WHAT REASON DID MR EISENBERG GIVE YOU FOR WHY IT WAS PUT IN THE HIGHLY CLASSIFIED SYSTEM? >> IT WAS A MISTAKE >> IT WAS A MISTAKE? >> AN ADMINISTERED OF ERROR >> AND MR

MORRISON'S FEEL THE JULY 25th CALL RECORD DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE PLACED ON A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED SERVER AT HIS DEPOSITION MR MORRISON TESTIFIED CALL RECORD WAS PLACED ON THE SERVER BY MISTAKE EVEN AFTER THIS ALLEGED MISTAKE WAS UNCOVERED, THE JULY 25th CALL SUMMARY WAS NOT REMOVED FROM THE CLASSIFIED SYSTEM BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS TRYING TO HIDE IT

IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE LAUNCH OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IN LATE SEPTEMBER AND AFTER INTENSE PUBLIC PRESSURE THAT THE ROUGH TRANSCRIPT OF THE JULY 25th CALL WAS RELEASED AGAIN, BECAUSE MR EISENBERG AND MR ELLIS REFUSED TO TESTIFY IN THE HOUSE WE DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY HOW THE JULY 25th CALL RECORD ENDED UP ON THIS HIGHLY CLASSIFIED NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SERVER

WHAT WE DO KNOW, MR EISENBERG ORDERED ACCESS RESTRICTED AFTER MULTIPLE OFFICIALS LIKE DR FIONA HILL AND LIEUTENANT COLONEL LINDEMAN, ADVISED HIM OF THE SCHEME TO CONDITION A WHITE HOUSE MEETING ON PHONY POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS IT STRONGLY SUGGESTS THERE WAS AN ACTIVE ATTACK TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE OF THE PRESIDENTS WRONGDOING INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THE PRESIDENTS MISCONDUCT, MR

EISENBERG SEEMINGLY TRIED TO COVER IT UP WHY DID MR EISENBERG PLACE THE JULY 25th CALL SUMMARY ON A SERVER FOR HIGHLY CLASSIFIED MATERIAL DID ANYONE SENIOR TO MR EISENBERG DIRECT HIM TO HIDE THE CALL RECORD? WHY DID THE CALL RECORD REMAIN ON THE CLASSIFIED SERVER EVEN AFTER THE SO-CALLED ERROR WAS DISCOVERED? WHO ORDERED THE COVER-UP OF THE CALL RECORD? WHO ORDERED THE COVER-UP OF THE CALL RECORD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE TO KNOW

FOLLOWING THE JULY 25th CALL THE PRESIDENT SCHEME TO PRESSURE UKRAINE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES INTENSIFIED, APPARENTLY UNCHECKED ON ANY EFFORT TO STOP IT FROM THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL'S OFFICE AFTER THE CALL THE AMBASSADOR WORKED WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PERSONAL LAWYER TO PROCURE A PUBLIC STATEMENT FROM PRESIDENT ZELENSKY TO ANNOUNCE PHONY INVESTIGATIONS INTO JOE BIDEN AND THE CROWD STRIKE CONSPIRACY THEORY BEING PEDDLED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP AT THE SAME TIME PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTINUED TO WITHHOLD WHITE HOUSE MEETING AND SECURITY ASSISTANCE FROM UKRAINE IN A MANNER THAT BROKE THE LAW AS THESE EFFORTS WERE ONGOING, WHITE HOUSE ATTORNEYS REPORTEDLY RECEIVED ANOTHER WARNING SIGN THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS ABUSING POWER

ACCORDING TO A PUBLISHED REPORT IN THE NEW YORK TIMES THE WEEK AFTER THE JULY 25th CALL, AN ANONYMOUS WHISTLEBLOWER REPORTED CONCERNS OF THE PRESIDENT WAS ABUSING HIS OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT LANDED IN THE CI JET — CIA GENERAL COUNSEL OFFICE THE CIA'S GENERAL COUNSEL, COURTNEY ELWOOD, ALERTED MR EISENBERG OVER THE NEXT WEEK, THEY REPORTEDLY DISCUSSED THE WHISTLEBLOWER'S CONCERNS

AND THEY DETERMINED AS REQUIRED BY LAW, BUT THE ALLEGATIONS HAD A REASONABLE BASIS SO, BY EARLY AUGUST WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS BEGAN WORKING ALONG WITH ATTORNEYS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO COVER UP THE PRESIDENTS WRONGDOING THEY WERE DETERMINED TO PREVENT CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM LEARNING ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRESIDENTS CORRUPT BEHAVIOR ALTHOUGH SENIOR JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS INCLUDING ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL BARR REPORTEDLY MADE AWARE OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT CORRUPT ACTIVITY , NO INVESTIGATION INTO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S WRONGDOING WAS EVEN OPEN BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

AS WHITE HOUSE AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LAWYERS WERE DISCUSSING HOW TO DEAL WITH THE CONCERNS, ON AUGUST 12th ANOTHER IMPORTANT DATE, THE WHISTLEBLOWER FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW ON AUGUST 26th THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TRANSMITTED THE COMPLAINT TO THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, JOSEPH McGUIRE ALONG WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION THAT THE COMPLAINT WAS BOTH CREDIBLE AND RELATED TO A MATTER OF URGENT CONCERN URGENT CONCERN BUT INSTEAD OF TRANSMITTING THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT TO THE HOUSE AND TO THIS SENATE DISTINGUISHED INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AS REQUIRED BY LAW, THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE NOTIFIED WHITE HOUSE

>> I AM STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CHRONOLOGY HE WENT TO THE OFFICE OF COUNSEL AND THEN HE WENT TO WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL? >> WE WENT, REPEAT THAT PLEASE >> YOU FIRST WENT TO THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND THEN HE WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL? >> NO, SIR WE WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE FIRST TO DETERMINE AND ASKED THE QUESTION >> WE WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE FIRST, SO YOU WENT TO THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT FOR ADVICE FIRST ABOUT WHETHER YOU SHOULD PROVIDE THE COMPLAINT TO CONGRESS? >> THERE WERE ISSUES WITH IN THIS, A COUPLE THINGS

ONE, IT DID APPEAR IT HAS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IF IT DOES HAVE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, IT IS THE WHITE HOUSE THAT DETERMINES THAT, I CANNOT DETERMINE THAT IF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE >> UNDER FEDERAL LAW THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE WAS REQUIRED TO SHARE THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WITH CONGRESS PERIOD, FULL STOP IF THAT HAD OCCURRED THE PRESIDENT SCHEMED TO WITHHOLD SECURITY ASSISTANCE IN A WHITE HOUSE MEETING BEING SOUGHT BY THE UNIT LEADER FOR HIS OWN POLITICAL GAIN AND WOULD HAVE BEEN EXPOSED

TO PREVENTTHAT FROM HAPPENING, THE PRESIDENTS LAWYERS AND TOP- LEVEL ADVISORS ADOPTED A TWO PRONGED COVER-UP STRATEGY FIRST, BLOCK CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM LEARNING ABOUT THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT SECOND, TRY TO CONVINCE PRESIDENT TRUMP TO LIFT THE HOLD ON THE SECURITY ASSISTANCE BEFORE ANYONE CAN FIND OUT ABOUT IT AND USE THAT EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM AFTER THE FIRST PRONG, SOMETIME AFTER THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL'S OFFICE ABOUT THE COMPLAINT, ON AUGUST 26th PATS A BLOWN AND MR

EISENBERG REPORTEDLY BRIEFED THE PRESIDENT THEY LIKELY DISCUSSED WHETHER THEY WERE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO GIVE THE COMPLAINT TO CONGRESS THEY STATED THEY WERE CONSULTING WITH THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TESTIFIED HE AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL CONSULTED WITH THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL WITHOUT ANY REASONABLE BASIS THAT HE DID NOT HAVE TO TURN OVER THE COMPLAINT TO CONGRESS

ON SEPTEMBER 3rd, THE DAY AFTER THE STATUTORY DEADLINE FOR THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TO PROVIDE THE COMPLAINT TO THIS BODY AND TO THE HOUSE, BUT ALSO OF THE OFFICE OF LEGAL CONSIDERATION CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO TURN OVER THE COMPLAINT THE COVER-UP WAS IN FULL SWING THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OPINED THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT DID NOT QUALIFY AS AN URGENT CONCERN AND THEREFORE DID NOT HAVE TO BE TURNED OVER

WHAT CAN BE MORE URGENT? THEN A SITTING PRESIDENT TRYING TO CHEAT IN AN AMERICAN ELECTION BY SOLICITING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE WHAT CAN BE MORE URGENT THAN THAT THAT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL CRIME IN PROGRESS BUT THEY CONCLUDED IT WASN'T AN URGENT MATTER THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TESTIFIED THAT THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OPINION DID NOT ACTUALLY PREVENT THEM FROM TURNING OVER THE COMPLAINT TO CONGRESS

INSTEAD BASED UPON HIS TESTIMONY IT IS CLEAR HE WITHHELD IT ON THE BASIS THE COMPLAINT MIGHT DEAL WITH INFORMATION THAT HE BELIEVED COULD BE COVERED BY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP NEVER ACTUALLY INVOKED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE HE NEVER ACTUALLY INVOKED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE NOR DID HE INFORM CONGRESS THAT HE WAS DOING SO WITH RESPECT TO THIS COMPLAINT INSTEAD THE WHITE HOUSE SECRETLY INSTRUCTED THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE TO WITHHOLD THE COMPLAINT BASED ON THE MERE POSSIBILITY THAT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE COULD BE INVOKED

DOING SO THE WHITE HOUSE WAS ABLE TO KEEP THE EXPLOSIVE COMPLAINT FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO DISCLOSE THE REASON WHY IT WAS WITHHOLDING THIS INFORMATION BUT TRUTH CRASHED TO THE GROUND WILL RISE AGAIN THERE IS A TOXIC MESS AT 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND I HUMBLY SUGGEST THAT IT'S OUR COLLECTIVE JOB ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO TRY TO CLEAN IT UP PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO CHEAT

HE GOT CAUGHT AND THEN HE WORKED HARD TO COVER IT UP THERE HAVE BEEN MANY GREAT PRESIDENTS, THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF THIS REPUBLIC GREAT REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS, GREAT DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS PERHAPS ONE OF THE GREATEST PRESIDENTS WAS ABRAHAM LINCOLN

HE ONCE SAID THAT ANY MAN CAN HANDLE ADVERSITY BUT IF YOU WANT TO TEST A MAN'S CHARACTER, GIVE HIM SOME POWER AMERICA IS A GREAT NATION WE CAN HANDLE ADVERSITY BETTER THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD WHENEVER AMERICA HAS FOUND ITSELF IN A TOUGH SPOT, WE ALWAYS MAKE IT

TO THE OTHER SIDE WE ARE IN A TOUGH SPOT DURING THE CIVIL WAR WHEN AMERICA WAS AT RISK OF TEARING ITSELF APART, WE MADE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE

A TOUGH SPOT IN OCTOBER OF 1929 WHEN THE STOCK MARKET COLLAPSED, PLUNGING US INTO THE GREAT DEPRESSION BUT WE MADE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE WE WERE IN A TOUGH SPOT IN DECEMBER OF 1941 WHEN A FOREIGN POWER STRUCK PLUNGING US INTO A GREAT CONFLICT WITH THE EVIL EMPIRE OFGERMANY BUT AMERICA MADE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE WE WERE IN A TOUGH SPOT IN THE 1960S DEALING WITH THE INHERENT CONTRADICTIONS OF JIM CROW

BUT WE MADE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE WE WERE IN A SENT TO AFGHANISTAN TO FIGHT THE TERRORISTS THERE WE DIDN'T HAVE TO FIGHT THE TERRORISTS HERE AND WE MADE IT APPEAR TO THE OTHER SIDE

AMERICA IS A GREAT COUNTRY WE CAN HANDLE ADVERSITY BETTER THAN ANY OTHER NATION IN THE WORLD BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? ABOUT OUR CHARACTER PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO CHEAT AND SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN AN AMERICAN ELECTION THAT IS AN ATTACK ON OUR CHARACTER

PRESIDENT TRUMP ABUSED HIS POWER AND CORRUPTED THE HIGHEST OFFICE IN THE LAND P ARE THAT IS AN ATTACK ON OUR CHARACTER PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO COVER IT ALL UP AND HIDE IT FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND OBSTRUCT CONGRESS, THAT IS AN EXTRAORDINARY ATTACK ON OUR CHARACTER AMERICA IS A GREAT NATION AND WE CAN HANDLE ADVERSITY BETTER THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT OUR CHARACTER? >> THE CRISIS AROUND THE PRESIDENT'S HOLD DEEPEN THROUGHOUT OUR GOVERNMENT

PRESIDENT'S OWN TOP ADVISERS REDOUBLED THEIR EFFORTS TO LIFT THE HOLD ON MILITARY AID AND STEM THE FALLOUT, IN CASE IT WENT PUBLIC AND IT DID GO PUBLIC ON AUGUST 28, POLITICO PUBLICLY REPORTED THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS WITHHOLDING THE MILITARY AID AND AS YOU HAVE HEARD THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF THE PRESIDENT'S HOLD IN LATE AUGUST CAUSED DEEP ALARM AMONG UKRAINIAN OFFICIALS P ARE IT ALSO CAUSED UKRAINIAN OFFICIALS TO REDOUBLE THEIR EFFORTS AGAIN AT THE END OF AUGUST SECRETARY OF STATE POMPEO, AND AMBASSADOR BOLTON REPORTEDLY TRIED TO CONVINCE PRESIDENT TRUMP TO RELEASE THE EIGHT

BUT THEY FIELD THE PRESIDENT WANTED THE WHOLE TO REMAIN THAT PROMPTED DUFFY, THE POLITICAL APPOINTEE CHARGED ITH IMPLEMENTING TH SEND AN EMAIL IN AUGUST TO THE DOD STATING, AND I QUOTE, CLEAR DIRECTION FROM POTUS TO HOLD PEER THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH TESTIMONY THAT THEY WERE QUOTE HOPEFUL THE WHOLE TIME THAT SECRETARY ESPER AND SECRETARY POMPEO WOULD BE ABLE TO MEET WITH THE PRESIDENT AND EXPLAINED TO HIM WHY IT WAS SO IMPORTANT AND GET THE FUNDS RELEASED BUT INSTEAD, THE PRESIDENT HELD FIRM

AND EVEN AS THE PRESIDENT'S OWN CABINET OFFICIALS WERE TRYING TO CONVINCE HIM TO LIFT THE HOLD, WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS WERE RECEIVING REPORTS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S ABUSE ON SEPTEMBER 1, VICE PRESIDENT PENCE MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY IN WARSAW AND IMMEDIATELY, AFTER, SONDLUND HAD AN SIDE CONVERSATION WITH THE TOP EIGHT MORRISON WAS PRIVY AND WHEN HE RETURNED FROM WORSE ARE REPORTED TO EISENBERG THE DETAILS >> WHAT DID AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TELL YOU THAT HE TOLD MR YOUR MOCK? >> THAT THE UKRAINIANS WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL MAKE A STATEMENT WITH RESPECT TO THE INVESTIGATION AS A CONDITION OF HAVING THE AID LIFTED

>> YOU TESTIFIED THAT YOU ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TOLD YOU? WHY NOT? >> I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT I SAW AS ESSENTIALLY AN ADDITIONAL HURDLE TO ACCOMPLISHING WHAT I HAD BEEN DIRECTED TO HELP ACCOMPLISH WHICH WAS GIVING THE PRESIDENT THE INFORMATION HE NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE SECURITY SECTOR ASSISTANCE COULD GO FORWARD >> SO THERE IS ANOTHER WRINKLE TO IT? >> THERE WAS THE APPEARANCE OF ONE BASED ON WHAT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND REPRESENTED >> AND YOU TOLD AMBASSADOR TAYLOR ABOUT THE CONVERSATION AS WELL? >> I PROBABLY REACHED OUT TO AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TO SCHEDULE SECURE PHONE CALL >> IN YOUR DEPOSITION YOU TESTIFIED HIS TESTIMONY OTHER THAN ONE SMALL DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL WAS ACCURATE AS TO WHAT YOU TOLD HIM? IS THAT CORRECT? >> ABOUT THAT CORRECTION, YES >> YOU CONFIRMED EVERYTHING THAT AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TOLD YOU , EXCEPT FOR THAT ONE THING AND A SMALL OTHER MINISTERIAL MATTER RELATED TO THE LOCATION OF THE MEETING? >> CORRECT

>> DID YOU TELL AMBASSADOR BOLTON ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION AS WELL? >> I REACH OUT TO HIM AS WELL AND REQUESTED HIS AVAILABILITY FOR SECURE PHONE CALL >> WHAT WAS HIS RESPONSE WHEN YOU EXPLAINED WHAT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND HAD SAID? >> I TOLD THE LAWYERS >> DID YOU TELL THE LAWYERS? >> WILL RETURN TO THE STATES, YES >> DID HE EXPLAIN WHY HE WANTED YOU TO TELL THE LAWYERS? >> HE DID NOT >> THIS WASN'T THE FIRST TIME AND IT WOULDN'T BE THE LAST THAT AMBASSADOR BOLTON INSTRUCTED OTHER GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO REPORT DETAILS OF THE PRESIDENT'S CAME TO WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS

LET'S BE CLEAR, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER SOMETHING IS LEGAL, THEY OFTEN GO TO THEIR AGENCIES ' LAWYERS IT WAS HAPPENING AN AWFUL LOT AROUND THIS TIME RECALLING THAT BOLTON ALSO OBSTRUCT DID DR HILL TO REPORT STATEMENTS ABOUT REQUIRING THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE INVESTIGATIONS AS WE REQUIREMENT OF WHITE HOUSE MEETINGS WHAT BOLTON CALLED THE DRUG DEAL WITH THE PRESIDENT'S TOPIC MICK MULVANEY, AMBASSADOR BOLTON'S TESTIMONY WOULD OBVIOUSLY SHINE FURTHER LIGHT ON THE CONCERNS AND WHAT, OR WHO IF ANYONE AT THE WHITE HOUSE OR CABINET DID TO STOP THE PRESIDENT AT THIS TIME

AFTER THE PRESIDENT'S HOLD ON MILITARY AID BECAME PUBLIC IN LATE AUGUST THERE WAS PRESSURE ON THE PRESIDENT TO LIFT THE HOLD ON SEPTEMBER 3, A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF SENATORS SENT A LETTER TO ACTING WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MICK MULVANEY AND AN EXCERPT FROM THE LETTER IS IN FRONT OF YOU THE CENTER EXPRESSED QUOTE DEEP CONCERNS THAT THE QUOTE ADMINISTRATION IS CONSIDERING NOT OBLIGATING THE UKRAINE SECURITY INITIATIVE FUNDS FOR 2019 THE SENATOR'S LETTER ALSO URGED THAT THE VITAL FUNDS BE OBLIGATED IMMEDIATELY

ON SEPTEMBER 5, THE CHAIRMAN AND THE RANKING MEMBER OF THE HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE SENT A JOINT LETTER TO MULVANEY AND OMB DIRECTOR RUSSELL VAUGHN THAT LETTER ALSO EXPRESSED DEEP CONCERN ABOUT THE CONTINUING HOLD ON THE MILITARY AID THE SAME DAY, SENATORS MURPHY AND JOHNSON VISITED KEVIN AND MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY ALONG WITH AMBASSADOR TAYLOR >> AUNT SEPTEMBER 5 I ACCOMPANIED SENATORS JOHNSON AND MURPHY DURING THEIR VISIT WHEN I MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY HIS FIRST QUESTION TO THE SENATORS WAS ABOUT THE WITHHELD SECURITY ASSISTANTS

RECOLLECTION OF THE MEETING IS THAT BOTH SENATORS STRESSED THAT BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE IN WASHINGTON WAS UKRAINE'S MOST IMPORTANT STRATEGIC ASSET AND THAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY SHOULD NOT JEOPARDIZE THAT BIPARTISAN SUPPORT BY GETTING DRAWN IN TO US DOMESTIC POLITICS I HEADED IN MAKING AND CONTINUED TO MAKE THIS POINT TO ALL OF MY OFFICIAL UKRAINIAN CONTEXT BUT THE ODD PUSH TO MAKE PRESIDENT ZELENSKY PUBLICLY COMMIT TO INVESTIGATIONS OF BURISMA AND ALLEGED INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION SHOWED HOW THE OFFICIAL FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES WAS UNDERCUT BY THE IRREGULAR EFFORTS LED BY MR

GIULIANI >> THE SENATOR SOUGHT TO ASSURE RESIDENTS OF LINSKY THAT THERE WAS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN CONGRESS FOR PROVIDING THE TERRY AID ALSO ON SEPTEMBER 5 THE WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL BOARD REPORTED CONCERNS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS WITHHOLDING THE AID AND A MEETING TO FORCE PRESIDENT ZELINSKI TO ANNOUNCE INVESTIGATIONS TO BENEFIT HIS POLITICAL CAMPAIGN PERIOD THE EDITORS WROTE, QUOTE, WE ARE RELIABLY TOLD THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS A SECOND AGENDA, HE'S ATTEMPTING TO FORCE MR GALINSKY TO INTERVENE IN THE 2020 U

S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION BY LAUNCHING AN INVESTIGATION OF THE LEADING DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN MR TRUMP IS NOT JUST SOLICITING UKRAINE'S HELP WITH HIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, HE'S USING US

MILITARY AID, THE COUNTRY DESPERATELY NEEDS AND IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXTORT IT DESPITE THESE EFFORTS TO GET THE PRESIDENT TO LIFT THE HOLD, IN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ABUSE OF POWER THE SCHEME CONTINUED TWO DAYS LATER ON SEPTEMBER 7, MORRISON WENT BACK TO WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS TO REPORT ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT HE LEARNED FROM AMBASSADOR SONDLAND ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME AGAIN, AT THE DIRECTION OF AMBASSADOR BOLTON >> A FEW DAYS LATER ON SEPTEMBER 7, YOU SPOKE AGAIN TO AMBASSADOR SONDLAND WHO TOLD YOU THAT HE HAD JUST GOTTEN OFF THE PHONE WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT SOUNDS CORRECT, YES

>> WHAT DID AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TELL YOU THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID TO HIM? >> IF I RECALL THE CONVERSATION CORRECTLY, THIS WAS WHERE INVESTORS SOMEONE RELATED THAT THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO BUT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY HAD TO MAKE THE STATEMENT AND HAD TO DO IT >> BY THAT POINT DID YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATEMENT RELATED TO THE BIDEN, 2016 INVESTIGATIONS? >> I THINK I DID, YES >> AND THAT WAS IN ESSENTIALLY CONDITION FOR THE SECURITY ASSISTANTS TO BE RELEASED? >> I UNDERSTOOD THAT IS WHAT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND BELIEVED >> AFTER SPEAKING WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP? >> THAT IS WHAT HE REPRESENTED >> YOU TESTIFIED THAT HEARING THIS INFORMATION GAVE YOU A SINKING FEELING

WHY WAS THAT? >> I BELIEVE IF WE WERE ON SEPTEMBER 7, THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, SEPTEMBER 30, THESE ARE ONE-YEAR DOLLARS THE DOD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE FUNDS, WILLIE HAS SO MUCH TIME IN FACT, BECAUSE CONGRESS IMPOSED A 15 DAY NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT, ON THE STATE DEPARTMENT FUNDS, SEPTEMBER 7, SEPTEMBER 30, EVERYBODY MADE SEPTEMBER 15 IN ORDER TO SECURE THE PRESIDENT TO MAKE THE FUNDS GO FORWARD BUT DID YOU TALK ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION AS WELL? >> ID >> WHAT DID HE SAY? >> HE SAID TO TELL THE LAWYERS

>> WHY DID HE SAY TO TELL THE LAWYERS? >> HE DID NOT EXPLAIN THE DIRECTION >> AGAIN, TELL THE LAWYERS AMBASSADOR SONDLAND CALL WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP ON SEPTEMBER 7, ALSO PROMPTED DEEP CONCERN BY AMBASSADOR TAYLOR WHICH YOU HAVE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT ON SEPTEMBER 8 AND NINTH, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR EXCHANGED MESSAGES WITH AMBASSADOR SONDLAND AND AMBASSADOR VOLKER EXPLAINING THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO

THAT THEY GIVE THE INTERVIEW AND DON'T GET THE ASSISTANT HE GOES ON TO SAY, QUOTE THE RUSSIANS LOVE IT AND I QUIT AFTER THE HOLD OF THE MILITARY AID BECAME PUBLIC, THE WHITE HOUSE TOOK TWO ACTIONS IN EARLY SEPTEMBER FIRST, THE WHITE HOUSE AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ENSURE THAT THE ACTING DNI CONTINUE TO WITHHOLD THE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT FROM CONGRESS

IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE LAW SECOND, THE WHITE HOUSE ATTEMPTED TO CREATE A COVER STORY FOR THE PRESIDENT'S WITHHOLDING OF ASSISTANCE APPROXIMATELY TWO MONTHS AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD ORDERED THE FRIEZE MARK SONDLAND, RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM MICHAEL DUFFY THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME, GAVE A REASON FOR THE HOLD SONDLAND TESTIFIED THAT IN EARLY SEPTEMBER HE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM DUFFY THAT ATTRIBUTED THE WHOLE TO THE PRESIDENT CONCERN ABOUT OTHER COUNTRIES NOT CONTRIBUTING MORE TO UKRAINE

AGAIN, AFTER MONTHS OF SCRAMBLING, THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME ANY REASON HAD BEEN PROVIDED FOR THE HOLD AND ACCORDING TO SONDLAND IT WAS ALSO ONLY IN EARLY SEPTEMBER, AGAIN AFTER THE WHITE HOUSE LEARNED OF THE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT AND HOLD BECAME PUBLIC THAT THE WHITE HOUSE REQUESTED DATA FROM OMB ON OTHER COUNTRIES' ASSISTANCE TO UKRAINE SO LET'S RECAP WHY WE KNOW THE CONCERN ABOUT BURDEN SHARING WAS BOGUS FIRST, FOR MONTHS, NO REASON WAS GIVEN THAT THE VERY PEOPLE EXECUTING THE MILITARY AID WHO HAD BEEN ACTIVELY SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS ABOUT WHY THE AIDE WAS BEING WITHHELD SECOND, REMEMBER THE SUPPOSED INTERAGENCY PROCESS PERFORMED BY OMB? IT WAS FAKE AND THIRD, AFTER THE HOLD WENT PUBLIC, AND THE WHITE HOUSE BECAME AWARE OF THE WHISTLE- BLOWER THEY STARTED SCRAMBLING TO DEVELOP ANOTHER EXCUSE

PUBLIC REPORTS CONFIRMED THIS ON NOVEMBER 24, NEWS REPORTS FOR INSTANCE REVEALED IN SEPTEMBER THAT MR CIPOLLONE'S LAWYERS CONDUCTED INTERNAL REVIEW REVIEW REPORTEDLY QUOTES, TURNED UP HUNDREDS OF DOCUMENTS THAT REVEAL EXTENSIVE EFFORTS TO GENERATE AN AFTER-THE-FACT JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DECISION IN DEBATE OVER WHETHER DELL THE DELAY WAS ILLEGAL THE PRESIDENT'S TOP AIDES WERE TRYING TO DO WITH THE HOLD

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS WERE ACTIVELY WORKING TO DEVELOP AN EXCUSE FOR THE PRESENT'S SCHEME AND DEVISE A COVER STORY AND EVENT THAT IT WAS EXPOSED SOON IT WOULD BE SOON, THE CHAIRS OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND OVERSIGHT AND PERFORM PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED THAT THE JOINT INVESTIGATION OF PRESIDENT TRUMP AND MR GIULIANI'S SCHEME AND THIS IS WHEN THE MUSIC STOPS AND EVERYBODY STARTS RUNNING TO FIND A CHAIR

WORD OF THE COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATIONS SPREAD QUICKLY THROUGH THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE NFC MORRISON RECALLED SEEING AND DISCUSSING THE LETTER WITH STAFF LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN DISCUSSED IT WITH STAFF MEMBERS INCLUDING THE DEPUTY ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION THE SAME DAY THERE WERE EFFORTS AT OMB TO CREATE A PAPER TRAIL TO SCHIFF THE BLAME OF THE PRESIDENT'S HOLD ON SECURITY ASSISTANTS AWAY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE DUFFY SENT AN EMAIL TO ELAINE THAT CONTRADICTED MONTHS OF EMAIL EXCHANGES

IS DATED FALSELY THAT OMB HAD IN FACT AUTHORIZED DOD TO PROCEED WITH PROCESSES NECESSARY TO OBLIGATE FUNDS DUFFY WAS ATTEMPTING TO SCHIFF ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DELAY ON TO THE PENTAGON HE REPLIED, AND I QUOTE, YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS I AM SPEECHLESS NOW ALL OF THIS INCLUDING OMB'S EFFORTS TO SCHIFF BLAME TO THE PENTAGON, THE WHITE HOUSE EFFORT TO CREATE A COVER STORY FOR THE HOLD ON SECURITY ASSISTANTS, A CONTINUATION OF THE COVER-UP

IT STARTED WITH THE WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS FAILURE TO STOP THE SCHEME AFTER THE JULY 10 MEETING WAS REPORTED TO THEM, CONTINUED WITH ATTEMPTS TO HIDE THE JULY 25 CALL SUMMARY AND ESCALATED WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AS LEGAL CONCEALMENT OF THE WHISTLE-BLOWER CAN COMPLETE FROM CONGRESS ON SEPTEMBER 10, THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REQUESTED THAT THE DNI PROVIDE A COPY OF THE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT AS THE LAW REQUIRED BUT DNI CONTINUE TO WITHHOLD THE COMPLAINT FOR WEEKS THE SAME DAY WAS ANNOUNCED THAT AMBASSADOR BOLTON WAS RESIGNING OR HAD BEEN FIRED, IT IS UNCLEAR WHETHER AMBASSADORS BOLTON, DEPARTURE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE SAID ANYTHING TO DO WITH HIS OPPOSITION TO THE HOLD ON MILITARY AID BUT OF COURSE AMBASSADOR BOLTON COULD SHED LIGHT ON THAT, HIMSELF IF HE WAS TO TESTIFY

THE NEXT DAY ON SEPTEMBER 11, PRESIDENT TRUMP MET WITH VICE PRESIDENT PANTS, MICK MULVANEY AND SENATOR PORTMAN TO DISCUSS THE HOLD LATER THAT DAY THE PRESIDENT RELENTED AND LIFTED THE HOLD PERIOD AFTER THE SCHEME WAS EXPOSED THE PRESIDENT'S DECISION TO RELEASE THE AID, JUST LIKE HIS DECISION TO IMPOSE THE HOLD WAS NEVER EXPLAINED COOPER TESTIFIED THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LIFTING OF THE HOLD QUOTE, REALLY CAME OUT OF THE BLUE PERIOD WAS QUITE ABRUPT THE ONLY LOGICAL CONCLUSION BASED ON ALL THIS EVIDENCE IS THAT THE PRESIDENT LIFTED THE HOLD ON SEPTEMBER 11 BECAUSE HE GOT CAUGHT

THE PRESIDENT'S DECISION TO LIFT THE HOLD WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION IS ALSO VERY TELLING IF THE HOLD WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR LEGITIMATE POLICY REASONS, WHY LIFTED ARBITRARILY WITH NO EXPLANATION? BY LIFTING THE HOLD, ONLY AFTER CONGRESS HAD LAUNCHED THE INVESTIGATION, WHEN IS LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN TESTIFIED, NONE OF THE FACTS AND GROUND HAD CHANGED SINCE THE HOLD WAS PUT INTO PLACE THE PRESIDENT WAS CONCEDING THAT THERE WAS NEVER LEGITIMATE PURPOSE SINCE THE HOLD WAS LIFTED, THE PRESIDENT HAD PAID LIP SERVICE TO CONCERNS OF CORRUPTION AND BURDEN SHARING BUT THE ADMINISTRATION IS TAKING NO CONCRETE STEPS, BEFORE OR SINCE THE STATEMENTS WERE MADE TO SHOW THAT IT REALLY CARES

THE RECORD IS CLEAR BEFORE HE WAS CAUGHT THE PRESIDENT HAD NO INTEREST IN ANTICORRUPTION REFORM IN UKRAINE AND AS YOU HAVE ALREADY LEARNED, THOSE PEOPLE WHO REALLY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ISSUES, LIKE CONGRESS, THE SENATE, THE DOD AND STATE DEPARTMENT, HAD ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS TO ADDRESS IT AND AS AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TESTIFIED, AT NO POINT DID THE PRESIDENT ASK HIM TO DISCUSS ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO UKRAINE FROM EU COUNTRIES NOTED PRESIDENT TRUMP PUSH UKRAINE TO UNDERTAKE ANY SPECIFIC ANTICORRUPTION REFORMS NOW THE PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL WILL LIKELY SAY HIS LIFTING OF THE HOLD SHOWS GOOD FAITH

THEY WILL SAY THAT BECAUSE UKRAINE ULTIMATELY RECEIVED THE AID, WITHOUT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY HAVING TO ANNOUNCE THE SHAM OF INVESTIGATIONS THAT THERE WAS NO ABUSE OF POWER AS A LEGAL MATTER, THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT SCHEME WAS NOT FULLY SUCCESSFUL MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TRUMPS ABUSE OF POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY TO ASSIST HIS REELECTION CAMPAIGN UNDERMINING OUR FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS AND OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT IMPORTANTLY, PRESIDENT TRUMP ALMOST DID GET AWAY WITH IT AS DISCUSSED EARLIER, PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AGREED DURING HIS SEPTEMBER PHONE CALL WITH AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TO DO A CNN INTERVIEW DURING WHICH HE WOULD DENOUNCE THE INVESTIGATIONS

ON SEPTEMBER 12 AMBASSADOR TAYLOR PERSONALLY INFORMED PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND THE UKRAINIAN BORN MINISTER THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S HOLD ON MILITARY ASSISTANT HAD BEEN LIFTED AND ON SEPTEMBER 13, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR AND DAVID HOLMES MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND HIS ADVISORS AND URGED THEM NOT TO GO FORWARD WITH THE CNN INTERVIEW IT WAS NOT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 18 AND 19th, AROUND THE TIME THE PRESIDENT ZELENSKY SPOKE WITH VICE PRESIDENT PANTS THAT THE UKRAINIANS FINALLY CANCELED THE CNN INTERVIEW THE PRESIDENT HAS REPEATEDLY POINTED TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKY'S PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT HE DID NOT FEEL PRESSURED BY TRUMP NOT ONLY ON UNSURPRISING IT IS IRRELEVANT

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER PRESIDENT TRUMP USE THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY TO FORCE PRESIDENT ZELENSKY INTO HELPING HIM WIN THE CLINICAL CAMPAIGN THAT WE KNOW THAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY WAS PRESSURED HE KEPT DELAYING AND DELAYING BECAUSE HE DID NOT WANT TO BE A PAWN IN US DOMESTIC POLITICS

AND IN FACT, PRESIDENT ZELENSKY REMAINS UNDER PRESSURE TO THIS DAY AS HOLMES TESTIFIED THERE ARE THINGS THAT UKRAINIANS WANT AND NEED FROM THE UNITED STATES INCLUDING A MEETING FROM THE PRESIDENT IN THE OVAL OFFICE WHICH IS STILL NOT SCHEDULED AND YES, UKRAINE REMAINS AT FOUR AND NEEDS U

S MILITARY AID INCLUDING AID THAT IS STILL DELAYED FROM LAST YEAR FOR THESE REASONS, MR HOMES EXPLAINED, QUOTE, I THINK UKRAINIANS ARE BEING VERY CAREFUL

THEY STILL NEED US NOW, GOING FORWARD IN FACT, RIGHT NOW RESIDENTS LINSKY IS TRYING TO ARRANGE A SUMMIT MEETING WITH PRESIDENT PUTIN IN COMING WEEKS HIS FIRST FACE-TO-FACE MEETING WITH HIM TO ADVANCE THE PEACE PROCESS HE NEEDS OUR SUPPORT HE NEEDS PRESIDENT PUTIN TO UNDERSTAND THAT AMERICA SUPPORTS PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS SO DOES AND WITH THE LIFTING OF THE HOLD PERIOD UKRAINE NEEDS US AND AS I SAID, STILL IS FIGHTING THIS WAR THIS VERY DAY

WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP, FOR HIS PERSONAL POLITICAL GAME ASKED FOR A FAVOR FROM PRESIDENT ZELENSKY HE DID EXACTLY WHAT THE FRAMERS FEARED MOST HE INVITED THE INFLUENCE OF A FOREIGN POWER INTO OUR ELECTIONS USE THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO SECURE THAT ADVANTAGE AND JEOPARDIZED OUR NATIONAL SECURITY YET PRESIDENT TRUMP MAINTAINS THAT HE WAS ALWAYS IN THE RIGHT AND HIS JULY 25 CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELINSKI WAS PERFECT

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS MADE IT CLEAR HE BELIEVES HE IS FREE TO USE HIS POWER THE SAME WAY TO THE SAME AND, WHENEVER AND WHEREVER HE PLEASES AND MORE TROUBLING HE'S DOUBLING DOWN ON HIS ABUSE INVITING OTHER COUNTRIES TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTIONS WHAT DOES ALL OF THIS TELL YOU? IT TELLS YOU THAT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND WAS CORRECT WHEN HE TOLD HOLMES AFTER HANGING UP WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP ON JULY 26 THAT THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T CARE ABOUT UKRAINE

HE ONLY CARES ABOUT THE QUOTE, INC STAFF MEANING STUFF THAT HELPS THEM PERSONALLY THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE PRESIDENT USED THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE FOR PERSONAL MEDICAL GAIN HE DID SO KNOWINGLY

DELIBERATELY AND REPEATEDLY AND HIS MISCONDUCT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY >> SENATORS, FOR YOUR ORIENTATION THIS WILL BE THE LAST PRESENTATION ON ARTICLE 1 AND MR

LEADER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRESENTATION IT WILL BE A LOGICAL POINT TO TAKE A BREAK THIS LAST SECTION ON ARTICLE 1 DEALS WITH THE INJURY TO OUR NATIONAL INTEREST AND NATIONAL SECURITY WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP USE UKRAINE'S LEADER FOR POLITICAL FAVOR, AND WITHHELD CRITICAL MILITARY AID TO AN ALLY IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT FAVOR, HE DID EXACTLY WHAT OUR FRAMERS FEARED MOST HE INVITED FOREIGN INTERFERENCE INTO OUR ELECTIONS AND SOLD OUT OUR COUNTRY'S SECURITY FOR HIS PERSONAL BENEFIT AND BETRAYED THE NATION'S TRUST TO A FOREIGN POWER

THE PRESIDENT SCHEMED TO PRESSURE UKRAINE TO DO ITS POLITICAL DIRTY WORK AND HARM NATIONAL SECURITY, UNDERMINED FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS AND EVEN TODAY, EVEN TODAY, THREATENS THE VERY FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY WHEN THE PRESIDENT ARGUES THAT HIS CALL WAS PERFECT, THAT HE DID NOTHING WRONG, WHAT HE'S REALLY SAYING IS THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE PRESIDENT ASKING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO DO A FOREIGN — PERSONAL FAVOR THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE PRESIDENT PRESSURING THAT FOREIGN COUNTRY TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTIONS FOR HIS PERSONAL BENEFITS THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH WITHHOLDING CONGRESSIONALLY APPROPRIATED TAXPAYER FUNDING AND MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO THAT FOREIGN COUNTRY TO EXTRACT THE COUNTRY TO HELP THE PRESIDENT CHEAT, TO WIN AN ELECTION BUT THERE ARE GREAT MANY THINGS WRONG WITH THAT

MOST SIGNIFICANTLY FOR THE PURPOSES THAT BRING US HERE TODAY, THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PERMIT IT AND THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PERMIT IT BECAUSE THAT CONDUCT IS THE QUINTESSENTIAL ABUSE OF POWER THE USE OF OFFICIAL POWER FOR PERSONAL GAIN, PUTTING PERSONAL INTEREST OVER THE NATIONAL INTERESTS AND PLACING PERSONAL BENEFITS OVER OUR NATION'S SECURITY THE PRESIDENT CAUGHT CONDUCT THAT WE OUTLINED YESTERDAY HARMED OUR NATIONAL SECURITY, THAT IS WITHOUT A DOUBT IN ENDANGERED OUR ELECTIONS AND IT SENT OUR COUNTRY ON A DANGEROUS PATH, THAT IF LEFT UNCHECKED WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE BALANCE OF POWER, CONTEMPLATED IN OUR CONSTITUTION

IF SOMEONE SACRIFICES THE NATIONAL INTEREST IN FAVOR OF HIS OWN AND IS NOT REMOVED FROM OFFICE, OUR DEMOCRACY IS IN JEOPARDY IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE THE GRAVE CONSEQUENCES OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S MISCONDUCT DEMAND OUR ATTENTION LET ME TAKE THESE ISSUES AND BEGIN WITH THIS HARM TO NATIONAL SECURITY FIRST, THE PRESIDENT'S ABUSE OF POWER HAD IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCES TO OUR SECURITY

UKRAINE IS A BURGEONING DEMOCRACY ENTANGLED IN A HOT WAR WITH RUSSIA I WITHHOLDING MILITARY AID PRESIDENT TRUMP NOT ONLY DENIED UKRAINE MUCH NEEDED MILITARY EQUIPMENT BUT ALSO WEAKENED UKRAINE'S POSITIONS IN NEGOTIATIONS OVER THE END OF THE WAR WITH RUSSIA BECAUSE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CORRUPT ACTIONS, VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS EMBOLDENED AT A PIVOTAL MOMENT AHEAD OF THE SENSITIVE NEGOTIATIONS TO ATTEMPT TO END THE WAR AND EMBOLDENED RUSSIA IS A THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES AND GLOBAL SECURITY AROUND THE WORLD THE PRESIDENT'S WILLINGNESS TO PUT HIMSELF OVER COUNTRY UNDERCUT OUR EUROPEAN ALLIES' CONFIDENCE AND AMERICA'S CONTENT — AND SIGNALED TO ADVERSARIES AND FRIENDS ALIKE THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD, OUR COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF COULD BE INFLUENCED BY MANIPULATING HIS PERCEPTION OF WHAT WAS BEST FOR HIS PERSONAL INTERESTS

I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE RUSSIANS AND PROBABLY EVERY OTHER NATION THAT HAS THE CAPACITY DOES A PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AS WE PROFILE OTHER LEADERS THE PRESIDENT CAN BE SO EASILY MANIPULATED TO DISBELIEVE HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, TO ACCEPT THE PROPAGANDA OF THE KREMLIN, THAT IS A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY AND THAT IS JUST WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE BUT THAT'S NOT ALL

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S WILLINGNESS TO ENTANGLE OUR FOREIGN ALLIES IN A CORRUPT POLITICAL ERRAND ALSO UNDERMINED THE CREDIBILITY OF AMERICANS TO PROMOTE THE RULE OF LAW AND FIGHT CORRUPTION ABROAD THIS IS TRUMP FIRST, NOT AMERICA FIRST NOT AMERICAN IDEALS FIRST AND THE RESULT HAS AN CONTINUE WILL BE GREAT HARM TO OUR NATION IF THIS CHAMBER DOES NOT STAND UP AND SAY, IT IS WRONG IF YOU DO NOT STAND UP AND SAY, THIS IS NOT ONLY WRONG, NOT ONLY UNACCEPTABLE BUT CONDUCT INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY

AND IF IT REALLY IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY, IF YOU CANNOT FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THAT RESPONSIBILITY, IF YOU CANNOT BRING YOURSELF TO PUT URINATION'S INTERESTS AHEAD OF YOUR OWN, IT MUST BE IMPEACHABLE OR THE NATION REMAINS AT RISK LET'S CONSIDER THE BIG PICTURE AND PROBABLY A QUESTION THAT MANY AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE ASKING WHY DOES UKRAINE MATTER TO THE UNITED STATES? WHAT IS UKRAINE MATTER TO THE UNITED STATES?? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A SMALL COUNTRY THAT MANY PEOPLE KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT

THE SMALL COUNTRY, THIS ALLY OF OURS IS A COUNTRY HUNGRY FOR REFORM AND EAGER FOR A STRONGER RELATION WITH ITS MOST AND POWERFUL, IMPORTANT ALLY, THE UNITED STATES AND WERE TALKING ABOUT OURSELVES AND WHAT IT MEANS TO THE STRENGTH OF OUR OWN DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRACIES AROUND THE WORLD IN COUNTRIES LIKE UKRAINE WERE FIGHTING AGAINST AUTHORITARIANISM AT LEAST, THAT USED TO BE A FIGHT AND GOD HELP US IF IT IS NOT OUR FIGHT STILL RUSSIAN PRESIDENT PUTIN DECLARED THE COLLAPSE OF THE SOVIET UNION TO BE THE GREATEST GEOPOLITICAL CATASTROPHE OF THE 20th CENTURY

UKRAINE'S VOTE FOR INDEPENDENCE IN DECEMBER 1991 WAS THE FINAL NAIL IN THE SOVIET UNIONS' IN THAT MADE UKRAINE'S GREATEST MOMENTS PUTIN'S LATEST TRAGEDY WHEN DECLARING INDEPENDENCE FROM SOVIET DOMINATION, UKRAINE INHERITED NUCLEAR WARHEADS, AND A FIREPOWER TO LEVEL EVERY MAJOR AMERICAN CITY SEVERAL TIMES OVER 1900 SOVIET NUCLEAR WARHEADS IN EXCHANGE FOR A UKRAINE SURROUNDING THIS ARSENAL, THE UNITED STATES, RUSSIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM REACHED AN UNDERSTANDING CALLED THE BUDAPEST MEMORANDUM OF 1994

THEY CONTINUED AND COMMITTED TO RESPECTING THE BORDERS OF AN INDEPENDENT UKRAINE AND ALSO TO REFRAIN FROM USING THE THREAT OF USE OF FORCE AGAINST UKRAINE THIS WAS AN EARLY SUCCESS OF THE POST COLD WORD PERIOD DESPITE COMMITMENT TO RESPECT UKRAINE'S INDEPENDENT OF COURSE, RUSSIA CONTINUE TO METAL IN AFFAIRS AMBASSADOR TAYLOR RECOUNTED HOW EVENTS TOOK AN EVEN MORE SINISTER TURN IN 2013 >> THE WEST, IN 2013, VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS SO THREATENED BY THE PROSPECT OF UKRAINE JOINING THE EUROPEAN UNION THAT HE TRIED TO BRIBE THE UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT

THIS TRIGGERED MASS PROTESTS IN THE WINTER OF 2013 THAT DROVE THE PRESIDENT TO FLEE TO RUSSIA IN FEBRUARY OF 2014 BUT NOT BEFORE HIS FORCES KILLED 100 UKRAINIAN PROTESTERS IN CENTRAL YES — KYIV >> PRESIDENT PUTIN ORDERED THE INVASION OF UKRAINE SPECIFICALLY A REGION KNOWN AS CRIMEA

RUSSIA'S AGGRESSION WAS MET WITH GLOBAL CONDEMNATION >> WE LIKE THE SOUND BUT YOU CAN SEE THE IMAGES OF THE CONFLICT ON THE SCREENS BEFORE YOU DEPUTY ASSISTANTSECRETARY OF DEFENSE LAURA COOPER TESTIFIED AS TO THE STAKES FOR US NATIONAL SECURITY

>> RUSSIA VIOLATED THE SOVEREIGNTY OF UKRAINE'S TERRITORY RUSSIA ILLEGALLY ANNEXED TERRITORY THAT BELONG TO UKRAINE THEY ALSO DENIED UKRAINE ACCESS TO ITS NAVAL FLEET AT THE TIME AND TO THIS DAY, RUSSIA IS BUILDING CAPABILITY ON CRIMEA, DESIGNED TO EXPAND RUSSIAN MILITARY POWER PROJECTION, FAR BEYOND THE IMMEDIATE REGION >> IN 2014, WHERE THERE CONCERNS IN WASHINGTON, HERE IN WASHINGTON AND EUROPEAN CAPITALS THAT RUSSIA MAY NOT STOP IN UKRAINE? >> I WAS NOT IN MY CURRENT POSITION IN 2014 BUT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT FEAR ABOUT WHERE RUSSIAN AGGRESSION WOULD STOP >> ONE AMERICAN WAR HERO NO STRANGER TO THIS BODY RECOGNIZE THE THREAT POSED BY RUSSIA'S INVASION OF CRIMEA, SENATOR JOHN McCAIN

IN INTERVIEW, HE DECLARED QUOTE, WE ARE ALL UKRAINIANS SENATOR McCAIN ADVISED THAT THIS IS A CHESS MATCH, REMINISCENT OF THE COLD WAR AND WE NEED TO REALIZE THAT AND ACT ACCORDINGLY HE WAS OF COURSE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMITMENTS MADE TO UKRAINE IN 1994, THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE RESPONDED TO RUSSIA'S INVASION BY IMPOSING SIGNIFICANT SANCTIONS ON RUSSIA WE JOINED EUROPE IN PROVIDING UKRAINE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ECONOMIC SUPPORT TO HELP IT RESIST RUSSIAN INFLUENCE

AND THE SENATE APPROVED BY AN OVERWHELMING BIPARTISAN MAJORITY THE VITAL SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO HELP REBUILD UKRAINE'S MILITARY WHICH THE FORMER RUSSIAN BACKED LEADER OF UKRAINE HAD STARVED OF RESOURCES THE STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE REFLECTED WHAT SENATOR McCAIN SAID WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE UNITED STATES TO UNDERMINE RUSSIAN LEVERAGE IN EASTERN EUROPE, BY BUILDING QUOTE, A SUCCESS IN UKRAINE SENATOR McCAIN OUTLINED DECISION >> PUTIN ALSO SEES — HEARS THIS BEAUTIFUL AND LARGE AND MAGNIFICENT COUNTRY CALLED UKRAINE AND SUPPOSE THAT UKRAINE FINALLY, AFTER FAILING IN 2004 GETS IT RIGHT AND DEMOCRACY — GETS RID OF CORRUPTION, ECONOMY IS IMPROVING AND IT IS RIGHT ON THE BORDER OF RUSSIA? SO I THINK IT MAKES THEM VERY NERVOUS IF THERE WERE A SUCCESS IN UKRAINE IN BRINGING ABOUT A FREE AND OPEN SOCIETY AND ECONOMIC UCCESS, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE IN RUSSIA, AS YOU KNOW WHICH IS PROPPED UP BY ENERGY

>> ACHIEVING THE UKRAINIAN SUCCESS, THAT SENATOR McCAIN AND MANY OF US HOPE FOR PROVED TO BE A DAUNTING TASK AT SEVERAL WITNESSES WHO TESTIFIED BEFORE THE HOUSE SAID VOLODYMYR ZELENSKY'S LANDSLIDE ELECTION IN APRIL 2019 WAS A GAME CHANGER HERE IS HOW US DIPLOMAT DAVID HOLMES EXPLAINED THE QUOTE HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY CREATED BY HIS ELECTION

>> DESPITE THE RUSSIAN AGGRESSION OVER THE PAST 5 YEARS, UKRAINIANS HAVE REBUILT A SHATTERED ECONOMY, ADHERED TO THE PROCESS AND MOVED ECONOMICALLY AND SOCIALLY CLOSER TO THE WEST TOWARD OUR WAY OF LIFE EARLIER THIS YEAR, LARGE MAJORITIES OF UKRAINIANS, AGAIN CHOSE A FRESH START BY VOTING FOR A POLITICAL NEWCOMER AS PRESIDENT REPLACING 80% OF THE PARLIAMENT AND ENDORSING A PLATFORM CONSISTENT WITH OUR DEMOCRATIC VALUES, REFORM PRIORITIES AND OUR STRATEGIC INTERESTS THIS YEAR'S REVOLUTION AT THE BALLOT BOX UNDERSCORES THE DESPITE THEIR IMPERFECTIONS UKRAINE IS A GENUINE AND VIBRANT DEMOCRACY AND EXAMPLE TO OTHER POST-SOVIET COUNTRIES AND BEYOND FROM MOSCOW TO HOME — HONG KONG

>> SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE SECURITY AND REFORM IS CRITICAL, NOT ONLY TO OUR OWN NATIONAL SECURITY BUT TO OTHER ALLIES AND EMERGING DEMOCRACIES AROUND THE WORLD THE WIDELY ACCEPTED FACT OF UKRAINE'S IMPORTANCE TO NATIONAL SECURITY MAKES PRESIDENT TRUMP OFF HIS ABUSE OF POWER AND WITHHOLDING OF VITAL DIPLOMATIC AND MILITARY SUPPORT ALL THE MORE DISTURBING FIRST, WITNESSES ASSESS THAT WITHHOLDING MILITARY AID LIKELY HELPED PROLONG THE WAR AGAINST RUSSIA ONE MORE STRIKE ON, WHERE PEOPLE DIE AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TESTIFIED TO THIS SOBER REALITY

>> I TAKE IT, IF THE PROVISION OF US MILITARY ASSISTANCE WOULD SAY TO LIVES THAT ANY DELAY IN ASSISTANCE MAY ALSO COST UKRAINIAN LIVES IS THAT TRUE? >> OF COURSE IT IS HARD TO DRAW ANY DIRECT LINES BETWEEN ANY PARTICULAR ELEMENT OF SECURITY ASSISTANCE AND ANY PARTICULAR DEATH ON THE BATTLEFIELD BUT IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE THAT THE ASSISTANCE ENABLED UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES TO BE EFFECTIVE TO DETER AND TO TAKE COUNTERMEASURES TO THE ATTACKS THAT THE RUSSIANS HAD ON THEM

>> YOU SAID THE UKRAINIAN SOLDIER LOST A LIFE WHILE YOU WERE VISITING >> WE KEEP VERY CAREFUL TRACK OF THE CASUALTIES AND I NOTICED ON THE NEXT DAY, THE INFORMATION WE GOT THAT ONE WAS KILLED AND FOUR SOLDIERS WERE WOUNDED ON THAT DAY >> INDEED UKRAINIANS LOSE THEIR LIVES EVERY WEEK? >> EVERY WEEK >> DAVID HOLMES ALSO TESTIFIED THAT PROLONGING THE WAR IN UKRAINE RESULTS IN ADDITIONAL CASUALTIES

>> WE SIT HERE TODAY AND UKRAINIANS ARE FIGHTING A HOT WAR ON UKRAINIAN TERRITORY AGAINST RUSSIAN AGGRESSION THIS WEEK ALONE, SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE IN WASHINGTON, TWO UKRAINIAN SOLDIERS WERE KILLED AND TWO INJURED BY RUSSIAN LED FORCES IN EASTERN UKRAINE DESPITE DECLARED CEASE FIRE I LEARNED OVERNIGHT SEVEN MORE WERE INJURED YESTERDAY >> WITHHOLDING THE AID HAS REAL CONSEQUENCES TO SOLDIERS WITH REAL FAMILY SPIRIT AND BEAR IN MIND THAT US

AID IS FULLY 10% OF UKRAINE'S DEFENSE BUDGET 10% THAT IS NOT AN EXTRA BONUS, THAT IS NECESSARY AID FOR UKRAINE TO DEFEND ITSELF ON THE FRONT LINE WITH THE SECOND CONSEQUENCE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S WITHHOLDING OF MILITARY ASSISTANCE, WAS THAT IT EMBOLDENED RUSSIA, OUR ADVERSARY HERE IS LAURA COOPER, PATRICK ON OFFICIAL THAT OVERSAW THE MILITARY AID

>> WHAT ABOUT TODAY, IF THE US WERE TO WITHDRAW MILITARY SUPPORT OF UKRAINE, WHAT WOULD EFFECTIVELY HAPPEN? >> IT IS MY BELIEF THAT IF WE WERE TO WITHDRAW OUR SUPPORT, IT WOULD EMBOLDEN RUSSIA, IT WOULD ALSO VALIDATE RUSSIA'S VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW >> WHICH COUNTRY STANDS TO BENEFIT THE MOST? FROM SUCH A WITHDRAWAL? >> RUSSIA >> RUSSIA WAS NOT ONLY HIM — EMBOLDEN ON THE BATTLEFIELD, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TESTIFIED THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CORRUPT WITHHOLDING OF MILITARY ASSISTANCE AND FAILURE TO HOST PRESIDENT ZELENSKY IN THE OVAL OFFICE WAS QUOTE, A SIGN OF WEAKNESS TO MOSCOW

AND IT HARMED UKRAINE'S NEGOTIATING POSITION, EVEN AS RECENTLY OF DECEMBER 9 WHEN RESIDENT ZELENSKY AND PUTIN MET TO DISCUSS THE CONFLICT IN THE EAST SHOWN IN THIS PHOTO AMBASSADOR TAYLOR EXPLAINED, — >> WE JUSTIFY THE RUSSIA WAS WATCHING CLOSELY TO GAUGE SUPPORT FOR THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT WHY IS THAT SIGNIFICANT? >> THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THE UKRAINIANS AND IN PARTICULARLY UNDER THIS NEW ADMINISTRATION, ARE EAGER TO END THIS WAR AND THEY ARE EAGER TO END IT IN A WAY THAT THE RUSSIANS LEAVE THEIR TERRITORY THESE NEGOTIATIONS, LIKE ALL NEGOTIATIONS ARE DIFFICULT

UKRAINIANS WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH AT LEAST MORE STRENGTH THAN THEY NOW HAVE PART OF THAT STRENGTH, PART OF THE ABILITY OF THE NEW CANES TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE RIGHT GAUGE RUSSIANS FOR END TO THE WAR DEPENDS ON UNITED STATES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT IF WE WITHDRAW OR SUSPEND OR THREATEN TO WITHDRAW OUR SECURITY ASSISTANCE, THAT IS A MESSAGE TO THE UKRAINIANS

BUT AT LEAST AS IMPORTANT AS YOUR QUESTION INDICATES, MR CHAIRMAN, TO THE RUSSIANS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR ANY SIGN OF WEAKNESS OR ANY SIGN THAT WE ARE WITHDRAWING SUPPORT FOR YOU UKRAINE >> WHEN THE UKRAINIANS LEARNED OF THE SUSPENSION OF MILITARY AID, EITHER PRIVATELY OR WHEN OTHERS LEARNED PUBLICLY, THE RUSSIANS WOULDN'T BE LEARNING IT ALSO AND TAKE THAT AS A LACK OF ROBUST US SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE? IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT IS CORRECT, SIR

>> THAT WOULD WEAKEN UKRAINE IN NEGOTIATING THE END TO THE WAR? >> IT WOULD >> INDEED, THE AID DOESN'T JUST SUPPLY MUCH-NEEDED WEAPONS TO UKRAINE IT IS A SYMBOL OF SUPPORT TO A SYMBOL OF STRENGTH, A SYMBOL OF THE BACKING OF THE UNITED STATES AND WITHHOLDING THAT AID, EVEN FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, UNDERMINED ALL OF THOSE THINGS

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ACTIONS TOWARD UKRAINE ALSO UNDERCUT WORLDWIDE CONFIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES AS A RELIABLE SECURITY PARTNER MAINTAINING THAT CONFIDENCE IS CRUCIAL TO THE STRENGTH OF OUR ALLIANCES IN EUROPE, TO DETERRING RUSSIA AND ULTIMATELY PROTECTING AND PROJECTING DEMOCRACY AROUND THE WORLD THE UNITED STATES HAS ROUGHLY 68,000 TROOPS STATIONED IN EUROPE THEY SERVE ALONGSIDE TROOPS FROM 28 OTHER COUNTRIES THAT COMPRISE THE NATO OR NATO THEY ARE HOLDING THE LINE AGAINST FURTHER RUSSIAN AGGRESSION IT WAS U

S LEADERSHIP THAT LED TO THE CREATION OF NATO 70 YEARS AGO AS THE IRON CURTAIN WAS DESCENDING ACROSS THE HEART OF EUROPE AND IT IS AMERICAN LEADERSHIP THAT MAKES NATO WORK TODAY NATO IS EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OTHER COUNTRIES, FRIENDS AND FOES ALIKE KNOW THAT WE ARE COMMITTED TO OUR COLLECTIVE DEFENSE THAT AN ATTACK AGAINST ONE NATION IS AN ATTACK AGAINST ALL OF US

THAT PRINCIPAL DETERRED A RUSSIAN INVASION OF EUROPE DURING THE COLD WAR AND HAS ONLY BEEN INVOKED ONCE BY NATO IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE SEPTEMBER 11 TERRORIST ATTACKS NEW YORK IS A LONG WAY FROM THE FRONT LINES WITH RUSSIA BUT OUR EUROPEAN ALLIES STOOD WITH US AFTER THAT DARK DAY THEY DEPLOYED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF TROOPS TO AFGHANISTAN AND JOINED US IN FIGHTING THE AL QAEDA TERRORISTS WHO ATTACKED THE TWIN TOWERS AND PENTAGON UKRAINE IS NOT A MEMBER OF NATO BUT RUSSIA'S INVASION OF UKRAINE WAS A THREAT TO THE PEACE AND SECURITY OF EUROPE

MOSCOW'S AGGRESSION THREATENED TO THE RULES OF THE ROAD THAT IS KEPT THE PEACE IN EUROPE SINCE WORLD WAR II THE SACROSANCT IDEA THAT BORDERS CANNOT BE CHANGED BY MILITARY FORCE IF WE HAD NOT SUPPORTED UKRAINE IN 2014, IF MEMBERS OF THIS BODY HAD NOT VOTED OVERWHELMINGLY ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS FOR MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO REBUILD UKRAINE'S MILITARY, THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT IT WOULD HAVE INVITED FURTHER RUSSIAN ADVENTURISM IN UKRAINE AND PERHAPS ELSEWHERE IN THE HEART OF EUROPE IT WOULD HAVE WEAKENED OUR ALLIES AND EXPOSED US

TROOPS, STATIONED IN EUROPE TO GREATER DANGEROUS DETERRING RUSSIA REQUIRES PERSISTENCE NOT JUST ONE MILITARY AID PACKAGE OR ONE OVAL OFFICE MEETING BUT A SUSTAINED POLICY OF SUPPORT FOR OUR PARTNERS WE ONLY DID HER RUSSIA BY CONSISTENTLY DEMONSTRATING SUPPORT FOR OUR FRIENDS

RUNS LIKE UKRAINE GEORGE SCHOLZ, WHO SERVED AS RONALD REAGAN'S SECRETARY OF STATE UNDERSTOOD THIS PERKY COMPARED DIPLOMACY AND MANAGEMENT TO GARDENING HE SAID QUOTE, IF YOU PLANT A GARDEN AND GO AWAY FOR 6 MONTHS, WHAT HAVE YOU GOT WHEN YOU COME BACK? WEEDS DIPLOMACY, HE SAID IS KIND OF LIKE THAT YOU GO AROUND, TALK TO PEOPLE AND DEVELOP A RELATIONSHIP OF TRUST AND CONFIDENCE AND THEN IF SOMETHING COMES UP, YOU HAVE THAT BASE TO WORK FROM

PRESIDENT TRUMP DECISION TO TRANSFORM THE MILITARY AID AND OVAL OFFICE MEETING AND TO LEVERAGE WAS THE EQUIVALENT OF TRAMPLING ALL OVER GEORGE SCHOLZ GARDEN QUESTIONING UKRAINE'S CONFIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES AS A PARTNER HE ALSO CAUSED OUR NATO ALLIES TO QUESTION WHETHER WE WOULD STAND WITH THEM AGAINST RUSSIA LEADERS IN EUROPEAN CAPITALS NOW WONDER WHETHER PERSONAL, POLITICAL FAVORS AND NOT TREATY OBLIGATIONS GUIDE OUR FOREIGN POLICY COLIC, THIS IS HOW ALLIANCE WITH THEIR ANTI-

AND HOW RUSSIA WINS AMBASSADOR TAYLOR NEED CLEAR THAT IT IS WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT TO OUR SECURITY THAT WE STAND WITH UKRAINE >> MR CHAIRMAN, AS MY COLLEAGUE, GEORGE KENT DESCRIBED, WE HAVE A NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY, NATIONAL DEFENSE POLICY THAT IDENTIFIES RUSSIA AND CHINA AS ADVERSARIES THE RUSSIANS ARE VIOLATING ALL OF THE RULES, TREATIES, UNDERSTANDINGS THAT THEY COMMITTED TO, THAT ACTUALLY KEPT THE PEACE IN EUROPE FOR NEARLY 70 YEARS

UNTIL THEY INVADED UKRAINE IN 2014, THEY HAD ABIDED BY SOVEREIGNTY OF NATIONS IN VIABILITY OF BORDERS THAT RULE OF LAW, THAT ORDER, THAT KEPT THE PEACE IN EUROPE, AND ALLOWED FOR PROSPERITY AS WELL AS PEACE IN EUROPE, WAS VIOLATED BY THE RUSSIANS AND IF WE DON'T PUSH BACK ON THAT, ON THOSE VIOLATIONS, THEN THAT WILL CONTINUE AND THAT, MR

CHAIRMAN AFFECTS US IT AFFECTS THE WORLD THAT WE LIVE IN THAT OUR CHILDREN WILL GROW UP IN AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN — THIS AFFECTS THE KIND OF WORLD THAT WE WANT TO SEE A BROAD THAT IS OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS VERY DIRECTLY UKRAINE IS ON THE FRONT LINE OF THAT, OF THAT CONFLICT

>> WE UNDERSTOOD THAT IN 2017 THE FIRST YEAR OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, IT APPEARED THAT THE TRUMP INITIATION UNDERSTOOD IT AS WELL WE UNDERSTOOD IT IN 2018 AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNDERSTOOD THAT AS WELL AND WE UNDERSTOOD THAT IN 2019 AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION APPEARED TO AS WELL

AT LEAST IT DID, UNTIL IT DID IN IT DID UNTIL SOMETHING OF GREATER IMPORTANCE AND SIGNIFICANCE CAME ALONG AND THAT EVENT OF GREATER SIGNIFICANCE TO THE OVAL OFFICE WAS THE EMERGENCE OF JOE BIDEN AS A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT AND THEN, THE MILITARY SUPPORT, WHICH HAD INCREASED DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WAS SUDDENLY PUT ON HOLD FOR INEXPLICABLE REASONS UKRAINE GOT THE MESSAGE

IT WASN'T VERY INEXPLICABLE TO UKRAINE AND ONCE MORE, RUSSIA GOT THE MESSAGE BUT IT WASN'T INEXPLICABLE TO RUSSIA IT PUSHED OUT THE WHOLE PROPAGANDA THEORY THAT IT WAS UKRAINE THAT HAD INTERFERED IN OUR ELECTION AND NOT RUSSIA AND SO, THAT CONSENSUS AMONG THE CONGRESS AND ADMINISTRATION , AMONG THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT AND CENTER, THAT IS AMBASSADOR TAYLOR EXPLAINING, THIS IS NOT ONLY VITAL TO UKRAINE SECURITY AND THE POST-WORLD WAR II ORDER, THAT IS KEPT THE PEACE IN EUROPE FOR 70 YEARS BUT IS VITAL TO US AND OUR SECURITY AS WELL THAT ALL BROKE DOWN

THAT ALL BROKE DOWN OVER AND EFFORT, LED BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS AGENT, RUDY GIULIANI AND HIS AGENT, TO OVERTURN ALL OF THAT OVERTURN A DECADES LONG COMMITMENT TO STANDING UP TO RUSSIAN AGGRESSION

WE HAVE, SO TREMENDOUSLY BENEFITED NO COUNTRY HAS BENEFITED MORE FROM THE INTERNATIONAL RULES OF THE ROAD, THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER, THEN THE UNITED STATES GAVE US THE PEACE AND STABILITY TO PROSPER LIKE NO OTHER NATION HAS BEFORE AND WE ARE THROWING IT AWAY WE ARE THROWING IT AWAY

WE ARE UNDERMINING THE RULE OF LAW WE ARE UNDERMINING THE PRINCIPLE THAT YOU DON'T INVADE YOUR NEIGHBOR WE ARE UNDERMINING THE KEY TO OUR OWN SUCCESS FOR WHAT? FOR HELP WITH A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN PERIOD TO QUOTE BILL TAYLOR, THAT IS CRAZY THAT IS CRAZY

IF OUR ALLIES CAN'T TRUST US TO STAND BEHIND THEM AT A TIME OF NEED, WE WILL SUE NOT HAVE A SINGLE ALLY LEFT LOOK, I KNOW IT IS PAINFUL TO SEE SOME OF OUR ALLIES AND HOW THEY TALK ABOUT THIS PRESIDENT, BECAUSE WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE PRESIDENT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THE UNITED STATES AND IT IS PAINFUL TO SEE OUR ALLIES DISTANCE THEMSELVES FROM THE UNITED STATES AND IT IS MORE THAN PAINFUL, IT IS DANGEROUS IT IS DANGEROUS TO US

I THINK CHURCHILL ONCE SAID, THERE'S NOTHING WORSE THAN ALLIES, EXCEPT HAVING NO ALLIES BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO CONDITION OUR SUPPORT FOR ALLIES ON THEIR WILLINGNESS TO BE TRACKED, KICKING AND SCREAMING INTO OUR POLITICS, WE ARE GOING TO CONDITION THE STRENGTH OF OUR ALLIANCE ON WHETHER THEY WILL HELP US CHEAT IN AN ELECTION, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A SINGLE ALLY LEFT AND NOT A SINGLE ONE OF US IN THIS CHAMBER IS EVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY, ONE OF OUR COUNTERPARTS TO RESPECT THE RULE OF LAW WITHOUT IT BEING THROWN IN OUR FACE >> PROMOTING THE RULE OF LAW AND FIGHTING CORRUPTION IS CENTRAL TO OUR FOREIGN POLICY IT TO DISTINGUISHES U

S GLOBAL LEADERSHIP FROM THE TRANSACTIONAL APPROACH FAVORED BY F4 — AUTHORITARIAN ADVERSARIES PICK THE CORRECT NATURE OF THE PRESIDENCY MAN THAT UKRAINE INVESTIGATE HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT UNDERMINE CREDIBILITY OF EFFORTS TO PROMOTE THE RULE OF LAW AND COMBAT COMPLEXION IN UKRAINE AROUND THE WORLD AND HE THE PRESIDENT ENGAGING IN THE VERY CONDUCT AT HOME THAT ARE POLICY FIGHTS A BROAD SABOTAGES LONG-STANDING BIPARTISAN PILLARS OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY THIS WAS A PROBLEM, NOT LEAST BECAUSE THE PERVASIVE CORRUPTION WITH UKRAINE LEAVES POLITICS AND ECONOMY SUCEPTIBLE TO RUSSIAN INFLUENCE AND SUBTERFUGE AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH EMPHASIZE THAT U

S POLICY RECOGNIZES THE STRUGGLE AGAINST CORRUPTION AND DEFENDING AGAINST RUSSIA ARE IN FACT, TWO SIDES OF THE VERY SAME COIN >> CORRUPTION MAKES UKRAINE'S LEADERS EVER VULNERABLE TO RUSSIA AND THE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS WHY THEY LAUNCH THE REVOLUTION OF DIGNITY IN 2014, DEMANDING TO BE PART OF EUROPE DEMANDING THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE SYSTEM

DEMANDING TO LIVE UNDER THE RULE OF LAW UKRAINIANS ONE THE LAW TO APPLY EQUALLY TO ALL PEOPLE WHETHER THE INDIVIDUAL IN QUESTION IS THE PRESIDENT OR ANY OTHER CITIZEN KIT WAS A QUESTION OF FAIRNESS OF DIGNITY HERE AGAIN, THERE IS A COINCIDENCE OF INTEREST

CORRUPT LEADERS ARE INHERENTLY LESS TRUSTWORTHY WELL AND HONEST AND ACCOUNTABLE UKRAINIAN LEADERSHIP MAKES THE US UKRAINIAN PARTNERSHIP MORE RELIABLE AND VALUABLE TO THE UNITED STATES A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD IN A STRATEGICALLY LOCATED COUNTRY BORDERING FOUR NATO ALLIES CREATES AN ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH US

BUSINESS CAN MORE EASILY TRADE, INVEST AND PROFIT CORRUPTION IS A SECURITY ISSUE BECAUSE CORRUPT OFFICIALS ARE VULNERABLE TO MOSCOW >> DURING THAT CONVERSATION, THAT WE RELATED IN THE PAST WHEN AMBASSADOR VOLKER URGED HIS UKRAINIAN COUNTERPART, NOT TO INVESTIGATE AND HE THREW IT BACK IN HIS FACEBOOK REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION PIERRE CAME IN THE INVESTIGATION, YOU WANT US TO DO OF THE CLINTONS AND BIDENS THEY TAUGHT US SOMETHING IN THAT CONVERSATION THEY TAUGHT US THAT WE HAD FORGOTTEN, FOR THAT MOMENT, OUR OWN VALUES

JUST LISTENING TO THE AMBASSADOR RIGHT NOW, I WAS THINKING, HOW INTERESTING IT IS THAT THE UKRAINIANS CHOSE TO DESCRIBE THE REVOLUTION AS A REVOLUTION OF DIGNITY AND MAYBE THAT IS WHAT WE NEED, REVOLUTION OF DIGNITY AT HOME THE REVOLUTION OF CIVILITY, HERE AT HOME MAYBE WE CAN LEARN A LOT MORE FROM OUR UKRAINIAN ALLIES IN SHORT, AMERICA'S NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST THAT HELPED UKRAINE TRANSFORM INTO A COUNTRY WHERE THE RULE OF LAW, GOVERNORS AND CORRUPTION IS HELD IN CHECK

AS WE HEARD YESTERDAY, ANTICORRUPTION POLICY WAS A CENTRAL PART OF THE TALKING POINTS PROVIDED TO PRESIDENT TRUMP BEFORE HIS PHONE CALLS WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY ON APRIL 21 AND JULY 25 PRESIDENT TRUMP, OF COURSE DID NOT MENTION CORRUPTION BUT IMPORTANTLY, THE SAME FOREIGN- POLICY GOALS REMAINED INTACT, FOLLOWING THE CALL AS TIM MORRISON TESTIFIED, ANTICORRUPTION REFORMS INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS REMAINED A TOP US PRIORITY TO HELP UKRAINE FIGHT CORRUPTION

PRESIDENT ZELENSKY WAS SWEPT INTO OFFICE ON AN ANTICORRUPTION PLATFORM IMMEDIATELY, HE KEPT HIS PROMISE AND INTRODUCED BILLS IN PARLIAMENT, IN A SIGN THAT HE INTENDED TO HOLD HIMSELF ACCOUNTABLE HE EVEN INTRODUCED A DRAFT LAW ON PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT HE ALSO INTRODUCED A BILL TO RESTORE TOP PUNISHMENT OF TOP OFFICIALS, FOUND GUILTY OF ILLICIT ENRICHMENT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SELF-SERVING SCHEME THREATEN TO UNDERMINE ZELENSKY'S ANTICORRUPTION WORK ZELENSKY SUCCESSFUL ANTICORRUPTION REFORMS WOULD HAVE ADVANCED U

S SECURITY CAN STAND, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEMANDS UNDERMINED THAT EFFORT TO BRING ABOUT REFORM TO UKRAINE HERE IS GEORGE KENT, THE RULE OF LAW AND CORRUPTION EXPERT AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT >> U

S EFFORTS TO COUNTER CORRUPTION >> THAT IS, TO CREATE AND FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW THAT MEANS, IF THERE IS A CRIMINAL NEXUS FOR THIS, US LAW ENFORCEMENT SHOULD PURSUE THE CASE

IF THERE HAS BEEN A CRIMINAL ACT, THAT VIOLATES US LAW, WE HAVE THE MECHANISMS TO ADDRESS THAT IT COULD BE THROUGH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND FBI AGENT ASSIGNED OVERSEAS OR THROUGH TREATY MECHANISMS SUCH AS THE MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATY, AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE I DO NOT BELIEVE THE US

SHOULD ASK OTHER COUNTRIES TO ENGAGE IN POLITICALLYASSOCIATED INVESTIGATIONS OR PROSECUTIONS AGAINST OPPONENTS OF THOSE IN POWER BECAUSE SUCH SELECTIVE ACTIONS UNDERMINE THE RULE OF LAW REGARDLESS OF THE COUNTRY >> SO IT IS CLEAR WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP DID WHEN ABUSING HIS OFFICE AND DEMANDING UKRAINE OPEN AN INVESTIGATION INTO JOE BIDEN WAS NOT FIGHTING CORRUPTION, IT WAS NOT PART OF ESTABLISHED US ANTICORRUPTION POLICY, THAT CAMPAIGN FOR HIS OWN POLITICAL BENEFIT SUBVERTED U

S ANTICORRUPTION EFFORTS IN UKRAINE AND UNDERCUT NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENT TRUMP IS NOT FIGHTING TO END CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE AS MY COLLEAGUE IN THE HOUSE MR HIMES POINTED OUT DURING ONE OF OUR HEARINGS, HE WAS TRYING TO AIM CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE AT FORMER VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN SELECTIVE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED PROSECUTION , POLITICAL OPPONENTS UNDERCUT GOVERNANCE IN UKRAINE

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEMAND THAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY HELP THEM TO PRECISELY HELP AND ADVISE OFFICIALS NOT TO DO, COMPLETELY UNDERCUT THE CREDIBILITY OF EFFORTS TO PROMOTE THE RULE OF LAW THERE THE AMOUNT UNDERCUT THE UNITED STATES MORAL STANDING AND AUTHORITY IN THE EYES OF A GLOBAL AUDIENCE HERE ONCE AGAIN, GEORGE KENT >> IS PRESSURING UKRAINE TO CONDUCT WHAT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE CALLED POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS A PART OF US

FOREIGN POLICY TO PROMOTE THE RULE OF LAW IN UKRAINE AND AROUND THE WORLD? >> IT IS NOT >> IS IT IN THE NATURAL INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES? >> IT IS NOT >> WHY NOT? >> OUR POLICIES, PARTICULARLY IN PROMOTING THE RULE OF LAW ARE DESIGNED TO HELP COUNTRIES IN EASTERN EUROPE AND CENTRAL EUROPE, THAT IS OVERCOMING THE LEGACY OF COMMUNISM IN THE COMMUNIST SYSTEM, THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL OFFICE WAS USED TO SUPPRESS AND PERSECUTE CITIZENS, NOT PROMOTE THE RULE OF LAW HELPING COUNTRIES REACH THEIR OWN ASPIRATIONS TO JOIN THE WESTERN COMMUNITY OF NATIONS AND LIVE LIVES OF DIGNITY, HELPING THEM HAVE THE RULE OF LAW WITH STRONG INSTITUTIONS IS THE PURPOSE OF OUR POLICY

>> IN OTHER WORDS THE PURPOSE OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY TO ENCOURAGE FOREIGN NATIONS TO REFRAIN FROM CONDUCTING POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS? >> CORRECT, IN FACT AS A MATTER OF POLICY, NOT PROGRAMMING, WE OFTENTIMES RAISE CONCERNS USUALLY IN PRIVATE WITH COUNTRIES WE FEEL ARE ENGAGED IN SELECTIVE POLITICAL PROSECUTION AND PERSECUTION OF THEIR OPPONENTS >> SUMMARIZED THE GLOBAL CONSEQUENCES AND HARM TO US NATIONAL SECURITY RESULTING FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEMAND THAT UKRANE INVESTIGATE HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT >> SUCH CONDUCT UNDERMINES THE U

S, EXPOSES OUR FRIENDS AND WIDENS THE PLAYING FIELD FOR AUTOCRATS LIKE VLADIMIR PUTIN OUR LEADERSHIP DEPENDS ON THE POWER OF OUR EXAMPLE AND THE CONSISTENCY OF PURPOSE BOTH HAVE NOW BEEN OPENED TO QUESTION >> THE ISSUES I COVERED ARE NOT A MATTER OF POLICY DISAGREEMENT OVER FOREIGN POLICY AND NATIONAL SECURITY

ARTICLE 1 ASSERTS THE PRESIDENT WAS ENGAGED IN NO SUCH POLICY AT ALL BUT INSTEAD SOLD OUT POLICIES AND NATIONAL INDUSTRY FOR HIS OWN GAIN THAT IS THE CORE CONDUCT OF AN IMPATIENT BOTH EVENTS THE PRESIDENT ABUSE OF POWER ALSO AFFECTED OUR ELECTION INTEGRITY FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION WERE FEARFUL THE PRESIDENT MIGHT MISUSE OR ABUSE THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO UNDERMINE THE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS AT THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY

SADLY THAT MOMENT HAS ARRIVED PRESIDENT TRUMP'S REPEATED SOLICITATION OF AN INVESTIGATION WAS A CLEAR EFFORT TO LEVERAGE FOR INTERFERENCE TO BOLSTER HIS PROSPECTS IN THE 2020 ELECTION IN OTHER WORDS, TO CHEAT AND HAS ELECTION IN OUR DEMOCRACY, POWER FLOWS FROM THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE AS MANIFEST IN FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE IS FUNDAMENTAL IN OUR DEMOCRACY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S INVITATION OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2020 ELECTION FOR THE PURPOSES OF HELPING HIM WIN THE ELECTION, UNDERCUT THE CONSTITUTIONS, COMMIT TO POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY

AMERICANS ARE LEFT TO WONDER IF THEIR VOTE MATTERS OR IF THEY ARE PAWNS IN A SYSTEM BEING MANIPULATED BY SHADOWY FOREIGN FORCES WORKING ON BEHALF OF CORRUPT INTERESTS OF A LAWLESS PRESIDENT OVER THE LONG-TERM THIS WEAKENS OUR DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS CAPACITY FOR SELF-GOVERNANCE BY ENCOURAGING APATHY AND NONPARTICIPATION CYNICISM MAKES IT EASIER FOR ENEMIES TO INFLUENCE POLITICS AND UNDERMINE THE NATIONAL GOOD

AND D THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT VLADIMIR PUTIN INTENDED WHEN HE MEDDLED IN THE 2016 ELECTION FOR US TO BECOME MORE CYNICAL, FOR US TO LOSE FAITH IN THE NOTION THAT THE AMERICAN SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IS SUPERIOR TO THE CORRUPT, AUTOCRATIC MODEL OF GOVERNMENT THAT HE HAS ERECTED IN RUSSIA AND SOUGHT TO EXPORT TO PLACES LIKE UKRAINE THESE ARE NOT THE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS AMERICANS EXPECT OR DEMAND IF FOREIGN POWERS ARE INTERFERING HOW CAN WE KNOW THAT OUR ELECTIONS ARE FREE FROM FOREIGN INTERFERENCE BY HACKING, MISINFORMATION OR FAKE INVESTIGATIONS WE MUST NOT BECOME NUMB TO FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS

OUR ELECTIONS ARE SACRED IF WE DO NOT ACT TO PUT AN END TO THE SOLICITATION OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTION BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE EFFECT WILL BE CORROSIVE TO OUR ELECTIONS AND OUR VALUES FUTURE PRESIDENTS MAY BELIEVE THEY TO CAN USE THIS POWER CONFIRMED ON THEM IN ORDER TO UNDERMINE OUR SYSTEM OF FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS THAT THEY TOO CAN CHEAT TO OBTAIN POWER OR KEEP IT THAT WAY LIES DISASTER FOR THE GREAT AMERICAN EXPERIMENT IN SELF-GOVERNMENT

HAVE YOU HAVE SEEN'S POWERFUL EVIDENCE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL CONTINUE TO BETRAY THE NATIONAL INTEREST TO A FOREIGN POWER AND FURTHER UNDERMINE BOTH SECURITY AND DEMOCRACY THIS CREATES AN URGENT NEED TO REMOVE HIM FROM OFFICE BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE CONTINUIN THREAT, LET ME DESCRIBE RUSSIA'S ONGOING EFFORTS TO HARM OUR ELECTIONS THE PRESIDENT'S CORRUPT REFUSAL TO CONDEMN OR DEFEND AGAINST THOSE ATTACKS, HIS STATEMENTS CONFIRM HE WELCOMES FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS SO LONG AS IT IS MEANT TO HELP HIM

AND HIS CONDUCT PROVING HE WILL PERSIST IN SEEKING TO CORRUPT ELECTIONS AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR SECURITY AND AT EXPENSE OF THOSE ELECTIONS LET'S START WITH RUSSIA'S ONGOING ATTACKS ON OUR DEMOCRACY AT THE HEART OF THE PRESIDENTS UKRAINE SCHEME IS HIS DECISION TO SUBSCRIBE TO THAT DANGEROUS CONSPIRACY THEORY THAT UKRAINE, NOT RUSSIA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR INTERFERING IN 2016 PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS MEN PRESSURED UKRAINE TO INVESTIGATE THIS BOGUS PIECE OF RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA AND IN DOING SO THEY AIDED THE CONSIDERED PART TO UNDERMINE OUR SECURITY AND DEMOCRACY SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WARNED THE PLOT WAS ONGOING

>> IS THIS, IN YOUR INVESTIGATION DO YOU THINK THIS WAS A SINGLE ATTEMPT BY THE RUSSIANS TO GET INVOLVED IN OUR ELECTION OR DID YOU FIND úEVIDE TRY TO DO THIS AGAIN? >> THEY ARE DOING AS WE SIT HERE AND THEY EXPECT TO DO IT DURING THE NEXT CAMPAIGN >> NOT A SINGLE ATTEMPT, THEY ARE DOING IT AS WE SIT HERE AND EXPECT TO DO IT IN THE NEXT CAMPAIGN THAT WAS THE STARK WARNING AND WE NOW KNOW THAT THE DIRECTOR WAS CORRECT

JUST THE OTHER WEEK WE SAW PUBLIC REPORTING THAT RUSSIA MAY BE USING EMAILS TO ATTACK THE UKRAINIAN GAS COMPANY BURISMA, IN SEARCH OF DIRT ON JOE BIDEN THOSE ARE THE SAME TACTICS DEPLOYED BY THE SAME ADVERSARY, RUSSIA, THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL WARNED ABOUT IN THE LAST ELECTION IT MAY BE RUSSIA ONCE AGAIN ATTEMPTING TO SWAY OUR ELECTION FOR ONE CANDIDATE, THIS TIME THREE UKRAINE INDEED, PRESIDENT TRUMP TO THIS VERY DAY REFUSES TO ACCEPT THE UNANIMOUS ASSESSMENT OF OUR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONALS THAT RUSSIA INTERFERED IN THE 2016 CAMPAIGN AND POSES A THREAT TO THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, INSTEAD HE VIEWS IT FROM HIS OWN PERSONAL ONES WHETHER IT AS AN ATTACK FROM 2016 ELECTORAL VICTORY SPECIAL COUNSEL MOORE'S TESTIMONY ON JULY 24th, 2019, THE DAY BEFORE THE PRESIDENTS CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY'S CALL CONTRADICTED THE CLAIM THAT HIS WAS A CLEAN CAMPAIGN

MUELLER FOUND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2016 CAMPAIGN OF THE PRESIDENT WELCOMED RUSSIA'S OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE AND ADJUSTED THEIR POLITICAL STRATEGY SO THAT THEN CANDIDATE DONALD TRUMP MIGHT BENEFIT FROM RUSSIA'S ASSISTANCE WHEN THEY WERE SUBSEQUENTLY ASKED BY US LAW ENFORCEMENT ABOUT THEIR ACTIVITIES, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ADVISORS REPEATEDLY LIED IN HELSINKI IN JULY OF 2018, PRESIDENT TRUMP REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE RESTROOM THREAT TO OUR ELECTIONS

WHEN A REPORTER ASKED WHETHER HE BELIEVED PUTIN OR THE US INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES ON THE ISSUE OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE, AND THE 2016 ELECTION, PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID QUOTE, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY IT WOULD BE AND TALKED ABOUT THE DNC SERVER >> LET ME JUST SAY THAT WE HAVE TWO THOUGHTS, YOU HAVE GROUPS WONDERING WHY THE FBI NEVER TOOK THE SERVER

WHY HAVEN'T THEY TAKEN THE SERVER? I WAS THE FBI TOLD TO LEAVE THE OFFICE OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, I HAVE BEEN WONDERING THAT AND ASKING THAT FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND I HAVE BEEN TWEETING IT OUT AND CALLING IT OUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA WHERE IS THE SERVER? I WANT TO KNOW WHERE IS THE SERVER AND WHAT IS THE SERVER SAYING, WITH THAT SAID, ALL I CAN DO IS ASK THE QUESTION, MY PEOPLE CAME TO ME, DO", THEY THINK IT'S RUSSIA, I HAVE PRESIDENT PUTIN, DID — FINDING OUT WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SERVER WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SERVERS OF THE PAKISTANI'S GENTLEMAN THAT WORKED ON THE DNC WHY ARE THEIR SERVERS, THEY ARE MISSING WHERE ARE THEY? WHAT HAPPENED TO HILLARY CLINTON'S E-MAILS

33,000 E-MAILS GONE, JUST GONE I THINK IN RUSSIA THEY WOULDN'T BE GONE SO EASILY I THINK IT'S THOUSANDS OF E-MAILS >> I'M SURE YOU REMEMBER THIS IT WAS I THINK UNFORGETTABLE FOR EVERY AMERICAN BUT I'M SURE IT WAS EQUALLY UNFORGETTABLE FOR VLADIMIR PUTIN

I MEAN, THERE HE IS, THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA STANDING NEXT TO THE PRIDE PRESIDENT OF E UNITED STATES AND HEARING HIS OWN KREMLIN POP PROP BEGAN TAUGHT TALK — PROP BEGAN TAUGHT TALKING POINTS COMING FROM THE UNITED STATES IF THAT'S NOT A PROPAGANDA COUP I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS IT'S THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY THING IT'S THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY THING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES STANDING NEXT TO THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA, OUR ADD VARIOUSY SAYING — ADVERSARY E SAYING HE DOESN'T BELIEVE HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES

HE DOESN'T BELIEVE THEM HE'S PROMOTING THIS KOOKY CRAZY THEORY COOKED YOU BY THE KREMLIN RIGHT NEXT TO THE GUY WHO COOKED IT UP IT'S A BREATHTAKING SUCCESS OF RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S EVER BEEN A GREATER SUCCESS OF RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE WHATEVER PROFILE RUSSIA DID OF OUR PRESIDENT, BOY DID THEY HAVE HIM SPOT ON

FLATTERY AND PO PROPAGANDA FLATTERY AND PROPAGANDA IS ALL RUSSIA NEEDED AS TO UKRAINE, WELL, THEY NEEDED TO DELIVER A POLITICAL INVESTIGATION TO GET HELP FRO >> — THIS IS JUST THE MOST INCREDIBLE PROPAGANDA COUP AS I SAID YESTERDAY IT'S NOT JUST THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES STANDING NEXT ABOUT A PUTIN IS READING KREMLIN TALKING POINTS, HE WON'T READ HIS OWN NATIONAL SECURITY STAFF TALKING POINTS BUT HE WILL READ THE KREMLIN ONCE IT'S NOT JUST THAT HE ADOPTS THE KREMLIN TALKING POINTS, THAT WOULD BE BAD ENOUGH

IT'S NOT JUST BAD ENOUGH, IT'S NOT DAMAGING ENOUGH, NOT DANGEROUS ENOUGH TO NATIONAL SECURITY THAT IS UNDERMINING OUR OWN AGENCIES IT'S NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT HE UNDERMINES THOSE VERY AGENCIES THAT HE NEEDS LATER THAT WE NEED LATER, TO HAVE CREDIBILITY WE JUST HAD A VIGOROUS DEBATE OVER THESE STRIKES AGAINST GENERAL SOLO MONEY AND THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE HIS ARGUMENT ABOUT WHAT THE INTELLIGENCE SAYS AND SUPPORTS

HOW DO YOU MAKE THOSE ARGUMENTS? WHEN YOU SAY THE US INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE CAN'T BE BELIEVED WE HAVE HAD A VIGOROUS DEBATE ABOUT WHAT THAT HAS TO SAY THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE

THE ISSUE HERE IS YOU UNDERMINED THE CREDIBILITY OF YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, YOU WEAKEN THE COUNTRY FOR WHEN YOU NEED TO RELY ON THEM, FOR WHEN YOU NEED TO PERSUADE YOUR FRIENDS AND ALLIES , YOU CAN TRUST US WHEN WE TELL YOU THIS IS WHAT THE INTELLIGENCE SHOWS HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT ARGUMENT AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? WHEN YOU JUST TOLD THE WORLD YOU TRUST THE RUSSIANS MORE THAN YOUR OWN PEOPLE HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT CASE? WHAT IS THAT MEAN TO OUR SECURITY? THAT IS NOT THE END OF IT

IT'S NOT JUST A PROPAGANDA COUP, NOT JUST THE UNDERMINING OF OUR AGENCIES, IT IS ALSO THAT THE BUY IN TO THAT PROPAGANDA MEANT THAT UKRAINE WASN'T GOING TO GET MONEY TO FIGHT THE RUSSIANS I MEAN, THAT IS ONE HELL OF A RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE COUP THEY GOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO PROVIDE COVER FOR THE OWNER INTERFERENCE WITH THE ELECTION, THEY GOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO DISCREDIT HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO DRIVE A WEDGE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND UKRAINE THEY GOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO WITHHOLD AID FROM UKRAINE IN A WAR WITH RUSSIA IN A WAR THAT IS CLAIMING UKRAINIAN LIVES EVERY WEEK HAS THERE EVER BEEN SUCH A COUP

I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU AND THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE COLD WAR THE SOVIET UNION HAD NO SUCH SUCCESS NO SUCH SUCCESS AND WHY, THE FORMER OF NEW YORK, PERSUADED THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO SACRIFICE ALL OF THAT FOR A CHEAP SHOT AT HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT FOR A SMEAR AGAINST HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT WAS IT WORTH IT, I HOPE IT IS WORTH IT

I HOPE IT WAS WORTH IT FOR THE PRESIDENT BECAUSE IT WASN'T WORTH IT FOR THE UNITED STATES NOW, YOU CAN SEE PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES NOT PLANED BY THE MAYOR PUTIN AND THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WHO INTERFERED IN OUR ELECTION FOR THE QUESTION SURROUNDING HAS VICTORY HE DID NOT BLAME THE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR HIS CAMPAIGN AND WERE CONVICTED

OF LYING TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HE BLAMED THE INVESTIGATORS SPECIAL COUNSEL MORE, THE MAN IN CHARGE WITH GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THE INTERFERENCE OF 2016 AND HE CHOSE TO BELIEVE VLADIMIR PUTIN, A FORMER RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE OFFICER RATHER THAN HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WE CAN SEE A PATTERN HERE

PRESIDENT TRUMP SOLICITED INTERFERENCE FROM RUSSIA AS A CANDIDATE IN 2016 AND THEN HIS CAMPAIGN WELCOMED RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTION AND THE HELSINKI BELIEF OVER HIS OWN AGENCIES I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY IT WOULD BE REFERRING TO RUSSIA INSTEAD OF DENOUNCING RUSSIA'S INTERFERENCE HE DENOUNCED THOSE INVESTIGATING RUSSIA'S INTERFERENCE AND HE RAISED THAT NOW FAMILIAR DNC CROWD STRIKE SERVER THING

I REALLY DO WANT TO SEE THE SERVER I DON'T THINK WE CAN GO ON WITHOUT FINDING OUT WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SERVER THAT IS THE EXACT SAME SERVER THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP DEMANDED UKRAINE INVESTIGATE DURING HIS JULY 25th CALL WHEN THE PRESIDENT TALKED ABOUT THE SERVER IN HELSINKI WITH VLADIMIR PUTIN STANDING BY HIS SIDE, HE WAS REFERENCING THE SAME DISCREDITED CONSPIRACY THEORY ABOUT UKRAINE INTERFERENCE IN 2016 THAT PUTIN REPEATEDLY PROMOTED LET'S LOOK AT THIS WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE FROM JULY 2018

IN THE AND COMES PERFORMANCE ALONGSIDE LIKE A TOUR THROUGH HIS MOST CONTROVERSIAL ANSWERS HE THEORIES TWEETS AND OFF THE CUSS MUSINGS ON RUSSIA BUT HE DID ALL ABROAD , THE LEADER OF ONE OF AMERICA'S POLITICAL FOES THEY UNDERSCORE THE EAGERNESS TO DISREGARD HIS OWN ADVISORS, HOLINESS TO FLOUT THE CONCLUSIONS OF HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT RUSSIA INTERFERED IN THE 2016 ELECTIONS AND HIS FEAR THAT PUSHING HIM MIGHT CAST DOUBT ON HIS ELECTORAL VICTORY WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS TOLD THE WASHINGTON POST I PRESIDENT TRUMP'S REMARKS IN HELSINKI WERE QUOTE, VERY MUCH COUNTER TO THE PLAN THAT IS ANOTHER UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE CENTURY

IF THAT SOUNDS FAMILIAR, IT'S BECAUSE THE WITNESS WHO TESTIFIED BEFORE THE HOUSE AS PART OF THE IMPEACHMENT QUERY, THEY ALL SAID THE SAME THING ABOUT THE PHONE CALL THE PRESIDENT IGNORED VITAL NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES, HE WAS SUPPOSED TO RAISE INSTEAD RAISED DISPROVEN CONSPIRACIES ABOUT 2016 AND THE DNC SERVER, THE VERY SAME RUSSIA PROPAGANDA HE PUBLICLY ENDORSED IN HELSINKI, DO YOU THINK IT WILL STOP NOW? DO YOU THINK IF WE DO NOTHING, IT WILL STOP NOW ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IS TO THE CONTRARY, YOU KNOW IT IS NOT GOING TO STOP THE PRESIDENT JUST TOLD ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY HE STILL WANTS BIDEN INVESTIGATED IT IS NOT GOING TO STOP UNLESS THE CONGRESS DOES SOMETHING ABOUT IT

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BETRAYAL BEGAN IN 2016 WHEN HE FIRST SOLICITED RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTION >> RUSSIA IF YOU ARE LISTENING, I HOPE YOU ARE ABLE TO FIND THE 30,000 EMAILS THAT ARE MISSING >> THAT THE TRAIL CONTINUED IN HELSINKI IN 2018 WHEN AS WE SAW HE REJECTED THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S ASSESSMENT ABOUT RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THAT SAME ELECTION

WHEN HE CRITICIZED US OFFICIALS INVESTIGATING THE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE, INSTEAD PROMOTED HIS CONSPIRACY THEORY ABOUT UKRAINE THE BETRAYAL CONTINUED IN 2019 WHEN HE CARRIED OUT A SCHEME TO CHEAT IN THE 2020 ELECTION BY DEMANDING THE LEADER OF UKRAINE , A US

PARTNER UNDER MILITARY ATTACK BY RUSSIA ANNOUNCED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE SAME BUSINESS CONSPIRACY THEORY ABOUT A DNC SERVER AND THE BOGUS ALLEGATIONS ABOUT FORMER VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN AND THE ABUSE OF POWER CONTINUES HE IS STILL TRYING TO CHEAT IN THE NEXT ELECTION EVEN AFTER THE SCHEME CAME TO LIGHT, EVEN AFTER IT BECAME THE SUBJECT OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, IT CONTINUED AND THE FULL STATEMENT ABOUT IT CONTINUED PRESIDENT TRUMP REPEATEDLY ASSERTED THAT HE HAD A PREROGATIVE TO URGE FOR NATIONS TO INVESTIGATE U

S CITIZENS WHO DARE TO CHALLENGE HIM POLITICALLY JUST FOR A MINUTE WE SHOULD TRY TO STEP INTO THE SHOES OF SOMEONE ELSE MY FATHER USED TO SAY YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND A PERSON UNTIL YOU STOP IN THEIR SHOES I ALWAYS THOUGHT HE INVENTED THAT WISDOM HIMSELF UNTIL I WATCHED TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD AND FOUND OUT ATTICUS FINCH FOUND IT FIRST

LET'S JUST TRY TO STEP INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S SHOES FOR A MOMENT LET'S IMAGINE IT WASN'T JOE BIDEN, LET'S IMAGINE IT WAS ANYONE OF US, LET'S IMAGINE THE MOST POWERFUL PERSON IN THE WORLD WAS ASKING A FOREIGN NATION TO CONDUCT A SHAM INVESTIGATION INTO ONE OF US WHAT WOULD WE THINK ABOUT IT DONE? WOULD WE THINK THAT IS GOOD US POLICY, WHAT WE THINK HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT? WHEN WE THINK THAT IS A PERFECT CALL

LET'S STOP FOR A MINUTE INTO THE AMBASSADOR SHOES AND THE SUBJECT OF A VICIOUS SMEAR CAMPAIGN THAT NO ONE IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT WE WORK FOR UP TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE THINGS HAS A SHORT OF CREDIBILITY LET'S STEP INTO HER SHOES FOR A MINUTE WE SPENT OUR WHOLE LIFE DEVOTED TO PUBLIC SERVICE, SERVED IN DANGEROUS PLACES AROUND THE WORLD AND WE ARE POUNDED OUT OF OUR POST

AND ONE DAY SOMEONE RELEASES A TRANSCRIPT OF A CALL BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND A FOREIGN LEADER AND THE PRESIDENT SAYS THERE HAS TO BE SOME THINGS HAPPENING TO YOU OR TO YOU OR TO YOU OR TO YOU OR TO YOU HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? WOULD YOU THINK HE WAS ABUSING THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE? AND IF YOU WOULD, IT SHOULDN'T MATTER IT WASN'T YOU, IT SHOULDN'T HAVE MATTERED IT WAS HER, JOE BIDEN I WILL TELL YOU SOMETHING, THE NEXT TIME IT JUST MAYBE YOU IT JUST MAYBE YOU DO YOU THINK FOR A MOMENT ANY OF YOU, WHAT YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS PRESIDENT, NO MATTER HOW CLOSE YOU ARE, DO YOU THINK FOR A MOMENT HE FELT IT WAS IN HIS INTEREST HE WOULD ASK YOU TO BE INVESTIGATED DO YOU THINK FOR A MOMENT THAT HE WOULDN'T

AND IF SOMEWHERE DEEP DOWN BELOW YOU REALIZE THAT HE WOULD , YOU CANNOT LEAVE A MAN LIKE THAT IN OFFICE WHEN HE IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION SHOULDN'T MATTER IT WAS JOE BIDEN, COULD'VE BEEN ANY LESS IT MAY BE ANY OF US IT SHOULDN'T MATTER IT WAS THE AMBASSADOR, SOME OTHER DIPLOMAT TOMORROW

FOR SOME OTHER REASON GOES TO WHAT MR JEFFRIES SAID, IT GOES TO CHARACTER YOU DON'T REALIZE HOW IMPORTANT CHARACTER IS AT THE HIGHEST OFFICE IN THE LAND UNTIL YOU DON'T HAVE IT UNTIL YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT WILLING TO USE HIS POWER TO COURSE AN ALLY, TO HELP HIM CHEAT

TO INVESTIGATE ONE OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS ONE OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS YES, HE'S RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT HE IS STILL A US

CITIZEN STILL A US CITIZEN HE DESERVES BETTER THAN THAT

OF COURSE IT WASN'T JUST UKRAINE IT WASN'T JUST RUSSIA THERE IS THE INVITATION TO CHINA TO INVESTIGATE THE BIDEN'S IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP

SEPTEMBER 19th, RUDY GIULIANI WAS INTERVIEWED ON CNN YOU PROBABLY HAVE ALL SEEN THE CLIP, WHEN ASKED SPECIFICALLY IF HE URGED UKRAINE TO LOOK INTO VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN HE REPLIED IMMEDIATELY, OF COURSE I DID OF COURSE I DID IT SHOULDN'T MATTER IT WAS JOE BIDEN WASN'T HUNTER BIDEN THERE? IT WAS JOE BIDEN

IT SHOULDN'T MATTER, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AMERICAN CITIZENS IT SHOULDN'T MATTER TO ANY OF US WHICH AMERICAN CITIZENS AND HE HASN'T STOPPED URGING UKRAINE TO CONDUCT THESE INVESTIGATIONS MR

GIULIANI HASN'T, DONALD TRUMP HASN'T TO THE CONTRARY AND CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING WE KNOW ABOUT THE PRESIDENT, HE HAS DONE NOTHING BUT DOUBLE DOWN DURING HIS FIRST WEEK, THE FIRST WEEK OF DECEMBER, MR GIULIANI TRAVELED TO UKRAINE, HUNGARY TO INTERVIEW THE CORRUPT FORMER UKRAINIAN PROSECUTORS WHO HAD BEEN PUSHING THESE FALSE NARRATIVES ABOUT FORMER VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN AND THIS CONSPIRACY ABOUT 2016

MR GIULIANI MET WITH CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE UKRAINE PARLIAMENT TO HAVE ADVOCATED FOR THAT SAME FRAUDULENT INVESTIGATION JENNA LASHER PRESIDENT TRUMP úT POLITICAL DIRT FROM A FOREIGN COUNTRY IF HE WAS OFFERED IT AGAIN IF HE HAS LEARNED ANYTHING FROM THE TUMULT OF THE LAST THREE YEARS, IT IS HE CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING HE CAN DO IT AGAIN

CAN'T BE INDICTED, CAN'T BE IMPEACHED KENT IF YOU BELIEVE OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL BE INVESTIGATED OUR FOUNDERS ARE WORRIED ABOUT A SITUATION LIKE THIS JAMES MADISON PUT IT SIMPLY, THE PRESIDENT QUOTES MIGHT BETRAY HIS TRUST TO FOREIGN POWERS IN HIS FAREWELL ADDRESS GEORGE WASHINGTON WARNED AMERICANS TO BE CONSTANTLY AWAKE SINCE HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE PROVE THAT FOREIGN INFLUENCE IS ONE OF THE MOST PAINFUL FOES OF REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT

JOHN ADAMS IN A LETTER TO THOMAS JEFFERSON WROTE, YOU ARE APPREHENSIVE OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE INTRIGUE, INFLUENCE, SO MY BUT AS OFTEN AS ELECTIONS HAPPEN , THE DANGER OF FOREIGN INFLUENCE RECURS OR TO QUOTE THE PRESIDENT'S CHIEF OF STAFF, GET OVER IT THERE IS GOING TO BE POLITICS AND FOREIGN POLICY WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS JOHN ADAMS POINT

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS JAMES MADISON'S POINT AND I DON'T THINK THAT WAS GEORGE WASHINGTON'S POINT IF IT WAS, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID GET OVER IT BUT THEY RECOGNIZED, AS I KNOW WE RECOGNIZED WHAT A PROFOUND DANGER THAT WOULD BE FOR THAT TO BECOME THE NEW NORMAL

ANOTHER ELECTION IS UPON US 10 MONTHS FOOTERS WILL UNDERTAKE THE MOST IMPORTANT DUTY AS CITIZENS BY GOING TO THE POLLS AND VOTING FOR THEIR LEADER AND SO WE MUST ASK WHAT ROLE WILL FOREIGN POWERS PLAY IN TRYING TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME AND IF THEY TAKE THE PRESIDENT SIDE, WHO WILL PROTECT OUR FRANCHISE IF THE PRESIDENT WILL NOT AS CHARGED IN THE FIRST ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS DEMONSTRATED HE WILL REMAIN A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE CONSTITUTION IF ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN OFFICE AND HAS ACTED IN A MANNER GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH SELF- GOVERNANCE AND THE RULE OF LAW

BASED ON ABUSE OF POWER FOR WHICH HE WAS IMPEACHED, AND HIS ONGOING EFFORTS TO SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE, BOTH DIRECTLY AND THROUGH MR GIULIANI, THERE CAN BE LITTLE DOUBT THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL CONTINUE TO INVITE FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT POSES IMMINENT THREAT TO THE INTEGRITY OF OUR DEMOCRACY OUR FOUNDERS UNDERSTOOD THAT A PRESIDENT LIKE DONALD TRUMP MIGHT ONE DAY GRASP THE REINS OF POWER UNREMARKABLE, OVERREACHING EXECUTIVE

FAITHFUL TO HIMSELF ONLY AND WILLING TO SACRIFICE OUR DEMOCRACY AND NATIONAL SECURITY FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL ADVANTAGE HIS PATTERN OF CONDUCT REPEATEDLY SOLICITING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN ELECTIONS FOR HIS OWN BENEFIT CONFIRMS HE WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO RETAIN HIS POWER HE WILLFULLY CHOSE TO PLACE HIS OWN PERSONAL INTERESTS ABOVE THE COUNTRIES IN THE INTEGRITY OF ELECTIONS, EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WILL CONTINUE HE HAS STONEWALLED CONGRESS AND ORDERED AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS THAT WORK FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, NOT FOR THE PRESIDENT, TO JOIN IN HIS OBSTRUCTION, HE DEPLOYED MR GIULIANI TO UKRAINE TO CONTINUE ADVANCING HIS SCHEME THAT SERVES NO OTHER PURPOSE THAN ADVANCING HIS 2020 REELECTION PROSPECTS

HE ATTACKED WITNESSES, PUBLIC SERVANTS, PATRIOTS WHO STAYED TRUE TO THEIR OATH AND LEVELED WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT THE GRAVE NATIONAL INJURY THAT RESULTED FROM THE PRESIDENT'S MISCONDUCT AND HE CONTINUED TO URGE FOREIGN NATIONS TO INVESTIGATE AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT HE VIEWS AS A THREAT THE THREAT HE WILL CONTINUE TO ABUSE HIS POWER AND CAUSE GREAT HARM TO THE NATION OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT YEAR UNTIL A NEW PRESIDENT IS SWORN IN OR INTEL HE WOULD BE REELECTED IT IS NOT HYPOTHETICAL

MERELY EXPOSING THE PRESIDENT SCHEME HAS NOT STOPPED HIM FROM CONTINUING THIS DESTRUCTIVE PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR THAT HAS BROUGHT US TO THIS MOMENT HE IS WHO HE IS THAT WILL NOT CHANGE AND NOR WILL THE DANGER ASSOCIATED WITH HIM EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THAT TERRIBLE CONCLUSION THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL ABUSE HIS POWER AGAIN

THAT HE WILL CONTINUE TO SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE TO HELP CORRECTLY SECURE HIS REELECTION HE HAS SHOWN NEITHER REMORSE NOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF úWRONGDOI IF YOU BELIEVE JULY 25th WAS A PERFECT CALL, ASKING FOR INVESTIGATIONS OF YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND USING THE POWER OF YOUR OFFICE TO MAKE IT SO WAS PERFECTLY FINE, THEN THERE IS NOTHING THAT WOULD STOP YOU FROM DOING IT AGAIN PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ABUSED THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE AND MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE OFFICE MITCH McCONNELL I YIELD BACK >> THE MAJORITY LEADER HAS RECOGNIZED

>> I SUGGEST A 15 MINUTE RECESS >> WITHOUT OBJECTION SO ORDERED >> AND THEIR, THE FIRST PART OF DAY THREE BY THE DEMOCRATS ON KEPT MIDDLE HILL, THEY ARE WRAPPING UP THEIR PRESENTATION ON ARTICLE 1 OF THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT THAT IS ABOUT ABUSE OF POWER THIS AFTERNOON, WE WILL HEAR ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS PRETTY EXTRAORDINARY, REMEMBER ADAM SCHIFF IS ALSO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE

HE HAS ACCESS TO SOME OF THE MOST SENSITIVE AND SECURE INTELLIGENCE THAT OUR GOVERNMENT COLLECTS I KNOW WE WERE ALL SITTING HERE, I ALMOST GASSED OUT LOUD BECAUSE OF WHAT HE ACCUSED THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF DOING ON THE SENATE FLOOR I WANT TO INTRODUCE OUR PANEL, THANK YOU ALL ON THAT POINT, MARGARET HE SAID THIS WAS A PROPAGANDA COUP FOR THE RUSSIANS

THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WAS PROMOTING THIS CRAZY SERVER THEORY THAT WAS COOKED UP BY THE KREMLIN SPECIFICALLY WHEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WAS STANDING NEXT TO THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA AND HELSINKI AND THE PRESIDENT DISCOUNTED OUR OWN US INTELLIGENCE AND IN THE WORDS OF ADAM SCHIFF, THE MOST INCREDIBLE PROPAGANDA COUP BY THE RUSSIANS >> THAT WAS A MOMENT TO POINT BACK TO PLAY THE TELEVISION CLIP OF THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF SAYING THAT NEXT TO VLADIMIR PUTIN BECAUSE THAT WAS A MOMENT THAT MANY REPUBLICANS SAID THEY WERE INCREDIBLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH DURING THE PRESIDENT QUESTION U

S INTELLIGENCE AND IT'S VERY CLEAR CONCLUSIONS IN TERMS OF WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INTERVENTION IN THE 2016 ELECTION WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT IS IN THAT JULY 25th PHONE CALL WITH THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, REFERRING AGAIN TO THIS DEBUNKED CASSETTE CONSPIRACY THEORY THAT SOMEHOW THE SERVER BELONGED TO THE DNC IS HIDDEN AWAY IN UKRAINE AND THE REASON THAT THIS COMES UP SO FREQUENTLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S BECAUSE HE CONTINUES TO BELIEVE IT EVEN THOUGH SOME OF HIS ADVISORS HAVE CONTINUALLY AND SET ON THE RECORD THAT THEY TELL HIM — >> UKRAINE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT

IT WAS AN EFFORT BY THE RUSSIANS TO PLANT THAT PROPAGANDA IN ORDER TO TRACK OR DETRACT FOCUS FROM THEIR OWN CULPABILITY >> I AM BEING SPECIFIC IN MY LANGUAGE AND TALKING ABOUT ELECTION INTERFERENCE THE TERM YOU HEARD WAS MEDDLING, A MUDDY, MESSY NEBULOUS WORD AND THAT IS HOW SME PEOPLE GET AWAY WITH SAYING UKRAINE MEDDLED, TOO THAT IS TO SAY WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS A CANDIDATE AND HE SAID THINGS THAT THROUGH INTO QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THE TERRITORY OF UKRAINE THAT HAD BEEN ANNEXED BY RUSSIA, WOULD BE RETURNED, HE THREW IT INTO QUESTION WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT FOX ALL US

COUNTRIES IN TERMS OF POSITION AND AT THAT TIME OFFICIALS CAME OUT STRONGLY AGAINST THE CANDIDATE AND YOU HAVE HEARD REPUBLICAN SAY SOME OF THAT COULD AMOUNT TO MEDDLING AND THAT DEMOCRATS WERE IN CONTACT WITH THEM AND COULD BE COMPLICIT, THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM ELECTION INTERFERENCE THE MILITARY INTELLIGENCE WING OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENED IN 2016 >> TO HEAR HIM SAY THAT, THAT HAS BEEN A CHARGE BUT TO SAY IT ON THE WELL — >> I WAS STRUCK BY THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION FROM JEFFRIES TO CONGRESSMAN CROW, SHIFT, THE DEMOCRATS TODAY, THE HOUSE MANAGERS ARE MAKING THE CASE BASED ON VALUES, THEY ARE ARGUING THE FACTS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THE CHARACTER OF AMERICA, AMERICAN INTEREST, THE TRUST WITH OUR ALLIES AND ALLIANCES AND COULD THEY HAVE TRUSTED US THOSE ARE THE TERMS THEY ARE USING WHICH GET TO THE CORE OF WHAT WE ELECT THE PRESIDENT FOR WHICH HIS JUDGMENT TO PROTECT AND CARE FOR THE NATION IN OUR STEAD AND I THINK THAT IS A VERY POWERFUL CASE THAT THE REPUBLICANS AND THE SENATE WILL WRESTLE WITH WHEN THEY HAVE TO DELIBERATE OVER THIS AFTER THIS IS OVER

>> THIS WAS PART OF WHAT IS MENTIONED BRIEFLY IN THE ACTUAL ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT WERE THE DEMOCRATS REFER AND IN THEIR BRIEF HAS REFERRED AS AN IMMINENT THREAT >> IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A TAD TOO MUCH THERE MAY HAVE BEEN MORE PASSION THAN PERSUASION THERE BECAUSE THEY WENT SO FAR THAT THEY VIRTUALLY ACCUSED THE PRESIDENT OF BEING A RUSSIAN ASSET AND SHORT OF HAVING A KGB EMAIL ADDRESS IT WAS VERY STINGING LANGUAGE BUT IN SOME WAYS YOU HAVE TO KNOW YOUR JURY

IF THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO GET THEM TO EMBRACE, IF THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO GET THEM TO VOTE ON IN THEIR VERDICT, YOU JUST LOST YOUR CASE BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY THOSE REPUBLICAN SENATORS ARE GOING TO BUY THAT NARRATIVE SO THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU TRYING TO GET THE SENATORS OR ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE THE CASE TO THE VOTERS? THIS DID NOT STRIKE ME AS THE CLOSING ARGUMENT ON ARTICLE 1 TO GET A VERDICT >> I SEE IT DIFFERENTLY I THINK ONE OF THE STRONGEST DEFENSES FROM THE BEGINNING FOR THE REPUBLICANS AND TRUMP HAS BEEN THE WHO CARES DEFENSE I THINK WHAT THEY WERE DOING TODAY, YESTERDAY, THE FIRST FEW DAYS, A LOT ABOUT PROCEDURE, WITNESSE, FAIRNESS OF THE PROCESS, TODAY THE MESSAGE IS AMERICANS, WHY DOES THIS MATTER? AND THEY MADE, I THINK HE MADE A COMPELLING CASE THAT WE WANT PEOPLE IN OFFICE THAT ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THE POWER OF THAT OFFICE FOR THE BENEFIT OF AMERICANS, REGULAR PEOPLE AND LAID OUT THE MANY WAYS THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN HERE

HOW IF THIS IS BAD FOR UKRAINE, BAD FOR AMERICA, RUDY GIULIANI DOES NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, HE IS WORKING AS A FIDUCIARY FOR THE PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE OPERATING FOR US THIS GOES BACK TO THE RUSSIA CAMPAIGN HOW IMPORTANT AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS THE RUSSIANS GOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO COVER UP FOR THEIR OWN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTION, HE SAID IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP UNLESS CONGRESS DOES SOMETHING ABOUT IT >> IF THE DEMOCRATS HAVE MADE THE JUDGMENT, JONATHAN STARTED TO TOUCH ON THIS

IF THE DEMOCRATS MADE THE JUDGMENT THAT FIXES IT, THERE IS NO WAY THEY WILL ACTUALLY OF THE PRESIDENT CONVICTED WHAT THEY HAVE IS A MULTI-DAY OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A CASE TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC INCLUDING HIGHLIGHT REELS FROM EVERY NEW SHOW AND COMEDY SHOWS ARE SAYING TO MAKE THE CASE ABOUT WHY THEY THINK THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T HAVE THE JUDGMENT TO LEAD AND IF THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL AT THAT, THAT EMPOWERS THE NOMINEE TO MAKE THE CASE >> WHAT IS INTERESTING, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE 67 SENATORS THAT VOTE TO REMOVE THE SENATOR FROM OFFICE I THINK WITH SOME ASSURANCE AT THIS POINT, WHETHER IT IS 50 OR 51, WHO LOOK FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, ASSUMING THE DEMOCRATS VOTE IN UNISON THEY WOULD NEED FOUR TO FLIP FOUR REPUBLICANS ON THEIR SIDE IN ORDER TO PROLONG THIS TRIAL, GET SOMEONE LIKE JOHN BOLTON TO TESTIFY AND THERE WAS A PIECE IN THE ATLANTIC WHERE THEY SAY THEY MAY NOT NEED FOUR, THEY MAY ONLY NEED THREE AND IT MAY INVOLVE THE CHIEF JUSTICE WEIGHING IN HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> THIS IS AN LIKE A JUDICIAL TRIAL BUT THERE IS A JUDGE, IT'S NOT THE VICE PRESIDENT AS IT IS FOR OTHER IMPEACHMENTS, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND THE ARGUMENT I MAKE IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS COULD MAKE MOTIONS AS HAPPENED WITH ANDREW JOHNSON'S IMPEACHMENT, TO ACTUALLY HAVE EVIDENCE TO TREATED AS ADMISSIBLE, MATERIAL AND THE CHIEF JUSTICE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION, WILL I RULE OR DO I PUNT IT TO THE WIDER SENATE THERE IS NOTHING LIMITING THE CHIEF JUSTICE'S ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS AS A MATTER OF LAW UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, FAIRNESS, WHAT IS THE WORD MEANING, UNDER THE SIXTH AND SEVENTH AMENDMENTS, THEY UNDERSTOOD AND INVOLVED FACTS AND WITNESSES AND THE CHIEF JUSTICE HAS BEEN ASSUMED BUT IT'S NOT PREORDAINED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION >> I WOULD BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT THE 1968 PRECEDENT SORRY 1868 PRECEDENT

>> IT WAS SO LONG AGO, HARD TO REMEMBER >> I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THAT IMPEACHMENT THE CHIEF JUSTICE RULINGS WERE HE AMONG HIS OTHER VIEWS IS THAT HE HAD A RIGHT TO TIEBREAK ON THE MERITS OF IMPEACHMENT SOMETHING THAT MANY PEOPLE REJECT HE DID ROLL TWICE ON THESE TYPES OF ISSUES, YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR

EVEN IF ROBERTS AGREES TO FOLLOW CHASE, THEY MIGHT NOT LIKE HIS ANSWERS SOMEONE LIKE HUNTER BIDEN, HE COULD VERY WELL FIND HE IS IRRELEVANT ON PRIVILEGE IT MAY NOT BE WHAT PEOPLE ARE SUGGESTING HE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS AS TO WHAT IS COVERED BY PRIVILEGE YOU CAN'T JUST SHOOT FROM THE HIP AND SAY THE WHOLE WORLD IS YOURS

>> I WANT TO MENTION WE ARE EXPECTING RETURN TO THE SENATE FLOOR AND JUST A BIT AS THE DEMOCRATS STILL HAVE OVER FIVE HOURS IN ORDER TO CONTINUE THEIR PRESENTATION ON ARTICLE 2 WHICH A LITTLE BIT OF ARTICLES THE WEAKER OF THE TWO BUT THEY WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS I WANT TO SHOW YOU THE SENATE SUBWAY, SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM IS SPEAKING THERE, THERE IS A SUBWAY IN BETWEEN THE OFFICES WHERE MANY ARE AND LET'S LISTEN IN >> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO AND I WOULDN'T TAKE 24 HOURS >> HOW TO THE REPUBLICANS LOOK AT THE BIDEN'S IN 2016 AND 2017

>> HONEST TO GOD, I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS I WASN'T FOLLOWING IT, I DIDN'T KNOW, I LIKE JOE BIDEN, PEOPLE ASKED ME I DON'T THINK HE'S CORRUPT BUT I THINK HE HAS TO HAS TO ANSWER FOR HOW HE CAN ALLOW HIS SON TO GET HIMSELF IN THE SPOT THOSE ARE FAIR QUESTIONS BUT A LOT OF THIS HAS COME OUT WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT THE UKRAINE I GAVE MUELLER THE SPACE TO DO ALL THINGS RUSSIA BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO BRING UP THE UKRAINE, AND TRUMP, HOW CAN YOU NOT BRING UP THE UKRAINE AND BIDEN THE PRESIDENT DIDN'T SAY I WANT MY OPPONENTS INVESTIGATED

HE IS SAYING WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ME IN THE UKRAINE, HOW CAN YOU IGNORE THE BIDEN'S IN THE UKRAINE , IT'S AN OBVIOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT COMPROMISES NATIONAL SECURITY AND UNDERCUTS THE NARRATIVE WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT CORRUPTION I WOULD SAY THIS, I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY UP HERE TO CONDUCT OURSELVES HONORABLY AND TO FOLLOW THE LAW BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE PROBABLY HAVE KIDS WORKING IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR FOR LOBBYISTS I THINK THAT IS DIFFERENT WHEN WORKING FOR THE MOST CORRUPT COMPANY IN THE UKRAINE AND GIVING THE CHARGE OF TRYING TO COME BACK I THINK THAT IS A BRIDGE TOO FAR AND THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE, IF IT WERE MY SON OR MY DAUGHTER AD YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN, YOU WOULD BE ALL OVER US AND I KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE ME SAYING THAT BUT REPUBLICANS BELIEVE MORE THAN EVER THAT THERE IS A TWO TIERED SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY

AND THAT'S NOT FAIR AND I DON'T WANT — >> THERE YOU HERE REPUBLICAN SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM MAKING THE CASE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY CAN THE CASE , HE DOESN'T WANT TO DO IT BUT TO HEAR THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO HEAR FROM THE BIDEN'S YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE RIGHT BEHIND SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM IS ONE OF THE PRESIDENT'S ATTORNEYS, WE COULD HEAR FROM HIM AS WELL AS PAT CIPOLLONE WHO IS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL IF WE DO STEP TO THE MICROPHONES, WE WILL DIP BACK IN TO LISTEN TO THEM THEY ARE ALSO EXPECTED TO BEGIN THEIR PRESENTATION TOMORROW, SATURDAY MORNING

AND WHAT THE PRESIDENT TWEETED THIS MORNING IS THAT IT IS THE DEATH VALLEY IN TV WHAT HE MEANS IS A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SPENDING THEIR SATURDAY MORNINGS IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN TURNING ON THE TELEVISION BUT THEY WILL GET THREE DAYS, THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME PROVIDED TO THE DEMOCRATS KEN STARR, ALAN DERSHOWITZ, PEOPLE WITH NAME RECOGNITION >> WE HAD INDICATIONS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE THAT THE TEAM OF LAWYERS MAY NOT USE THE FULL 24 HOURS WHAT IS THE BURDEN THE WHITE HOUSE HAS TO MEET THEIR GOAL IN FRONT OF THE SENATORS? >> THE WONDERFUL THING ABOUT BEING DEFENSE COUNSEL YOU HAVE TO HIT GROUNDERS

THE BURDEN IS ON THE PROSECUTION AND I WAS LISTENING TO THE CLOSING ON THE FIRST ARTICLE I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR ADAM SCHIFF, I THOUGHT HE DID A GOOD JOB IT ALSO MADE ME WONDER IF HE HAS GIVEN UP BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT PROVED TOO MUCH FOR HIS JERSEY — STORY IT MAKES THEM EASIER AT THIS POINT, THE HOUSE MANAGERS HAVE STRUCTURED, THEY ARE LOCKED INTO THE NARRATIVE THE PRESIDENT PUT FORWARD THAT EVERYTHING IS PERFECT, THE CALL WAS PERFECT, THE HOLDING OF IT WAS PERFECT AND THEY ARE RELUCTANT TO THIS CONTROVERSIAL THEORY THAT YOU NEED A CRIME TO HAVE AN IMPEACHMENT

THAT DOESN'T GIVE THEM AS MUCH ROOM THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY WANT ON THE DEFENSE YOU DON'T HAVE MUCH ROOM TO MANEUVER AND THAT WILL MAKE THEM THAT WILL MAKE THEM LESS SUCCESSFUL >> I SEE THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL RETURNING TO THE CHAMBER WHICH MEANS MOST SENATORS HAVE GOTTEN THE WORD TIME TO COME BACK LET'S KEEP THIS PROCESS GOING

LET'S DIP IN QUICKLY TO LISTEN TO THE PRESIDENT'S ATTORNEY JESSICA OH >> THIS IDEA OF THE SOLICITATION OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IS DEPLORABLE I WONDER IF HE THOUGHT THAT ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN HAD SOUGHT, WHEN IT'S COMPLETELY CORROBORATED, UNCONTESTED, THE STILL DOSSIER WHO IS UTILIZING BOTH ASSET THAT A FORMER BRITISH SPY HAD IN RUSSIA TO GET INFORMATION ON THE PRESIDENT THEN CANADA

WAS THAT NOT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE? WAS THAT NOT AN ATTEMPT FOR FOREIGN INTERFERENCE? YOU CAN GET ON YOUR HORSE AND ACT HAUGHTY AND PROUD BUT LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS HERE IS WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS, THERE WAS FOREIGN INVOLVEMENT BUT LET'S NOT FORGET, WHERE IT ORIGINATED FROM, LET'S NOT FORGET, WE HAVEN'T PUT ON OUR CASE, WE WON'T BEGIN UNTIL TOMORROW MORNING I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THIS, WHERE TO THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE COME FROM WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? IT CAME FROM CONNECTIONS FROM THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THE NUMBER 3 WHOSE WIFE HAPPENED TO WORK FOR FUTURE GPS YOU HAPPENED TO BE HIRED BY THE DNC TO DO AN INVESTIGATION ON DONALD TRUMP AND BY THE WAY, SHE DIDN'T JUST DO IT WITH A STILL DOSSIER, SHE WAS INVOLVED WITH GUESS WHAT, UKRAINE

WE HAVEN'T PUT OUR CASE, OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T BEGUN TO BUT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET A SENSE FROM WHAT I AM SAYING NOW THAT THIS, YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR, WE ARE GOING TO REBUT AND REFUTE AND WE WILL PUT ON AN AFFIRMATIVE CASE TOMORROW BUT THAT IS JUST ONE, JUST ONE ISSUE AND FOR THE LIFE OF ME, WE HAVE DONE IT AND WHY THEY OPENED UP THE DOOR AS WIDE AS A DOUBLE DOOR ON THE HUNTER BIDEN, JOE BIDEN BURISMA ISSUE, THEY FIGURED THAT WAS THEIR WAY OF GETTING OUT OF IT WE WILL ADDRESS IT BECAUSE LET ME SAY ONE LAST THING AND I WILL ANSWER QUESTIONS I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THIS JOE BIDEN WAS CHARGED AS VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WITH UKRAINE POLICY

THAT WAS HIS CHARGE HIS SON, WENT TO WORK FOR, WENT TO THE BOARD OF UKRAINIAN GAS COMPANY FIRST THE VICE PRESIDENT SAID HE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT BUT THE STATE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY WERE CONCERNED WHEN PEOPLE WERE BEING PUT UP FOR CONFIRMATION THAT THE ISSUE MIGHT ARISE BELIEVE ME, YOU WILL HEAR ABOUT THAT ISSUE LET ME TAKE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS

>> YOUR RESPONSE TO THE DEMOCRATS ABUSE OF CONGRESS >> THEY WILL BE DOING IT TODAY >> AN EASY RESPONSE, THIS IDEA THAT YOU OBSTRUCT CONGRESS BY EXERCISING, PRIVILEGE IS ABSURD ABSOLUTELY ABSURD I THINK WHAT JONATHAN SAID WAS RIGHT BUT I FORGET WHAT HE SAID

THAT IS FINE BUT WHAT THE COURTS HAVE SAID, THESE ARE IMPORTANT RIGHTS, THE WAY SEPARATION OF POWER WORKS UNDER GOVERNMENT >> ARE YOU SUGGESTING THIS WAS INVOLVED? >> YOU ARE NOT, RIGHT? >> THE STILL DOSSIER, HOW, THE QUESTION IS THE RESULT OF THE DISCUSSION WAS WHY WAS THE PRESIDENT SO SUSPICIOUS OF SOME OF HIS INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION, SOME OF THE LEADERS HE WAS DEALING WITH WITHIN HIS OWN GOVERNMENT THE NUMBER 3 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WAS WORKING TO AFFIRM DOSSIER AGAINST THE SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH

LET ME BE CLEAR WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT, THAT WAS THE NUMBER 3 AT THE FBI AND FOR THE LIFE OF ME I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY HE IS STILL THERE SHE WAS ALSO WORKING ON UKRAINE NEXT QUESTION AS FAR AS HOW LONG WE WILL GO, I CAN'T MAKE THAT DETERMINATION

THE SENATE ASKED FOR AN ACCOMMODATION, WE WERE PREPARED TO GO AS LONG AS THEY WANTED US, 10 TO 1 WAS THE FINAL DECISION, WE WILL PRESENT FROM THEN, WE ARE READY TO GO BUT IT'S THE SENATE'S DECISION, WE RESPECT THE PROCESS >> THEY SAID THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO USE ALL 24? >> THEY SAID CAN YOU PROCEED FOR THREE HOURS AND TAKE THE OTHER TIME YOU NEED TO PRESENT YOUR CASE WE WILL LIVE AT 10:00 TOMORROW I SUSPECT TRUST ME, THERE WILL BE PLENTY TO COVER >> IS THE DEFENSE TEAM CONCERNED OF A RECORDING SHOWING TRUMP SAID TAKE HER OUT ABOUT THE UKRAINE INCOME MASSETER

>> WAS THE SAME ONE FOR THE CONVERSATION INVOLVED, YEAH, NO I'M NOT CONCERNED >> I'M NOT A PAID ADVISOR, I'M RETAINED COUNSEL I DON'T DISCUSS MY LEGAL FEES BUT WE ARE PAID FOR LEGAL SERVICES I'M NOT GETTING INTO THAT TOMORROW, I THINK YOU WILL SEE I GUESS I WOULD CALL IT A TRAILER, COMING ATTRACTIONS IS THE BEST WAY TO SAY IT

WE HAVE THREE HOURS TO PUT IT OUT, WE WILL TAKE WHATEVER TIME IS APPROPRIATE DURING THAT TIME, LAY OUT THE CASE, NEXT WEEK IS WHEN YOU WILL SEE THE FULL VISITATION BUT THERE WILL PUT — >> — THAT IS SENATOR WARNER WHO IS THE DEMOCRATIC LEAD ON THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND WE WILL MONITOR THAT BUT I THINK IT DESERVES A QUICK DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WE HEARD FROM ONE OF THE PRESIDENTS LEAD ATTORNEYS HE CONFUSED A NUMBER OF THE FACTS I THINK WHEN HE WAS TALKING ABOUT A NUMBER 3 OFFICIAL IN THE FBI WE WERE SAYING WHO IS HE TALKING ABOUT WHO MET WITH SOME OUT THE STILL DOSSIER I THINK HE IS REFERRING TO BRUCE OR WHO WAS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WHICH IS A DIFFERENT ORGANIZATION IN THE FBI IT WAS NOT THE NUMBER 3, HE IS A CAREER OFFICIAL THERE

>> I THINK ON SOME EARLY VERSIONS OF REPUBLICAN WISH LIST FOR POTENTIAL WITNESSES, HIS SPOUSE WAS ON THAT >> LET ME ASK PAULA, PAULA REID IS WHAT THE'S WHO COVERS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND KNOWS EACH OF THESE FIGURES YOUR TAKE QUICKLY ON HOW JAY MAY HAVE CONFUSED SOME INDIVIDUALS >> YOU ARE CORRECT, HE WAS APPARENTLY REFERRING TO BRUCE OR HER DURING THE FINAL MONTHS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WAS ACTING IN ONE OF THE TOP ROLES AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HIS WIFE WORKED FOR A COMPANY THAT WORKED ON THE STILL DOSSIER AND THAT WAS A COLLECTION OF INFORMATION, OPPOSITION RESEARCH ON PRESIDENT TRUMP AND APPEARED WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO ARGUE IS THAT IF THEY DNC THAT HELPED FUND THE STILL DOSSIER, IF THEY COULD GET ASSISTANCE FROM A FOREIGN BRITISH INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, ISN'T THAT A CAMPAIGN- FINANCE VIOLATION, WERE THEY SOLICITING FOREIGN ASSISTANCE, I HAVEN'T HEARD THEM LAY OUT THIS ARGUMENT THIS WAY BEFORE, THE PRESIDENT LIKES TO MENTION HIM ALONG WITH PETER STRUCK AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS, THE PROBLEM IS HE DIDN'T ADDRESS A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS HE WAS ASKED

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TOMORROW IN HIS OPENING ARGUMENT, WHICH HE TEASED AS A TRAILER IF YOU REALLY WILL DIRECTLY TAKE ON THE SUBSTANCE AND EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED AGAINST HIS CLIENT OR IF HE WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO MAKE THESE ARGUMENTS WHICH EFFECTIVELY DISSOLVED DOWN INTO LOOK AT WHAT THEY DID >> LET ME BRING IN OUR LAWYERS HERE, IS IT A TRAILER? >> THAT IS NOT HOW WE WOULD GENERALLY REFER TO OUR OPENING ARGUMENT WHAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS NOT JUST THE TENOR, MOST CERTAINLY THAT SHOULD NOT BE THE TENOR FOR TOMORROW, THAT GOES WELL BEYOND PETTY FOGGING AS THE CHIEF JUSTICE REFERENCED EARLIER IN HIS ADMONITION I THINK ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS IS HE SEEMS TO BE SUGGESTING THAT THEY WILL GO AHEAD AND PRESENT THE CASE OF THE ATTACKS, THE INVESTIGATIONS OF DONALD TRUMP

IF THESE COMMENTS REFLECTIVE OF WHAT WILL COME TOMORROW, IT REAFFIRMS WHAT I SAID EARLIER THAT NEITHER SIDE SEEMS TO BE TRYING TO CONVINCE JURORS, IF THEY ARE GOING TO PRESENT THE CASE OF THE ABUSE OF DONALD TRUMP, IT'S NOT A CASE TO TRY TO GET DIRT JURORS ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE TO VOTE SO THAT NEITHER SIDE IS SPEAKING TO ONE HALF OF THE ASSEMBLY >> EXCEPT THAT THERE HAS BEEN A METICULOUS, METHODICAL PRESENTATION BY THE HOUSE MANAGERS WHETHER YOU AGREE THAT IS IMPEACHABLE IS ONE OTHER THING THAT WAS ON A METICULOUS DEFENSE BY JAY SEKULOW, IT WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE FACTS, THE INDIVIDUALS HE WAS SPEAKING WITH AND REFERRED TO YOU, SINCE YOU ARE THE ONLY REPUBLICAN WITNESS IN THE HOUSE AND HE SAID >> I THINK THIS CHIEF JUSTICE IS GOING TO BE WATCHING VERY CLOSELY

ABOUT WHETHER ANYONE CROSSES THE LINE OF CIVILITY >> I KNOW YOU HAVE HEARD THIS, NORA, THAT HEAVILY MANY SENATE REPUBLICANS WILL SAY, THAT WASN'T A PRIVATE, PERFECT PHONE CALL BETWEEN THE TWO LEADERS BUT WHAT X TOGETHER THE REPUBLICAN DEFENSE IS A SENSE OF GRIEVANCE, AS YOU HEARD FROM LINDSEY GRAHAM WHERE HE SAID THERE ARE TWO SETS OF RULES IN THIS COUNTRY AND DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS ARE TREATED FAIRLY BY THE PRESS HE SAID I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T LIKE HEARING THAT THAT WAS STRATEGY THAT IS HELPED KEEP REPUBLICANS TOGETHER THERE

IT IS ALSO A STRATEGY TO SAY, WELL, WHY ISN'T HUNTER BIDEN BEING QUESTIONED FOR WHAT HE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE DONE IN TERMS OF BEING APPOINTED TO A BOARD HE MAY HAVE NOT DESERVED TO BEEN ON IN THE FIRST PLACE WHY ARE YOU COVERING THAT? THOSE ARE DIVERSIONS AWAY FROM THE ACTUAL CASE THAT DEMOCRATS ARE MAKING BUT UP UNTIL NOW, IT IS EFFECTIVE FOR REPUBLICANS >> I WANT TO GET YOUR TAKE ON THAT BUT NANCY QUARTERS, SHE HAS TO GO BACK INSIDE WHEN THIS BEGINS AND LISTEN, NANCY, YOUR TAKE ON THAT? >> I THINK PRIVATELY, SOME SENATE REPUBLICANS HAVE TOLD THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL TEAM THAT WHEN THEY ACTUALLY MAKE THEIR OPENING ARGUMENTS, THAT THEY HOPE THAT THEY GO BEYOND THIS YEAH, BUT ARGUMENTS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MAKING FOR THE CAMERAS YEAH, BUT, FUSION DPS, YEAH, BUT HUNTER BIDEN

SENATE REPUBLICANS THERE IS A LIMIT TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THAT APPROACH AND THEY WANT THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY, TO TRY TO GO AT THE EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, OVER THE PAST THREE DAYS AND REBUT ANY OF IT IF THEY CAN IF THEY CAN'T, YOU HAVE HEARD THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS SAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN, LISTEN TO WHAT THE DEFENSE SAYS ABOUT THIS ARE THEY GOING TO DENY THIS HAPPENED? ARE THEY GOING TO DENY THAT HAPPENED IF THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS DON'T DENY ANY OF THE FACTS AND SO FAR, THEY HAVE DECLINED TO DO SO, THE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS FEEL THAT THEIR CASE FOR MORE WITNESSES AND MORE DOCUMENTS IS GOING TO BE STRENGTHENED

>> ON THAT POINT, COULDN'T THE DEFENSE CERTAINLY THE WHITE HOUSE DEFENSE THAT IS IN THE PRESIDENT'S POWER TO DELAY ADA TO THE UKRAINIANS, THAT WAS ULTIMATELY RELEASED AND WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS BEFORE AND LAY OUT WHAT IS IN THE PRESIDENT'S PREROGATIVE IN TERMS OF WHAT IS TRUE THAT CERTAINLY THOSE TYPES OF — AND MEETING WITH SOMEONE MIGHT BE DELAYED USE LEVELS OF POWER WHEN IT COMES TO FOREIGN POLICY THE ISSUE IS NOT THAT IT IS BECAUSE IT WAS CLINICAL OR PERSONAL BENEFIT THE WHOLE COUNTRY AND THE PRESS, SAID LEE WOULD BENEFIT FROM A VIGOROUS ARGUMENT AS NANCY IS SAYING ON WHY IT IS WITHIN THE PRESIDENT'S RIGHT TO DO WHAT HE DID AND THE CONVERSATION HE HAD WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY

>> THERE IS AN ACTUAL DEFENSE, THIS IS THE STORY OF WHAT HAPPENED, DID NOT HAPPEN THE WAY THE DEMOCRATS LAID OUT THERE WAS ANOTHER REASON FOR IT NUMBER 2 WOULD BE A LEGAL DEFENSE, THAT IS IT DOESN'T RISE TO ABUSE OF POWER, EVEN IF THE FACTS ARE AS THE DEFENDANTS OR DEMOCRATS SAY THEY ARE, THAT DOESN'T GIVE RISE FOR REMOVAL THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE, IT DOESN'T MATTER DEFENSE WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE THAT I THINK THAT ADAM SCHIFF WAS GETTING TO AND IF NONE OF THAT WORKS, IT IS A DISTRACTION, YES, BUT DEFENSE, HUNTER BIDEN DEFENSE, THE FBI IS CORRUPT DEFENSE

I THINK AMERICANS AT THIS POINT CAN USE THAT IT COMMONSENSE AND SEE-THROUGH THAT I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WITH THE REPUBLICANS, RESPONSE OR WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE IS FORMER DC CIRCUIT JUDGE AND WHITEWATER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, WORKED WITH HIM, KEN STARR WHO IS A CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR AND A VERY POLISHED AND SEASONED PUBL ADVOCATE AND HAS AT LEAST, IN THE WHITEWATER INVESTIGATION CARED A LOT ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE OFFICE

I THINK THAT IS THE STRONGEST ARGUMENT FOR THE DEMOCRATS >> HAVE WE HEARD WHAT ROLE CAN START WILL PLAY? >> I HAVEN'T HEARD IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THEY DIVIDE UP THE TIME WE KNOW AND HAVING SEEN WITH THE HOUSE MANAGER DID, IT IS UP TO THEM I'M SURE THEY ARE STRATEGIZING RIGHT NOW

>> THE WHITE HOUSE SAID HE WILL PRESENT ON THE HISTORY OF IMPEACHMENT IS UNCLEAR WHAT THAT EXACTLY MEANS OTHER THAN COMPARING IT TO THE CASE HE HAD PRESENTED >> THEIR DEFENSES TO BE MADE THE CASE IS LARGELY INFERENTIAL BECAUSE THE KEY MOST DIRECT WITNESSES HAVE NEVER BEEN SUBJECT TO EXAMINATION >> THEY HAVE BEEN HIDDEN BY THE PRESIDENT

>> BUT ALSO THE HOUSE DID NOT SEEK TO COMPEL WITNESSES LIKE JOHN BOLTON WHOEVER IS AT FAULT, THE FACT IS THAT THE KEY DIRECT WITNESSES HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD FROM IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU VIEW THIS YOU CAN TAKE EVERY INFERENCE AND READ IT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT OR TAKE EVERY INFERENCE AND EXCEPT THE PRESIDENT'S ACCOUNT FOR THE SENATORS THEY WILL HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHETHER INFERENTIAL IMPEACHMENT IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH >> YOU THINK THAT IS THE STRONGEST CASE THAT THE WAY HOW SHOULD MAKE ON THAT? >> I THINK IT IS

THE SENSE IS THAT THE PRESIDENT SAID HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT PRODUCTION MANY PEOPLE ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE SAYING IS RIDICULOUS BUT THAT IS HIS DEFENSE HUNTER BIDEN AS PART OF THAT DEFENSE THE FACT IS, THE HUNTER BIDEN CONTRACT WAS ALL THE WAY INTO 2019

IT WAS GOING IN DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THEY CAN BUILD ON THAT AND SAY THERE WERE ONGOING CONCERNS ABOUT CORRUPTION, INCLUDING THE BINDING CONTRACT AND YOU MIGHT DISAGREE WITH HIM, RAISING IT BUT YOU CAN MAKE THAT IMPEACHABLE AND THE STRONGEST ARGUMENT THEY CAN MAKE IS WHAT MY FRIEND MICHAEL GEARHART SAID AT THIS IS NOT IMPEACHABLE, NOTHING IS

YOU CAN ALSO SAY, WELL, IF THIS IS IMPEACHABLE EVERYTHING IS BECAUSE ARE YOU REALLY GOING TO SAY ANY TIME A PRESIDENT CROSSES THAT LINE, A VERY FINE WOOD >> LET'S GO BACK TO THE QUESTION OF INTENT AND ADAM SCHIFF'S WORDS LAST NIGHT BRING IN THE EARTH YEARS WHERE HE SAYS DOES ANYONE DOUBT WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS UP TO AND HOW HE MAKES DECISIONS? WE HAVE SEEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN PUBLIC, AS FOR RUSSIA'S HELL WE HAVE SEEN HIM IN PUBLIC AS FOR CHINA TO INVESTIGATE WE KNOW FROM THE MICHAEL COHEN CASE THAT HE MAY BE INDIVIDUAL NUMBER 1 IN A HUSH MONEY SCHEME TO PAY OFF SOME OF HIS PARAMORE IS

SO THERE IS A HISTORY OF THE PRESIDENT USING WHATEVER HE CAN TO BENEFIT HIMSELF PERSONALLY THAT IS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD NOW, HERE WE ARE WITH ANOTHER CASE WHERE THERE IS A LOT OF RECORD OF WITNESSES SAYING THIS HAPPENED BUT WE ARE FACED WITH THE QUESTION >> THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT, EVERYTHING IS NOT IMPEACHABLE IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INTERFERING IN ELECTION >> PAULA REID IS AT THE WHITE HOUSE, COVERS THE WHITE HOUSE AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, ALSO IS A LIAR AND SPEAKS WITH MANY OF THOSE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS IN TERMS OF STRATEGY

WEIGH IN ON WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD, THIS ARGUMENT THAT THE WHITE HOUSE TEAM COULD SAY, LOOK, THE PRESIDENT WAS DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT CORRUPTION, HOW DO THEY EXPLAIN AWAY THEN THE CORRUPTION WAS NEVER MENTIONED ON THE JULY 25 CALL? >> IT IS UNCLEAR IF THEY ARE GOING TO EXPLAIN THAT AWAY SO FAR, THEY SAID THE LEAD LAWYERS HAVE BEEN IN THEIR AND ARE LISTENING TO WHEN THEY PRESENT THEIR CASE THEY WILL TRY TO ADDRESS, SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS THE DEMOCRATS HAVE MADE THEN THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE AFFIRMATIVE ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT AS YOU HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, ONE OF THE WEAKER ARGUMENTS IS THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME WHEN YOU LOOK AT HISTORICAL CONTEXT, THE FRAMERS AND HOW THEY DESIGN THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS, IF THEY HAD MEANT FOR THERE TO BE A SPECIFIC CRIME THEY WOULD HAVE SPECIFIED CRIMES

THEY ALMOST DID WITH TREASON AND BRIBERY SOME OF THE OTHER ARGUMENTS THEY HAVE LAID OUT IS THAT THIS IS ALL MOTIVATED BY A DESIRE TO OVERTURN THE 2016 ELECTION BUT THAT IS AN ARGUMENT THAT DOES RESONATE WITH THE PRESIDENT'S SPACE IN TALKING WITH THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS, THEY ARE CONFIDENT THAT HE'S NOT GOING TO BE REMOVED AND IN MANY WAYS THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE TALKING JUST AS MUCH TO THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION AS THEY ARE A GROUP OF SENATORS IN FRONT OF THEM THAT IS WHY YOU HEAR THE PRESIDENT SAY, READ THE TRANSCRIPT

IT WAS JUST ONE CALL WHEN YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION IT WAS NOT JUST ONE CALL THIS WAS OUR BROADER CAMPAIGN TO PRESSURE UKRAINE AND OF COURSE THERE IS NO TRANSCRIPT ALL THERE IS A PARTIAL RECORD RELEASED BY THE WHITE HOUSE AND CALLING UP PEOPLE TO BE THE TRANSCRIPT ASSUMES THEY'RE NOT GOING TO READ IT BECAUSE IT IS DAMNING

RIGHT NOW IT IS UNCLEAR IF HIS LAWYERS WILL BE ABLE TO ADDRESS MANY OF THE POINTS MADE BY THE PRESIDENT AND OTHERS, CLAIMING INNOCENCE >> PERFECT TIMING, PAULA AS WE RETURN NOW TO THE SENATE CHAMBER AND IT LOOKS LIKE NOW, THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, JOHN ROBERTS IS TAKING A SIP OF WATER AND VAL DEMINGS, TWO-TERM CONGRESSWOMAN FROM FLORIDA — >> I WANT TO JOIN MY COLLEAGUES AND THANKING YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND YOUR INDULGENCE WHAT I CAN TELL YOU TODAY IS THAT WE ARE CLOSER TODAY THAN WE WERE YESTERDAY

BECAUSE I AM PREPARED TO PRESENT ARTICLE NUMBER 2, OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS THE SECOND ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT CHARGES THAT THE PRESIDENT WITH MISUSING THE POWERS OF HIS HIGH OFFICE TO OBSTRUCT THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WE ARE HERE TODAY, IN RESPONSE TO A BLANKET ORDER, ISSUED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP, DIRECTING THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO WITHHOLD ALL DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONY FROM THAT INQUIRY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION OF IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WAS CATEGORICAL, INDISCRIMINATE AND HISTORICALLY UNPRECEDENTED AND ITS PURPOSE WAS CLEAR

TO IMPEDE CONGRESS' ABILITY TO CARRY OUT ITS DUTIES UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO HOLD THE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS AS PART OF HIS EFFORT TO COVER UP EVIDENCE, OF HIS SCHEME TO SOLICIT FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION, PRESIDENT TRUMP DID SOMETHING THAT NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER DONE OR DARED TO DO IN THE HISTORY OF OUR REPUBLIC

PRESIDENT TRUMP DIRECTED THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE BRANCH NOT TO COOPERATE WITH THE HOUSE''S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY PRESIDENT TRUMP BLOCKED EVERY PERSON WHO WORKS IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND EVERY PERSON WHO WORKS IN EVERY DEPARTMENT, AGENCY AND OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH BY PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THE HOUSE AS PART OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THIS WAS NOT ABOUT SPECIFIC NARROWLY DEFINED SECURITY OR PRIVACY ISSUES NOR WAS IT BASED ON POTENTIAL PRIVILEGES, AVAILABLE TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

INDEED, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS NOT ONCE ASSERTED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE DURING THIS PROCESS THIS WAS A DECLARATION OF TOTAL DEFIANCE, OF THE HOUSE' AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE CREDIBLE ALLEGATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S MISCONDUCT AND A WHOLESALE REJECTION OF CONGRESS' ABILITY TO HOLD THE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE THE PRESIDENT'S ORDER, EXECUTED BY HIS TOP AIDES, SUBSTANTIALLY INTERFERED WITH THE HOUSE'S CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED POWER TO CONDUCT AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DIRECTION, THE WHITE HOUSE ITSELF RELEASED — REFUSED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE DOCUMENT OR RECORD IN RESPONSE TO HOW SUBPOENA THAT REMAINS IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND CONTINUES TO WITHHOLD THOSE DOCUMENTS FROM CONGRESS AND FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BUT IT IS NOT JUST THE WHITE HOUSE

FOLLOWING PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ORDER, THE OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT, THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, I'LL CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO PRODUCE A SINGLE DOCUMENT OF RECORD IN RESPONSE TO 71 SPECIFIC REQUESTS , INCLUDING FIVE SUBPOENAS ADDITIONALLY, FOLLOWING PRESIDENT TRUMP SORTER, 12 CURRENT OR FORMER ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS CONTINUED TO REFUSE TO TESTIFY AS PART OF THE HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY NOT ONLY CURRENT, ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS, BUT FORMER ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS AS WELL 9 OF THOSE WITNESSES INCLUDING SENIOR OFFICIALS WITH DIRECT FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE PRESIDENT'S ACTIONS WHO CONTINUE TO DEFY SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY BECAUSE OF THE PRESIDENT'S ORDER AND YET, DESPITE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION, AS YOU HAVE HEARD AND SEEN THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE MANAGER'S PRESENTATION OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME, THE HOUSE GATHERED OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF MISCONDUCT FROM COURAGEOUS PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO WERE WILLING TO FOLLOW THE LAW, COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS AND TELL THE TRUTH ON THE BASIS OF THAT FORMIDABLE BODY OF EVIDENCE, THE HOUSE ADOPTED THE FIRST ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT

THESE WITNESSES ALSO TESTIFIED WITH GREAT SPECIFICITY ABOUT EXTENSIVE DOCUMENTS, COMMUNICATIONS AND RECORDS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE WHITE HOUSE AND OTHER AGENCIES, REGARDING THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME TO COERCE UKRAINE'S LEADER TO HELP HIS REELECTION AS YOU HAVE HEARD OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS, THE HOUSE WAS THEREFORE ABLE TO DEVELOP AN EXTENSIVE CATALOG OF SPECIFIC DOCUMENTS AND PERTINENT COMMUNICATION THAT GO TO THE HEART OF THE PRESIDENT'S WRONGDOING AND AT WHICH THE PRESIDENT HAS ORDERED, BE CONCEALED FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE REVELATIONS OF EVIDENCE, HARMFUL TO THE PRESIDENT HAVE ONLY CONTINUED SINCE THE HOUSE COMPILED ITS INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS RECENT COURT ORDERED RELEASES UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, AS WELL AS THE DISCLOSURES TO THE MEDIA HAVE FURTHERED DEMONSTRATED THAT THE WHITE HOUSE, OMB, STATE DEPARTMENT, AND OTHER AGENCIES ARE ACTIVELY WITHHOLDING HIGHLY RELEVANT DOCUMENTS THAT COULD FURTHER IMPLICATE THE PRESIDENT AND HIS SUBORDINATES OVERTIME, THESE DOCUMENTS AND THIS EVIDENCE WILL UNDOUBTABLY COME TO LIGHT AND I ASK THIS BODY TO NOT WAIT TO READ ABOUT IT IN THE PRESS OR IN A BOOK

YOU SHOULD BE HEARING THIS EVIDENCE NOW HEARING THIS EVIDENCE NOW NOW THERE IS ONE POINT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE VERY CLEAR PRESIDENT TRUMP'S WHOLESALE OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS STRIKES AT THE VERY HEART OF OUR CONSTITUTION AND OUR DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN UNDERTAKE SUCH COMPREHENSIVE OBSTRUCTION, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE EXCEPTIONAL POWERS AND TRUSTED HIM BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

ONLY ONE PERSON IN THE WORLD HAS THE POWER TO ISSUE AN ORDER TO THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THAT PERSON, SENATORS, AS YOU KNOW IS THE PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT TRUMP USED THAT POWER , NOT TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE LAW BUT TO ORDER AGENCIES AND EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE OF MISCONDUCT NOW I KNOW THAT NO OTHER AMERICANS COULD SEEK TO INSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS OR HER WRONGDOING IN THIS WAY WE ALL KNOW THAT, NO OTHER AMERICAN CAN USE THE VAST POWERS OF OUR GOVERNMENT TO UNDERTAKE A CORRUPT SCHEME TO CHEAT, TO WIN AN ELECTION AND THEN USE THOSE SAME POWERS TO SUPPRESS THE EVIDENCE OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL CRIME

WE WOULD NOT ALLOW — I AM CONVINCED THAT WE WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY MEMBER OF OUR STATE, OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO USE THE OFFICIAL POWERS OF THEIR OFFICE TO COVER UP CRIMES AND MISDEEDS, AS THIS BODY IS WELL AWARE, MAYORS AND GOVERNORS HAVE GONE TO JAIL FOR DOING SO SHERIFF'S, AND POLICE CHIEFS ARE CERTAINLY NOT IMMUNE IF WE ALLOW PRESIDENT TRUMP TO ESCAPE ACCOUNTABILITY, WE WILL INFLICT LASTING DAMAGE ON THE SEPARATION OF POWERS, AMONG OUR BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT OUR FUNDAMENTAL SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES IT WOULD INFLICT IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE BY ALLOWING THIS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF AND ESTABLISHING PRESIDENTS FOR FUTURE PRESIDENTS TO ACT CORRUPTLY OR ABUSIVELY AND THEN USE THE VAST POWERS OF THEIR OFFICE, THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY TO CONCEAL THEIR OWN MISCONDUCT FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

AND IN OTHER WORDS, WE WOULD CREATE A SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS THIS PRESIDENT AND ANY FUTURE PRESIDENT TO REALLY DO WHATEVER HE OR SHE WANTS IT IS AN ATTACK ON CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT, NOT JUST ON THE HOUSE BUT ALSO ON THE SENATE'S OWN ABILITY TO OVERSEE AND SERVE AS A CHECK ON THIS AND FUTURE PRESIDENT, BOTH REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS WITHOUT MEANINGFUL OVERSIGHT, WITHOUT THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT, AMERICANS WOULD HAVE TO COME TO ACCEPT A FAR GREATER LIKELIHOOD OF MISCONDUCT IN THE OVAL OFFICE AND THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO LOOK TO OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT TO HOLD THEIR PRESIDENT, THE PEOPLE'S PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE EXECUTIVE POWER, WITHOUT ANY SORT OF RESTRAINT, WITHOUT OVERSIGHT AND WITHOUT ANY CHECKS AND BALANCES IS ABSOLUTE POWER

AND WE KNOW WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT ABSOLUTE POWER ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY THIS IS THE VERY OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE FRAMERS INTENDED THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION PURPOSEFULLY AND TRUSTED THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH SO THAT IT MAY PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM A CORRUPT PRESIDENT THE TIMES, SENATORS, HAVE FOUND US

IF CONGRESS ALLOWS PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION TO STAND, IT EFFECTIVELY NULLIFIES THE IMPEACHMENT POWER SENATORS, WE ARE THE KEEPERS, THE PROTECTORS, THE DEFENDERS OF WHAT THE FRAMERS INTENDED AND WE MUST HOLD ANY UNPRINCIPLED AND UNDISCIPLINED EXECUTIVE ACCOUNTABLE SENATORS, I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT EASY I DON'T TAKE THIS MOMENT LIGHTLY , THESE ARE TOUGH TIMES

REMEMBER QUITE A FEW TOUGH TIMES DURING MY 27 YEARS AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BUT WE MUST STOP THIS PRESIDENT AND TODAY WE WILL EXPLAIN WHY FIRST, WE WILL REVIEW KEY FACTS REGARDING THE SCOPE AND BREADTH OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S UNPRECEDENTED ACTIONS TO STOP THE HOUSES IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AS YOU WELL KNOW, WE COVERED MANY OF THESE FACTS ON TUESDAY WHENWE EXPLAINED IN DEPTH, WHAT EVIDENCE THE PRESIDENT HAD BLACK FROM CONGRESS

WE ADDRESSED IT DOCUMENTS WE KNOW THAT THE WHITE HOUSE AND OTHER AGENCIES ARE CONCEALING AND WE ADDRESSED TESTIMONY THAT PRESIDENT AIDES WERE PROVIDE IF THEY TESTIFIED UNDER OATH WE WILL THEREFORE REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES BRIEFLY SECOND, AFTER SURVEYING RELEVANT HISTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, WE WILL EXPLAIN WHY OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS IN AND OF ITSELF WARNS THE IMPEACHMENT, AND REMOVAL FROM OFFICE FINALLY, WE WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS WITHOUT QUESTION GUILTY OF OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

THAT HIS DEFENSE LACKS ANY LEGAL FONDATION AND THAT HIS ACTIONS POSE A DIRE AND CONTINUING THROUGHOUT TO THE FOUNDATION OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK THIS IS VERY SIMPLE IT IS SIMPLE THE PRESIDENT ABUSED THE POWERS , AND TRUSTED IN HIM BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN A SCHEME TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE , ESCAPE ACCOUNTABILITY AND ORCHESTRATE A MASSIVE COVER UP

AND HE DID SO IN PLAIN SIGHT AND HIS OBSTRUCTION REMAINS ONGOING >> MR CHIEF JUSTICE, SENATORS, PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL, BEFORE I START, I TOO WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE SENATORS FOR BEING SO PATIENT AND BEING SUCH GOOD LISTENERS IT REMINDS ME QUITE FRANKLY OF ONE OF THE FIRST DAYS WHEN I WAS AFFECTIONATELY CALLED BABY JUDGE SCHOOL WHEN WE FIRST GOT STARTED

AND THOSE ARE THE FIRST TWO THINGS THAT THEY TOLD US THAT WE NEEDED TO BE PATIENT AND WE NEEDED TO LISTEN AND THAT WE NEEDED TO BE FAIR AND ALWAYS GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD TO EACH SIDE, CERTAINLY SAY THAT YOU HAVE BEEN PLAYING A VERY GOOD ROLE AS JUDGES BECAUSE, ALTHOUGH I KNOW THE PRESS CALLS YOU JURORS, I KNOW THAT YOU ARE THE ROLE OF JUDGES AND I COMMEND YOU FOR BEING GOOD LISTENERS AND FOR HAVING THE PATIENT PATIENCE TO LISTEN TO US IN THE LAST FEW DAYS AND OUR FINAL REMARKS TODAY

THANK YOU ALL NOW MS DEMING'S GAVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE SECOND ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT, OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS LET US TURN TO THE FACTS OF THE CSE BECAUSE TO FULLY APPRECIATE THE SCOPE AND SCALE, THE SCALE OF THE PRESIDENT'S WRONGDOING AND THE SIZE OF THE COVER UP, HE HAS ORCHESTRATED, REQUIRES UNDERSTANDING OF THE EVIDENCE THAT HE HAS FLAWLESSLY, WIRELESSLY HIDDEN FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

PRESIDENT TRUMP, CATEGORICALLY, INDISCRIMINATELY AND AND IN UNPRECEDENTED FASHION OBSTRUCTED CONGRESS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IN OTHER WORDS HE ORCHESTRATED A COVER-UP AND DID IT IN PLACE SIGHT FIRST, FROM THE BEGINNING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SOUGHT TO HAVE THE PRESIDENTS MISCONDUCT BY REFUSING TO TURN OVER THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT

THE COMPLAINT WOULD SOUND THE FIRST ALARM OF THE PRESIDENT'S WRONGDOING SECOND, THE PRESIDENT ISSUED AN ORDER, PROHIBITING THE ENTIRE, THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE BRANCH FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY NO COOPERATION, NO NEGOTIATION, NOTHING, OR AS WE SAY IN TEXAS, NOT A — NADA FOLLOWING ORDERS FEDERAL AGENCIES REFUSE TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS AND KEY WITNESSES, REFUSE TO TESTIFY IN FACT, THE PRESIDENT SANCTIONED SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS TO OFFICIALS TO DEFY CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS

THIRD, AND PERHAPS THE MOST REPREHENSIBLE OF ALL, THE PRESIDENT WAGED A CAMPAIGN OF INTIMIDATION, AGAINST BRAVE PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO DID COME FORWARD TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW SENATORS, AS I MENTIONED, I AM A LAWYER AND FORMER JUDGE I HAVE NEVER, EVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS FROM A LITIGANT PART OR PARTY IN ANY CASE, NOT ANYWHERE BUT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE SCANDAL, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS SOUGHT TO HIDE AND COVER UP KEY EVIDENCE THE COVER-UP STARTED EVEN BEFORE THE HOUSE BEGAN TO INVESTIGATE THE PRESIDENT'S UKRAINE RELATED ACTIVITY

IT BEGAN WHEN THE WHITE HOUSE SOUGHT TO CONCEAL THE RECORD OF DONALD TRUMP'S JULY 25 CALL WITH THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE BY PLACING IT ON A HIGHLY CLASSIFIED SYSTEM BUT AS WE HAVE SAID BEFORE, THERE WAS NO LEGITIMATE NATIONAL SECURITY REASON TO DO SO THE COVER-UP CONTINUED A TOP OMB OFFICIAL INSTRUCTED THE FREEZE TO BE QUOTED, CLOSELY HELD IN OTHER WORDS, DON'T SAY ANYTHING TO ANYBODY

SENATORS, YOU KNOW IN ORDER TO LAWFULLY WITHHOLD THE FUNDING, THE PRESIDENT WAS REQUIRED TO NOTIFY CONGRESS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY INVOLVED AND WHY HE WAS INTENDING TO FREEZE IT INSTEAD, THE WHITE HOUSE TRIED TO KEEP THE FACT OF THE FREEZE SECRET MAYBE THEY KEPT IT A SECRET BECAUSE A SENIOR WHITE HOUSE AID, ROB BLAIR ACCURATELY PREDICTED TO HIS BOSS, MICK MULVANEY QUOTE, EXPECT CONGRESS TO BECOME UNHINGED IF IT LEARNED THAT BIPARTISAN AID, APPROVED FOR VALUABLE FOREIGN PARTNER WAS BEING FROZEN FOR THE PRESIDENT'S PERSONAL GAIN THAT THE COVER-UP REACHED ITS PEAK, SOON AFTER AUGUST 12

BECAUSE ON AUGUST 12, A WHISTLE- BLOWER FILED A LAWFUL AND PROTECTIVE COMPLAINT, INTENDED FOR CONGRESS WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THE PRESIDENT, WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT, LEARNED OF THE FILING WELL BEFORE CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN AN EFFORT TO CONCEAL THE WHISTLE-BLOWER'S CONCERNS, THE WHITE HOUSE AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, TOOK AN UNPRECEDENTED STEP NO ADMINISTRATION HAD EVER INTERVENED IN SUCH A MANNER BEFORE BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP MANEUVERED TO KEEP THE WHISTLE-BLOWER CONCERNS FROM CONGRESSIONAL INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEES

IN THE HISTORY OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY WHISTLE- BLOWER PROTECTION ACT, NO CREDIBLE AND URGENT COMPLAINT HAD EVER, EVER BEEN WITHHELD FROM CONGRESS NOT EVER BEFORE IT WAS THROUGH IMMENSE PUBLIC PRESSURE, AND VIGOROUS OVERSIGHT BY THE HOUSE THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ULTIMATELY PRODUCED A COMPLAINT TO THE HOUSE AND SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEES EVEN WHEN IT WAS PRODUCED, IT WAS WEEKS AFTER THE LEGAL DEADLINE IF THE PRESIDENT'S EFFORTS TO CONCEAL THE WHISTLE-BLOWER CONCERNS HAD SUCCEEDED, CONGRESS WOULD NEVER HAVE LEARNED ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE COMPLAINT, LET ALONE THE ALLEGATINS THAT IT CONTAINED

BUT THIS ATTEMPT TO HIDE THE INFORMATION FROM CONGRESS WAS ONLY THE FIRST SIGN OF WHAT WAS TO COME FOLLOWING NEW, DEEPLY, TROUBLING REVELATIONS ABOUT THE JULY 25 CALL ON SEPTEMBER 24, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE ANNOUNCED THAT THE HOUSE INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME TO PRESSURE UKRAINE FOR PERSONAL GAIN WOULD BE FOLDED INTO THE ONGOING IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY JUST DAYS LATER, THE PRESIDENT BEGAN TO ATTACK THE LEGITIMAY OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WAS STANDING ON THE TARMAC OF ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, PRESIDENT TRUMP ARGUED THAT THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY QUOTE, SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED HE CLAIMED THAT THEY ARE, AND I CALLED AGAIN, THERE SHOULD BE A WAY OF STOPPING IT

MAYBE, LEGALLY THROUGH THE COURTS LET'S WATCH THE PRESIDENT AND WHAT HE HAD TO SAY >> MY CALL WAS PERFECT THE PRESIDENT, YESTERDAY OF UKRAINE, SAID IT WAS NO PRESSURE PUT ON HIM WHATSOEVER, NONE WHATSOEVER

AND HE SAID IT LOUD AND CLEAR FOR THE PRESS WHAT THESE GUYS ARE DOING, DEMOCRATS ARE DOING TO THIS COUNTRY IS A DISGRACE AND IT SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED THERE SHOULD BE A WAY OF STOPPING IT, MAY BE LEGALLY THROUGH THE COURTS >> THERE SHOULD BE A WAY OF STOPPING IT

SOON AFTER, PRESIDENT TRUMP TOOK THE MATTERS INTO HIS OWN HANDS THE PRESIDENT USED HIS AUTHORITY AND HIS OFFICE TO WAGE A RELENTLESS AND MISLEADING PUBLIC CAMPAIGN TO ATTACK THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE PRESIDENT SPENT TIME AT RALLIES AND PRESS CONFERENCES AND ON TWITTER, TRYING TO PERSUADE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT THE HOUSE'S INQUIRY WAS INVALID AND FRAUDULENT HERE, JUST A FEW OF HIS COMMENTS ABOUT THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HE CALLED IT A WITCH HUNT

A KUH AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB A FRAUD AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HE SAID, IT IS THE PHONY IMPEACHMENT SCAM THE PHONY IMPEACHMENT HOAX

THE UKRAINE HOAX AND A CONTINUATION OF THE GREATEST SCAM AND WITCHHUNT IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY AND THOSE ARE PROBABLY SOME OF THE ONES I CAN REPEAT HERE AND IT DIDN'T STOP THE ATTACKS DID NOT END THERE

PRESIDENT TRUMP TURNED FROM RHETORIC TO ACTION ON OCTOBER 8, THE WHITE HOUSE SENT A LETTER TO SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI, INFORMING HER THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD SEEK TO COMPLETELY ABSTRACT THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THEY SENT THE LETTER, THE WHITE HOUSE STATIONARY I SHOULDN'T SAY THIS BUT I AM A LAWYER, VERY — AID-PAGE LATER, LAWYERS CANNOT DO ANYTHING ON ONE PAGE WE HAVE TO DO SEVEN OR 8

I JUST WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM LINE IT SAYS, PRESIDENT TRUMP CANNOT PERMIT HIS ADMINISTRATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PARTISAN INQUIRY UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HE WAS JUST SAYING, WE ARE NOT GOING TO COOPERATE AND THE LETTER IS DATED, AGAIN, OCTOBER 8 AND IS SIGNED BY PAT CIPOLLONE WHO IS HERE, OF COURSE WITH THE LEAD COUNSEL FOR THE PRESIDENT THE PRESIDENT DID NOT MAKE ANY CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE THE PRESIDENT DID NOT MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO COMPROMISE

HE HAD NO VALID EXCUSE AND ALTHOUGH WE ARE ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP'S RHETORIC AND RANTS, THESE WORDS IN THIS LETTER ON THE WHITE HOUSE STATIONARY, SIGNED BY HIS LEAD COUNSEL, HERE TODAY HAS CONSEQUENCES THESE WORDS HAVE CONSEQUENCES THEY WERE MORE THAN JUST INK ON A PAGE THEY WERE MORE THAN JUST EIGHT PAGES OF WORDS IN THE DAYS THAT FOLLOWED, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S AGENCIES AND OFFICIALS FOLLOWED HIS ORDER TO CONCEAL INFORMATION FROM CONGRESS

OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS, YOU HAVE HEARD EXTENSIVE DETAIL FROM ALL OF US ABOUT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC AND INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS WITHHELD FROM CONGRESS TO BEGIN, HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE THE HOUSE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES, SOUGHT A TOTAL OF 71 SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OF DOCUMENTS FROM SIX DIFFERENT AGENCIES AND OFFICES PRESIDENT TRUMP BLOCKED EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, OF THESE REQUESTS ALL OF THEM

THE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE ISSUED SUBPOENAS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, TO THE WHITE HOUSE, THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, AND DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY THE COMMITTEES ALWAYS REMAINED OPEN TO WORKING WITH THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO DISCUSS AND PRIORITIZE THE SUBPOENAS úSOME SUGGESTED THEY MIGHT COMPLY FOR EXAMPLE, A FEW DAYS AFTER RECEIVING SUBPOENA, THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE SENT STAFF AND REACHED OUT TO THE COMMITTEE TO QUOTE, DISCUSS ACCOMMODATIONS AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE ACCOMMODATION PROCESS IS ONE CONGRESS AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DISCUSS PRIORITIES AND CONCERNS

SO THAT THE COMMITTEE GETS WHAT IT NEEDS EFFICIENTLY WHILE MINIMIZING ANY BURDEN TO THE AGENCY ON OCTOBER 7, THE COMMITTEE STAFF MET WITH STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS DURING THAT CONVERSATION, THE COMMITTEE MADE A GOOD-FAITH ATTEMPT TO ENGAGE THE DEPARTMENT IN NEGOTIATIONS TO START THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS THAT THE DEPARTMENT PRIORITIZE THE PRODUCTION OF A NARROW SET OF NONPRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE STATED THAT THEY WOULD TAKE THE REQUESTS BACK TO SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS

BUT THAT WAS THE END, THAT WAS THE END THOSE PRIORITY DOCUMENTS WERE NEVER PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEES IN ADDITION, TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT, THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ALSO SHOWED AN INITIAL INTEREST IN COOPERATING DURING AN OCTOBER 13 TELEVISION APPEARANCE, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE MARK ESPER STATED REPEATEDLY THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE WOULD SEEK TO COMPLY , HE SAID, ON AIR, ON TV AND THAT THEY WOULD SEEK TO COMPLY WITH THE SUBPOENAS IN EXCHANGE ON FACE THE NATION, HE SPECIFICALLY WAS ASKED, QUESTIONED, VERY QUICKLY, ARE YOU GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE SUBPOENA THAT THE HOUSE PROVIDED YOU IN DOCUMENTS TO THEM, REGARDING THE HALL TO MILITARY AID TO UKRAINE? ANSWER FROM THE SECRETARY, YES, WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO COOPERATE

WITH CONGRESS JUST IN THE LAST WEEK OR 2, GENERAL COUNSEL SENT OUT A NOTE, AS WE TYPICALLY DO IN THESE SITUATIONS TO ENSURE THE DOCUMENTS ARE RETAINED BUT AGAIN, THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT YES, ANSWER, THAT IS A YES QUESTION, YOU ARE COMPLYING WITH THE SUBPOENA? ANSWER AGAIN, THE SECRETARY, WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN COMPLY , THESE ARE HIS VERY OWN WORDS WE CAN COMPLY, WE CAN COMPLY

BUT REMEMBER, THAT OCTOBER 8 LETTER FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, COUNSEL SENT TO THE SPEAKER, STATING THAT THE PRESIDENT'S POSITION OF TOTAL DEFIANCE PRESIDENT TRUMP, AGAIN AND I WILL QUOTE IT, SAID, PRESIDENT TRUMP CANNOT PERMIT HIS ADMINISTRATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS ARTISAN INQUIRY UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES EVERY DEPARTMENT, EVERY OFFICE, TOP TO BOTTOM OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WAS UNDER THESE INSTRUCTIONS YOU KNOW, THAT IS ABOUT 2 MILLION PUBLIC SERVANTS, TOP TO BOTTOM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, ALL ORDERED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP, NOT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO CONGRESS

THE PRESIDENT OFFERED NO ACCOMMODATION AND NO OPPORTUNITY FOR NEGOTIATION ULTIMATELY, EACH AGENCY AND OFFICE FOLLOWED THE PRESIDENT'S ORDER AND IN RESPONSE TO EACH SUBPOENA, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION PRODUCED NO DOCUMENTS, NOTHING AND THE AGENCIES AND OFFICES MADE CLEAR THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE PRESIDENT'S INSTRUCTIONS THEY ALWAYS DEFER TO THAT OCTOBER 8 LETTER

FOR EXAMPLE, DESPITE THE SECRETARY'S INITIAL SIGNAL OF COOPERATION, I GAVE YOU THE QUOTE WHEN HE WAS ASKED SPECIFICALLY ON TV, HE SAID THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO COOPERATE DESPITE THAT, THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE LATER REFUSED TO RESPOND TO THE COMMITTEE PROFIT SUBPOENA IN A LETTER TO THE COMMITTEE, THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ECHOED MANY OF THE WHITE HOUSE'S UNSUPPORTED LEGAL ARGUMENTS AND CONCLUDED, AND I QUOTE, IN LIGHT OF THESE CONCERNS, AND IN VIEW OF THE PRESIDENT'S POSITION AS EXPRESSED IN THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL OCTOBER 8 LETTER, AND WITHOUT WAIVING ANY OTHER OBJECTIONS TO THE SUBPOENA, THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY HAVE, THE DEPARTMENT IS UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH YOUR REQUEST FOR DOCUMENT AT THIS TIME AGAIN, ON A TV INTERVIEW, ON FACE THE NATION, THEY TRIED TO ASK HIM AGAIN WHEN ASKED BY CHRIS WALLACE ON FOX NEWS, QUESTION, DO YOU FEEL CONGRESS HAS THE RIGHT TO OVERSIGHT AND TO BE ABLE TO SEE DOCUMENTS FROM THE PENTAGON ABOUT A PROGRAM THAT WAS APPROVED BY CONGRESS, ANSWER, THEY DO

BUT PROVIDED IT IS DONE IN THE RIGHT WAY AND PROPER WAY AND I THINK THAT WAS THE ISSUE, AGAIN, I THINK MY REPUTATION IS PRETTY GOOD IN TERMS OF BEING TRANSPARENT I LIKE TO COMMUNICATE WITH MEMBERS OF CONGRESS BUT IN THIS CASE, MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT THERE WERE TECHNICAL AND LEGAL ISSUES THAT PROHIBITED US FROM DOING EXACTLY WHAT WAS REQUESTED BY CONGRESS SO, HE SAID HE WOULD TRY TO COOPERATE, TO COMPLY BUT NOW THEY ARE BACKPEDALING BUT SENATORS, THERE WAS NO VALID, TECHNICAL OR LEGAL ARGUMENTS

NONE WERE PUT FORTH TO JUSTIFY THE STONEWALLING OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE DOCUMENTS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS WITHHOLDING ARE HIGHLY RELEVANT, RESPONSIVE AND WOULD FURTHER OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME HERE IS A SAMPLING OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE KNOW EXIST, THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING WITHHELD NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR JOHN BOLTON'S NOTES AMBASSADOR TAYLOR'S FIRST PERSON CABLE TO SECRETARY POMPEO, EMAILS BETWEEN OMB AND OTHER AGENCIES ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S DIRECTIVE TO PLACE A HOLD ON THE UKRAINE MILITARY AID AND THE HUNDREDS OF HEAVILY REDACTED DOCUMENTS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION NOW TURNED OVER TO 3rd PARTIES ON FOIA COURT ORDERS CERTAINLY THE DOCUMENTS RELEASED PURSUANT TO THE FOIA LAWSUITS WERE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY CLAIMS OR PRIVILEGE OR CONFIDENTIALITY OR BURDEN

THE ADMINISTRATION RELEASED THEM PUBLICLY BY CONTRAST, THE PRESIDENT TURNED OVER NOTHING IN RESPONSE TO THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION NOW SENATORS, THERE STILL IS ANOTHER COMPONENT OF THE PRESIDENT'S OBSTRUCTION THAT I WANT ALL OF US TO FOCUS ON NOT ONLY DID THE PRESIDENT BLOCK AGENCIES AND OFFICES FROM REDUCING DOCUMENTS, HIS ADMINISTRATION ALSO BLOCKED CURRENT AND FORMER OFFICIALS FROM IDENTIFYING, PRODUCING OR EVEN REVIEWING RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FIRST, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ACTIVELY DISCOURAGED EMPLOYEES FROM EVEN IDENTIFYING DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY GEORGE KENT TESTIFIED IN HIS DECIBEL — DEPOSITION THAT HE INFORMED THE STATE DEPARTMENT ATTORNEY ABOUT ADDITIONAL RESPONSIVE RECORDS THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAD NOT COLLECTED ACCORDING TO KENT, THE DEPARTMENT ATTORNEY, QUOTE, GOT VERY ANGRY

AND QUOTE, OBJECTIVE TO KENT RAISING OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HE QUOTE, MADE CLEAR THAT HE DID NOT THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR KENT TO MAKE THE SUGGESTION SO HERE IS A LAWYER TELLING THE WITNESS, DON'T SAY THAT FRANKLY, AS A FORMER JUDGE I CAN'T BELIEVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD HAPPEN BUT KENT RESPONDED, THAT HE WAS JUST TRYING TO QUOTE, MAKE SURE THAT THE DEPARTMENT WAS BEING FULLY RESPONSIVE

SECOND, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION REFUSED TO PERMIT INDIVIDUAL WITNESSES TO PRODUCE REVELER DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES AFTER THE STATE DEPARTMENT FAILED TO RESPOND TO VOLUNTARY REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS THAT WERE THE BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION, THE COMMITTEE SAID DOCUMENT REQUEST TO 6 INDIVIDUALS, STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES SECRETARY POMPEO OBJECTED TO THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS TO STATE OFFICIALS, CALLING THEM QUOTE, IT IS AN ACT OF INTIMIDATION AND INVITATION TO VIOLATE FEDERAL COURT LAWS HE ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE HOUSE INQUIRY QUOTE, AN ATTEMPT TO INTIMIDATE, BULLY AND TREAT THEM PROPERLY THE DISTINGUISHED PROFESSIONALS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE NOW, WE ARE THE BULLIES

BUT LET'S BE CLEAR, HIS STATEMENT HAS BEEN CONTRADICTED BY ACTUAL STATE DEPARTMENT PROFESSIONALS FROM WHOM THE COMMITTEE SOUGHT DOCUMENTS KENT TESTIFIED THAT HE QUOTE, HAD NOT FELT BULLIED, THREATENED AND INTIMIDATED BY THE HOUSE IN FACT KENT SAID THE LANGUAGE THE SECRETARY POMPEO'S LETTER, WHICH HAD BEEN DRAFTED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT ATTORNEY WAS WITHOUT CONSULTING MR KENT HE SAID, QUOTE, IT WAS INACCURATE

INACCURATE THAN THE STATE DEPARTMENT ORDERED WITNESSES TO WITHHOLD DOCUMENTS FROM CONGRESS FOR EXAMPLE, ON OCTOBER 14, THE DEPARTMENT SENT A LETTER TO KENT'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY, WARNING — WARNING, QUOTE, YOUR CLIENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO DISCLOSE TO CONGRESS ANY RECORDS RELATING TO OFFICIAL DUTIES CERTAIN WITNESSES DEFIED THIS ORDER AND PRODUCED THE SUBSTANCE OF KEY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING CRITICAL INSIGHT INTO THE PRESIDENT'S SCHEME

PARTNER WITNESSES PRODUCE DOCUMENTS TO THE TRUMP — TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SO THAT THEY COULD BE TURNED OVER TO CONGRESS NOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS ALSO SITTING ON THOSE DOCUMENTS AND IS REFUSING TO TURN THEM OVER AMBASSADOR TAYLOR TESTIFIED THAT HE TURNED OVER DOCUMENTS TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BUT TO HIS KNOWLEDGE THEY HAD NOT BEEN PRODUCED TO THE HOUSE LET'S WATCH

>> HAVE ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS YOU TURNED OVER, TO KNOWLEDGE BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE COMMITTEE? >> NO >> SENATORS, I WILL CONFIRM THE COMMITTEES HAVE NOT SEEN, NOT ONE OF THESE DOCUMENTS NONE FINALLY, IF IT CAN BE ANY WORSE, WELL IT IS A TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL , AMBASSADOR SONDLAND INFORMED US THAT HE WAS NOT EVEN PERMITTED TO REVIEW HIS OWN ROUGH FISH RELEVANT RECORDS IN PREPARATION FOR TESTIMONY

AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE HIS OWN RECORD SO THAT HE COULD PREPARE TO TESTIFY LET'S WATCH >> I HAVE NOT HAD ACCESS TO ALL OF MY PHONE RECORDS, STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS AND MANY, MANY OTHER STATE DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS I WAS TOLD I COULD NOT WORK WITH MY EU STAFF TO PULL TOGETHER THE RELEVANT FILES AND INFORMATION HAVING ACCESS TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT MATERIALS WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL TO ME IN TRYING TO RECONSTRUCT, WITH WHOM I SPOKE AND MET AND WHEN AND WHAT WAS SAID

MY LAWYERS AND I HAVE MADE MULTIPLE REQUESTS TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT AND THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THESE MATERIALS YET, THESE MATERIALS WERE NOT PROVIDED TO ME AND THEY HAVE ALSO REFUSED TO SHARE THESE MATERIALS WITH THIS COMMITTEE THESE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AND IN FAIRNESS, SHOULD'VE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE >> OF COURSE WE AGREED

A PRESIDENT TRUMP SORTER, AGENCIES AND OFFICES REFUSE TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMITTEE REQUESTS AND THEY REFUSE TO ALLOW INDIVIDUAL WITNESSES TO DO SO EITHER SO LET'S RECAP THE DOCUMENTS, ZERO, TO SAG, NADA IN RESPONSE TO OVER 70 REQUESTS , 70 REQUESTS AND FIVE SUBPOENAS NO ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE

NO GENUINE ATTEMPT TO ACCOMMODATE CATEGORICAL INDISCRIMINATE AND UNPRECEDENTED STONEWALLING AGAIN, NEVER IN MY TIME AS A LAWYER OR AS A JUDGE, HAVE I EVER SEEN THIS KIND OF TOTAL DISRESPECT AND DEFIANCE OF A LAWFULLY ISSUED SUBPOENA IN ALL, A PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BORDERS AND IT COULD CONTINUE BECAUSE THIS OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS ISRAEL AND IT IS BEYOND COMPARISON

THIS PRESIDENT SHOULD BE REMOVED >> MR CHIEF JUSTICE AND SENATORS, LET'S TURN TO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EFFORTS TO STOP WITNESSES TESTIFYING NO OTHER PRESIDENT, FACING IMPEACHMENT HAS TAKEN THE EXTREME STEP TO PROHIBIT EXECUTIVE WITNESSES, BRANCH WITNESSES FROM TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS EVEN PRESIDENT NIXON, WHO FAMOUSLY ATTEMPTED TO DEFY A SUBPOENA FOR TAPE RECORDINGS OF THE CONVERSATIONS, HE LET HIS MOST SENIOR STAFF TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS

NOW I REMEMBER LISTENING ON TV AS JOHN DEAN TESTIFIED BEFORE THE SENATE WATERGATE COMMITTEE HE WAS THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYER PRESIDENT NIXON DIDN'T BLOCK HIM NOT ONLY DID PRESIDENT NIXON ALLOW HIS STAFF TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS, HE PUBLICLY DIRECTED THEM TO TESTIFY AND WITHOUT DEMANDING A SUBPOENA ACTUALLY, WITH THE SENATE WATERGATE INVESTIGATION, PRESIDENT NIXON SAID, THIS IS A QUOTE, ALL MEMBERS OF THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF WILL APPEAR VOLUNTARILY WHEN REQUESTED BY THE COMMITTEE

THEY WILL TESTIFY, UNDER OATH AND WILL ANSWER FULLY, ALL PROPER QUESTIONS NOW COMPARE THAT TO PRESIDENT TRUMP HE PUBLICLY ATTACKED THE HOUSE 'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY CALLING IT QUOTE, CONSTITUTIONALLY INVALID AND HE ORDERED EVERY SINGLE PERSON, WORKING IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO DEFY THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AS JUST DISCUSSED IN THE LETTER TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL SAID THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP, QUOTE, CANNOT PERMIT HIS ADMINISTRATION TO PARTICIPATE

NO PRESIDENT EVER USE THE OFFICIAL POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO PREVENT WITNESSES FROM GIVING TESTIMONY TO CONGRESS IN SUCH A BLANKET AND INDISCRIMINATE MANNER THERE'S NO TELLING HOW MANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WOULD HAVE COME FORWARD IF THE PRESIDENT HAD AN ISSUE THIS ORDER LET'S LOOK AT SOME OF THE WITNESSES THAT FOLLOW THE PRESIDENT'S ORDERS THE HOUSE ISSUED SUBPOENAS TO COMPEL THE TESTIMONY OF THREE OFFICIALS AT THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET ACTING DIRECTOR RUSSELL WATTS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR MICHAEL DUFFY AND ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR MICHAEL McCORMICK

ACCORDING TO THE TESTIMONY IN THE HOUSE, WHICH WAS REINFORCED BY EMAILS, RECENTLY REVEALED, THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT LAWSUITS, OMB WAS JUST CENTRAL TO THE PRESIDENT'S HOLD ON SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO UKRAINE IT OFFICIALLY SERVED AS CONDUIT FOR THE WHITE HOUSE TO IMPLEMENT THE HOLD WITHOUT DIRECTLY ENGAGING THE AGENCY THAT SUPPORTED THE RELEASE OF THE AID PRESIDENT TRUMP DIRECTED THESE THREE OMB OFFICIALS TO VIOLATE THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATION BY DEFYING LAWFUL SUBPOENAS AND THEY FOLLOWED HIS ORDERS THIS ISN'T JUST AN ARGUMENT IT IS A FACT

IN RESPONSE TO HAVE SUBPOENAS, THE OMB SENT A LETTER TO CHAIRMAN SCHIFF, REFUSING TO COMPLY AND THIS IS WHAT THE LETTER SAID AS DIRECTED BY THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL'S OCTOBER 8, 2019 LETTER, OMB WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS PARTISAN AND UNFAIR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT, OMB ADMITTED SEVERAL KEY POINTS FIRST, MR

SUBLIMITY'S LETTER OF OCTOBER 8 WAS UNOFFICIAL DIRECTED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE SECOND, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BLANKET ORDER APPLIED TO OMB AND THE THREE OFFICIALS SUBPOENAED BY THE HOUSE THIRD, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BLANKET ORDER, NOT ONLY DIRECTED THEM TO REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE VOLUNTARILY, IT ALSO DIRECTED THEM TO DEFY HOW SUBPOENAS FOURTH, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BLANKET ORDER DIRECTLY PREVENTED THE THREE OMB OFFICIALS FROM PROVIDING TESTIMONY TO THE HOUSE THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THE SCOPE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ORDER, IT WAS TOTAL

THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THE INTENT OF THE ORDER IT WAS CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD BY ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS AS SHOWN BY OMB AND THERE IS NO QUESTION, THE ORDER HAD AN IMPACT IT DIRECTLY PREVENTED THE HOUSE FROM GETTING TESTIMONY FROM THE THREE SENIOR OFFICIALS AT OMB SO HERE WE ARE

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ISSUED AN OFFICIAL ORDER, FOR BIDDING EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO WORKS FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, OF OUR GOVERNMENT FROM GIVING TESTIMONY TO THE HOUSE AS PART OF THE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION THAT ORDER, PREVENTED THE HOUSE FROM GETTING TESTIMONY FROM WITNESSES WHO KNEW ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S MISCONDUCT THE MATTER IS SIMPLE, PLAIN TO SEE THE QUESTION, WE HERE IN CONGRESS MUST ASK, IS WHETHER WE ARE PREPARED TO TURN A BLIND EYE TO A PRESIDENT'S OBSTRUCTION OBSTRUCTION NOT ONLY OF OVERSIGHT BUT ALSO THE POWER TO TO DETERMINE WHETHER CONGRESS MAY GATHER EVIDENCE IN AN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING

IF THE SENATE IS PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT, IT WILL MEAN THAT NOT ONLY PRESIDENT TRUMP, ALL PRESIDENTS AFTER HIM WILL HAVE VETO POWER OVER CONGRESS' ABILITY TO CONDUCT OVERSIGHT AND THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT THE HOUSE WAS NOT PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT AND THAT IS WHY THE HOUSE APPROVED THE ARTICLE TO AS YOU CONSIDER, WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT PLEASE KNOW THAT THE PRESIDENT'S BLANKET ORDER WAS NOT THE END OF HIS CAMPAIGN TO OBSTRUCT THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ACTUALLY, IT WAS JUST THE BEGINNING IN ADDITION TO HIS TOTAL BAN OF GOVERNMENT WITNESSES, PRESIDENT TRUMP ALSO SAID SPECIFIC EXPLICIT ORDERS

HE DIRECTED KEY WITNESSES TO DEFY SUBPOENAS AND TO REFUSE TO TESTIFY AS PART OF THE HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AS YOU KNOW THE HOUSE SUBPOENAED ACTIVE THE DAY AFTER HIS INITIALLY SCHEDULED DEPOSITION, MR BLAIR'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY SENT A LETTER TO THE HOUSE IT SAID, QUOTE, MR BLAIR HAS BEEN DIRECTED BY THE WHITE HOUSE NOT TO APPEAR AND TESTIFY

THE HOUSE ALSO WANTED TESTIMONY FROM JOHN EISENBURG, THE SENIOR ATTORNEY ON PRESIDENT TRUMP'S NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AS YOU'VE HEARD OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS, KEY WITNESSES INCLUDING DR HILL, LIEUTENANT COLONEL VENNMAN SAID THEY WERE CONCERNED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EFFORTS TO PRESSURE UKRAINE THEY WERE TOLD TO REPORT THESE CONCERNS TO MR EISENBURG

ON THE DAY BEFORE HIS SCHEDULED DEPOSITION, THE WHITE HOUSE SENT A LETTER TO MRIZENBURG'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY THAT SAID, QUOTE, THE PRESIDENT DIRECTS MRIZINGBURG MR EISENBURG TO APPEAR THE LETTER SAID THIS, UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, MR

EISENBERG HAS NO OBLIGATION SEPTEMBER TO FOLLOW THE DIRECTION OF HIS EMPLOYER, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ACCORDINGLY MR EISENBERG WILL NOT APPEAR IT SHOWS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ORDER LEFT MR EISENBERG WITH NO OTHER OPTION CONSISTENT WITH HIS LEGAL AND ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS BY DIRECTING HIM TO DEFY A LAWFUL SUBPOENA, PRESIDENT TRUMP CREATED A LEGAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEM FOR MR

EISENBERG CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS CAN BE PUNISHABLE AS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE AND CARRY A SENTENCE UP TO 12 MONTHS IN JAIL NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER DARED DURING AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO EXPLICITLY ORDER GOVERNMENT WITNESSES TO DEFY HOUSE SUBPOENAS YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER HIGH MINDED CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WAS WRONG IT'S SIMPLE REALLY

BY ORDERING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO DEFY SUBPOENAS, PRESIDENT TRUMP FORCED THOSE OFFICIALS TO CHOOSE BETWEEN SUBMITTING TO THE DEMANDS OF THEIR BOSS OR BREAK THE LAW NOBODY SHOULD ABUSE A POSITION OF POWER IN THAT WAY PRESIDENT TRUMP SPECIFICALLY ORDERED ALL THREE OF THESE SENIOR WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS, MULVANEY, BLAIR, EISENBURG TO ORDER SUBPOENAS AND REFUSED TO TESTIFY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EFFORTS TO CONCEAL ACTIONS DIDN'T STOP THERE AND DIDN'T STOP AT THE FRONT DOOR OF THE WHITE HOUSE NO LESS THAN 12 OTHER WITNESSES WERE SPECIFICALLY ORDERED NOT TO TESTIFY

ONE OF THOSE WITNESSES HASN'T BEEN HIGHLIGHTED MUCH OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS THE WAY HE FITS INTO THE STORY IS WORTH NOTING MR BRECKBOIL IS A SENIOR OFFICIAL AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT LIKE OTHER SENIOR OFFICIALS, HE WAS ORDERED NOT TO TESTIFY

IN A LETTER TO THE HOUSE, HIS ATTORNEY SAID, QUOTE, MR BRECKBOIL HAS RECEIVED A LETTER OF INSTRUCTION FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT DIRECTING HE NOT APPEAR MR BRECKBOIL IS ANOTHER PERSON THAT COULD SHED LIGHT ON MR TRUMP'S ACTIONS

HE WAS KEPT UPDATED ON RUDY GIULIANI'S BROADER EFFORTS IN UKRAINE HE HAD FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE OF SECRETARY POMPEO'S INVOLVEMENT FOR ONE THING, HE HANDLED THE RECALL FROM UKRAINE EVEN THOUGH HE REFUSED TO MEET WITH HER IN THE AFTERMATH ALSO MESSAGES BY THE AMBASSADOR SHOW MR BRECHBUHL KNEW ABOUT GIULIANI'S EFFORTS IN THE UKRAINE AS THEY OCCURRED

ON JULY 10th, AMBASSADORS, TAYLOR, SONDLAND DISCUSSED RUDY GIULIANI'S PUSH ABROAD WHILE DISCUSSING THE PROBLEMS RUDY WAS CREATING BY MEDDLING IN OFFICIAL US FOREIGN POLICY, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR NOTED HE, QUOTE, BRIEFED ALRICH THIS AFTERNOON HE EMAILED TO ASK HIM TO BRIEF SECRETARY POMPEO ON THE STATEMENT HE WAS NEGOTIATES WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY, THE AIM OF QUOTE, MAKING THE BOSS HAPPY ENOUGH TO AUTHORIZE AN INVITATION

AMBASSADOR SONDLAND WROTE TO HIM, QUOTE, WE NEGOTIATED A STATEMENT FROM Z TO BE DELIVERED FOR OUR REVIEW IN A DAY OR TWO THE CONTENTS WILL HOPEFULLY MAKE THE BOSS HAPPY ENOUGH TO AUTHORIZE AN INVITATION STATE DEPARTMENT SECRETARY ANSWERED AM AMBASSADOR SONDLAND LATER LETTING HIM KNOW SHE'D PASS THAT ON TO SECRETARY POMPEO LET'S CONSIDER AND PAUSE WHY THIS MESSAGE TO MR BRECHBUHL THAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT CONTINUES TO CONCEAL IS IMPORTANT

IN THIS EXCHANGE, AMBASSADOR SONDLAND TOLD BRECHBUHL THAT HE NEGOTIATED A DEAL TO GET ZELENSKY TO MAKE A STATEMENT AND SONDLAND HOPED THE PROMISED STATEMENT WOULD, QUOTE MAKE THE BOSS HAPPY ENOUGH TO AUTHORIZE AN INVITATION IT SHOWS THAT SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT LEADERSHIP INCLUDING SECRETARY POMPEO WERE QUITE AWARE OF THE DEAL TO TRADE AN INVITATION TO THE WHITE HOUSE FOR A STATEMENT FROM PRESIDENT ZELENSKY INDEED AMBASSADOR SONDLAND CONFIRMED HE KEPT THEM IN THE LOOP HERE'S HIS TESTIMONY >> WE KEPT THE LEADERSHIP OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT AND THE NSC INFORMED OF OUR ACTIVITIES

THAT INCLUDED COMMUNICATIONS WITH SECRETARY OF STATE POMPEO, HIS COUNCILLOR, ULRCH, HIS SECRETARY, AM BASS BOAR BOLTON, HILL, MORRISON, THEIR STAFF AT NSC THEY KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING AND WHY >> EIGHT OTHER WITNESSES WERE ALSO ORDERED NOT TO TESTIFY AS PART OF THE HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THOSE EIGHT WITNESSES CAME FORWARD ANY WAY DESPITE THE PRESIDENT'S EFFORTS TO PREVENT THEM FROM TESTIFYING ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES WERE TOLD NOT TO TESTIFY

AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH, SONDLAND, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF SATE GEORGE KENT, AMBASSADOR BILL TAYLOR, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LAURA COOPER, DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AT OMB MARK SANDY, STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL KATHERINE CROFT AND STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL KRISTIN ANDERSON EACH FOLLOWED LAW, OBEYED HOUSE SUBPOENAS TESTIFIED BEFORE THE HOUSE N ALL, WE KNOW THAT BY ISSUES THE BLANKET ORDER AND LATER SPECIFIC ORDERS, PRESIDENT TRUMP PREVENTED AT LEAST 12 CURRENT OR FORMER ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS FROM TESTIFYING DURING THE HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HE SPECIFICALLY FORCED NINE OF THOSE WITNESSES TO DEFY DUALLY AUTHORIZED SUBPOENAS THE FACTS ARE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND NOT IN DISPUTE

FIRST, IN THE HISTORY OF OUR REPUBLICAN, NO PRESIDENT EVER DARED TO ISSUE AN ORDER TO PREVENT A SINGLE GOVERNMENT WITNESS FROM TESTIFYING IN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY SECOND, PRESIDENT TRUMP ABUSED THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE BY USING HIS OFFICIAL POWER IN AN ATTEMPT TO PREVENT EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO WORKS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH FROM TESTIFYING BEFORE THE HOUSE FINALLY, PRESIDENT TRUMP 'S ORDERS IN FACT PREVENTED THE HOUSE FROM OBTAINING KEY WITNESS TESTIMONY FROM AT LEAST 12 CURRENT OR FORMER GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ORDERS WERE CLEAR THEY WERE CATEGORICAL

THEY WERE INDISCRIMINATE AND WRONG THEY PREVENTED KEY GOVERNMENT WITNESSES FROM TESTIFYING THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT'S OBSTRUCTION PLAIN AND SIMPLE PUBLICLY ATTACK THE PUBLIC SERVANTS THAT CAME FORWARD TO TESTIFY

TO BE CLEAR, THESE WITNESSES DIDN'T SEEK THE SPOTLIGHT IN THIS WAY FOR YEARS THEY QUIETLY AND EFFECTIVELY PERFORMED DUTIES ON BEHALF OF THE NATURAL INTEREST AND BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE WHY WOULD THEY SEEK THE SPOTLIGHT IN THIS WAY KNOWING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN RESPONSE THE PRESIDENT ISSUED THREATS, OPENLY DISCUSSD POSSIBLE RETALIATION ATTACKED THE CHARACTER, PATRIOTISM AND SUBJECTED THEM TO MOCKERY AND OTHER INSULTS THE PRESIDENT'S ATTACKS WERE BROADCAST TO MILLIONS OF AMERICANS INCLUDING WITNESSES, THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS, AND THEIR COWORKERS THIS CAMPAIGN OF INTIMIDATION RISKED DISCOURAGING WITNESSES FROM COMING FORWARD VOLUNTARILY OR COMPLYING WITH MANDATORY SUBPOENAS FOR DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONIES AS WE ALL KNOW, WITNESS INTIMIDATION IS A FEDERAL CRIME

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TODAY TO WALK THROUGH EACH OF THE PRESIDENT'S ATTACKS ON THE HOUSE'S WITNESSES MARIE VA YOVANOVITCH WAS CALLED FOR TESTIMONY DURING A DIFFERENT TOUR, WHEN AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH HELPED TO OPEN A US EMBASSY, DURING WHICH TIME THE EMBASSY WAS ATTACKED BY A GUNMAN THAT SPRAYED THE BUILDING WITH GUNFIRE AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH SERVED AS AMBASSADOR AND SERVED THE U

S EMBASSY AND MOSCOW AS CHAIRMAN SCHIFF SAID EARLIER, SHE HAS SERVED IN SOME DANGEROUS PLACES AROUND THE WORLD ON BEHALF OF OUR INTERESTS AND THE INTERESTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS DESCRIBED AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH AS AN EXCEPTIONAL OFFICER DOING EXCEPTIONAL WORK AT A CRITICAL EMBASSY DURING AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH'S PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PRESIDENT TRUMP TWEETED, EVERYWHERE MARIE YOVANOVITCH WENT TURNED BAD

SHE STARTED OFF IN SOMALIA HOW DID THAT GO? THEN FAST FORWARD TO UKRAINE WHERE THE NEW UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT SPOKE UNFAVORABLELY ABOUT HER IN MY SECOND PHONE CALL WITH HIM IT IS THE US

OUT RIGHT ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO APPOINT AMBASSADORS IN THAT SAME HEARING, CHAIRMAN SCHIFF ASKED AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH FOR HER REACTIONS TO THE PRESIDENT'S ATTACKS DURING HER TESTIMONY BEFORE THE HOUSE LET'S LISTEN TO THAT EXCHANGE NOT WITHSTANDING THE FACT AS YOU TESTIFIED EARLIER THE PRESIDENT IMPLICITLY THREATENED YOU IN THAT CALL RECORD NOW THE PRESIDENT REAL TIME IS ATTACKING YOU

WHAT EFFECT DO YOU THINK THAT HAS ON OTHER WITNESSES WILLINGNESS TO COME FORWARD AND EXPOSE WRONG DOING? >> WELL, IT'S VERY INTIMIDATING >> IT'S DESIGNED TO INTIMIDATE, IS IT NOT? >> I MEAN, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO DO I THINK THE EFFECT IS TO BE INTIMIDATING SOME OF US HERE TAKE WITNESS INTIMIDATION VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY >> THE HOUSE ALSO SUBPOENAED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY OF AMBASSADOR WILLIAM B TAYLOR, ANOTHER CAREER PUBLIC SERVANT THAT GRADUATED AT THE TOP OF HIS CLASS AT WEST POINT, SERVED AS INFANTRY COMMANDER IN VIETNAM AND EARNED A BRONZE STAR AND AN AIR MEDAL WITH THE V DEVICE FOR VALOR

YES, YET SHORTLY AFTER AMBASSADOR TAYLOR CAME FORWARD TO CONGRESS, PRESIDENT TRUMP PUBLICLY REFERRED TO HIM AS A NEVER TRUMPER WITHOUT ANY BASIS THEN WHEN A REPORTER NOTE HAD THE SECRETARY OF STATE MIKE POMPEO HAD HIRED AMBASSADOR TAYLOR, PRESIDENT TRUMP RESPONDED, AND I QUOTE, HEY, EVERYBODY MAKES MISTAKES HE THEN HAD THE FOLLOWING EXCHANGE ABOUT AMBASSADOR TAYLOR LET'S LISTEN >> HE'S A NEVER TRUMPER

HIS LAWYER IS HEAD OF THE NEVER TRUMPER THEY'RE A DYING BREED THEY'RE STILL THERE >> AMBASSADOR TAYLOR HAS SINCE STEPPED DOWN FROM HIS POSITION AS OUR CHIEF DIPLOMAT IN UKRAINE IN ADDITION TO HIS RELENTLESS ATTACK ON WITNESSES WHO TESTIFIED IN CONNECTION TO THE HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, THE PRESIDENT ALSO REPEATEDLY THREATENED AND ATTACKED THE MEMBER OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY WHO FILED THE ANONYMOUS WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT

IN MORE THAN 100 STATEMENTS ABOUT THE WHISTLE-BLOWER, OVER A PERIOD OF JUST TWO MONTHS, THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY QUESTIONED THE WHISTLE-BLOWER'S MOTIVES AND DISPUTED THE ACCURACY OF THE WHISTLE- BLOWER'S ACCOUNT MOST DISTURBING, PRESIDENT TRUMP ISSUED A THREAT AGAINST THE WHISTLE-BLOWER AND THOSE WHO PROVIDED INFORMATION TO THE WHISTLE-BLOWER LET'S LISTEN >> WHO'S THE PERSON THAT GAVE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER ? THE PERSON THAT GAVE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER TE INFORMATION? YOU KNOW WHAT WE USE TO DO IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN WE WERE SMART WITH SPIES AND TREASON? WE USED TO HANDLE THEM DIFFERENTLY >> THE PRESIDENT'S NEED TO CONCEAL HISSINGS WERE SO EXTREME, HE ATTACKED THE CREDIBILITY OF THOSE WITNESSES WHO SERVED OUR COUNTRY IN COMBAT

THIS INCLUDED ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY PERSONNEL AND VETERANS WHO EARNED THE PURPLE HEART AND BRONZE STAR AMONG OTHER BATTLEFIELD RECOGNITION BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP SHOWED ULTRA DISREGARD FOR SUCH PATRIOTISM FOR EXAMPLE, PRESIDENT TRUMP ATTACKED LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINMAN DURING HIS TESTIMONY ON NOVEMBER 19th SEEKING TO QUESTION HIS LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES THE PRESIDENT RETWEETED LIEUTENANT VINMAN WAS OFFERED POSITION OF DEFENSE MINISTER FOR UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT THREE TIMES LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINMAN, THE NATIONAL SECURITY DIRECTOR FOR UKRAINE HAS BEEN AN ACTIVE DUTY ARMY OFFICER MORE THAN 20 YEARS

LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINMAN EARNED A PURPLE HEART FOR WOUNDS HE SUSTAINED IN AN IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE ATTACK OR DEVICE IN IRAQ PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN OF WITNESS INTIMIDATION IS REPREHENSIBLE TO BASIS THE PRESIDENCY AND PART OF HIS EFFORT TO OBSTRUCT THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE FACT THAT IT IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MAKING THESE THREATS TELLS US SOMETHING IT TELLS US THAT THE PRESIDENT DESPERATELY WANTED TO KEEP WITNESSES FROM TESTIFYING IT IMPACTS YOU

YOUR JOB AS MEMBER OF CONGRESS IS TO HOLD THE BRANCH IN CHECK THIS IS TRUE NO MATTER WHO OCCUPIES THE WHITE HOUSE OR WHICH PARTY CONTROLS THE HOUSE OR SENATE THE FURTHER THE PRESIDENT, ANY PRESIDENT DEPARTS FROM THE LAW AND CONSTITUTION, THE MORE IMPORTANT IT IS FOR YOU TO DO YOUR JOB I SUSPECT THERE'S COMMON GROUND HERE WE KNOW IN ORDER TO DO WORK, THEY MUST HAVE INFORMATION

WHAT IS THE ADMINISTRATION DOING? SHOULD WE SUPPORT IT, OPPOSE IT, ENACT LEGISLATION TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM? ASKING QUESTIONS, GATHERING INFORMATION, MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON ANSWERS, THIS IS ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL FUNCTIONS OF CONGRESS I SUSPECT THAT WE AGREE ON THIS AS WELL OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT WORK DEPENDS ON OUR GATHERING INFORMATION IT DEPENDS ON THE POWER OF THE CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA EVEN WHEN YOU MAKE A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM THE ADMINISTRATION, THAT REQUEST IS BACKED BY THE THREAT OF A SUBPOENA

ALTHOUGH THE POWER OF CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA IS CONFIRMED REPEATEDLY BY THE COURTS, INSHRINED IN THE RULES AND HOUSE OF SENATE AND INSPECTED BY HOUSE AGENCIES FOR CENTURIES, IF THE PRESIDENT CHOOSES TO IGNORE SUBPOENAS, OUR POWERS AND BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, THE ABILITY TO DO OUR JOBS, OUR ABILITY TO KEEP AN ADMINISTRATION IN CHECK, OUR ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY A CONGRESS, NOT JUST BY A PRESIDENT IS DIMINISHED PLEASE KNOW WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT A DISAGREEMENT OVER THE LAST FEW DOCUMENTS AT THE END OF A LONG PRODUCTION SCHEDULE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DIRECT ORDER FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO COMPLETELY DISREGARD ALL SUBPOENAS, TO DENY ALL INFORMATION THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO KEEP SECRET THIS IS AN ORDER TO DEPRIVE CONGRESS OF OUR ABILITY TO HOLD THE ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE IT IS A BID TO CONGRESS TO RENDER THE PRESIDENT ALL POWERFUL SINCE CONGRESS CANNOT HAVE INFORMATION, THE PRESIDENT DIDN'T WANT US TO HAVE

WITHOUT INFORMATION, WE CANNOT ACT SO WE MUST ASK, IS THERE A CONSEQUENCE FOR A PRESIDENT WHO DEFIES OUR SUBPOENAS ABSOLUTELY, WHO SAYS TO ALL BRANCHES OF THE ADMINISTRATION DO NOT OBEY A SINGLE CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA CATEGORICALLY WITHOUT KNOWING THE SUBJECT OF THE SUBPOENA? JUST NEVER ANSWER A CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA WHO DENIES CONGRESS THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION NECESSARY, TO CHALLENGE HIS POWER WOULD MADISON HAMILTON IN WASHINGTON SUPPORT REMOVING A PRESIDENT WHO DECLARES THE CONSTITUTION LITS HIM DO WHATEVER HE WANTS AND WHO BRAISINGLY ADDS HE CAN IGNORE ANY EFFORT TO INVESTIGATE EVEN WHEN BACKED BY SUBPOENAS THAT THE LAW REQUIRES HIM TO OBEY? THE ANSWER TO ALL THESE IS A RESOUNDING YES I'D LET TO SET THE SCENE

FRAMERS WERE WISE THEY WORRIED THE PRESIDENT WOULD USE IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN THEY FEARED A PRESIDENT MIGHT MISTAKE HIMSELF FOR A KING WHO'S DECISIONS CANNOT BE QUESTIONED, CONTACT CANNOT BE INVESTIGATED, WHO'S POWER TRANCE ENDS THE RULE OF LAW SUCH WOULD BE KING WOULD THINK THINGS LIKE, QUOTE, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER I WANT AS PRESIDENT HE MIGHT BELIEVE THAT IT IS QUOTE, ILLEGITIMATE FOR ANYONE TO INVESTIGATE HIM OF COURSE NOT EVEN THE FRAMERS COULD HAVE IMAGINED A PRESIDENT WOULD SAY THESE THINGS OUT LOUD

A PRESIDENT WITH THIS VIEW OF RAW POWER WOULD ATTACK ANYONE WHO HAVE TRIED TO HOLD HIM TO ACCOUNT BRANDING THEM QUOTE HUMAN SCUM AND QUOTE, THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE HE WOULD ARGUE THAT COURTS HAVE NO POWER TO ENFORCE SUBPOENAS AGAINST HIM HE WOULD CONSCRIPT ALLIES TO RIDICULE CONGRESS, HARASS WITNESSES THAT TESTIFIED AGAINST HIM, DECLARING IT DISLOYAL TO QUESTION HIS CONDUCT HE WOULD USE THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE TO SABOTAGE OUR SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES

ALL OF THIS WE HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST FEW YEARS INDEED IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS THE FRAMERS WROTE THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM SUCH A PRESIDENT THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE EXISTS TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN BETWEEN ELECTIONS IT EXISTS TO REMIND PRESIDENTS THEY SERVE THE PUBLIC NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND IT IS A REMINDER TO PRESIDENTS THEY ANSWER TO SOMETHING GREATER THAN THEMSELVES

IT CONFIRMS THAT NOBODY IN AMERICA IS ABOVE THE LAW NOT EVEN THE PRESIDENT AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THE IMPEACHMENT POWER DOES NOT MAGICALLY PROTECT US WHEN A PRESIDENT COMMITS HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS IN BENJAMIN FRANKLIN'S WORDS, FRAMERS LEFT US A REPUBLIC IF WE CAN KEEP IT ONE WAY WE CAN UPHOLD THAT PROMISE IS DUE OUR DUTY AS ELECTED MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO HOLD THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IN CHECK

THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS PART OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN THE BURDEN IS OURS REGARDLESS OF OUR POLITICAL PARTY NO MATTER WHO SITS IN THE OVAL OFFICE N ORDINARY COURTS WHEN WE DO OUR JOBS, WE DO OUR NATION'S SERVICE BY HOLDING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, BOTH POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL CORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE FOR ITS ACTIONS WHEN THE PRESIDENT'S CONDUCT EXCEEDS THE SAFEGUARDS, IT FALLS ON THE HOUSE TO INVESTIGATE PRESIDENTIAL WRONG DOING AND IF NECESSARY TO APPROVE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT IT THEN FALLS ON THE SENATE TO JUDGE, CONVICT, REMOVE PRESIDENTS THAT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION

IF PRESIDENTS COULD ABUSE THEIR POWER AND THEN CONCEAL ALL THE EVIDENCE FROM CONGRESS, THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE WOULD BE ANULLITY WE THE PEOPLE WOULD LOSE VITAL PROTECTION IN HISTORY, THEY REPEATEDLY RECOGNIZED IMPEACHMENT SERVED IN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY MUST BE OBEYED INCLUDING BY THE PRESIDENT IT IS BEFORE PRESIDENT TRUMP ONLY A SINGLE OFFICIAL IN AMERICAN HISTORY THAT DEFIED AN IMPEACHMENT SUBPOENA, AND WHY THAT OFFICIAL RICHARD NIXON FACED ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE REASONED IN ANALYSIS OF KNICKS SON'S OKAY INSTRUCTION, QUOTE, UNLESS THE DEFIANCE OF THE HOUSE OF SUBPOENAS IS CONSIDERED GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT, IT IS DIFFICULT TO CONCEIVE OF ANY PRESIDENT ACKNOWLEDGING HE IS OBLIGATED TO SUPPLY THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE NECESSARY FOR CONGRESS AND RESPONSIBILITY IN AN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING REPRESENTATIVE FROM ILLINOIS EXPLAINED IMPORTANCE OF OUR ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT FOR SEPARATION OF POWERS

HE SAID IF WE REFUSE TO RECOMMEND THE PRESIDENT BE IMPEACHED BECAUSE OF HIS DEFIANCE OF CONGRESS AND RESPECTED SUBPOENAS WE HAVE ISSUED, THE FUTURE RESPONDENTS WILL BE IN THE POSITION WHERE THEY CAN DETERMINE THEMSELVES WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO PROVIDE IN AN IMPEACHMENT REQUIRE AND WHAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE THIS WOULD BE PARTICULARLY SO IN THE CASE OF AN INQUIRY DIRECTED TOWARD THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES SO NOT ONLY AFFECT THIS IS PRESIDENT BUT FUTURE PRESIDENTS THAT'S WHY WE FIND OURSELVES NOW BUT WITH GREATER FORCE PRESIDENT TRUMP NIXON AUTHORIZED OTHER EXECUTIVE BRANCH OFFICIALS AND AGENCIES TO HONOR THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATIONS

HE ALSO TURNED OVER MANY OF HIS OWN DOCUMENTS PRESIDENT TRUMP IN CONTRAST DIRECTED HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION, EVERY AGENCY, EVERY OFFICE AND EVERY OFFICIAL NOT TO COOPERATE WITH THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AS IN NIXON'S CASE, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION IS MERELY AN EXTENSION OF HIS COVER UP AS IN NIXON'S CASE, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION REVEALS CONSCIOUSNESS OF GUILT INNOCENT PEOPLE DO NOT ACT THIS WAY

THEY DO NOT HIDE ALL THE EVIDENCE LIKE NIXON, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS OFFERED AN ASSORTMENT OF ARGUMENTS TO EXCUSE HIS OBSTRUCTION AS WAS TRUE IN NIXON'S CASE M NONE OF THESE EXCUSES CAN EXCEED THESE ARGUMENTS AMOUNT TO A CLAIM THE PRESIDENT CAN DICTATE TERMS OF HIS OWN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LAWYERS MAY ASSISTED GROUNDS FOR DEFYING CONGRESS AND LIMITED THAT THEY ONLY APPLY HERE JUST THE ONE TIME THAT IT WAS THE HOUSE NOT THE PRESIDENT THAT BROKE FROM PRESIDENT

THAT HE WOULD GLADLY COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS IF THE HOUSE WOULD DO IF HE INSISTS THAT IS PURE FANTASY THE PRESIDENT'S ARGUMENTS ARE NOT A ONE RIDE TICKET THEY'RE NOT UNIQUE TO THESE FACTS UNLESS THEY ARE FIRMLY AND FINALLY REJECTED HERE, THESE BOGUS EXCUSES WILL REAPPEAR EVERY TIME CONGRESS INVESTIGATES ANY PRESIDENT FOR SERIOUS ABUSES OF POWER, EVERY SINGLE TIME

THEY WILL CONSTITUTE A PLAYBOOK FOR IGNORING OVERSIGHT AVAILABLE TO ALL FUTURE PRESIDENTS DEMOCRATIC OR REPUBLICAN THESE ARGUMENTS ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION THEY'RE WINDOW DRESSING FOR UNPRECEDENTED DANGEROUS POWER GRAB PLENTY OF PRESIDENTS AND JUDGES COMPLAINED ABOUT IMPEACHMENT INQUIRIES DECLARING THEIR OWN INNOCENCE, ATTACKING THE MOTIVES, CLAIMING DUE PROCESS GIVES THEM ACCESS TO ALL SORTS OF THINGS NO PRESIDENT BESIDES NIXON DEFIED SUBPOENAS

NO PRESIDENT HAS DIRECTED THE OTHERS TO DEFY SUBPOENAS CATEGORICALLY ACROSS THE BOARD THEY HAVE ALL RECOGNIZED THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW PRESIDENT TRUMP STANDS ALONE IF PRESIDENT TRUMP IS PERMITTED TO DEFY SUBPOENAS HERE IN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, WHEN THE COURTS HAVE SAID THE CONGRESSIONAL POWER OF INQUIRY IS AT HIGHEST, IMAGINE WHAT WILL FUTURE PRESIDENTS WILL DO WHEN WE ATTEMPT TO CONDUCT ROUTINE OVERSIGHT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS THE FIRST LEADER OF THIS NATION TO DECLARE NOBODY CAN INVESTIGATE FOR OFFICIAL MISCONLECONDUCT EXCEPT HIS OWN TERMS

PRESIDENT TRUMP DECLARED HIMSELF ABOVE THE LAW HE HAS DONE OF BECAUSE HE IS GUILTY AND WISHES TO CONCEAL AS MUCH EVIDENCE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND FROM THIS BODY AS HE CAN IN THAT, HE MUST NOT SUCCEED IF PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN OFFICE AFTER THIS CONDUCT, HISTORIANS WILL MARK THE DATE THIS SENATE ALLOWED THIS PRESIDENT TO BREAK ONE OF OUR MIGHTIEST DEFENSES AGAINST TYRANNY THEY WILL WONDER WHY CONGRESS SO READILY SURRENDERED ONE OF THE CORE CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS

THEY'LL WONDER WHY CONGRESS ADMITTED THAT A PRESIDENT CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING, VIOLATE ANY CONSTITUTIONAL RULE, ANY LIBERTY, ANY REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AND GET AWAY WITH IT SIMPLY BY SAYING I DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS CONGRESS HAS NO POWER TO MAKE ME ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT MY CONDUCT THAT'S WHAT IS AT STAKE FUTURE PEOPLE WILL DESPAIR THAT FUTURE PRESIDENTS ABUSE THEIR POWER WITHOUT FEAR OF CONSEQUENCE OR CONSTRAINT LET'S BEGIN WITH A LEGAL PREMISE

CONGRESS HAS THE POWER TO EFFICIENT PRESIDENTS FOR MISCONDUCT THIS IS INDISPUTABLE, ARTICLE ONE OF THE CONSTITUTION ALL LEGISLATIVE POWERS HERE AND GRANT IT SHOULD BE VESTED IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES WHICH THAT WILL CONSIST OF SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EACH HOUSE MAY DETERMINE THE RULES OF ITS OWN PROCEEDINGS OUR INVESTIGATIONS ARE GROUNDED IN ARTICLE 1 OF THE CONSTITUTION WHICH GRANTS CONGRESS ALL LEGISLATIVE POWERS AND AUTHORIZES EACH HOUSE TO DETERMINE IT'S OWN RULES AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS EXPLAINED, IT HAS CONSTITUTION THUS THE HOUSE AND SENATE WITH POWER OF INQUIRY THAT IS PENETRATING AND FAR REACHING, CLOSED QUOTE

MORE OVER, CONGRESS CAN EFFECTUATE THAT POWER BY ISSUING SPEAKS DEMANDING THE SUBPOENA TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTS OR THE TESTIFY UNDER OATH COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENAS IS MANDATORY IT'S NOT AT THE OPTION OF THE EXECUTIVE OR THE PRESIDENT AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS EXPLAINED, QUOTE, IT IS UNQUESTIONABLY THE DUTY OF ALL CITIZENS TO COOPERATE WITH THE CONGRESS IN EFFORTS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION NEEDED IT IS THERE THE UNREMITTING OBLIGATION TO RESPOND TO SUBPOENAS TO RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF THE CONGRESS AND IT'S COMMITTEES AND TO TESTIFY WITH RESPECTIVE MATTERS WITHIN THE PROVINCE OF PROPER INVESTIGATION

MORE RECENTLY, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE BROWN JACKSON WILL BE ELABORATED, QUOTE, IT IS NOT ABSTRACT DUTY INJURY OR NOR A DENIAL ININSULT TO OUR DEMOCRACY IT'S FRONT TO THE MECHANISM FOR CURBING ABUSES OF POWERS THE FRAMERS CRAFTED FOR OUR PROTECTION AND THEREFORE WITNESSES ACTUALLY UNDERMINED THE BROADER INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES IN RECOGNITION OF THE IMPORTANT ROLE CONGRESSION PLAY, IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OBSTRUCT THEM OF COURSE WHILE CONGRESS INVESTIGATES MANY ISSUES, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT IS MISCONDUCT IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THERE'S A LONG HISTORY OF CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

TO NAME A FEW FAMOUS CASES, CONGRESS INVESTIGATED CLAIMS THAT PRESIDENT LINCOLN MISHANDLED CIVIL WAR STRATEGY, PRESIDENT NIXON'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE WATER GATE SCANDAL, THE PRESIDENT REAGAN IN THE IRAN AFFAIR, PRESIDENT CLINTON IN THE MONICA LEWINSKY SCANDAL, THE WIRINGS FROM GEORGE BUSH, PERSONAL ATTACKS ON BENGHAZI UNDER OBAMA SINCE THE DAWN, CONGRESS INVESTIGATES THE POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH EVEN SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIONS INVOLVING NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOREIGN POLICY FOR EXAMPLE, THE IN THE IRAN INQUIRY, PRESIDENT REAGAN'S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR AND NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS POINT DEXTER TESTIFIED THE BEFORE CONGRESS PRESIDENT REAGAN PRODUCED THE RELEVANT EXERTS FROM HIS PERSONAL DIARY

WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL IN THE BENGHAZI INVESTIGATION, OBAMA MADE MUCH AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEWS INCLUDING SUSAN RICE, DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS BENJAMIN ROSE THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PRODUCED MORE THAN 75,000 PAGES OF DOCUMENTS INCLUDING 1450 PAGES OF WHITE HOUSE E-MAILS WITH COMMUNICATION OF SENIOR OFFICIALS ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL TO BE SURE CERTAIN HOUSE REPUBLICANS COMPLAINED LOUDLY THAT THE OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO THE BENGHAZI ADMINISTRATION WAS INSUFFICIENT JUST IMAGINE HOW THEY WOULD HAVE REACTED IF PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA HAD ORDERED TOTAL DEFIANCE OF ALL SUBPOENAS

THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN OUTRAGE WHY? BECAUSE CONGRESS UNQUESTIONABLY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE PRESIDENTIAL CONDUCT NOW NOT ONLY DOES CONGRESS HAVE THE POWER TO INVESTIGATE THE EXECUTIVE, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED ARTICLE ONE OF THE CONSTITUTION, IT GIVES THE HOUSE THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT THE FRAMER INTENDED THIS POWER TO BE AN ESSENTIAL CHECK ON OUT OF CONTROL PRESIDENTS IT DOES NOT WORK AUTOMATICALLY

THE HOUSE MUST INVESTIGATE, QUESTION WITNESSES, REVIEW DOCUMENTS ONLY THEN CAN IT DECIDE TO APPROVE OR NOT ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT THEREFORE WHEN THE HOUSE DETERMINES THE PRESIDENT MAY HAVE COMMITTED HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, IT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO INVESTIGATE HIS CONDUCT IN SUCH CASES, THE HOUSE ACTS NOT ONLY SUNT TO IT'S LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY BUT ALSO SERVES AS A GRAND INQUEST OF THE NATION BECAUSE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY YIELDS ONE OF THE GREATEST POWERS IN THE CONSTITUTION, A POWER THAT EXISTS SPECIFICALLY TO CONSTRAIN PRESIDENTS, IT'S SUBPOENAS ARE BACKED WITH A FULL FORCE OF THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE THEY CANNOT BE TWARTED BY ORDINARY THEIR PRIVILEGES OR OBJECTIONS

IT'S RESUMED AS PRESIDENT POPE CONCEDED 150 YEARS AGO, QUOTE, ALL THE ARCHIVES AND PAPERS OF THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO INSPECTION EVERY POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE WOULD BE AFFORDED THE HOUSE TO PROSECUTE THE INVESTIGATION WHAT INVESTIGATION? THE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION OF PRESIDENT POE PRESIDENT POE'S STATEMENT WAS NO OUTLIER PRESIDENTS HAVE UNDERSTOOD THEY MUST COMPLETE REQUIREMENTS

IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC, NO PRESIDENT CLAIM TO DEFY A HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ON THE CONTRARY, EVERY PRESIDENT FACING THIS ISSUE AGREED CONGRESS HAS A BROAD INQUIRING POWER INVESTIGATING GROUNDS OF IMPEACHMENT THIS REFUTES PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CLAIM THAT HE OBSTRUCTED CONGRESS TO PROTECT THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT EVERY PRIOR OCCUPANT OF HIS OFFICE HAS DISVOWED THE LIMITLESS POWER HE ASSERTS THAT MATTERS AS THE SUPREME COURT EXPLAINED JUST A FEW YEARS AGO AND I QUOTE, LONG SETTLED AND ESTABLISHED PRACTICES IS CONSIDERATION OF GREAT WEIGHT

IN A PROPER INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PREVISIONS REGULATING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT LET'S TAKE A QUICK TOUR OF THIS HISTORICAL RECORD TO BEGIN AT THE BEGINNING, A SWELTERING SUMMER IN PHILADELPHIA 1787 THE FRAMERS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH THE BALANCE BETWEEN PRESIDENTS AND CONGRESS REMEMBER, THEY JUST THOUGHT A BLOODY WAR TO RID THEMSELVES OF A TYRANT

THEY WERE CONSCIOUS THEY DIDN'T WANT ANOTHER TYRANT WHEN IMPEACHMENT CAME UP, THEY AGREED IT WOULD LIMIT THE PRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY A STRONG MAJORITY OF FRAMERS STRONG A VIRTUE NOT OF ICE THEY WANTED TO EMPOWER PRESIDENT BUT ALSO KEEP HIS POWER FROM GETTING OUT OF HAND

IMPEACHMENT COULD NOT SERVE THAT ROLE IF THE HOUSE WERE UNABLE TO INVESTIGATE THE PRESIDENT FOR SUSPECTED HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS THIS IS RECOGNIZED EARLY ON STARTING WITH OUR VERY FIRST PRESIDENT IN 1796, THE HOUSE REQUESTED PRESIDENT TRUMP WASHINGTON WHO PROVIDED SENSITIVE DIPLOMATIC MATERIALS THE RELATED TO HUGE UNPOPULAR TREATY WITH GREAT BRITAIN PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DECLINED

SINCE THIS REQUEST WAS UPON HIS EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS BUT WASHINGTON AGREE HAD THE IMPEACHMENT WOULD CHANGE HIS CALCULUS IN THE INSUING THE DEBATES, IT WAS NOTED ON THE HOUSE FLOOR, WASHINGTON ADMITTED, QUOTE, WHERE THE HOUSE EXPRESSES INTENTION TO IMPEACH, THE RIGHT TO DEMAND FROM THE EXECUTIVE ALL PAPERS AND INFORMATION FROM HIS POSITION BELONGS TO IT ALL PAPERS AND INFORMATION THIS WAS ONLY THE FIRST OF MANY REFERENCES TO THAT POINT IN OUR CNSTITUTIONAL TRADITION

FOR EXAMPLE, LESS THAN 40 YEARS LATER, 1833, JOSEPH STORY REMARKED UPON THE DANGERS OF PRESIDENTIAL OBSTRUCTION HE WROTE, THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT WILL GENERALLY BE APPLIED TO PERSONS HOLDING HIGH OFFICES UNDER THE GOVERNMENT IT IS OF GREAT CONSEQUENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULD NOT HAVE THE POWER OF PREVENTING A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THEIR OWN CONDUCT CONSISTENT WITH THIS TEACHING, PRESIDENT POLK OFFERED CLEAR AND INSIGHTFUL EXPLANATION OF WHY PRESIDENTS MUST HONOR IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS HE SAID, AND I QUOTE, IT MAY BE ALLEGED THAT THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT BELONGS TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THAT WITH A VIEW TO THE EXERCISE OF THIS POWER THAT HOUSE HAS THE RIGHT TO INVESTIGATE THE COLONEL DUCT OF ALL PUBLIC OFFICES UNDER THE GOVERNMENT DECADES LATER, DURING OUR FIRST IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, IN 1867 FOR EXAMPLE, THE HOUSE OF YOU DISH COMMITTEE OBTAINED EXECUTIVE AND PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS

THE COMMITTEE INTERVIEWED CABINET OFFICERS AND PRESIDENTIAL AIDS ABOUT CABINET METINGS AND PRIVATE úCONVERSATI PRESIDENT BY HIS TOP AIDS AND CABINET OFFICIALS MULTIPLE WITNESSES MORE OVER ANSWERED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OPINIONS OF THE PRESIDENT, STATEMENTS MADE BY THE PRESIDENT AND ADVICE GIVEN TO THE PRESIDENT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT JOHNSON EVER ASSERTED PRIVILEGE THE TO PREVENT DISCLOSURE OF PRESIDENTIAL CONVERSATIONS TO THE COMMITTE OR FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE COMMITTEE'S REQUESTS THUS IN THE FIRST 80 YEARS OF THE REPUBLIC, PRESIDENTS WASHINGTON, POLK, JOHNSON ALONG WITH MEMBERS AND COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE AND SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ALL RECOGNIZED CONGRESS IS AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION TO INVESTIGATE FOR IMPEACHMENT AND THAT PRESIDENTS ARE OBLIGATED TO GIVE ALL INFORMATION REQUESTED PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTEMPT TO STONEWALL CONGRESS WOULD HAVE SHOCKED THOSE PRESIDENTS

WITH ONLY A FEW EXCEPTIONS, INVOCATIONS OF THE IMPEACHMENT POWER SUBSIDED FROM 1868 TO 1972 YET EVEN IN THAT PERIOD, WHILE OBJECTING TO ORDINARY THEIR LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT, PRESIDENTS GRANT, CLEVELAND, ROOSEVELT EACH NOTED CONGRESS COULD OBTAIN KEY EXECUTIVE BRANCH DOCUMENTS IN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THEY CONFIRMED YET AGAIN IMPEACHMENT IS DIFFERENT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION IT REQUIRES FULL COMPLIANCE THEN CAME WATERGATE

WHEN PRESIDENT NIXON ABUSED HIS OFFICE TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL OPPONENTS EVEN NIXON UNDERSTOOD HE MUST COMPLY WITH SUBPOENAS FOR INFORMATION RELATING TO HIS MISCONDUCT THUS HE STATED IN MARCH 1973 REGARDING THE SENATE'S WATERGATE INVESTIGATION, ALL MEMBERS OF THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF WILL APPEAR VOLUNTARILY REQUESTED BY THE COMMITTEE THEY WILL TESTIFY UNDER OATH AND ANSWER FULLY ALL QUESTIONS AS A RESULT, MANY SENIOR WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS THE TESTIFIED INCLUDING WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL JOHN DEAN, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF HR HOLDMAN AND DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT ALEXANDER BUTTERFIELD

NIXON PRODUCED DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS INCLUDING NOTES FROM MEETINGS WITH THE PRESIDENT AS THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE EXPLAINED AT THE TIME, 69 OFFICIALS HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATIONS THROUGHOUT AMERICAN HISTORY YET, AND I QUOTE, WITH THE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION OF ONE MINOR OFFICIAL WHO INVOKED THE PRIVILEGE OF SELF-INCRIMINATION, NOT ONE OF THEM CHALLENGED THE POWER THE COMMITTEE CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE IT DEEMED NECESSARY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S NIXON PRODUCTION OF RECORDS WAS INCOMPLETE IN AN IMPORTANT RESPECT HE DID NOT PRODUCE TAPE RECORDINGS OF KEY OVAL OFFICE CONVERSATIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE APPROVED ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT FOR OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

24 YEARS LATER, THE HOUSE UNDERTOOK IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PRESIDENT CLINTON UNLIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP, CLINTON PROVIDED WRITTEN RESPONSES TO 81 INTERROGATORIES FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND THREE WITNESSES PROVIDED TESTIMONY DURING THE SENATE TRIAL AS THIS REVIEW OF THE HISTORICAL RECORD PROVES, PRESIDENTS HAVE LONG RECOGNIZED THE CONSTITUTION COMPELS THEM TO HONOR SUBPOENAS SERVED BY THE HOUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BLOCKADE OF THE HOUSE, HIS REFUSAL TO HONOR ANY SUBPOENAS, HIS ORDER THAT ALL SUBPOENAS, NOT KNOWING WHAT THEY WERE, ALL SUBPOENAS BE DEFIED HAS NO ANALOG IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLICAN NOTHING EVEN COMES CLOSE

HE IS ENGAGED IN OBSTRUCTION THAT SEVERAL PREDECESSORS HAVE SAID IS FORBIDDEN THAT LED TO ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST NIXON PRESIDENT TRUMP IS AN OUTLIER HE IS THE FIRST AND ONLY PRESIDENT EVER TO DECLARE HIMSELF UNACCOUNTABLE AND TO úI CONSTITUTION'S IMPEACHMENT POWER IF HE IS NOT REMOVED FROM OFFICE, IF HE IS PERMITTED TO DEFY THE CONGRESS ENTIRELY, CATEGORICALLY, TO SAY THAT SUBPOENAS FROM CONGRESS AND THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ARE NONSENSE, WE WILL HAVE LOST THE HOUSE WILL HAVE LOST, SENATE WILL CERTAINLY HAVE LOST ALL POWER TO HOLD ANY PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE

THIS IS A DETERMINATION BY PRESIDENT TRUMP THAT HE WANTS TO BE ALL POWERFUL HE DOES NOT HAVE TO RESPECT THE CONGRESS HE DOES NOT HAVE TO RESPECT THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE ONLY HIS WILL GOES HE IS A DICTATOR

THIS MUST NOT STAND THAT IS ANOTHER REASON HE MUST BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE >> MR CHIEF JUSTICE, SENATORS, WE'VE NOW SHOWN HOW THE EXTREME MEASURES PRESIDENT TRUMP TOOK TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE AND BLOCK WITNESSES DEFIES THE CONSTITUTION AND CENTURIES OF HISTORICAL PRACTICE THERE'S MORE TO THIS STORY AND IT ONLY FURTHER UNDERMINES PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CASE

THE POSSESSION HE'S TAKEN IS NOT ONLY BASELESS AS A HISTORICAL MATTER, IT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S STATED REASON FOR REFUSING TO INDICT OR PROSECUTE PRESIDENTS NOW, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICES UNWILLINGNESS TO INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT CREATES A DANGER THAT THE PRESIDENT CAN'T BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE BY ANYONE, EVEN FOR GRAVE MISCONDUCT TO ITS CREDIT, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RECOGNIZE HAD THE RISK IN ITS VIEW, QUOTE, THE CONGRESSALLY CONSTITUTIONALLY SPECIFIES THE PRESIDENT WOULD NOT PLACE ABOVE THE LAW THIS RULE BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS ARE IMPORTANT

IN JUSTIFYING THE VIEW THAT A PRESIDENT CAN'T BE HELD CRIMINALLY LIABLE WHILE IN OFFICE DOJ RELIES ON CONGRESS' ABILITY TO IMPEACH AND REMOVE A PRESIDENT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S RATIONALLAL FALLS APART IF THE CONSTITUTIONALLY SPECIFIED IMPEACHMENT PROCESS CAN'T FUNCTION BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF HAS OBSTRUCTED IT THE SUPREME COURT CORRECTLY NOTED IN NIXON VERSUS FITZGERALD THAT'S NOT RICHARD NIXON IT'S JUDGE NIXON

THAT VIGILANT OVERSIGHT BY CONGRESS IS NECESSARY TO, QUOTE, MAKE CREDIBLE THE THREAT OF IMPEACHMENT HE IS SUBJECT TO IMPEACHMENT BUT THEN BE ALLOWED TO SABOTAGE THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS ITSELF THAT'S WHAT THIS PRESIDENT DID THAT PLACES HIM DANGEROUSLY ABOVE THE LAW AND BEYOND THE SEPARATION OF POWERS PRESIDENTS CAN'T BE ABOVE THE LAW

PRESIDENTS LIKE EVERYONE ELSE MUST OBEY THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE SUPREME COURT EXPLAINED, QUOTE, WHERE QUESTION OF SUCH IMPEACHMENT IS BEFORE EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS, ACTING IN ITS APPROPRIATE SUPERIOR, WE SEE NO REASON TO DOUBT WITNESSES AND THEIR ANSWER TO PROPER QUESTIONS IN THE SAME MANNER AND BY THE USE OF THE SAME MEANS THAT COURTS OF JUSTICE CAN IN LIKE CASES ALMOST A CENTURY LATER, THE JUDGE'S INFLUENTIAL OPINION ON THE WATERGATE ROAD MAP IN 1974 EMPHASIZED THE SPECIAL WEIGHT ASSIGNED TO CONGRESS IN AN IMPEACHMENT HE WROTE, IT SHOULD NOT BE FORGOTTEN THAT WE DEAL IN A MATTER OF THE MOST CRITICAL MOMENT TO THE NATION AN IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO CONCEIVE OF A MORE COMPELLING NEED THAN THAT OF THIS COUNTRY FOR AN UNSWERVINGLY FAIR INQUIRY BASED ON ALL PERTINENT INFORMATION

THAT SAME YEAR THE SUPREME COURT DECIDED THE FAMOUS CASE OF NIXON VERSUS THE UNITED STATES THAT'S PRESIDENT NIXON I WAS STANDING JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE COURT WHEN THE CASE WAS HANDED DOWN I REMEMBER SEEING THE REPORTERS RUNNING DOWN THE MARBLE STEPS CLUTCHING THE UNANIMOUS DECISION THE DECISION FORCED THE RELEASE OF KEY OVAL OFFICE TAPES THAT PRESIDENT NIXON TRIED TO COVER UP BY INVOKING EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE

IN ORLANDO, IT LED TO THE RESIGNATION OF PRESIDENT NIXON THE PLAINTIFF WAS THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR LEON WHO HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO INVESTIGATE THE WATER GATE BURGLARY AND ISSUE TAPES THE SUPREME COURT UPHELD SUBPOENAS AGAINST PRESIDENT NIXON'S CLAIM OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IT REASONED HIS ASSERTED INTEREST IN CONFIDENTIALITY COULD NOT OVERCOME THE CONSTITUTIONALLY GROUNDED INTERESTS IN THE FAIR ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN REACHING THAT CONCLUSION, THE COURT SAID THIS, QUOTE, THE ENDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE WOULD BE DEFEATED IF JUDGMENTS WERE TO BE FOUND ON A PARTIAL OR SPECULATIVE PRESENTATION OF THE FACTS

THE VERY INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE SYSTEM DEPEND ON FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL FACTS WITHIN THE FRAME WORK OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THAT REASON WHICH WAS A UNANIMOUS DECISION BY THE SUPREME COURT AND NIXON TAPES CASE APPLIES WITH FULL FORCE AND INDEED GREATER FORCE TO IMPEACHMENTS THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE RECOGNIZE HAD THE WHEN IT APPROVED AN ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST PRESIDENT NIXON FOR OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS IT REASONED AS FOLLOWS, QUOTE, IF A GENERALIZED PRESIDENTIAL INTEREST IN CONFIDENTIALITY CANNOT PREVAIL OVER QUOTE THE FUNDAMENTAL DEMAND OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW IN THE FAIR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, NEITHER CAN IT BE PERMITTED TO PREVAIL OVER THE FUNDAMENTAL NEED TO OBTAIN ALL RELEVANT FACTS IN THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS WHATEVER THE LIMITS OF LEGISLATIVE POWER AND OTHER CONTEXT AND WHATEVER NEED MAY OTHERWISE EXIST FOR PRESERVING THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF PRESIDENTIAL CONVERSATIONS

IN THE CONTEXT OF AN IMPEACHMENT, PROCEEDING THE BALANCE WAS STUCK IN THE FAVOR OF THE POWER OF THE INQUIRY ACCORDINGLY, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CONDUCT IS UNPRECEDENTED AND ACTUALLY OFFENSIVE TO THE PRESIDENT IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH HIS DUTY, HIS OATH TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE LAWS NOW THAT OBLIGATION TO SEE THAT THE LAWS ARE FAITH FRIDAY EXECUTING STATUTES, IT'S A DUTY TO THE CONSTITUTION, EVERY PART OF IT AS STATED IN THE TEXT AND UNDERSTOOD ACROSS HISTORY AND IT IS A DUTY HE IS VIOLATED BY OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS HERE I WANT TO MAKE ONE ADDITIONAL POINT REGARDING THE JUDICIARY

NOW PRESIDENTS HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO COMPLY WITH THE CONGRESS' IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE COURT REVIEWED THE REQUEST WE MAKE THIS POINT EVEN THOUGH I THINK PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LAWYERS WOULD MAKE A MISTAKE TO RAISE IT, AFTER ALL THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS THEY CAN'T ARGUE WE MUST GO TO COURT THEN ARGUE IN COURT THE CASE CAN'T BE HEARD THE IMPEACHMENT WOULDN'T BE SOLE OR MUCH OF A POWER IF THE HOUSE COULDN'T INVESTIGATE THE PRESIDENT AT ALL WITHOUT SPENDING YEARS LITIGATING BEFORE THE THIRD BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT IT WOULD FRUSTRATE THE CONSTITUTION FOR THE HOUSE TO DEPEND ENTIRELY ON THE JUDICIARY TO ADVANCE ITS IMPEACHMENT RELATED

BEFORE PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE HOUSE HAD NEVER BEFORE FILED A LAWSUIT TO REQUIRE TESTIMONY OR DOCUMENTS IN A PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO NO PRESIDENT EVER ISSUED A BLANKET BAND ON COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE SUBPOENAS OR CHALLENGED THE HOUSE TO FIND A WAY AROUND HIS UNLAWFUL ORDER IN THIS STRANGE AND UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION, IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR CONGRESS TO REACH IT'S OWN JUDGMENT THE PRESIDENT IS OBSTRUCTING THE EXERCISE OF CONSTITUTIONAL POWER

AS THEN REPRESENTATIVE LINDSEY GRAHAM EXPLAINED IN 1998 DURING THE CLINTON PROCEEDINGS WHERE WE SERVED TOGETHER ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, QUOTE, THE DAY RICHARD NIXON FAILED TO ANSWER THAT SUBPOENA IS THE DAY HE WAS SUBJECT TO IMPEACHMENT BECAUSE HE TOOK THE POWER FROM CONGRESS OVER THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS AWAY FROM CONGRESS AND HE BECAME THE JUDGE AND JURY THERE'S STILL ANOTHER REASON WHY IT WOULD BE WRONG AND DANGEROUS TO INSIST THAT THE HOUSE CANNOT TAKE ACTION WITHOUT INVOLVING THE COURTS THAT REASON IS DELAY CONSIDER JUST THREE LAWSUITS FILED BY HOUSE COMMITTEES OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES TO ENFORCE SUBPOENAS AGAINST SENIOR PECK TIFF BRANCH OFFICIALS I SERVED ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WHEN WE DECIDE HAD THE WE NEEDED TO HEAR FROM FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL HARRIET MYERS

THEY TRIED TO FORCE HER TO GIVE TESTIMONY ABOUT THE FIRINGS OF ATTORNEYS THE COMMITTEE SERVED THE SUBPOENA IN 2007 WE NEGOTIATED AS COURTS INDICATED YOU SHOULD WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AND FINALLY FILED SUIT IN MARCH OF 2008 WE WON A FAVORABLE DISTRICT COURT ORDER IN JULY 2008 WE DIDN'T RECEIVE TESTIMONY FROM MYERS UNTIL JUNE OF 2009

THAT WAS TWO YEARS IN COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM VERSUS HOLDER, THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM TRIED TO FORCE ATTORNEY GENRIC HOLD TORE PRODUCE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SO CALLED OPERATION FAST AND FURIOUS THE COMMITTEE SERVES THIS SUBPOENA ON OCTOBER 2011 THEY FILED SUIT AUGUST 2012 THEY WON A SERIES OF ORDERS REQUIRING PRODUCTIONS OF DOCUMENTS

THE FIRST SUCH ORDER DID NOT ISSUE UNTIL AUGUST OF 2014 NEARLY THREE YEARS IN COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY VERSUS McGAN, THE HOUSE COMMITTEE SOUTH TO FORCE SUBPOENA TO REQUIRE WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL DON McGANN TO GIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING MATTERS RELATING TO THE SPECIAL COUNCIL'S INVESTIGATION NOW, WE SERVE THAT SUBPOENA IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR WE FILED SUIT IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR WE WON A FAVORABLE DISTRICT COURT ORDER IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR

THE COURT OF APPEALS HAS STAYED THAT RULES AND DIDN'T HEAR ARGUMENTS UNTIL EARLY THIS MONTH WITH THE OPINION AND POTENTIALLY UNLIKELY SUPREME COURT APPLICATION LIKELY TO FOLLOW WE WILL NOT HAVE AN ANSWER LIKELY THIS YEAR SOMETIMES COURTS MOVE QUICKLY BUT HERE THEY HAVEN'T, NOT AT ALL EVEN WHEN THE HOUSE URGES EXPEDITED ACTION, IT USUALLY TAKES YEARS NOT MONTHS TO GET EVIDENCE THROUGH JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS NOW THE PRESIDENT CAN'T PUT OFF IMPEACHMENT FOR YEARS BY ORDERING TOTAL DEFIANCE OF THE HOUSE AND THEN INSISTS THE COURT GO TO COURT EVEN AS HE ARGUES THAT THEY CAN'T GO TO COURT

THAT'S ESSENTIALLY TRUE WHERE THE PRESIDENT JUST DOESN'T RAISE ONE OR TWO OBJECTIONS TO SPECIFIC SUBPOENAS BUT ORDERS A BLANKET GOVERNMENT WIDE COVER UP OF ALL EVIDENCE THAT KIND OF ORDER MAKES THIS CLEAR THE PRESIDENT SEES HIMSELF COMPLETELY IMMUNE FROM ANY ACCOUNTABILITY ABOVE THE LAW IT REVEALS HIS PRETENSIONS TO ABSOLUTE POWER IT CONFIRMS HE MUST BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE

HERE'S THE KEY POINT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS IS NOT NEARLY UNPRECEDENTED AND WRONG IT'S ALSO A HIGH CRIME AND MISDEMEANOR AS THE FRAMERS USED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT PHRASE WARRANTING HIS IMMEDIATE REMOVAL FROM OFFICE TO SEE WHY, LET'S RETURN TO FIRST PRINCIPLES AS >> THE FRAMERS JUST REBELLED AGAINST ENGLAND WERE ONE-MAN, THE KING WAS ABOVE JUSTICE BY AUTHORIZING CONGRESS TO REMOVE HIM FOR THE EGREGIOUS MISCONDUCT, THE FRAMERS REJECTED THAT MODEL UNLIKE BRITAIN'S KING, THE PRESIDENT WOULD ENTER TO CONGRESS AND TO THE NATION IF HE ENGAGED IN SERIOUS WRONGDOING BECAUSE THE IMPEACHMENT POWER EXISTS, NOT TO PUNISH THE PRESIDENT, BUT TO CHECK PRESIDENTS

IT CANNOT FUNCTION IF PRESIDENT'S ARE FREE TO IGNORE ALL CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT IMPEACHMENT SCHOLAR, FRANK BOWMAN SAID THIS, WITHOUT THE POWER TO COMPEL SUBPOENAS AND THE RIGHT TO IMPEACH A PRESIDENT FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY THE IMPEACHMENT POWER WOULD BE NULLIFIED THE CONSEQUENCES OF PRESIDENTIAL OBSTRUCTION GO BEYOND ANY PARTICULAR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO GO TO THE HEART OF THE IMPEACHMENT POWER ITSELF, THEY WEAKEN THE SHIELD AGAINST A CORRUPT PRESIDENT PRESIDENTS ARE AFRAID TO RAISE PRIVACY, NATIONAL SECURITY OR OTHER CONCERNS IN THE COURSE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, THERE IS ROOM FOR GOOD-FAITH NEGOTIATIONS OVER WHAT WILL BE DISCLOSED

THERE IS A STRONG PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF FULL COMPLIANCE WITH CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS WHEN A PRESIDENT ABUSES HIS OFFICE, ABUSES HIS POWER TO COMPLETELY DEFY HOUSE INVESTIGATORS IN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, WHEN HE DOES THAT WITHOUT LAWFUL CAUSE OR EXCUSE, HE ATTACKS THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF WHEN HE DOES THAT, HE CONFIRMS HE SEES HIMSELF AS ABOVE THE LAW PRESIDENT NIXON'S CASE IS INFORMATIVE, PRESIDENT NIXON LET HIS SENIOR OFFICIALS TESTIFY, HE PRODUCED MANY DOCUMENTS, HE DID NOT DIRECT ANYTHING LIKE A BLANKET INDISCRIMINATE BLOCK OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY SUBPOENAS SEEKING RECORDS AND RECORDINGS OF THE OVAL OFFICE

PRESIDENT NIXON CLAIMED HIS NON- COMPLIANCE WAS LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE, HE INVOKED THE DOCTRINE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE REJECTED THAT EXCUSE, THE COMMITTEE EMPHASIZED "THE DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS CANNOT JUSTIFY THE WITHHOLDING OF INFORMATION FROM THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AFTER ALL THE VERY PURPOSE OF SUCH AN INQUIRY IS TO PERMIT THE HOUSE ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE TO CURB THE EXCESSES OF ANOTHER BRANCH IN THIS INSTANCE, THE EXECUTIVE" WHATEVER THE LIMITS OF LEGISLATIVE POWER AND OTHER CONTEXT AND WHATEVER NEED MAY OTHERWISE EXIST FOR PRESERVING THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF PRESIDENTIAL CONVERSATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING, THE BALANCE WAS STRUCK IN FAVOR OF THE POWER OF THE INQUIRY WHEN THE IMPEACHMENT PROVISION WAS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION ULTIMATELY, THE COMMITTEE APPROVED AN ARTICLE AGAINST NIXON BECAUSE HE SOUGHT TO PREVENT THE HOUSE FROM EXERCISING ITS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY ARTICLE 3, CHARGED NIXON WITH ABUSING HIS POWER BY INTERFERING WITH THE DISCHARGE OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITY TO INVESTIGATE FULLY AND COMPLETELY, WHETHER HE HAD COMMITTED HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, PRESIDENT NIXON'S THIRD ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT EXPLAINED IT THIS WAY, IN REFREEZING REFUSING TO PRODUCE THESE PAPERS AND THINGS, RICHARD M NIXON, SUBSTITUTING HIS JUDGMENT AS TO WHAT MATERIALS WERE NECESSARY FOR THE INQUIRY, INTERPOSED THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY AGAINST THE LAWFUL SUBPOENAS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THEREBY ASSUMING TO HIMSELF THE FUNCTIONS AND JUDGMENTS NECESSARY TO THE EXERCISE OF THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT AS INVESTED BY THE CONSTITUTION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

IN ALL OF THIS, RICHARD M NIXON ACTED CONTRARY TO HIS TRUST AS PRESIDENT, SUBVERSIVE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT TO THE GREAT PREJUDICED OF THE CAUSE OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND THE MANIFEST INJURY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES PRESIDENT NIXON'S CASE POWERFULLY SUPPORTS THE CONCLUSION PRESIDENTIAL DEFIANCE OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY CONSTITUTES HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS I HAVE BEEN THINKING A LOT ABOUT THE FOUNDERS, REREADING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE NOTES FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, IT WAS A LITTLE OVER 230 YEARS AGO THEY MET IN PHILADELPHIA NOT FAR FROM HERE, THEY WERE AT IT FOR A LONG TIME , THEY DID NOT KNOW WHETHER THE CONSTITUTION THEY WERE TRYING TO RIGHT WOULD SUSTAIN FREEDOM, THEY WERE TRYING TO CREATE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TYPE OF GOVERNMENT ON JULY 20, THE GOVERNOR SAID THIS, THE MAGISTRATE IS NOT THE KING THE PEOPLE ARE THE KING

GEORGE MASON OF VIRGINIA ON THAT SAME DAY SAID SHALL ANY MAN BE ABOVE JUSTICE? ABOVE ALL, THAT MAN MAY COMMIT THE MOST EXTENSIVE AND JUSTICE ELDRIDGE JERRY ARGUED HE HOPED THE MAXIM, THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE COULD DO NO WRONG WOULD NEVER BE ADOPTED HERE FINALLY, ON SEPTEMBER 8, THEY ADOPTED THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE IN THE US CONSTITUTION

I HOPE WE WILL REMEMBER THE INITIATIVE WE SHOULD NEVER ACCEPT THE FACT THE MAGISTRATE THE PRESIDENT CAN DO NO WRONG THEY CRAFTED THE CONSTITUTION TO PROTECT OUR LIBERTY AND THE LIBERTY OF THOSE THAT WOULD FOLLOW US PROFESSOR NOAH FELDMAN TALKED ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION IN HIS TESTIMONY BEFORE THE HOUSE >> A PRESIDENT WHO SAYS AS THIS PRESIDENT DID SAY, I WILL NOT COOPERATE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM WITH YOUR PROCESS ROBS EIGHT COORDINATED BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, ROBS THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF ITS BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL POWER OF IMPEACHMENT >> A PRESIDENT WHO DOES THAT ALSO ENDANGERS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY STRIPPING AWAY THE CONSTITUTION'S FINAL SAFEGUARD AGAINST PRESIDENTS WHO ABUSE POWER AND HARM THE NATION

SUCH A PRESIDENT ACTS LIKE A KING, WHICH THE FOUNDERS WERE FIGHTING AGAINST THAT IS WHAT THEY WROTE OUT OF THE CONSTITUTION, A PRESIDENT CANNOT BE IMMUNE FROM OVERSIGHT, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND EVEN SIMPLE JUSTICE IN THE EXERCISE OF POWERS ENTRUSTED TO HIM WE CANNOT LET THAT STAND IN THIS CASE, THE PRESIDENT MUST FORFEIT THE POWERS HE HAS ABUSED AND BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE >> MR CHIEF JUSTICE, DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF THE SENATE, COUNSEL FOR THE PRESIDENT, MY COLLEAGUES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WHO ARE ASSEMBLED HERE TODAY, I THINK WE HAVE OUR NEXT BREAK SCHEDULED WITHIN THE HOUR SO I FIND MYSELF IN THE UNENVIABLE POSITION OF BEING THE ONLY THING STANDING BETWEEN YOU AND OUR DINNER

BUT BE NOT DISCOURAGED, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW THE ADVICE OF A FORMER SUNDAY SCHOOL TEACHER OF MINE, GREW UP IN THE CORNERSTONE BAPTIST CHURCH IN BROOKLYN, SHE SAID JEFFRIES, ON THE QUESTION OF PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS, BE BRIEF, BE BRIGHT, AND BE GONE SO, I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO MY BEST PRESIDENTS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH IMPEACHMENT SUBPOENAS THIS PRESIDENT HAS COMPLETELY DEFIED THEM THAT CONDUCT ALONE IS A HIGH CRIME AND MISDEMEANOR

THE FACTS HERE ARE NOT REALLY IN DISPUTE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEFENSE APPEARS TO BE, I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT TO DO, ONLY I CAN FIX IT I AM THE CHOSEN ONE >> THAN I HAVE IN ARTICLE 2 WHERE I HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER I WANT AS PRESIDENT >> NOBODY KNOWS THE SYSTEM BETTER THAN ME

>> WHICH IS WHY I ALONE CAN FIX IT >> SOMEBODY HAD TO DO IT, I AM THE CHOSEN ONE SOMEBODY HAD TO DO IT >> IS THAT WHO WE ARE AS A DEMOCRACY? PRESIDENT TRUMP CAN'T ADDRESS THE SUBSTANCE OF OUR CASE, HE THEREFORE COMPLAINS ABOUT PROCESS BUT THESE PROCEDURAL COMPLAINTS ARE BASELESS EXCUSES AND THEY DO NOT JUSTIFY HIS ATTEMPTS TO HIDE THE TRUTH FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

THE PRESIDENT'S ARGUMENTS FAIL FOR FOUR SIMPLE REASONS FIRST, THE HOUSE, NOT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT AND THE SOLE POWER TO DETERMINE THE RULES OF ITS PROCEEDINGS THAT IS ARTICLE 1 SECTION 2 OF THE CONSTITUTION SECOND, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DUE PROCESS ARGUMENT HAS NO BASIS IN LAW, NO BASIS IN FACT, NO BASIS IN THE CONSTITUTION

PRESIDENT TRUMP MAY NOT PREEMPTIVELY DENY ANY AND ALL COOPERATION TO THE HOUSE AND THEN ASSERT THE HOUSE PROCEDURES ARE ILLEGITIMATE BECAUSE THEY LACK HIS COOPERATION THIRD, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CLAIM HE IS BEING TREATED DIFFERENTLY COMPLETELY LACKS MERIT DESPITE WHAT HE CONTENDS THE HOUSE PROVIDED PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH GREATER PROTECTION THAN WHAT WAS GIVEN TO BOTH PRESIDENT NIXON AND PRESIDENT CLINTON THE FACT PRESIDENT TRUMP FAILED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS DOES NOT MEAN THEY DID NOT EXIST PRESIDENT TRUMP IS NOT THE FIRST PRESIDENT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT HOUSE PROCEDURES

HE WON'T BE THE LAST HE IS NOT THE FIRST ONE TO CHALLENGE THE MOTIVES OF ANY INVESTIGATION OR CERTAINLY AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY SUCH COMPLAINTS ARE STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FROM THE ARTICLE 2 EXECUTIVE BRANCH PRESIDENTS JOHNSON, NIXON, CLINTON HAD PLENTY OF COMPLAINTS BUT NO PRESIDENT, NO PRESIDENT, NO PRESIDENT HAS TREATED SUCH OBJECTIONS AS A BASIS FOR WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE, LET ALONE CATEGORICALLY DEFINE EVERY SINGLE SUBPOENA NINE

EXCEPT DONALD JOHN TRUMP FINALLY, THE OBLIGATIONS TO APPLY WITH SUBPOENAS IS UNYIELDING, DOES NOT DISSIPATE BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT BELIEVES HOUSE COMMITTEE SHOULD INVITE DIFFERENT WITNESSES, GIVE HIS DEFENDERS UNFETTERED SUBPOENA POWER OR INVOLVE HIS PERSONAL LAWYERS AT THE DEPOSITION STAGE OF THE PROCESS, WHEN THAT HAS NEVER BEEN DONE AND IF A PRESIDENT CAN DEFY CONGRESS ON SUCH FRAGILE GROUNDS, IT IS DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE WHY ANY FUTURE PRESIDENT WHATEVER COMPLY WITH AN IMPEACHMENT OR INVESTIGATIVE SUBPOENA AGAIN THROUGHOUT OUR HISTORY, IMPEACHMENTS HAVE BEEN RIGHT THE SUPREME COURT HAS MADE CLEAR, IT IS WEARY OF INTRUDING ON MATTERS OF IMPEACHMENT

THIS OF COURSE LEAVES ROOM FOR INTERBRANCH NEGOTIATION BUT IT DOES NOT ALLOW THE PRESIDENT TO ENGAGE IN BLANKET DEFIANCE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBJECTIONS ARE NOT GENUINELY ROOTED IN THE LAW, THEY ARE NOT GOOD-FAITH LEGAL ARGUMENTS WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID EARLY ON THAT HE WOULD FIGHT ALL SUBPOENAS, WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE HE DECLARED THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ILLEGITIMATE BEFORE IT EVEN ADOPTED ANY PROCEDURES WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE HE HAS DENOUNCED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT TO INVESTIGATE HIM AS A WITCHHUNT

WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE HE NEVER EVEN CLAIMED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE DURING THE ENTIRE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING PRESIDENT TRUMP'S FIRST EXCUSE FOR OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS, THE ASSERTED BELIEVE HE DID NOTHING WRONG, HIS JULY 25 CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY WAS PERFECT IN THE OCTOBER 8 LETTER SENT BY HIS COUNSEL, PRESIDENT TRUMP ASSERTED THE PREROGATIVE TO DEFY ALL HOUSE SUBPOENAS BECAUSE HE HAS DECLARED HIS OWN INNOCENCE úAS MR SUE PALLONE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S BEHEST, THE PRESIDENT DID NOTHING WRONG

THERE IS NO BASIS FOR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, HE HAD THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL INCLUDE THIS IN A FORMAL LETTER TO THE HOUSE DEFYING EVERY SINGLE SUBPOENA AS WE HAVE SHOWN IN OUR DISCUSSION ON THE FIRST ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT, THESE CLAIMS OF INNOCENCE ARE BASELESS, THEY LACK MERIT WE HAVE PROVIDED OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S GUILT THE PRESIDENT CANNOT LAWFULLY OBSTRUCT THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY BECAUSE HE SEES NO NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED ONE OF THE MOST SACRED PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE IS NO MAN SHOULD BE THE JUDGE IN HIS OWN CASE

AND YET, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO DO BUT THIS IS AMERICA, HE CANNOT BE JUDGE, JURY, AND EXECUTIONER MOREOVER, THE PRESIDENT CANNOT SIMPLY CLAIM INNOCENCE AND WALK AWAY FROM A CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED PROCESS EVEN PRESIDENT NIXON DID NOT DO THAT AS WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED

CONGRESS HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO SERVE AS A CHECK AND BALANCE ON AN OUT OF CONTROL EXECUTIVE BRANCH OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT TO THIS PRESIDENT, IT IS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BLANKET PRESIDENTIAL DEFIANCE WOULD BRING A SWIFT HALT TO ALL CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF THE EXECUTIVE THAT PRINCIPAL WOULD HAVE AUTHORIZED CATEGORICAL OBSTRUCTION IN THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON, PRESIDENT NIXON, AND PRESIDENT CLINTON IN EACH OF THOSE CASES, THE HOUSE WAS CONTROLLED BY A DIFFERENT PARTY THAN THE PRESIDENCY

THE PRESIDENT ATTACKED THOSE INQUIRIES AS A PARTISAN YET THOSE PRESIDENTS DID NOT VIEW THEIR CONCERNS WITH EXCESSIVE PARTISANSHIP AS A BASIS FOR DEFYING EVERY SINGLE SUBPOENA THE PURPOSE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS FOR THE HOUSE TO COLLECT EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHETHER THE PRESIDENT MAY HAVE COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION VESTED THE HOUSE WITH THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT THE PRESIDENT WHO SERVES AS THE JUDGE OF HIS OWN INNOCENCE IS NOT ACTING AS A PRESIDENT

THAT IS A DICTATOR THAT IS A DESPERATE THAT IS NOT DEMOCRACY THE PRESIDENT ALSO BELIEVES IT APPEARS HIS BLANKET OBSTRUCTION WAS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE THE HOUSE DID NOT EXPRESSLY ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO PROPERLY DELEGATE SUCH INVESTIGATIVE POWERS TO ITS COMMITTEES NOW, THE FULL HOUSE VOTED IN JANUARY IN ADVANCE OF THE INQUIRY TO ADOPT RULES AUTHORIZING COMMITTEES TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS, ISSUE SUBPOENAS, GATHER DOCUMENTS, AND HEAR TESTIMONY

BEGINNING IN THE SPRING AND SUMMER OF 2019, EVIDENCE CAME TO LIGHT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS ASSOCIATES MIGHT HAVE BEEN SEEKING THE ASSISTANCE OF ANOTHER FOREIGN GOVERNMENT UKRAINE TO INFLUENCE THE UPCOMING 2020 ELECTION ON SEPTEMBER NOW, THE HOUSE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES ANNOUNCED A JOINT INVESTIGATION, THEY REQUESTED RECORDS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, THIS INVESTIGATION WAS CONSISTENT WITH ALL RULES APPROVED BY THE FULL HOUSE AT THE SAME TIME, EVIDENCE EMERGED THE PRESIDENT MAY HAVE ATTEMPTED TO COVER UP HIS ACTIONS AND PREVENT THE TRANSMISSION OF A WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT TO THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE

GIVEN THE GRAVITY OF THESE ALLEGATIONS AND THE IMMEDIACY OF THE THREAT TO THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, A CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER EXPLICITLY NAMED IN ARTICLE 1 ANNOUNCED ON SEPTEMBER 24, THE HOUSE WOULD BEGIN A FORMAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THERE IS NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION, NOTHING IN FEDERAL LAW, NOTHING IN SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE THAT REQUIRED A FORMAL VOTE AT THE TIME THE PRESIDENT HAS PUT FORTH FAKE ARGUMENTS ABOUT PROCESS BECAUSE HE CANNOT DEFEND THE SUBSTANCE OF THESE ALLEGATIONS FOLLOWING THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, THE HOUSE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES ISSUED ADDITIONAL REQUESTS AND THEN SUBPOENAS FOR DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONY THE COMMITTEES MADE CLEAR THIS INFORMATION WILL BE COLLECTED AS PART OF THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AND SHARED AMONG COMMITTEES AS WELL AS WITH THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY AS APPROPRIATE

THEN ON OCTOBER 31, THE FULL HOUSE VOTED TO APPROVE HOUSE RESOLUTION 660 WHICH DIRECTED HOUSE COMMITTEES TO CONTINUE THEIR ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS AS HEART OF THEIR EXISTING INQUIRY INTO WHETHER SUFFICIENT GROUNDS EXIST FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO EXERCISE ITS CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO IMPEACH ONALD JOHN TRUMP IN ADDITION TO AFFIRMING THE ONGOING HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, SET FORTH PROCEDURES FOR OPEN HEARINGS IN THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND FOR ADDITIONAL PROCEEDINGS IN A JUDICIARY COMMITTEE EVERY STEP IN THIS PROCESS WAS FULLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION, THE RULES OF THE HOUSE AND HOUSE PRECEDENT THE HOUSE AUTONOMY STRUCTURE FOR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS GROUNDED IN THE CONSTITUTION

THE PRESIDENT'S PRINCIPAL ARGUMENT TO THE CONTRARY IS NO COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE IS PERMITTED TO INVESTIGATE ANY PRESIDENTIAL MISCONDUCT UNTIL THE FULL HOUSE ACTED AS A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT RECENTLY CONFIRMED, THE NOTION A FULL HOUSE VOTE IS REQUIRED TO AUTHORIZE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HAS NO TEXTUAL SUPPORT IN THE US CONSTITUTION OR THE GOVERNING RULES OF THE HOUSE

THE INVESTIGATIONS INTO MISCONDUCT BY PRESIDENTS ANDREW JOHNSON, NIXON AND CLINTON ALL BEGAN PRIOR TO THE HOUSE'S CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INVESTIGATION RECENTLY, UNDER REPUBLICAN CONTROL, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CONSIDERED THE IMPEACHMENT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FOLLOWING A REFERRAL FROM ANOTHER COMMITTEE AND ABSENT A FULL LOAD OF THE HOUSE FOR AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THERE IS NO MERIT TO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ARGUMENT THAT THE FULL HOUSE HAD DEVOTE THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, LARGELY TRACK THOSE IN THE NIXON PROCEEDINGS

>> THE HOUSE JUDICIARY PROCEEDINGS BEGAN IN OCTOBER 1973 WHEN RESOLUTIONS CALLING FOR PRESIDENT NIXON'S IMPEACHMENT WERE INTRODUCED IN THE HOUSE AND REFERRED TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, THE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATED THE WATERGATE BREAK-IN AND COVERUPS AMONG OTHER MATTERS USING ITS EXISTING INVESTIGATORY AUTHORITY THE COMMITTEE ALSO HIRED A SPECIAL COUNSEL AND OTHER ATTORNEYS TO ASSIST IN THESE EFFORTS

MOST IMPORTANTLY, ALL OF THIS OCCURRED BEFORE THE HOUSE APPROVED A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE WITH THE GROUNDS TO IMPEACH RICHARD NIXON EXISTED IN THIS INSTANCE, THE COMMITTEES BEGAN THEIR INVESTIGATION WITH THEIR EXISTING POWERS, AUTHORIZED BY THE FULL HOUSE THAT COURSE OF EVENTS IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH THE RICHARD NIXON PRECEDENT IT IS ALSO COMMON SENSE AFTER ALL, BEFORE VOTING TO CONDUCT AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, THE HOUSE MUST ASCERTAIN THE NATURE AND SERIOUSNESS OF THE ALLEGATIONS AND THE SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY THAT MAY FOLLOW THERE AFTER

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SECOND EXCUSE ALSO FAILS LET'S NOT ADDRESS THE PRESIDENT'S SO-CALLED DUE PROCESS AND FAIRNESS ARGUMENT THE PRESIDENT HAS PHRASED SOME OF HIS COMPLAINTS IN THE LANGUAGE OF DUE PROCESS, HE COMPLAINED THE PROCEDURES WERE NOT FAIR, EVEN THOUGH THEY REFLECT PRIOR PRACTICE AND STRIKE A REASONABLE BALANCE BETWEEN PRESIDENTIAL INVOLVEMENT ON THE ONE HAND AND THE HOUSE'S OBLIGATION TO FIND THE TRUTH ON THE OTHER PRESIDENT'S COME AND PRESIDENTS GO, THEY ALL SHARPLY CRITICIZED HOUSE PROCEDURES NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER TREATED THOSE OBJECTIONS AS A BASIS FOR COMPLETE DEFIANCE, NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER DONE THAT

IN THE CONTEXT OF A HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, IT IS FAIR TO SAY A PRESIDENT IS A SUSPECT WHO MAY HAVE COMMITTED A HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR, HE CANNOT TELL THE DETECTIVES INVESTIGATING THE POSSIBLE CONSTITUTIONAL CRIME WHAT THEY SHOULD DO IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR INVESTIGATION IN THE PRESIDENT'S OCTOBER 8 LETTER, MR CIPPOLONE COMPLAINS HE WAS DENIED THE MOST BASIC PROTECTIONS DEMANDED BY DUE PROCESS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND BY FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO CROSS- EXAMINE WITNESSES, TO CALL WITNESSES, RECEIVE TRANSCRIPTS OF TESTIMONY, TO HAVE ACCESS TO EVIDENCE AND HAVE COUNSEL PRESENT IT SOUNDS TERRIBLE, BUT IT IS NOT ACCURATE THE PRESIDENT APPEARS TO HAVE MISTAKEN THE INITIAL PHASES OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY FOR A FULL-BLOWN TRIAL

THE TRIAL PHASE OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS TAKING PLACE RIGHT NOW CHAIRMAN PETER RODINO OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ONCE OBSERVED, AS IT RELATES TO THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PRESIDENT NIXON, IT IS NOT A RIGHT BUT A PRIVILEGE OR COURTESY FOR THE PRESIDENT TO PARTICIPATE THROUGH COUNSEL AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS NOT A TRIAL, RATHER IT ENTAILS A COLLECTION AND EVALUATION OF FACTS BEFORE THE TRIAL OCCURS IN THAT RESPECT, THE HOUSE ACTS LIKE A GRAND JURY OR PROSECUTOR INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE WHETHER CHARGES ARE WARRANTED OR NOT FEDERAL GRAND JURIES AND PROSECUTORS DO NOT ALLOW TARGETS OF THEIR INVESTIGATION TO COORDINATE WITNESS TESTIMONY

THE PROTECTIONS THE PRESIDENT LABELED AS DUE PROCESS DO NOT APPLY HERE BECAUSE THOSE ENTITLEMENTS HE SOUGHT, MANY OF WHICH WERE ACTUALLY AFFORDED TO HIM, BUT THOSE ENTITLEMENTS HE SOUGHT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE AVAILABLE TO ANY AMERICAN IN A GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION MOREOVER, IT SHOULD BE CLEAR THE HOUSE NOTWITHSTANDING THIS FRAMEWORK HAS TYPICALLY PROVIDED A LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY IN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY'S, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO PRESIDENTS IN PAST IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY'S, THIS TYPICALLY MEANT THE PRINCIPAL EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS DISCLOSED TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE PUBLIC THOUGH SOME EVIDENCE IN PAST PROCEEDINGS HAS REMAINED CONFIDENTIAL

THE PRESIDENT HAS TYPICALLY BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AT A STAGE WHEN EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FULLY GATHERED AND PRESENTED TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS GIVEN THE CHANCE TO DO THAT IN THIS CASE BUT HE DECLINED PRESIDENTS HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE INQUIRY AND REQUEST RELEVANT WITNESSES BE CALLED, PRESIDENT TRUMP GIVEN THE CHANCE TO DO THAT IN THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY BEFORE THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BUT HE DECLINED UNDER HOUSE RESOLUTION 660, PRESIDENT TRUMP RECEIVED PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS, NOT JUST EQUAL TO BUT SOME INSTANCES GREATER THAN THAT AFFORDED TO PRESIDENTS NIXON AND CLINTON

LET'S BE CLEAR THE PRIVILEGES DESCRIBED IN THE OCTOBER 8 LETTER WERE IN FACT OFFERED TO PRESIDENT TRUMP AS THEY HAD BEEN IN PRIOR IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY'S THE PRESIDENT WAS ABLE TO REVIEW ALL EVIDENCE, RELIED ON BY THE HOUSE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES INCLUDING EVIDENCE THE MINORITIES PUBLIC REPORT IDENTIFIED AS FAVORABLE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP DURING THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS, THE PRESIDENT HAD OPPORTUNITIES TO PRESENT EVIDENCE, CALL WITNESSES, HAVE COUNSEL PRESENT TO RAISE OBJECTIONS, CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES, AND RESPOND TO THE EVIDENCE RAISED AGAINST HIM, AS THE RULES COMMITTEE REPORTED, HOUSE BILL 660 SAID THESE RULES ARE FOLLOWING THE INQUIRY PROCESS IN THE CASES OF NIXON AND CLINTON PRESIDENT TRUMP SIMPLY CHOSE NOT TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF WHAT HAD BEEN OFFERED

THE FACT PRESIDENT TRUMP DECLINED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE PROTECTIONS DOES NOT! USE HIS BLANKET CONSTITUTIONAL OBSTRUCTION UNLIKE THE NIXON CLINTON IMPEACHMENT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THE ARGUMENT THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE, THE ARGUMENT HE HAS MADE RELATES TO THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS AND NOT ANALOGOUS IN THIS CASE, THE HOUSE CONDUCTED A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE FACTUAL INVESTIGATION ITSELF BECAUSE NO INDEPENDENT PROSECUTOR WAS APPOINTED TO INVESTIGATE THE ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR REFUSED TO AUTHORIZE A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT THEY TRIED TO WHITEWASH THE WHOLE SORDID AFFAIR

LEFT TO THEIR OWN DEVICES, THE HOUSE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEES FOLLOWED STANDARD BEST PRACTICES FOR INVESTIGATIONS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO PRESIDENTS NIXON AND CLINTON IN ADVANCE OF THEIR IMPEACHMENTS THE COMMITTEES RELEASED TRANSCRIPTS OF ALL INTERVIEWS AND INTERROGATIONS CONDUCTED DURING THE INVESTIGATION DURING THE INVESTIGATION, MORE THAN 100 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE PARTICIPATED IN THE SO-CALLED CLOSED DOOR PROCEEDINGS MORE THAN 100 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE, 47 OF WHOM WERE REPUBLICANS

THEY ALL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS, THEY ALL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS WITH EQUAL TIME INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS WERE 12 OF THE KEY WITNESSES TESTIFIED INCLUDING SEVERAL REQUESTED BY THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE VERY SAME PROCEDURES IN HOUSE RESOLUTION 660 WAS SUPPORTED BY ACTING WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MICK MULVANEY WHEN HE SERVED AS A MEMBER OF THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE, MIKE POMPEO WHEN HE SERVED AS A MEMBER OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON BEEN GHAZI >> TELL YOU IN THE PRIVATE INTERVIEWS, THERE IS NEVER ANY OF WHAT YOU SAW THURSDAY IT IS ONE HOUR ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, ONE HOUR ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE, WHICH IS WHY YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE NEXT TWO DOZEN INTERVIEWS DONE PRIVATELY

LOOK AT THE OTHER INVESTIGATIONS BEING DONE RIGHT NOW, THE LATEST INVESTIGATION JUST ANNOUNCED, WAS THAT PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? >> IF THIS PROCESS WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR OTHER PRESIDENTS, WHY ISN'T IT GOOD ENOUGH FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP? REPRESENTATIVE GAUDI, FINISHED THAT STATEMENT BY SAYING, THE PRIVATE ONES HAVE ALWAYS PRODUCED THE BEST RESULTS THE PRIVATE ONES ACCORDING TO GOWDY PRODUCED THE GREATEST RESULTS HE DID NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE DURING THE INTEL COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS NEITHER PRESIDENT NIXON NOR PRESIDENT CLINTON WERE PERMITTED TO HAVE COUNSEL DISSIPATE IN THE INITIAL FACT GATHERING STAGES WHEN THEY WERE INVESTIGATING BY SPECIAL COUNSEL, INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, PRESIDENT NIXON HAD NO ATTORNEY PRESENT WHEN THE PROSECUTORS AND GRAND JURIES BEGAN COLLECTING EVIDENCE ABOUT WATERGATE AND RELATED MATTERS, PRESIDENT NIXON DID NOT HAVE ATTORNEY PRESENT IN THIS DISTINGUISHED BODY WHEN THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON WATERGATE BEGAN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES AND HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS, NOR DID PRESIDENT CLINTON HAVE AN ATTORNEY PRESENT WHEN PROSECUTORS FROM THE OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, KENNETH STARR DEPOSED WITNESSES AND ELICITED THEIR TESTIMONY BEFORE A GRAND JURY

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTORNEY COULD HAVE CROSS-EXAMINED THE INTEL COMMITTEE'S COUNSEL DURING HIS PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE BEFORE THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT WOULD HAVE FUNCTIONED AS THE EQUIVALENT OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED TO PRESIDENT CLINTON TO HAVE HIS COUNSEL CROSS- EXAMINED KENNETH STARR, WHICH HE DID AT LENGTH PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS PROVIDED A LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE CONSISTENT WITH THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF DUE PROCESS AND FAIRNESS GIVEN TO OTHER PRESIDENTS WHO FOUND THEMSELVES IN THE MIDST OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE PRESIDENT, AND I'M WINDING DOWN, THE PRESIDENT'S NEXT PROCEDURAL COMPLAINT IS THAT IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO EXCLUDE AGENCY COUNSEL FROM PARTICIPATING IN CONGRESSIONAL DEPOSITIONS

THE BASIS FOR THE RULE EXCLUDING AGENCY COUNSEL IS STRAIGHTFORWARD IT PREVENTS AGENCY OFFICIALS WHO ARE DIRECTLY IMPLICATED IN THE ABUSES CONGRESS IS INVESTIGATING FROM TRYING TO PREVENT THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES FROM COMING FORWARD TO TELL CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE TRUTH IT IS COMMON SENSE THE RULE PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF WITNESSES BY ALLOWING THEM TO BE ACCOMPANIED IN DEPOSITIONS, BY PERSONAL COUNSEL A RIGHT THAT WAS AFFORDED TO ALL OF THE WITNESSES WHO APPEARED IN THIS MATTER

AGENCY ATTORNEYS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FROM EXTERNAL DEPOSITIONS OF EXECUTIVE BRANCH OFFICIALS FOR DECADES UNDER BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS INCLUDING REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, DAN BURTON REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, DARRELL ICE UP REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, JASON CHE FITS REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, TREY GOWDY

REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, KEVIN BRADY AND REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN, JEB PENCILING JUST TO NAME A FEW AGAIN, THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THE HOUSE WITH THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT AND THE SOUL AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE THE RULES OF ITS PROCEEDINGS WHICH WERE FAIR TO ALL INVOLVED GIVEN TO CLARITY ON THIS POINT, THE PRESIDENT'S ARGUMENT HE CAN ENGAGE IN BLANKET OBSTRUCTION IS DEAD WRONG

PRESIDENT TRUMP ALSO OBJECTS THE HOUSE MINORITY LACKS SUFFICIENT SUBPOENA RIGHTS BUT THE SUBPOENA RULES APPLIED IN THE TRUMP IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WERE PUT INTO PLACE BY MY GOOD FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, HOUSE REPUBLICANS WHEN THEY WERE IN THE MAJORITY WE ARE PLAYING BY THE SAME RULES DEVISED BY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES PRESIDENT NIXON DID NOT ENGAGE IN BLANKET OBSTRUCTION, PRESIDENT CLINTON DID NOT ENGAGE IN BLANKET OBSTRUCTION, NO PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS EVER ACTED THIS WAY LASTLY, WE SHOULD REJECT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SUGGESTION HE CAN CONCEAL ALL EVIDENCE OF MISCONDUCT BASED ON UNSPECIFIED CONFIDENTIALITY INTERESTS, THOSE ARE HIS EXACT WORDS, BUT NOT ONCE IN THE ENTIRE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY DID HE EVER INVOKE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE PERHAPS THAT IS BECAUSE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE CANNOT BE INVOKED TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING

BECAUSE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE DOES NOT PROVIDE BLANKET OBSTRUCTION THAT INCLUDES BLOCKING DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES FROM THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE BRANCH , PERHAPS PRESIDENT TRUMP DID NOT INVOKE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BECAUSE IT HAS NEVER BEEN ACCEPTED AS A SUFFICIENT ASUS FOR COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY DEFINE ALL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY'S AND SUBPOENAS OR PERHAPS PRESIDENT TRUMP DID NOT INVOKE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BECAUSE WHEN PRESIDENT NIXON DID SO HE LOST DECISIVELY, UNANIMOUSLY, CLEARLY BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WHATEVER THE EXPLANATION, PRESIDENT TRUMP NEVER INVOKED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE SO IT IS NOT A CREDIBLE DEFENSE TO HIS OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS LASTLY SUGGESTED HIS OBSTRUCTION IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE HIS TOP AIDES ARE ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE FROM BEING COMPELLED TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS

EVERY FEDERAL COURT TO CONSIDER THE SO-CALLED DOCTRINE OF ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY HAS REJECTED IT 2008, A FEDERAL COURT REJECTED AN ASSERTION THE 43rd PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, MIERS WAS IMMUNE BEING COMPELLED TO TESTIFY KNOWING THE PRESIDENT FAILED TO POINT TO A SINGLE JUDICIAL OPINION TO JUSTIFY THAT CLAIM AND ON NOVEMBER 25 OF LAST YEAR, ANOTHER FEDERAL JUDGE REJECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CLAIM OF ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY FOR FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON McGHAN THE COURT CONCLUDED EXECUTIVE BRANCH OFFICIALS ARE NOT ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE FROM COMPULSORY CONGRESSIONAL PROCESS NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH HAS ASSERTED AS MUCH OVER THE YEARS

EVEN IF THE PRESIDENT EXPRESSLY DIRECTS SUCH OFFICIALS NOT TO COMPLY THE COURT ADDED SIMPLY STATED, THE PRIMARY TAKE AWAY FROM THE PAST 250 SOME ODD YEARS OF RECORDED AMERICAN HISTORY THAT PRESIDENT'S ARE NOT KINGS THE PRESIDENT IS NOT A KING PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO CHEAT, HE GOT CAUGHT AND THEN HE WORKED HARD TO COVER IT UP HE MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ABUSING HIS POWER

HE MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS, HE MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR BREAKING HIS PROMISE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE >> MY FOREIGN-POLICY WILL ALWAYS PUT THE INTERESTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND AMERICAN SECURITY ABOVE ALL ELSE, IT HAS TO BE FIRST, HAS TO BE THAT WILL BE THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY SINGLE DECISION I WILL MAKE >> WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO PUT AMERICA FIRST? AMERICA IS A GREAT COUNTRY, BUT ABOVE ALL ELSE, I THINK AMERICA IS AN IDEA, A PRECIOUS IDEA, AN IDEA THAT HAS WITHSTOOD THE TEST OF TIME AN ENDURING IDEA, YEAR AFTER YEAR, DECADE AFTER DECADE, CENTURY AFTER CENTURY AS WE CONTINUE ALONG NECESSARY AND MAJESTIC MARCH TOWARD A MORE PERFECT UNION

AMERICA IS AN IDEA, ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL, EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW, GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE, THE PREEMINENCE OF THE RULE OF LAW, AMERICA IS AN IDEA, WE CAN EITHER DEFEND THAT IDEA OR WE CAN ABANDON IT GOD HELP US ALL GOD HELP US ALL IF WE CHOOSE TO ABANDON IT >> THE MAJORITY LEADER IS RECOGNIZED

>> WE WILL TAKE A 30 MINUTE BREAK FOR DINNER >> WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED >>> HELLO, EVERYONE I AM TANYA RIVERO , WE ARE IN NEW YORK OF DAY FOUR OF THE PRESIDENT'S TRIAL IN THE SENATE, THIS IS THE FIRST THIRD AND FINAL DAY FOR THE FINAL ARGUMENT OF HOUSE MANAGERS

TODAY, DEMOCRATS ARE FOCUSING ON PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS, THEY SAID THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE BY WITHHOLDING AID TO UKRAINE AS A WAY OF PRESSURING THAT COUNTRY TO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCING INVESTIGATION INTO THE PRESIDENT'S RIVAL, JOE BIDEN THEN HE ILLEGALLY BLOCKED CONGRESS'S POWER TO INVESTIGATE HIS ACTIONS THIS IS ALL ACCORDING TO THE DEMOCRATIC MANAGERS WE HEARD FROM ALL SEVEN IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS SO FAR TODAY, LET'S LISTEN TO CHUCK SCHUMER >> THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS WILL HAVE THEIR WORK CUT OUT FOR THEM , THE HOUSE MANAGERS DID AN AMAZING JOB AND SET A VERY VERY HIGH BAR WHICH WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS TO OVERCOME

THE HOUSE PRESENTATION HAS BEEN STRONG, DETAILED, COMPREHENSIVE , AND AT MANY TIMES, COMPELLING JUST DREW YOU RIGHT INTO IT AND THEY SUCCESSFULLY IN ADVANCE, PREEMPTIVE JUST ABOUT ALL OF THE ARGUMENTS THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS WILL MAKE THEY ANTICIPATED WHAT THOSE ARGUMENTS WOULD BE AND THEY ANSWERED THEM EVEN BEFORE THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS GOT THERE AND THEY HAVE TO DO THAT BECAUSE THEY DON'T GET ANOTHER CHANCE TO REBUT THE WAY MacCONNELL SET OUT THE RULES LET ME PAY HAKEEM JEFFRIES INCREDIBLE COMPLEMENT, MY FELLOW BROOKLYNITE, YOU ARE AS GOOD AS ADAM SCHIFF HE DID AN AMAZING, AMAZINGLY GREAT JOB

NOW, WE DID NOT HEAR TOO MUCH ABOUT THE ARTICLE 2 IN THE IMPEACHMENT CHARGES UNTIL THIS AFTERNOON I BELIEVE IT IS THE SLEEPER THE ARGUMENT WAS INCREDIBLE IT WAS STRONG AND IT HAS BECOME CLEAR PRESIDENT TRUMP DEMANDED COMPLETE IMMUNITY PARTICIPATED IN A BLANKET OBSTRUCTION AND HAD ABSOLUTE DEFIANCE PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING HE WANTED IMMUNITY FOR EVERYTHING PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE SAID I'M NOT A PRESIDENT, I'M A KING AND NO ONE CAN STOP ME, NOBODY CAN OVERSEE ME, NO ONE CAN PUT A CHECK ON ME, THAT IS NOT AMERICA, WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS DEMANDED AND WHAT JUSTIFIES THE HOUSE BRINGING THESE ARTICLES IS TOTALLY OUT OF SYNC WITH THE CONSTITUTION, THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND EVERY OTHER IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

NEITHER PRESIDENT ANDREW JOHNSON, PRESIDENT NIXON, OR PRESIDENT CLINTON HAVE THE GALL, THE TEMERITY TO COME CLOSE TO EVEN ASKING WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ASKING FOR WHICH IS TOTAL ABSOLUTE HE SAYS I WILL DEFY ALL SUBPOENAS PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO WAIT TO SEE WHAT THE SUBPOENA IS, I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER IT THAT IS SO AGAINST WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS SET UP IN THIS COUNTRY, IT IS SO AGAINST WHAT WE HAD AS OUR TRADITION AND SO AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION THE PRESIDENT IS, AND THEN THE PRESIDENT EVEN KNOWS THE WEAKNESS OF HIS ARGUMENT BECAUSE HE WANTS COMPLETE EXECUTIV PRIVILEGE BUT HE HAS NOT INVOKED IT WANTS, NOT WANTS IN THIS TRIAL IN ANY OF THE CASES

I WILL TAKE A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE SUBJECT I TALKED ABOUT FIRST, BUT OTHERS TOO >> Reporter: YOU PUSH BACK ON THE IDEAS SOME REPUBLICANS ARE TALKING ABOUT RELATED TO EXECUTIVE GLITCH CONCERNS, DO YOU BELIEVE THE ARTICLES OF THEM PRESENTATION DOVETAIL — >> THE ARTICLE 2 PRESENTATION BY THE HOUSE MANAGERS DECIMATES TRUMP AND THE REPUBLICANS' ARGUMENT, IF YOU HAVE ANY FIDELITY TO THE TRUTH, THEY JUST DECIMATED IT, DECIMATED IT ALL OF THE ARGUMENTS THE REPUBLICANS CITED, HAKEEM JEFFRIES SAID THE PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL WAS NOT ALLOWED TO BE IN , HE LISTED 10 REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEN THAT CONDUCTED OVERSIGHT IN EXACTLY THE WAY THE HOUSE MANAGERS AND HOUSE COMMITTEES DID, DEMOCRATIC HOUSE COMMITTEES >> Reporter: IT YOUR RESPONSE TO ABC REPORTING EARLIER TODAY, THE RECORDING WITH TRUMP SAYING — >> HAVE THEY VERIFIED THE RECORDING YET? >> Reporter: I THINK THEY HAVE >> Reporter: "THE NEW YORK TIMES" SAID THEY HANDED IT OVER [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> OKAY, AS LONG AS IT IS VERIFIED

THIS IS THE KIND OF DESPICABLE CONDUCT TE PRESIDENT ENGAGES IN, DESPICABLE CONDUCT, A LIFELONG PUBLIC SERVANT, A WOMAN THAT DEDICATED HER LIFE TO THIS COUNTRYAND BECAUSE SHE IS STANDING FOR TRUTH AND WILL NOT LET HIM BREAK THE LAW, HE IS VICIOUS TO HER NO PRESIDENT SHOULD BE LIKE THAT, REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH IMPEACHMENT, NO PRESIDENT SHOULD BE LIKE THAT AND TREAT PEOPLE THAT WAY, BUT HE HAS DONE IT TIME AND TIME AGAIN OKAY THANK YOU, EVERYBODY >> WE WERE LISTENING TO SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER THERE

IT LOOKS LIKE TWO MORE SENATORS OR AT LEAST ONE MORE IS TAKING THE MIC THIS IS RICK SCOTT, LET'S LISTEN >> CHARADE IF YOU LOOK AT IT, I HAVE BEEN PUTTING TWEETS OUT ALL DAY WHAT DEMOCRATIC SENATORS SAID IN THE PAST ABOUT THE IMPEACHMENT OF BILL CLINTON THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE COME DOWN HERE AND SAID JUST THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY SAID IN 1999, THEY HAVE BEEN DOING DAY AFTER DAY

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE WHITE HOUSE TOMORROW, STARTING TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT BECAUSE THEY SAID THE SAME THING, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I'VE SEEN AMBASSADOR SONDLAND AND FIONA HILL, THEY ALL SAY THE EXACT SAME THING I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING THEY SAID SO FAR IS IMPEACHABLE I DO LOOK FORWARD TO WATCHING THE WHITE HOUSE PRESENT THEIR CASE >> THIS IS THE FOURTH DAY WE HAVE HEARD THE DEMOCRATS MAKE THEIR ARGUMENTS >> WE WILL PULL AWAY FROM THE SENATORS AND BRING OUR PANEL OF LESLIE SANCHEZ, JOEL PAYNE, AND JESSICA LEVINSON

LESLIE IS A CBS NEWS POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR AND REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, SHE IS WITH ME ONSET JOEL IS A CBSN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST AND FORMER LEADERSHIP AIDE IN THE SENATE AT THE WASHINGTON BUREAU AND JESSICA IS A PROFESSOR AT LOYOLA LAW SCHOOL IN LOS ANGELES AND JOINING ME ON THE PHONE A CBSN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR AND ASSOCIATED PRESS WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, ZEKE MILLER WELCOME TO ALL OF YOU JESSICA, I WILL BEGIN WITH YOU, WHAT STOOD OUT TO YOU FROM THE DEMOCRATIC CASE TODAY AS THEY FOCUSED ON ARTICLE 2, OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS? >> WHAT STOOD OUT TO ME IS THIS IS A VERY METHODICAL PRESENTATION THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY, A LOT OF DISCUSSION OF IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT THIS PRESIDENT, NOT JUST ABOUT THIS MOMENT IN OUR COUNTRY, NOT JUST ABOUT THIS TERRIBLY POLARIZED MOMENT, IT IS ABOUT WHAT EVERY OTHER PRESIDENT HAS DONE, IT IS ABOUT IT BEING CATEGORICALLY UNACCEPTABLE A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WOULD SAY I'M NOT COMPLYING WITH, NOT JUST THIS SUBPOENA OVER HERE, OR THAT PARTICULAR REQUEST OVER HERE, I'M NOT COMPLYING WITH THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS

THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM A NARROW ASSERTION OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, I THOUGHT THEY PLACED THEIR ARGUMENTS WELL HISTORICALLY, I THOUGHT THEY PLACED THEM LEGALLY AND I THOUGHT IT WAS ORGANIZED VERY WELL >> LESLIE, TO CONTINUE ON THAT POINT, I THINK DEMOCRATS WERE CAREFUL TO SAY, THEY KNEW THEIR AUDIENCE, THEY HAVE TO SWAY THE SENATE REPUBLICANS THEY SAID THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PRESIDENT, THIS IS ABOUT EMMA IN GENERAL YOU MAY LIKE THIS ONE BUT YOU MAY NOT LIKE THE NEXT ONE WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE IS GIVING AWAY SOME OF YOUR OWN POWER , DO YOU THINK THAT ARGUMENT CAN SWAY SENATE REPUBLICANS? >> I FELT IT WAS VERY PASSIONATE

WE TALKED ABOUT THE PASSION OF THE ARGUMENT BUT NOT NECESSARILY EFFECTIVE PART OF THE CHALLENGE, YOU HAVE SO MANY REPUBLICANS ON A PARTISAN BENCH THAT HAVE MADE UP THEIR MIND, PREDETERMINED OUTCOME, WE READ THE LAST CHAPTER WHAT IS INTERESTING, WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT HISTORICAL CONTEXT, BROUGHT UP RICHARD NIXON, TALKED ABOUT THIS MOMENT IN TIME, I THINK THE AMERICAN ELECTORATE CANNOT BE IGNORED HERE, YOU TALK ABOUT AUGUST 1974, RICHARD NIXON, HE HAD 24 % APPROVAL RATING, IT TANKED REPUBLICAN SENATORS THAT CAME AROUND SAID IT IS TIME TO GO, DO YOUR GOODBYE IN YOUR OUT, CLOSING CALL YOU DON'T SEE WHAT WITH THE PRESENT

ACCORDING TO THE GALLUP POLL, MORE THAN HALF THE COUNTRY DISAPPROVES OF THE PRESIDENT'S JOB, 53 %, LESS THAN THAT, 46 % WANT CONVICTION, YOU HAVE A TYPE OF THE AMERICAN ELECTORATE GENERALLY, DOES NOT WANT TO REMOVE THE PRESIDENT REGARDLESS OF HOW PASSIONATE THEY ARE, THEY DON'T SEE IT THE SAME WAY FROM A PARTISAN LENS >> YES, YOU'RE ARGUING THIS IS VERY MUCH A POLITICAL PROCESS AND THE POPULARITY OF THE CURRENT PRESIDENT IS SWAYING THE WAY THE SENATORS ARE ABSORBING THIS INFORMATION >> I THINK PEOPLE BELIEVE IT IS A HIGHLY PARTISAN ACT, HAD IT COME FROM THE MUELLER REPORT, HAD IT BEEN A THIRD PARTY ENTITY THAT WAS REMOVED FROM SUCH A HYPER ARTISAN PROCESS, WE WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, I WOULD NEVER CALL THEM NEVER TRUMPERS, PEOPLE THAT DON'T ENJOY BEING ON THE BANDWAGON, THOSE SENATORS WOULD BE MORE OPEN TO THE IDEA, THE PROCESS ITSELF DID NOT ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN >> I WANT TO GET TO THAT IN A MOMENT JOEL, I WILL TURN TO YOU, TODAY IS THE FINAL DAY DEMOCRATS CAN MAKE THEIR ARGUMENTS

WHAT IS THE SINGLE BIGGEST NARRATIVE THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE CLEAR BEFORE REPUBLICANS TAKE THE FLOOR TOMORROW? >> LAST NIGHT WHEN I JOINED YOUR, WHAT STUCK OUT TO ME WAS CHARM OFFENSIVE THEY EXTENDED THAT TODAY, BUT TO LESLIE'S POINT, RATHER TO YOUR POINT YOU PRESENTED TO LESLIE, THEY REALLY WANT TO FRAME IT AROUND LOGIC AND EMOTION, THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE LEGAL ARGUMENTS TO APPEAL TO THE LOGIC, THESE ARE THINGS WE KNOW THAT HAPPENED AND THERE'S NO DEFENSE FROM THE PRESIDENT OR HIS ALLIES ABOUT THOSE THINGS THEY ARE SAYING IT IS NOT IMPEACHABLE THE EMOTION PART OF IT IS WHAT WE GOT TO WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FUTURE PRESIDENTS OR FUTURE , THIS PRESIDENT OR WHETHER OR NOT REPLACE MARIE YOVANOVITCH OR GORDON SONDLAND, THE PERSON HOLDING THE BAG RIGHT NOW COULD VERY WELL BE YOU DOWN THE LINE DEALING WITH THIS PRESIDENT I THOUGHT THAT WAS A REALLY COMPELLING ARGUMENT ADAM SCHIFF LED THE DAY WITH, THAT IS THE HIGHLIGHT FROM TODAY

>> I AGREE WITH YOU WHEN HE TURNED TO THOSE SENATORS AND LOOKED AT THEM DIRECTLY, DON'T THINK THIS PRESIDET WON'T TURN ON YOU IF IT IS IN HIS INTEREST >> ZEKE WHAT ARE YOU HEARING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE? OUR UNDERSTANDING IS WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS DON'T EXPECT TO LOSE ANY REPUBLICAN VOTES ON THE ISSUE OF WITNESSES IS THE WHITE HOUSE STILL THAT CONFIDENT? >> THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE SAYING PUBLICLY, PRIVATELY THEY ARE CONCEDING THEY ARE LIKELY TO LOSE ONE OR TWO, THE QUESTION IS, DO THEY GET TO THREE OR FOUR? THAT IS WHERE THINGS STAND, THERE IS A LOBBY NOT LED BY THE WHITE HOUSE BUT BITE MITCH McCONNELL AND THE OTHERS TO THE MODERATE DEMOCRATS TO MANAGE OTHERS WHO COULD POTENTIALLY CROSS THE AISLE, THAT SEEMS UNLIKELY RIGHT NOW GIVEN THEIR PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT IS SORT OF WHERE THINGS ARE, LIKELY TWO REPUBLICANS CROSSOVER, DOES IT

>> I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, IF THEY WERE TO VOTE AGAINST THE PRESIDENT, THEIR HEAD WOULD BE ON A SPIKE SO, DO YOU THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THOSE THREE OR FOUR REPUBLICANS NEED TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT THEIR POLITICAL FUTURES? >> THAT IS A BIG STICK THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN ABLE TO HOLD NOT ONLY HAS HE THREATENED TO SUPPORT A PRIMARY OPPONENT, THOSE ARE VERY REAL THREATS I WOULDN'T SAY — >> NO RIGHT

>> THEY ARE VERY DIRECT THIS IS PART OF THE HARD BALL OF POLITICS OF KEEPING EVERYONE IN LINE SOMETIMES IF YOU KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO BE UNDER THE FOUR VOTE THRESHOLD THAT YOU NEED, THEY LOOK MORE INDEPENDENT, IT GIVES THEM KIND OF POLITICAL CAPITAL IN THEIR STATE BUT STILL ALLOWS THE REPUBLICANS TO STAY TOGETHER >> IF YOU WERE A MEMBER OF THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL TEAM, WHAT ARE YOU LISTENING TO FROM THE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS AS YOU PREPARE TO LAY OUT YOUR CASE? >> IF WE LOOK AT THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IN GENERAL, I WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WHAT I WOULD BE THINKING ABOUT IF I WERE A MEMBER OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S TEAM, THIS IS POLITICAL THEATER, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE THE LAW IN YOUR FAVOR, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE THE FACTS IN YOUR FAVOR WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME IS

I THINK THEY WILL NOT ARGUE ABOUT WHAT THE FACTS ARE, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, I DON'T THINK THEY WILL ARGUE ABOUT THE LAW AND WHAT THE FOUNDERS ENVISIONED WHEN THEY THOUGHT ABOUT THE IMPEACHMENT CAUSE, I DON'T THINK THEY WILL TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF ABUSE OF POWER THEY WILL TURN THE TABLES ON THE DEMOCRATS AND SAY THIS HAS BEENA WITCH HUNT FROM THE BEGINNING THIS IS NOT SOMEBODY YOU LIKE IT WILL BE MORE OF WHAT YOU HEARD DURING THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRIES WHERE IT WAS DON'T LOOK OVER HERE AT PRESIDENT TRUMP, LOOK OVER HERE AT THE BIDENS I THINK THERE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF A DISTRACTION

AGAIN, I THINK IT WILL BE THIS IS BASED ON BIAS, THE DEMOCRATS DON'T LIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP, LOOK AT THAT — LOOK AT FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN, LOOK AT HIS SON AND I THINK THEN THEY WILL PROBABLY SUM IT UP WITH, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU MIGHT NOT LIKE WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP DID BUT DOES IT RISE IT THE LEVEL OF REMOVING A POPULAR PRESIDENT >> EVERYTHING WE HEARD BEFORE, NOTHING SUBSTANTIALLY NEW >> EXACTLY >> SPEAKING OF THE DEFENSE, WE WILL GO TO THE PRESIDENT'S PERSONAL COUNSEL JAY SEKULOW WHO SPOKE MOMENTS AGO

>> THE PRESIDENT FROM THE BALLOT IN 2020 WE ARE 10-1/2 MONTHS OUT FROM AN ELECTION AND THEY DON'T TRUST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO MAKE A DECISION AND THERE WAS SUCH A STATEMENT OF URGENCY IN MOVING THIS THAT NANCY PELOSI SAT ON IT FOR 33 DAYS YOU DON'T GET IT EVERY WAY AND THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO TOMORROW MORNING WE PUT ON OUR CASE

WE HAVE TWO GOALS, WE WILL REFUTE THE ALLEGATIONS AND PUT ON A CASE AS WELL FEW QUESTIONS >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I AM NOT GOING TO — HE IS NOT A WITNESS HE'S THE LAWYER NUMBER ONE

TO ASK WHAT THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYER'S ADVICE WAS TO THE PRESIDENT, I THINK EVEN THEY WOULD BE HESITANT WHEN YOU TALK EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, LOOK, THEY PUT THEIR CASE FORWARD, IT IS OUR TIME NEXT >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I THOUGHT THAT WHOLE — HE WAS ADMONISHED ONCE ALREADY I DON'T — IT IS THE — IT IS RHETORIC IT IS JERRY NADLER RHETORIC

THE CONSTITUTION GOVERNS THE PROCEEDINGS THEY PUT THEIR CASE FORWARD WE WILL NOW DO OURS >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> HOW DO YOU NOT? THEY TALKED ABOUT ALL THE FOREIGN INTERFERENCE I AM GOING TO BRING UP A COUPLE THINGS TOMORROW

TOMORROW IS OUR SNEAK PREVIEW I AM GOING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING, LOOK FOR THINGS LOOK FOR THINGS THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE — FOREIGN INTERFERENCE, SEE WHAT THE FISA COURT HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> THEY INCORPORATED — YEAH

YEAH NO, THERE IS NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE THIS IS WORSE THAN THIS ONE, THIS IS WORSE THAN THAT ONE BILL CLINTON WAS — THERE WAS AN ALLEGATION OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE THERE IS NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE HERE

ABUSE OF POWER OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS NEXT? >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> LOOK, I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT I AM GOING TO ARGUE LOOK AT WHAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKY SAID ABOUT THAT NEXT? >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLIER

LOOK, AN AMBASSADOR SERVES AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT YOU KNOW WHO SAID THAT? THE AMBASSADOR >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I HAVEN'T HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS ON THAT THE SENATE, IF — LOOK, FOR WHATEVER REASON, THE HOUSE MANAGERS DECIDED TO — NOT JUST OPEN THE DOOR, BUT KICK THE DOOR DOWN ON THE BURISMA-BIDEN MATTER, THEY HAVE DONE IT, THERE YOU GO >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU — WOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT OR NOT TALKING ABOUT, BUT THEY HAVE OPENED THE DOOR

LOOK AT OUR BRIEF THEY SPENT HOURS ON IT >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> RUDY GIULIANI — LOOK, I AM GOING TO SAY IT VERY CLEARLY RUDY GIULIANI WAS REPRESENTING A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, PRESIDENT TRUMP, WHO WAS UNDER ATTACK BY SPECIAL COUNSELS AND TO LOOK OVER EVERY POSSIBLE DEFENSE IS WHAT A LAWYER DOES ONE MORE

OR NONE >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> THE SENATE ASKED FOR THIS ACCOMMODATION, WE WERE WILLING TO DO IT 10:00 AM TO 1:00 P

M TOMORROW IS THE ALLOCATION >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT I AM GOING TO FOCUS ON WITH THREE HOURS IT WILL BE AN OVER VIEW >> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> NOT GOING TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION UNTIL THE CASE PROGRESSES

>> Reporter: [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >> MAY OR MAY NOT BE I DID A SUPREME COURT CASE WHERE MY ARGUMENT WAS 8 MINUTES WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL I THINK IT WAS 9-0 SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, LESS IS MORE BUT I WILL SAY THIS, IF WE NEED — IF WE DECIDE — AS OUR TEAM DECIDES, WE NEED TO TAKE THE FULL TIME, WE WILL TAKE IT

REMEMBER, AFTER THIS IS OVER, THIS IS JUST — THERE IS TWO DAYS OF — 16 HOURS OF QUESTIONING THAT COULD GO FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS SO >> Reporter: THANK YOU >> THANKS, EVERYBODY

>> WE WERE LISTENING TO PRESIDENT'S COUNSEL JAY SEKULOW THERE GIVING A PREVIEW OF WHAT WE CAN EXPECT TOMORROW I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT WHAT HE LAID OUT A TEASER THERE HE SAID THE DOSSIER WILL COME UP, THE FISA COURT WHEN YOU HEAR ALL THAT, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE DEFENSE THAT IS GOING TO BE MOUNTED? >> IF YOU HAVE THE LAW, YOU ARGUE THE LAW, IF YOU HAVE THE FACTS, YOU ARGUE THE FACTS

IF YOU DON'T HAVE EITHER YOU ARGUE ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE WHAT I HEAR, WHAT ABOUT THESE SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING THAT SAID OTHER THAN USING THE WORDS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE OR USING ABUSE OF POWER, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING THAT DIRECTLY UNDERCUT THOSE ARGUMENTS I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THIS STATEMENT THAT FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON FACED OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ONLY FACING OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS, SO WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE PRESIDENT'S ATTORNEY JUST NOW I THINK IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, IT WILL BE GAME OF DISTRACTION AND IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EVEN MATTER IF IT IS COMPELLING TO, YOU KNOW, THE AVERAGE VOTER, TO THE AVERAGE JUROR WHAT MATTERS IS THAT THE REPUBLICANS IN THE SENATE ARE GOING TO STICK TOGETHER ON THIS AND SO I THINK THAT THEY WILL PUT UP A BUNCH OF TALKING POINTS THAT WILL BE USEFUL FOR SENATES WHEN THEY RUN FOR REELECTION

I ABSOLUTELY THINK THEY WILL WIN >> ZEKE, WHAT MORE YOU'RE HEARING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, WE HEARD THE PRESIDENT'S ATTORNEY SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY PLAN TO REFUTE WHAT THE DEMOCRATS LAID OUT AND ASSERT OTHER POINTS OF THEIR OWN >> ONE THING THAT WAS A NOTABLE TAKE AWAY, THEY WERE ASKED WERE THEY GOING TO BRING UP JOE BIDEN AND HUNTER BIDEN THEY GAVE A TELLING RESPONSE WHICH WAS THAT THAT THEY SEEM TO THINK DEMOCRATS BROUGHT IT UP YESTERDAY AS THEY WERE LAYING OUT THE CASE FOR WHY AND THEY ARE TELLING THE PRESIDENT'S COMMENTS, CALLING FOR AN INVESTIGATION OF UKRAINE AND THE BIDENS, MADE IT A PART OF THEIR DEFENSE SO THAT IS AN INDICATION WE'LL HEAR ABOUT THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE AN EFFORT HERE, THEY ARE PLAYING FOR MULTIPLE AUDIENCES, THE SENATORS, THE PEOPLE WATCHING AND THE AUDIENCE ONE

THE PRESIDENT IS CLEAR, HE WANTS HIS DEFENSE TEAM ON THE FLOOR TO MOUNT A FULL FLOATED DEFENSE THIS IS PART OF AN EFFORT TO UNDUE THE 2016 ELECTION AND IMPACT THE TENT 20 ONE IT THE 2020 ONE THE INFORMATION THAT MANY DEMOCRATS WILL FIND INFLAMMATORY >> I WANT TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND TALK ABOUT THE OPTICS OF ALL OF THIS FOR THE AVERAGE VIEWER WHO IS CATCHING SOME OF IT, NOT OTHER PARTS

WE HEARD LOT OF REPETITION FROM BOTH SIDES THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS OR WE HEARD A METICULOUS LAYING OUT OF THE CASE DEMOCRATS, STARTING TOMORROW, THE REPUBLICANS, WHAT DO YOU THINK VIEWERS, VOTERS ARE TAKING AWAY FROM ALL OF THIS, WHERE WE STAND NOW? >> SURE THEY HEAR A LOT OF THE SAME THING INTERESTING, BECAUSE YOU HEAR PEOPLE REPEATING, REPUBLICANS, REPUBLICANS REPEATING A LOT OF THE SAME LINES THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME

THEY ALREADY KNOW IT IS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION WE TALKED ABOUT THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT HALF OF THEM, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE NOT MOVING ANYBODY THEY THINK IT IS MORE OF THE SAME

IF ANYTHING, IT IS AN ACTIVATION TOOL ON BOTH SIDES IF YOU HAVE 87% OF DEMOCRATS WHO WANT THE PRESIDENT REMOVED, AND CONVICTED, REMOVED FROM OFFICE, AND REPUBLICANS ARE SAYING NO, WE DON'T BUY IT, ON BOTH SIDES, IF YOU ARE ENGAGED ATTENTION BECAUSE IT IS JUST — IT IS LIGHTING THAT FIRE TO GET PEOPLE ACTIVATED AND MOTIVED IN THE EARLY STATES FOR, DEMOCRATS IT IS A POSITIVE FOR REPUBLICANS, THEY ARE GETTING READY AND THEY ARE GIVING MONEY >> YEAH RIGHT

ALL RIGHT HOW DO YOU THINK THAT THE — YOU KNOW, THE AVERAGE VOTER AT HOME WATCHING THIS, THE AVERAGE DEMOCRATIC VOTER, HOW ARE THEY ABSORBING THIS, IS IT MOVING — IS THE NEEDLE MOVING FOR ANYONE? >> WELL, REGARDLESS OF WHO YOU VOTE FOR, PROBABLY ANYTHING YOU SEE OUT OF WASHINGTON FEELS LIKE A WASTE OF TIME, WHETHER A MARK UP COMMITTEE HEARING OR A PRESS CONFERENCE THAT IS PROBABLY WHY DONALD TRUMP IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE SO I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE BOTH TO THE PRESIDENT'S FAVOR AND ALSO TO DISPROVE SOME OF THE THINGS THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES ARE SAYING I THINK THIS IS A REAL DISASTER FOR THE PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICANS

WE ARE SPENDING EVERY SINGLE DAY, IT IS NOT JUST WHAT IS GOING ON ON THE FLOOR IN THE SENATE, IT IS ALSO, YOU LOOK AT THAT LEAKED STORY MENTIONED EARLIER, THE ABC STORY ABOUT MARIE YOVANOVITCH ABOUT TAKE HER OUT, YOU HAVE THAT GOING ON YOU SEE PUBLIC POLLING THAT SUGGEST 72% OF PEOPLE WANT A FAIR TRIAL THEY WANT WITNESSES, DOCUMENTS 69% OF REPUBLICANS WANT THAT AND YOU HAVE THE PRESIDENT THREATENING TO PUNISH MEMBERS OF HIS PARTY WHO FOLLOW WHAT SEVEN OUT OF TEN OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS ARE SAYING THEY WANT THAT IS WHERE — THAT IS WHERE REPUBLICANS ARE RIGHT NOW

THAT IS A BAD PLACE TO BE >> CERTAINLY, I THINK, WE CAN AGREE, A LOT OF UNFLATTERING, YOU KNOW, INFORMATION HAS COME OUT ABOUT THE PRESIDENT HE IS PAINTED IN AN UNFLATTERING LIGHT WOULD YOU AGREE? >> RIGHT I FIND IT HARDER TO BE MORE UNFLATTERING THAN THE 2016 ELECTION

JUST BY VIRTUE OF WHO THE PRESIDENT IS IN 2016, SO IT IS — I AM SAYING — >> RIGHT RIGHT >> WE UNDERSTAND THE ATTITUDE — >> REPUBLICANS SUPPORT HIM IN SPITE OF WHO HE IS >> THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE BACK DROP OF STRONG ECONOMIC NUMBERS

TWO TRADE DEALS THEY DELIVERED ON THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES THEY DELIVERED ON RELIGION FREEDOM, ON THE BORDER WALL THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO KEEP TOUTING I HAVE BEEN GETTING THE JOB DONE BREAKING THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF WASHINGTON

AND THIS PLAYS INTO THAT I HEARD THIS, IT IS A SYSTEM THAT THEY ARE DYING HARD THIS OLD SYSTEM, THE WAY WASHINGTON IS BROKEN WILL NOT GO DOWN EASILY THAT IS THE ARGUMENT >> IS THERE EVER A MOMENT WHEN REPUBLICANS STEP BACK AND SAY, LOOK, YOU KNOW, THIS PRESIDENT HAS DELIVERED ON SOME OF THE THINGS WE CARE ABOUT BUT MAYBE HE IS TOO MUCH OF A LIABILITY AND MIKE PENCE ISN'T SO BAD

>> WE ARE NOT THERE YET IF YOU SAY THERE WAS A MOMENT WITH DR HILL, THE RUSSIAN EXPERT, WORKED FOR THE STATE DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERT WHO SAID WE ARE PLAYING INTO RUSSIA'S HANDS THIS INFIGHTING IS WHAT RUSSIA WANTS US TO DO THAT IS A MOMENT, IF THERE WAS A BRIEF PAUSE, WHEN PEOPLE SAY WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND REMEMBER HOW WE FIGHT FOR THIS COUNTRY

>> REMEMBER, SHE CHASTISED REPUBLICANS, UKRAINE — >> UKRAINE AND SOME — SOME REPUBLICANS CONTINUED WITH THOSE TALKING POINTS BUT THAT WAS A MOMENT WHEN MORE PEOPLE TOOK A PAUSE AND TRIED TO LOOK, ASIDE FROM THE PARTISANSHIP AND FOR PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE — THEY WANT TO SEE THIS SYSTEM WORK AND THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IN THIS POLLING THEY WANT IT TO WORK >> I AGREE WITH YOU

I THINK THAT IDEA OF MAKING THE SYSTE WORK DEPENDS ON THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER FOR THE DEMOCRATS, IT IS IMPEACHING THE PRESIDENT 12 OFFICIALS CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO TESTIFY HOW WILL THIS PLAY INTO THE OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS ALLEGATION? >> WELL, I THINK IT ABSOLUTELY FEEDS INTO THE ALLEGATION THE IDEA THAT IT CAME FROM THE TOP

IT CAME FROM PRESIDENT SAYING WE WILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS AT ALL INTERESTINGLY, THAT WASN'T COMPLETELY EFFECTED IN THE THE FACT THAT THERE ARE STILL PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO TESTIFY, REFUSE TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS, BOLSTERS THE CASE, BOLSTERS THE CASE FOR OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT WE HEAR THESE WORDS, SUBPOENA, EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR PEOPLE TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA BUT SAY I WON'T TALK ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION, THIS AREA, BUT I WILL GIVE YOU THESE DOCUMENTS BUT NOT THESE DOCUMENTS WHAT DEMOCRATS TRIED TO TALK ABOUT TODAY IS THE IDEA THAT THIS IS JUST DIFFERENT

THIS IS DIFFERENT THE IDEA THAT YOU COULD JUST SAY I AM NOT COMPLYING WITH THE PROCESS I WON'T EVEN LEND ANY LEGITIMACY TO IT, PERIOD AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING — THAT IS PART OF THE REASON TODAY FELT REPETITIVE, THE LAST FEW DAYS THERE IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT ABOUT SAYING I AM NOT ACKNOWLEDGING THIS PROCESS HAS THE FORCE AND EFFECT OF LAW

>> RIGHT EXACTLY THAT IS WHAT DEMOCRATS ARGUED STRONGLY FOR TODAY BUT TOMORROW THE BALL IS IN THE REPUBLICAN COURT SO WHAT TYPE OF PUSH BACK DO YOU EXPECT TO HEAR FROM DEMOCRATS AS THE REPUBLICANS BEGIN TO LAY OUT THEIR ARGUMENTS TOMORROW? >> I WAS GIVING THAT SOME THOUGHT

I HAVE SEEN THE LAST FEW DAYS THE REPUBLICAN ALLIES OF THE PRESIDENT HAVE BEEN QUICK TO GIVE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CASE I WILL BE INTERESTED TO SEE WHETHER THE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS TAKE THE SAME TACTICS WHETHER THEY LET THEIR ARGUMENTS STAND FOR THEMSELVES OR HAVE ONE SPOKESPERSON OR MULTIPLE SPOKESPERSONS, MEMBERS OF THE SENATE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS WHO SPEAK AGAINST WHAT THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM IS ARGUING I WILL BE CURIOUS TO SEE THAT, TO WHETHER OR NOT THE DEMOCRATS WILL MIMIC THE TACTICS WE HAVE SEEN FROM THE PRESIDENT AND HIS TEAM TO TRY TO MOUNT A COUNTEROFFENSE TO THE MESSAGE YOU ARE HEARING >> DO YOU KNOW HOW THAT WILL WORK OUT? THE REPUBLICANS HAVE THREE DAYS TO PRESENT THEIR DEFENSE

WILL THERE BE CLOSING ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH SIDES? >> WELL, I THINK THE WAY THIS IS SET UP IS EACH SIDE HAS 24 HOURS AND THEN 16 HOURS OF QUESTIONS AND THEN I BELIEVE THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL VOTES BASED ON WHAT PROCEDURE WE WANT TO GO FORWARD THERE WILL BE A VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS WITNESSES I EXPECT THAT VOTE TO FAIL AND I THINK THERE WILL BE A DETERMINATION AS TO HOW LONG THERE WILL BE ANY REBUTTAL AND THEN A QUICK CLOSING SO, YOU KNOW, THIS WILL WRAP UP PRETTY QUICKLY AND I THINK IN A WAY, PRELIMLY SPEAKING, I THINK BOTH SIDES ARE READY FOR THIS TO BE DONE

EVERYONE WOULD JUST BE EXHAUSTED INTO SUBMISSION, THAT AFTER SIX DAYS OF THIS SENATORS WOULD JUST SAY I AM DONE WITH MY WATER, I NEED MY iPHONE, I NEED TO GO BACK TO IOWA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, PLEASE, GOD, PUT ME OUT OF MY MISERY I KNOW WHAT THE VOTE GOING TO BE >> THERE MUST BE iPHONE WITHDRAWAL GOING ON IN THE SENATE RIGHT NOW SOMETHING THAT JOEL BROUGHT UP EARLIER, NEWS THAT THERE IS A TAPE WHERE PRESIDENT TRUMP CAN BE HEARD, YOU KNOW, SAYING DISBARGING DISPARAGING THINGS ABOUT AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH >> THIS TAPE IS APPARENTLY FROM 2018, A YEAR BEFORE AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH WAS ACTUALLY PULLED OUT OF — WITHDRAWN FROM UKRAINE

IT IS INTERESTING BECAUSE IT DOES PUT THE PRESIDENT AND LEV PARNAS AND THE OTHERS IN THE ROOM HAVING A DISCUSSION TOGETHER THE CHALLENGE IN ALL OF THIS IS THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY CLEAR THAT THAT EVIDENCE AND INFORMATION IS ADMITTED ON TO THE SENATE FLOOR SOME HAS ALREADY BEEN REFERENCED TURNED OVER TO THE HOUSE DISCUSSED BY THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS

BUT THIS CAME, YOU KNOW, WASN'T BROUGHT UP BY DEMOCRATS TODAY ON THE FLOOR NOT GOING TO HEAR REPUBLICANS PUT IT FORWARD IT IS IMPORTANT IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT DOESN'T TELL US ANYTHING MORE THAN WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY KNEW FROM THE OTHER TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE

THE PRESIDENT HAD SOMETHING AGAINST THIS AMBASSADOR AND THE REPUBLICAN ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE AND FIRE AMBASSADORS AS HE SEES FIT WITH NO STANDARD THEY ARE WILLING TO WIPE THIS AWAY AND DISMISS THE EVIDENCE >> ALL RIGHT YOU HAVE BEEN THERE FOLLOWING THIS, WHAT IS THE MOOD BEEN INSIDE THE SENATE? >> INSIDE THE SENATE IT HAS BEEN VERY HARD FOR THE SENATORS TO HAVE THE PATIENCE TO SIT THROUGH THIS TRIAL TODAY WE SAW A SENATOR ON THE FLOOR WITH SOME BOOKS AND EVEN THOUGH AFTER BEING CHASTISED EARLIER, THE SENATORS HAVE SHOWN MORE DISCIPLINE, THEY STILL ARE LIKELY TO VEER OUT, TAKE SOME BREAKS, EVEN BEFORE THE THREE HOURS ARE UP

SO THIS IS SLOW GOING FOR THEM >> WERE THERE ANY MOMENT WHERES LAWMAKERS SEEMED INTRIGUED, DID YOU SEE THEM PERK UP AT SPECIFIC POINTS? >> RIGHT NOW THE THING THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE REALLY FIRED UP OVER IS THE MENTION OF JOE BIDEN FROM YESTERDAY WHEN DEMOCRATS BROUGHT UP THE INVESTIGATION THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS SEEKING INTO JOE BIDEN, A LOT OF REPUBLICANS RESPONDED SAYING THIS MAKES JOE BIDEN FAIR GAME AND WE WANT THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO GO THERE WE WANT THEM TO GO THERE TOMORROW WHEN IT IS THE WHITE HOUSE'S TURN TO PRESENT ITS ARGUMENTS

>> SO DO WE KNOW, THEN, HOW MANY THE REPUBLICANS WILL FOCUS ON JOE BIDEN TOMORROW? WE DID HEAR EARLIER FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY JAY SEKULOW AND HE DID SUGGEST WE COULD HEAR ABOUT THE DOSSIER, THE FISA COURT SOUNDS LIKE JOE BIDEN AND BURISMA WILL PROBABLY COME UP >> OUR EXPECTATION IS JOE BIDEN, HUNTER BIDEN, BURISMA WILL PROBABLY COME UP OF COURSE, FROM THE DEMOCRATS PERSPECTIVE THIS GETS REPUBLICANS INTO DANGEROUS TERRAIN IN WHICH THEY ARE ADVANCING A FORM OF RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA REPUBLICANS BELIEVE DEMOCRATS ARE UNWILLING TO OVERLOOK SOMETHING, AND OF COURSE, THIS FOCUS, OF COURSE, WILL CARRY US INTO THAT VOTE ON WITNESSES

AND IT DOES BECOME A SITUATION IN WHICH ENOUGH REPUBLICANS ARE PEALED OFF TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF WITNESSES, THEN, OF COURSE, A SUBPOENA FOR HUNTER BIDEN BECOMES A TOPIC OF DEBATE YOU COULD SEE US BUILDING TO A VERY, VERY MESSY CRESCENDO >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AS A REMINDER, SENATORS ARE ON A SHORT BREAK RIGHT NOW DURING THIS, THE FOURTH DAY OF THE SENATOR IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF PRESIDENT TRUMP HERE IS A QUICK RUN THROUGH OF WHAT YOU MAY HAVE MISSED

>>> THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OPINE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT DID NOT QUALIFY AS AN URGENT CONCERN AND THEREFORE DID NOT HAVE TO BE TURNED OVER WHAT CAN BE MORE URGENT THAN A SITTING PRESIDENT TRYING TO CHEAT IN AN AMERICAN ELECTION BY SOLICITING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE? WHAT CAN BE MORE URGENT THAN THAT? THAT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL CRIME IN PROCESS BUT THEY CONCLUDED IT WASN'T AN URGENT MATTER >> PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS NOT CONCERNED WITH FIGHTING CORRUPTION

IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY THAT WITH A STRAIGHT FACE THE PRESIDENT NEVER MENTIONED CORRUPTION ON EITHER CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY >> A FORMER MAYOR OF NEW YORK PERSUADED A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO SACRIFICE ALL OF THAT FOR A CHEAP SHOT AT HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT FOR A SMEAR AGAINST HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT WAS IT WORTH IT? I HOPE IT WAS WORTH IT I HOPE IT WAS WORTH IT

FOR THE PRESIDENT BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY WASN'T WORTH IT FOR THE UNITED STATES >> IF WE ALLOW PRESIDENT TRUMP TO ESCAPE ACCOUNTABILITY WE WILL INFLICT LASTING DAMAGE ON THE SEPARATION OF POWERS ON OUR BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT IT WOULD INFLICT IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE BY ALLOWING THIS COMMANDER IN CHIEF TO ACT CURUPLY, CORRUPTLY AND USE THE OFFENSE OF THE PRESIDENCY TO CONCEAL THEIR OWN MISCONDUCT FROM CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE >> PRESIDENT TRUMP CAT OBSTRUCTED CONGRESS' IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

IN OTHER WORDS, HE ORCHESTRATED A COVERUP AND HE DID IT IN PLAIN SIGHT THE PRESIDENT WAGED A CAMPAIGN OF INTIMIDATION AGAINST THOSE BRAVE PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO DID COME FORWARD TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW >> NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER DARED DURING AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO OFFICIALLY ORDER GOVERNMENT WITNESSES TO DENY HOUSE SUBPOENAS YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER HIGH MINDED CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WAS WRONG

IT IS SIMPLE REALLY >> A PRESIDENT WITH THIS VIEW OF ROW POWER WOULD ATTACK ANYONE WHO TRIED TO HOLD HIM TO ACCOUNT BRANDING THEM HUMAN SCUM, AND THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE HE WOULD CONSTRIPT HIS ALLIES TO RIDICULE CONGRESS, HE WOULD HARASS WINS WHO TESTIFIED AGAINST HIM, DECLARING IT DISLAWYER TO QUESTION HIS CONDUCT HE WOULD USE THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE TO SABOTAGE OUR SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES

ALL OF THIS WE HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST FEW YEARS >> THAT WAS A REVIEW OF THE HIGHLIGHTS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED FROM THIS AFTERNOON I WANT TO BRING BACK IN OUR PANEL SO, STRATEGICALLY, HOW ARE DEMOCRATS GOING TO COUNTER THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL TEAM TOMORROW, YOU KNOW, THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL TEAM STARTS LAYING OUT ITS ARGUMENTS

ARE THE DEMOCRATS, YOU KNOW, BUILDING SOME DEFENSE OF THE DEFENSE? >> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION AND, YOU KNOW, THAT IS A LITTLE BITS OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO BEFORE, HOW WILL THEY PUSH BACK I THINK, IN A COMPELLING FASHION OVER THE LAST THREE DAYS I THINK DEMOCRATS HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF HAVING A SMALLER BUT MORE POWERFUL GROUP OF SPOKESPERSONS

YOU HAVE SEEN ADAM SCHIFF STEP UP JEFFREYS, I THINK THERE ARE SOME DEMOCRATS THAT ARE PROBABLY AREN'T AS STRONG SPOKESPERSONS AS THOSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN SO I THINK YOU WILL SEE DEMOCRATS STRATEGICALLY LOOK AT WHO SPEAKS FOR THE PARTY AND THE PARTY'S INTEREST THE BEST BUT THIS IS A REALLY TOUGH THING FOR REPUBLICANS TO COMBAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALMOST KIND OF GOT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY ARE NOT PUSHING BACK ON THE IDEA THAT THE PRESIDENT DID THIS OR THESE THINGS ARE FAKE NEWS YOU CAN'T

THESE ARE REPUBLICAN APPOINTEES VINDMAN, FOLKS IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO ARE WHISTLE- BLOWERS THESE ARE REPUBLICANS, YOU CAN'T DENY IT HAPPENED IT IS ABOUT DENYING WHETHER OR NOT IT IS WRONG >> THE WAY THEY TRIED TO FRAME THE ARGUMENT SEEMED TO ME IT WAS LESS ABOUT US AS DEMOCRATS NOT LIKING THIS PARTICULAR PRESIDENT, IT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE PLANS OF POWER OF OUR DEMOCRACY, WHAT HANGS IN THE BALANCE HERE IS WHETHER OR NOT CONGRESS IS GOING TO BE PERMANENTLY WEAKENED AND WHETHER THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WILL REACH A PLACE WHERE IT WILL EXIST UNCHECKED

RIGHT? >> YEAH I THINK THE ARGUMENT WAS IN TWO PARTS ONE, DONALD TRUMP IS A THREAT TO THE VALUES WE HOLD TRUE THAT IS WHAT THE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS WOULD ARGUE AND SECOND, IF WE DON'T ROLL BACK THE OVER REACHES OF THIS PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION, WE ARE GOING TO STEP OFF OF A CLIFF THAT WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO RECOVER FROM WHEN YOU TAKE THE ARGUMENTS AND PUT THEM INTO REAL PRACTICE

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM GOES AT IT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE SITTING ON SURPRISES THAT WILL REALLY COUNTER THE DEMOCRATS I THINK THE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS RAISE THE BAR FOR THE PRESIDENT, HIS DEFENSE TEAM >> IS THE PRESIDENT CONCERNED THAT HIS DEFENSE TEAM WILL BE PRESENTING THEIR CASE ON A WEEKEND, THEY BEGIN TOMORROW, A SATURDAY, COULD THAT MEAN, YOU KNOW, FEWER PEOPLE WATCHING, IS THAT A WEAKENED POSITION TO BEGIN? >> IT IS PART OF THE CONCERN PEOPLE ARE OFF DOING OTHER THINGS AND ENJOYING THEIR WEEKEND, OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL MONDAY, THEY ASKED THE SENATE TO DO THAT BUT THAT WOULD EXTEND THE TRIAL

IT ENDED UP WORKING OUT TO A HAPPY MEDIUM THAT SERVES THE SENATORS, PARTICULARLY THE ONES WHO ARE EXHAUSTED AFTER THE LONG WEEK OF THE HEARINGS AND THE ONES WHO WANT TO CONTINUE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT THE HALF DAY TOMORROW AND THEN ANOTHER SESSION ON MONDAY AND THAT ESPECIALLY THE TOTALITY OF THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL ARGUMENTS >> ALL RIGHT I AM SORRY TO INTERRUPT LOOKS LIKE THE SENATE RESUMED

THANK YOU THANK YOU LET'S LISTEN IN >>> IMPEACHMENT EXISTS NOT TO INFLICT PERSONAL PUNISHMENT FOR PAST WRONG DOING BUT RATHER TO PROTECT AGAINST FUTURE PRESIDENTIAL MISCONDUCT THAT WOULD ENDANGER DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW PRESIDENT TRUMP REMAINS A THREAT IN AT LEAST THREE FUNDAMENTAL WAYS

FIRST, HE CONTINUES TO INSERT THAT NOBODY IN THE US GOVERNMENT CAN INVESTIGATE HIM FOR WRONG DOING MAKING HIM UNACCOUNTABLE SECOND, HIS CONDUCT HERE IS NOT A ONE OFF

IT IS A PATTERN OF SOLICITING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR OWN ELECTIONS TO HIS ADVANTAGE AND USING THE POWS OF HIS OFFICE TO STOP ANYONE WHO DARES TO INVESTIGATE FINALLY, THE PRESIDENT'S OBSTRUCTION IS A CONSTITUTIONAL CRIME IN PROGRESS HARMING CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO DESERVE TO KNOW THE FACTS A PRESIDENT WHO BELIEVES HE CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING AND CAN USE HIS OFFICE TO CONCEAL EVIDENCE OF ABUSE, THREATENS US ALL

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS THE FIRST PRESIDENT IN US HISTORY WHO SAYS HE IS IMMUNE TO ANY EFFORT TO CHECK HIS POWER HE CLAIMS HE IS IMMUNE FROM CRIMINAL INDICTMENT AND PROSECUTION WHILE SERVING AS PRESIDENT HE CLAIMS HE CAN COMMIT ANY CRIME, EVEN SHOOT SOMEONE ON FIFTH AVENUE AS HE JOKED ABOUT

AND THE PRESIDENT'S OWN LAWYERS ARGUED IN COURT THAT HE CANNOT EVEN BE INVESTIGATED FOR VIOLATING THE LAW UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE NOW, NO PRESIDENT OF EITHER PARTY HAS EVER MADE CLAIMS LIKE THIS AND IF AN INVESTIGATION SOMEHOW DOES UNCOVER MISCONDUCT BY THE PRESIDENT, AS THIS INVESTIGATION HAS DONE, THE PRESIDENT BELIEVES THAT HE CAN QUASH IT HE CLAIMS THE RIGHT TO END FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS FOR ANY REASON OR NONE AT ALL EVEN WHEN THERE IS CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF HIS OWN WRONG DOING

ADDED TOGETHER, THE PRESIDENT'S POSITIONS AMOUNT TO A LICENSE TO DO ANYTHING HE WANTS NO COURT HAS EVER ACCEPTED THIS VIEW AND FOR GOOD REASON OUR FOUNDERS CREATED A SYSTEM IN WHICH ALL PEOPLE, EVEN PRESIDENTS ARE BOUND BY THE LAW AND ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS IN ADDITION TO CLAIMING HE IS IMMUNE TO CRIMINAL PROCESS PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTENDS HE IS NOTABILITY TOOL CONGRESS OR THE JUDICIARY

HE INVOKED BIZARRE LEGAL THEORIES HE ARGUED CONGRESS IS FORBIDDEN FROM HAVING THE COURTS INTERVENE WITH EXECUTIVE BRANCH OFFICIALS DISREGARDING ITS SUBPOENAS HE SUED TO BLOCK THIRD PARTIES FROM COMPLYING AND PRESIDENT TRUMP CLAIMED CONGRESS CANNOT INVESTIGATE HIS MISCONDUCT OUTSIDE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY CLAIMING THAT CONGRESS CANNOT INVESTIGATE HIS MISCONDUCT IN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OF COURSE, PRESIDENT TRUMP CONSIDERS ANY INQUIRY TO BE ILLEGITIMATE IF HE THINKS HE DID NOTHING WRONG LET'S REVIEW THE PRESIDENT'S POSITION

HE CAN'T BE INVESTIGATED FOR CRIMES HE CAN END ANY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION INTO HIM HE IS IMMUNE FROM ANY STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION NEITHER HE NOR HIS AIDS CAN BE SUBPOENAED HE CAN REJECT SUBPOENAS BASED ON BROAD, NOVEAND REJECTED THEORY AND WHEN HE DOES REJECT SUBPOENAS CONGRESS IS NOT ALLOWED TO SUE HIM BUT HE IS ALLOWED TO SUE TO BLOCK OTHERS FROM COMPLYING WITH CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS

CONGRESS CAN'T INVESTIGATE HIM OUTSIDE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE PRESIDENT BELIEVES THAT HE IS ABOVE THE LAW THIS IS NOT OUR SYSTEM AND IT NEVER HAS BEEN THE PRESIDENT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER UNLIKE A KING, HE IS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CONSTITUTION

BUT THIS PRESIDENT DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE HEAR REMEMBER THE PRECEDENT YOU SET IN THIS TRIAL WILL SHAPE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY FOR THE FUTURE IT WILL COVER THIS PRESIDENT AND THOSE WHO FOLLOW IF YOU LET THE PRESIDENT GET AWAY WITH HIS OBSTRUCTION, YOU RISK GRAVE HARM TO THE SEPARATION OF POWERS ITSELF REPRESENTATIVES HOGAN, A REPUBLICAN FROM MARYLAND, MADE THIS POINT DURING THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS

>> THE HISTORICAL PRECEDENT WE ARE SETTING HERE IS SO GREAT BECAUSE IN ANY FUTURE IMPEACHMENT OF A PRESIDENT, IT IS INCONCEIVABLE THAT THE EVIDENCE RELATING TO THAT IMPEACHMENT WILL NOT BE IN THE HANDS OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS UNDER HIS CONTROLS SO I AGREE, IF WE DO NOT PASS THIS ARTICLE TODAY, THE WHOLE IMPEACHMENT POWER BECOMES MEANINGLESS >> THIS LEADS US TO A SECOND CONSIDERATION THE PRESIDENT'S PATTERN OF OBSTRUCTING ARTICLE TWO DESCRIBES PRESIDENT TRUMP'S IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT IN OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS ON ITS OWN, THAT WARRANTS REMOVAL FROM OFFICE

AS STATED IN ARTICLE TWO, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OBSTRUCTION IS CONSISTENT WITH HIS EFFORTS TO UNDERMINE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN UNITED STATES ELECTIONS ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTEMPTS TO IMPEDE THE ESSENTIAL COUNSEL'S INVESTIGATION WITH RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AS WELL AS THE PRESIDENT'S EFFORTS TO OBSTRUCT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AFTER LEARNING HE WAS UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S INVESTIGATION ADDRESSED AN ISSUE ISSUE, THE INTEGRITY OF OUR ELECTIONS THEMSELVES RATHER THAN AID THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S INVESTIGATION, HOWEVER, PRESIDENT TRUMP USED THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE TO STOP IT PRESIDENT TRUMP ORDERED THE FIRING OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL

SOUGHT TO CURTAIL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S INVESTIGATION AND INSTRUCTED THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO MAKE FALSE PUBLIC STATEMENTS AND TAMPER WITH TWO KEY WITNESSES IN THE INVESTIGATION THE PATTERN IS AS UNMISTAKABLE AS IT IS UNNERVING IN ONE MOMENT PRESIDENT TRUMP WELCOMED AND INVITED A FOREIGN NATION TO INTERFERENCE WITH THE INVESTIGATION AND PRESSURED A FOREIGN NATION TO DO SO IN ONE MOMENT PRESIDENT TRUMP USED THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO OBSTRUCT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND USED THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE TO INSTRUCT THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IN ONE MOMENT THE PRESIDENT STATED HE REMAINED FREED TO INVITE FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS

AND THE NEXT HE INVITED ADDITIONAL FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR ELECTIONS >> BY THE WAY, LIKE WISE, CHINA SHOULD START AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BIDENS >> INDEED, PRESIDENT TRUMP PLACED HIS FAITHFUL JULY 25th CALL TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKY JUST ONE DAY AFTER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TESTIFIED IN CONGRESS ABOUT HIS FINDINGS QUOTE, THE POWER TO IMPEACH INCLUDES THE POWER TO INVESTIGATE BUT IF THE PRESIDENT CAN STYMIE THIS HOUSE'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, HE CAN ELIMINATE THE IMPEACHMENT POWER AS A MEANS FOR HOLDING HIM AND FUTURE PRESIDENTS ACCOUNTABLE FOR SERIOUS MISCONDUCT

IF LEFT UNCHECKED THE PRESIDENT WILL LIKELY CONTINUE HIS PATTERN OF SOLICITING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE NEXT ELECTION I MUST EMPHASIZE PRESIDENT'S OBSTRUCTION PERSISTS TO THIS DAY THE SECOND ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT CHARGES A HIGH CRIME IN PROGRESS AS A RESULT THE PRESIDENT'S WRONG DOING DID NOT JUST HARM THE HOUSE AS WE HAVE PERFORMED OUR OWN CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY, IT IS ALSO HARMING THE SENATE WHICH IS DEPRIVED OF INFORMATION YOU NEED BEFORE THE VOTES YOU WILL SOON TAKE OF COURSE, THE TRUE VICTIM IS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO DESERVE THE FULL TRUTH

AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THE PRESIDENT'S CLAIMS THAT ALL THE EVIDENCE HE IS HIDING WOULD PROVE HIS INNOCENCE THAT CLAIM, QUOTE, TAXES THE — PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS USED ALL THE AUTHORITY OF HIS OFFICE TO A BLOCK THE FULL TRUTH FROM COMING TO LIGHT HE DEFIED SUBPOENAS AND ORDERS OTHERS TO DO SO HE ATTACKED THE HOUSE FOR DARING TO INVESTIGATE HIM AND HE LOBBED PERSONAL ATTACKS ON WITNESSES AND COMPLAINTS TO SEW CONFUSION AND DISTRACT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

THEBEFORE I CONCLUDE, I THINK YOU ALL DESERVE AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY I AM STANDING HERE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION THE LAST FEW YEARS ABOUT WHAT MAKES AMERICA GREAT I HAVE SOME IDEAS ABOUT THAT I HAPPENED TO THINK THAT WHAT MAKES AMERICA GREAT IS THAT GENERATION AFTER GENERATION THERE HAVE BEEN AMERICANS THAT HAVE BEEN WILLING TO STAND UP AND PUT ASIDE THEIR SELF- INTEREST TO MAKE GREAT SACRIFICES FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD FOR, OUR COUNTRY I KNOW BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE DO THAT

LIKE SOME OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS CHAMBER, I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE GIVE EVERYTHING FOR THIS COUNTRY SO WE COULD SIT HERE TODAY NOW, THIS ISN'T POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT, IT ISN'T FOR ME, IT IS HARD IT REQUIRES SACRIFICE IT IS UNCOMFORTABLE

BUT THAT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF PUBLIC SERVICE THAT WE ARE HERE TO GIVE OF OURSELVES FOR THE COUNTRY FOR OTHERS SACRIFICE TO OURSELVES THOSE WHO HAV GIVEN SO MUCH FOR THIS COUNTRY DESERVE NOTHING LESS FROM US NOW THAN TO TRY HONOR THOSE SACRIFICES I HAVE TRIED TO DO THAT THE LAST FEW DAYS

MY TIME IS DONE AND IT IS NOW YOUR TURN >> SHOVE JUSTICE, CERTAINTIES, THIS IS THE LAST PRESENTATION OF THE EVENING AND AS I STARTED LAST NIGHT I MADE REFERENCE TO SOME GOOD ADVICE I GOT FROM AN ENCOURAGING VOICE THAT SAID KEEP IT UP, BUT NOT TOO LONG TONIGHT I GOT EQUALLY GOOD ADVICE, TO BE EMORTAL YOU DO NOT NEED TO BE ETERNAL

FIRST POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS, I AM TIRED I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT I AM EXHAUSTED AND I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW YOU FEEL BUT I AM ALSO VERY DEEPLY GRATEFUL FOR JUST HOW YOU HAVE ATTENDED TO THESE PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS DEEPLY GRATEFUL I CAN TELL HOW MUCH CONSIDERATION YOU HAVE GIVEN TO OUR POINT OF VIEW AND THE PRESIDENT'S POINT OF VIEW AND THAT IS ALL WE CAN ASK

AT THE END OF THE DAY, ALL WE CAN ASK IS THAT YOU HEAR US OUT, AND MAKE THE BEST JUDGMENT THAT YOU CAN, CONSISTENT WITH YOUR CONSCIOUS AND OUR CONSTITUTION NOW, I WANT TO START OWED TONIGHT WITH WHERE WE BEGAN WHEN WE FIRST APPEARED BEFORE YOU ABOUT A WEEK AGO AND THAT IS WITH THE RESOLUTION ITSELF WITH WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS CHARGED WITH IN THE ARTICLES AND HOW THAT HOLDS UP NOW THAT WE HAVE HEARD THE EVIDENCE FROM THE HOUSE DONALD TRUMP WAS IMPEACHED IN ARTICLE ONE FOR ABUSE OF POWER AND THAT ARTICLE PROVIDES THAT IN HIS CONDUCT OF THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AND IN VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL OATH TO EXECUTE THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AND TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFENDANT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, AND IS IN VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO TAKE CARE OF THE LAWS, DONALD JOHN TRUMP USING THE POWERS OF HIS OFFICE, PRESIDENT TRUMP SOLICITED THE INTERFERENCE OF A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, UKRAINE, IN THE 2020 UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

PRESIDENT TRUMP SOLICITED THE INTERFERENCE OF A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, UKRAINE, IN THE 2020 ELECTION THAT HAS BEEN PROVED HE DID SO THROUGH A SCHEME OR COURSE OF CONDUCT THAT INCLUDED SULITTING THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE TO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED INVESTIGATIONS THAT WOULD HARM THE ELECTION OF A POLITICAL OPPONENT AND INFLUENCE THE US 2020 POLITICAL ELECTION TO HIS ADVANTAGE

THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP ALSO SOUGHT TO PRESSURE THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE TO TAKE THESE STEPS BY CONDITIONING OFFICIAL US GOVERNMENT ACTS OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE TO UKRAINE, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP ENGAGED IN A SCHEME OR COURSE OF CONDUCT FOR CORRUPT PURPOSES IN PURSUIT OF PERSONAL POLITICAL BENEFIT, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

IN DOING SO PRESIDENT TRUMP USED TH POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY IN A MANNER THAT COMPROMISED THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES AND UNDERMINED THE INTEGRITY OF THE UNITED STATES DEMOCRATIC PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN PROVED HE IGNORED AND INJURED THE INTEREST OF THE NATION, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP ENGAGED IN THE SCHEME OR COURSE OF CONDUCT THROUGH THE FOLLOWING MEANS: PRESIDENT TRUMP ACTING DIRECTLY AND THROUGH HISAGIES WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SOLICITED THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE TO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE INVESTIGATIONS INTO A POLITICAL OPPONENT, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

ALLEGEDLY UKRAINE RATHER THAN RUSSIA INTERFERED IN THE 2016 UNITED STATES ELECTION, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED WITH THE SAME CORRUPT MOTIVES, PRESIDENT TRUMP CONDITIONED TWO OFFICIAL ACTS ON THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS HE REQUESTED, THE RELEASE OF $391 MILLION OF US TAXPAYER FUNDS CONGRESS AAPPROPRIATED ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING VITAL MILITARY AND SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO UKRAINE TO OPPOSE RUSSIAN AGGRESSION AND IN WHICH PRESIDENT TRUMP ORDERED AND SUSPENDED, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED FACED WITH PUBLIC REVELATION OF HIS ACTIONS, PRESIDENT TRUMP ULTIMATELY RELEASED THE MILITARY AND SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE BUT HAS PERSISTED IN OPENLY AND CORRUPTLY URGING AND SOLICITING UKRAINE TO UNDERTAKE INVESTIGATIONS FOR HIS PERSONAL POLITICAL BENEFIT

THAT HAS BEEN PROVED THESE ACTIONS WERE CONSISTENT WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PREVIOUS INVITATIONS OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN US ELECTIONS THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

IN ALL OF THIS, PRESIDENT TRUMP ABUSED THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY BY IGNORING AND INJURING NATIONAL SECURITY AND OTHER VITAL NATION INTERESTS TO OBTAIN AN IMPROPER POLITICAL BENEFIT, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED HE BETRAYED THE NATION BY ABUSING HIS OFFICE TO ENLIST A FOREIGN POWER IN CORRUPTING DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP BY SUCH CONDUCT HAS DEMONSTRATED HE WILL REMAIN A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE CONSTITUTION IF ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN OFFICE AND HAS ACTED IN A AMERICAN GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH SELF- GOVERNMENTS AND THE RULE OF LAW, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP WARRANTS IMPEACHMENT AND TRIAL REMOVAL FROM OFFICE AND DISQUALIFICATION TO HOLD AND ENJOY ANY OFFICE OF HONOR, TRUST AND PROFIT IN THE UNITED STATES, THAT WILL BE FOR YOU TO DECIDE BUT THE FACTS HAVE BEEN PROVED THOSE FACTS ARE NOT CONTESTED

WE HAVE MET OUR BURDEN ARTICLE TWO, OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS, THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SHALL HAVE THE SOUL POWER OF IMPEACHMENT AND THE PRESIDENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE ON IMPEACHMENT FOR AND CONVICTION OF TREASON, BRIBERY OR OTHER HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY, PRESERVE AND PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND IN VIOLATION OF HIS DUTY TO TAKE CARE THAT THE LAWS BE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED DONALD TRUMP DIRECTED THE UNPRECEDENTED CATEGORICAL DEFIANCE OF SUBPOENAS ISSUED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ABUSED THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY, IN THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ENGAGED IN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY FOCUSED ON PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CORRUPT SOLICITATION OF UKRAINE TO INTERFERE IN THE ELECTION, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED SUBPOENAS SEEKING DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONY VITAL TO THE INQUIRY, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

IN RESPONSE WITHOUT LAWFUL CAUSE OR EXCUSE PRESIDENT TRUMP DIRECTED EXECUTIVE BRANCH AGENCIES, OFFICES AND OFFICIALS NOT TO COMPLY WITH THOSE SUBPOENAS THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP INTERPOSED THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY AGAINST THE LAWFUL SUBPOENAS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND ASSUMED TO HIMSELF FUNCTIONS AND ADJUSTMNTS NECESSARY TO EXERCISE THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT VESTED IN THE CONSTITUTION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP ABUSED THE POWERS OF HIS HIGH OFFICE THROUGH THE FOLLOWING MEANS, NUMBER ONE, DIRECTING THE WHITE HOUSE TO DEFY A LAWFUL SUBPOENA BY WITH HOLDING THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS SOUGHT BY THE COMMITTEES THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

DIRECTING OTHER EXECUTIVE BRANCH AGENCIES AND OFFICES TO DEFY LAWFUL SUBPOENAS AND WITH HOLD THE DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS FROM THE COMMITTEES IN RESPONSE TO WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REFUSED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE RECORD OR DOCUMENT, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED DIRECTING CURRENT AND FORMER OFFICIALS NOT TO COOPERATE WITH THE COMMITTEES, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH NINE ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS DEFIED SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED THESE ACTIONS WERE CONSISTENT WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PREVIOUS EFFORTS TO UNDERMINE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN US ELECTIONS, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

PRESIDENT TRUMP SOUGHT TO AIRIGATE TO HIMSELF THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE THE SCOPE AND NATURE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY INTO HIS OWN CONDUCT AS WELL AS THE PREROGATIVE TO DENY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE EXERCISE OF ITS SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT THAT HAS BEEN PROVED IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC, NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER ORDERED THE COMPLETE DEFIANCE OF AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OR SOUGHT TO IMPEDE THE ABILITY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO INVESTIGATE HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS THAT HAS BEEN PROVED THE ABUSE OF OFFICE SERVED TO COVERUP THE PRESIDENT'S OWN MISCONDUCT AND TO SEIZE AND CONTROL THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT AND TO NULLIFY THE VITAL SAFEGUARD VESTED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED

IN ALL OF THIS, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ACTED IN A MANNER CONTRARY TO HIS TRUST AS PRESIDENT, TO THE MANIFEST INJURY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP BY SUCH CONDUCT HAS DEMONSTRATED HE WILL REMAIN A THREAT TO THE CONSTITUTION IF ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN OFFICE AND ACTED IN A MANNER INCOMPATIBLE WITH SELF-GOVERNMENT AND THE RULE OF LAW, THAT HAS BEEN PROVED PRESIDENT TRUMP WARRANTS IMPEACHMENT AND TRIAL REMOVAL FROM OFFICE AND DISQUALIFICATION TO HOLD AND ENJOY ANY OFFICE OF HONOR, TRUST, OR PROFIT UNDER THE UNITED STATES, THAT WILL BE FOR YOU TO DETERMINE LET ME SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THIS SECOND ARTICLE THE FACTS OF THE PRESIDENT'S DEFIANCE OF CONGRESS ARE VERY SIMPLE

BECAUSE THEY WERE SO UNIFORM THEY ARE SO UNCONTESTED BUT DO NOT MISTAKE FOR A MOMENT THE FACT THAT IT WAS SIMPLE AND QUICK TO PRESENT THAT COURSE OF CONDUCT, COMPARED WITH A SCIENTISTICATED CAMPAIGN TO SOPHISTED CAMPAIGN TO COERCE UKRAINE IF THERE IS NO ARTICLE TWO, LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, THERE WILL NEVER BE AN ARTICLE ONE IF THERE IS NO ARTICLE TWO, THERE WILL NEVER OF ANY KIND OR SHAPE OR FORM, BE AN ARTICLE ONE WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE IF YOU AND WE LACK THE POWER TO INVESTIGATE A PRESIDENT, THERE WILL NEVER BE AN ARTICLE ONE, WHETHER ARTICLE ONE ABUSE OF POWER, TREASON OR BRIBERY, THERE WILL NEVER BE AN ARTICLE ONE IF THE CONGRESS CAN'T INVESTIGATE AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE

IF THE CONGRESS CANNOT BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT PREVENTS IT, THERE WILL NEVER BE AN ARTICLE ONE BECAUSE THERE WILL BE NO MORE IMPEACHMENT POWER IT WILL BE GONE IT WILL BE GONE AS I SAID BEFORE, OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH UKRAINE WILL SURVIVE

GOD WILLING, HOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH UKRAINE WILL SURVIVE AND UKRAINE WILL PROSPER AND WE WILL GET BEYOND THIS UGLY CHAPTER OF OUR HISTORY BUT IF WE ARE TO DECIDE HERE THAT A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITD STATES CAN SIMPLY SAY UNDER ARTICLE TWO I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT, AND I DON'T HAVE TO TREAT A BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT LIKE IT EXISTS I DON'T HAVE TO GIVE IT ANYMORE THAN THE BACK OF MY HAND THAT WILL BE AN UNENDING INJURY TO THIS COUNTRY

UKRAINE WILL SURVIVE AND SO WILL WE BUT THAT WILL BE AN UNENDING INJURY TO THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE THE BALANCE OF POWER THAT OUR FOUNDERS SET OUT WILL NEVER BE THE SAME WILL NEVER BE THE SAME IF A PRESIDENT CAN SAY I AM GOING TO FIGHT ALL SUBPOENAS AND I WILL TELL YOU SOMETHING ELSE, TRUISM IN THE COURTS IS JUST AS TRUE HERE IN THE SENATE

WHERE THEY SAY JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED YOU GIVE THIS PRESIDENT OR ANY OTHER THE POWER TO DELAY AS LONG AS HE OR SHE LIKES, TO LITIGATE MATTERS FOR YEARS AND YEARS IN THE COURTS AND DO NOT FOOL YOURSELF INTO THINKING IT IS ANYTHING LESS IN APRIL IT WILL BE A YEAR SINCE WE SUBPOENAED DON MCGAN AND THERE IS NO SIGN TO AN END TO THAT CASE I WILL TELL YOU, WHEN IT GETS TO THE SUPREME COURT YOU MIGHT THINK THAT IS THE END AND THAT IS JUST THE END OF THE FIRST CHAPTER HE IS SAYING I AM IMMUNE FROM TESTIMONY

THAT IS BEEN REJECTED BY EVERY COURT THAT LOOKED AT IT BUT WE WILL SEE WHAT THE COURT OF APPEALS SAYS AND THEN SEE WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAYS WHEN WE PREVAIL IN THE SUPREME COURT, JUAN WHAT HAPPENS? THAT IS NOT THE END OF THE MATTER, IT COMES BACK TO THE TRIAL IS COURT AND THEN THEY CAN'T CLAIM ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, THEY CAN'T CLAIM WE DON'T HAVE TO BOTHER SHOWING UP SO NOW WE WILL TURN TO PLAN B, EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WE WILL SEE WE CAN'T AND WON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT ARE PERINANT TO YOUR IMPEACHMENT PUNTERINANT YOU CAN GAME THE SYSTEM FOR YEARS

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED SO WHEN YOU SUGGEST OR I SUGGEST OR ANYONE SUGGEST OR THE WHITE HOUSE SUGGEST WHY DOESN'T THE CONGRESS, WHY DIDN'T THE HOUSE JUST EXHAUST THEIR REMEDIES, AS IF IN THE CONSTITUTION WHERE IT SAYS THE HOUSE SHALL HAVE THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT, LET'S NOT KID OURSELVES ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS WHAT THAT MEANS IS YOU ALLOW THE PRESIDENT TO CONTROL THE TIMING OF HIS OWN IMPEACHMENT OR IF IT WILL EVER BE PERMITTED TO COME BEFORE THIS BODY THAT IS THE ABSENCE OF AN IMPEACHMENT POWER ARTICLE TWO IS EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT AS ARTICLE ONE

WITHOUT ARTICLE TWO, THERE IS NO ARTICLE ONE EVER AGAIN IT IS FUNDAMENT TOOL THE SEPARATION OF POWERS IF YOU CAN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE AN IMPEACHMENT POWER YOU MIGHT AS WELL NOT PUT IT IN THE CONSTITUTION NOW, SHORTLY THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION AND AS WE WILL NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO RESPOND TO WHAT THEY SAY, I WANT TO GIVE YOU A PREVIEW OF WHAT I THINK THEY WILL HAVE IN STORE FOR YOU SO THAT WHEN YOU DO HEAR IT, YOU CAN PUT IT INTO PERSPECTIVE

I EXPECT THAT THEY WILL ATTACK THE PROCESS I DON'T THINK THAT IS ANY MYSTERY BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU BOTH WHAT I EXPECT THEY WILL SHARE WITH YOU AND WHAT IT REALLY MEANS WHEN YOU CUT THROUGH IT, WHAT DOES IT MEAN THAT THEY ARE SAYING? HERE IS WHAT I EXPECT THEY WILL TELL YOU THE PROCESS WAS SO UNFAIR IT WAS THE MOST UNFAIR IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD

BECAUSE IN THE HOUSE THEY TOOK DEPOSITION HOW DARE THEY TAKE DEPOSITIONS HOW DARE THEY FOLLOW THE REPUBLICAN PROCEDURES THAT PROCEEDED THEIR INVESTIGATION HOW DARE THEY AND THEY WERE SO SECRET IN THE BUNKER IN THE BASEMENT AS IF WHETHER ON THE GROUND FLOOR OR THE BASEMENT OR THE FIRST FLOOR MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE

THOSE SUPER SECRET DEPOSITIONS IN WHICH ONLY 100 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, EQUIVALENT TO THE SENATE COULD PARTICIPATE THAT IS HOW EXCLUSIVE THEY WERE YOU HAVE 100 PEOPLE CAN PARTICIPATE BUT YOU HEARD EARLIER, BUT, THE REPUBLICANS WEREN'T ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE THAT IS JUST FALSE YOU KNOW HOW WE DID IT IN THE SUPER SECRET DEPOSITIONS AND YOU CAN LOOK THIS UP YOURSELF BECAUSE WE RELEASED THE TRANSCRIPTS

WE GOT AN HOUR, THEY GOT AN HOUR WE GOT 45 MINUTES, THEY GOT 45 MINUTES AND WE DID THAT BACK AND FORCE UNTIL EVERYONE WAS DONE ASKING THEIR QUESTIONS YOU WILL HEAR CHAIRMAN WAS SO UNFAIR HE WOULDN'T ALLOW US TO ASK OUR QUESTIONS

WELL, THERE WERE CERTAIN QUESTIONS I DIDN'T ALLOW QUESTIONS LIKE, WHO IS THE WHISTLE-BLOWER BECAUSE WE WANT TO PUNISH THAT WHISTLE-BLOWER BECAUSE YES, SOME OF US IN THIS HOUSE AND IN THIS HOUSE BELIEVE WE OUGHT TO PROTECT WHISTLE- BLOWERS SO YES, I DID NOT ALLOW THE OUTING OF THE WHISTLE-BLOWER

SO WHEN THEY SAY THE CHAIRMAN WOULDN'T ALLOW CERTAIN QUESTIONS, THAT IS WHAT THEY MEAN IT MEANS WE PROTECT PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE COURAGE TO COME FORWARD AND BLOW THE WHISTLE THAT WE DON'T THINK, THOUGH THE PRESIDENT MIGHT, THAT THEY ARE TRAITORS AND SPIES TO BELIEVE THAT SOMEONE WHO BLOWS THE WHISTLE ON MISCONDUCT ON THE SERIOUS NATURE YOU KNOW TOOK PLACE IS A TRAITOR OR SPY, THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY YOU CAN COME TO THAT CONCLUSION AND THAT IS IF YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE THE STATE AND THAT ANYTHING THAT CONTRADICTS YOU IS TREASON THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU CAN CONCEIVE OF SOMEONE WHO EXPOSES WRONG DOING IS A TRAITOR OR A SPY BUT THAT IS HOW THIS PRESIDENT VIEWS THOSE WHO EXPOSE HIS WRONG DOING BECAUSE HE IS THE STATE, HE IS THE STATE

AND YOU WILL HEAR THE PRESIDENT WASN'T ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN A JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT IS FALSE TOO THE PRESIDENT HAD THE SAME RIGHTS AS PRESIDENT 96 PRESIDENT CLINTON BUT YOU WILL HEAR IT WAS SO UNFAIR AND ALL THE SUBPOENAS WERE INVALID BECAUSE THE HOUSE DINTS IPASS A RESOLUTION ANNOUNCING ITS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY NEVER MIND THAT WE ACTUALLY DID, THE PROBLEM WAS THEY SAID WE HADN'T AND THEN WE DID, THEN THE PROBLEM WAS WELL, YOU DID

NOW, OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THE HOUSE HAS THE SOLE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT WE CAN DO IT BY HOUSE RESOLUTION, WE CAN DO IT BY COMMITTEE IT IS NOT THE PRESIDENT'S PLACE TO TELL US HOW TO CONDUCT AN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING ANYMORE THAN IT IS THE PRESIDENT'S PLACE TO TELL YOU HOW YOU SHOULD TRY IT SO WHEN YOU SEE THAT EIGHT PAGE DIATRIBE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL SAYING WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE A RESOLUTION IN THE HOUSE, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE THIS, WHAT YOU SHOULD HEAR, WHAT THEY MEAN IS DONALD TRUMP HAD THE RIGHT TO CONTROL HIS OWN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING AND IT IS AN OUTRAGE THAT DONALD TRUMP DIDN'T GET TO RIGHT THE RULES OF HIS OWN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING IN THE HOUSE YOU GIVE A PRESIDENT THAT RIGHT THERE, THERE IS NO IMPEACHMENT POWER

WHEN YOU HEAR THEM COMPLAIN ABOUT DEPOSITIONS THAT WERE THE SAME AS THE REPUBLICANS, OR THE RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE, THAT WAS THE SAME IN CLINTON AND NIXON AND BY THE WAY, THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO CALL WITNESSES THEY SAID WELL, THREE OF THE 12 WITNESSES WE HEARD WERE THE MINORITY WITNESS REQUESTS YOU WILL HEAR THOSE ARGUMENTS MOST UNFAIR IN THE HISTORY THE FACT IS WE HAD THE SAME PROCESS AND THOSE OTHER IMPEACHMENTS, THE MAJORITY DID NOT SURRENDER ITS SUBPOENA POWER, IT SAID YOU CAN SUBPOENA WITNESSES, AND IF THE MAJORITY DOESN'T AGREE YOU CAN FORCE A VOTE

THAT IS THE SAME PROCESS HERE THE MAJORITY DOESN'T SURRENDER ITS IMPEACHMENT POWER WHEN THEY SAY THE PROCESS WAS UNFAIR, WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN IS DON'T LOOK AT WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID DON'T LOOK AT WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID NOW, YOU WILL HEAR, I THINK THE SECOND THING YOU WILL HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT'S TEAM IS, ATTACK THE MANAGERS

THOSE MANAGERS ARE JUST AWFUL THEY ARE TERRIBLE PEOPLE ESPECIALLY THAT SHIFT GUY ADAM SCHIFF GUY HE MOCKED THE PRESIDENT

HE MOCKED THE PRESIDENT HE MOCKED THE PRESIDENT AS IF HE WAS SHAKING DOWN A LEADER OF ANOTHER COUNTRY, LIKE HE WAS AN ORGANIZED CRIME FIGURE HE MOCKED THE PRESIDENT HE SAID IT WAS LIKE THE PRESIDENT SAID LISTEN, I AM ONLY GOING TO SAY THIS SEVEN TIMES WELL, I DISCOVERED SOMETHING BY MOCKING THE PRESIDENT, FOR A MAN WHO LOVES TO MOCK OTHERS, HE DOES NOT LIKE TO BE MOCKED

SO TURNS OUT, HE HAS PRETTY THIN SKIN, WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT? NEVER MIND I SAID I WASN'T USING HIS WORDS BEFORE I SAID IT, AND I WASN'T USING HIS WORDS AFTER I SAID IT IT IS AN OUTRAGE, HE MOCKED THE PRESIDENT TERRIBLE NOW, THEY WILL ATTACK MY OTHER COLLEAGUES TOO FOR THINGS SAID IN THE HEAT OF DEBATE THEY WILL ATTACK SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO AREN'T IN THIS CHAMBER

MAYBE THEY WILL ATTACK THE SQUAD THAT IS A FAVORITE WITH THE PRESIDENT THEY ATTACK THE SQUAD, YOU SHOULD ASK, WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE PRICE OF BEANS YOU CAN EXPECT ATTACKS ON ALL KINDS OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUES BEFORE YOU AND WHEN YOU HEAR THOSE ATTACKS YOU SHOULD ASK YOURSELF, AWAY FROM WHAT DO THEY WANT TO DISTRACT MY ATTENTION BECAUSE NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN IT WILL BE THE PRESIDENT'S MISCONDUCT BUT LOOK FOR IT

ATTACKS ON THE MANAGERS, ATTACKS ON OTHER HOUSE MEMBERS, ATTACKS ON THE SPEAKER, ATTACKS ON WHO KNOWS WHAT IT IS ALL OF THE SAME ILIC YOU WILL ALSO HEAR ATTACKS ON THE CONSTITUTION IT WON'T BE FRAMED AS AN ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION BUT THAT IS WHAT IT REPRESENTS AND THAT IS, ABUSE OF POWER DOESN'T VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO ABUSE THEIR POWER THAT IS THE ARGUMENT PRESIDENTS HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ABUSE THEIR POWER AND HOW DARE THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CHARGE A PRESIDENT WITH ABUSING HIS POWER NOW, I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW WHY IT IS NOT IMPEACHABLE NOW BUT IT WAS A FEW YEARS AGO

BECAUSE LAST TIME I CHECKED I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE CONSTITUTION BETWEEN THE TIME HE SAID IT WAS IMPEACHABLE AND NOW SAYING IT IS NOT IMPEACHABLE I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO KEN STARR'S PRESENTATION BECAUSE DURING THE CLINTON IMPEACHMENT HE MAINTAINED A PRESIDENT COULD BUT MUST BE IMPEACHED FOR OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE BILL CLINTON NEEDED TO BE IMPEACHED BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH ABOUT SEX AND TO DO SO OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE YOU CAN BE IMPEACHED FOR OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE BUT YOU CANNOT BE IMPEACHED FOR OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS

NOW I HAVE TO CONFESS, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK BECAUSE THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION FROM THAT IS KEN STARR IS SAYING THAT BILL CLINTON'S MISTAKE WAS IN SHOWING UP UNDER SUBPOENA THAT BILL CLINTON'S MISTAKE WAS IN NOT SAYING I AM GOING TO FIGHT ALL SUBPOENAS THAT BILL CLINTON'S MISTAKE WAS IN NOT TAKING THE POSITION UNDER ARTICLE TWO HE COULD DO WHATEVER HE WANTED DOES THAT REALLY MAKE ANY SENSE? YOU CAN BE IMPEACHED FOR OBSTRUCTING YOUR OWN BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, BUT YOU CANNOT BE IMPEACHED FOR OBSTRUCTING A CO- EQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

THAT WOULD MAKE NO SENSE TO THE FRAMERS I HAVE TO THINK OVER THE CENTURIES AS THEY HAVE WATCHED US, THEY WOULD BE ASTONISHED THAT ANYONE WOULD TAKE THAT ARGUMENT SERIOUSLY OR CAN SO MISAPPREHEND HOW THIS BALANCE OF POWER IS SUPPOSED TO WORK SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT ARGUMENT AND MAYBE WHEN THEY MAKE THAT ARGUMENT THEY CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHY THEIR POSITION ON ABUSE OF POWER ISN'T SUPPORTED BY THEIR OWN ATTORNEY GENERAL

SO I HOPE THEY WILL ANSWER WHY, EVEN THEIR OWN ATTORNEY GENERAL DOESN'T AGREE BY THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW EXPERT WHO ALSO TESTIFIED AS TO ABUSE OF POWER, THAT IT IS IMPEACHABLE YOU DON'T NEED A CRIME THAT IS IMPEACHABLE NOW, WHEN YOU HEAR THEM MAKE THESE ARGUMENTS, CANNOT BE IMPEACHED FOR ABUSING YOUR POWER THIS IS WHAT IT REALLY MEANS, WE CANNOT DEFEND HIS CONDUCT AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE IT GO ALL THE WAY WITHOUT HAVING TO THINK ABOUT THAT

YOU DON'T NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID BECAUSE THE HOUSE CHARGED IT WRONG SO DON'T CONSIDER WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID THAT IS WHAT THAT ARGUMENT MEANS WE CAN'T DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE SO WE HAVE TO FALL BACK ON EVEN IF HE ABUSED HIS OFFICE, EVEN IF HE DID ALL THE THINGS HE IS ACCUSED OF, THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE NOTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT NOW, YOU WILL ALSO HEAR AS PART OF THE DEFENSE AND YOU HEARD THIS FROM JAY SEKULOW, LAST THING HE SAID, THE WHISTLE- BLOWER

THE WHISTLE-BLOWER I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANT BUT I SUSPECT YOU WILL HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT THE WHISTLE-BLOWER THE WHISTLE-BLOWER

IT IS HIS OR HER FAULT THAT WE ARE HERE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER YOU KNOW, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ THE WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT AGAIN WHEN YOU READ THAT COMPLAINT AGAIN YOU WILL SEE JUST HOW REMARKABLY ACCURATE IT IS ASTONISHINGLY ACCURATE

FOR ALL THE TIMES THE PRESIDENT IS OUT THERE SAYING THE COMPLAINT WAS ALL WRONG ALL WRONG YOU READ IT, NOW THAT YOU HAVE HEARD THE EVIDENCE, YOU READ IT AND YOU WILL SEE HOW REMARKABLY RIGHT THE WHISTLE-BLOWER GOT IT NOW, WHEN THAT COMPLAINT WAS FILED, IT WAS BEFORE WE HAD OUR DEPOSITIONS AND HAD OUR HEARINGS, ALL OF WHICH OBIATED THE NEED FOR THE WHISTLE- BLOWER IN THE BEGINNING WE WANTED THE WHISTLE-BLOWER TO TESTIFY BECAUSE ALL WE KNEW ABOUT WAS THE COMPLAINT

BUT THEN WE HEARD FROM FIRSTHAND WITNESSES ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED AND THEN THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES BEGAN THREATENING THE WHISTLE-BLOWER AND THE LIFE OF THE WHISTLE- BLOWER WAS AT RISK AND WHAT WAS THE POINT IN EXPOSING THE WHISTLE-BLOWER TO THE RISK OF HIS OR HER LIFE WHEN WE HAD THE EVIDENCE WE NEEDED WHAT WAS THE POINT? EXCEPT RETRIBUTION

AND THE PRESIDENT WANTS IT STILL YOU KNOW WHY THE PRESIDENT IS MAD AT THE WHISTLE-BLOWER? BECAUSE BUT FOR THE WHISTLE- BLOWER, HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN CAUGHT AND THAT IS AN UNFORGIVABLE SIN HE IS THE STATE AND BUT FOR THE WHISTLE-BLOWER, THE PRESIDENT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN CAUGHT FOR THAT HE IS A SPY AND HE IS GUILTY OF TREASON WHAT DOES HE ADD TO THIS? NOTHING BUT RETRIBUTION

YOU WILL ALSO HEAR THE PRESIDENT'S DEFENSE, THEY HATE THE PRESIDENT THEY HATE THE PRESIDENT YOU SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THE PRESIDENT'S MISCONDUCT BECAUSE THEY HATE THE PRESIDENT NOW, WHAT I HAVE SAID, I LEAVE YOU TO YOUR OWN JUDGMENTS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT, I ONLY HATE WHAT HE HAS DONE TO THIS COUNTRY I GRIEVE FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE TO THIS COUNTRY

BUT WHEN THEY MAKE THE ARGUMENT TO YOU THAT THIS IS ONLY HAPPENING BECAUSE THEY HATE THE PRESIDENT, IT IS JUST ANOTHER OF THE FORMS OF PLEASE, DO NOT CONSIDER WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID WHETHER YOU LIKE THE PRESIDENT OR DISLIKE THE PRESIDENT IS IMMATERIAL IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION AND HIS MISCONDUCT IF IT MEETS THE STANDARD OF IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT AS WE HAVE PROVED, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU "LIKE" HIM IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU DISLIKE HIM

WHAT MATTERS IS WHETHER HE IS A DANGER TO THE COUNTRY BECAUSE HE WOULD DO IT AGAIN AND NONE OF US CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE BASED ON HIS RECORD THAT HE WILL NOT DO IT AGAIN BECAUSE HE IS TELLING US EVERY DAY THAT HE WILL NOW, YOU WILL HEAR THE DEFENSE THAT BIDEN IS CORRUPT THAT JOE BIDEN IS CORRUPT THAT HUNTER BIDEN IS CORRUPT

THIS IS THEIR DEFENSE ANOTHER DEFENSE, BECAUSE WHAT THEY HOPE TO ACHIEVE IN THE SENATE TRIAL IS WHAT THEY COULDN'T ACHIEVE THROUGH THEIR SCHEME, IF THEY COULDN'T GET UKRAINE TO SMEAR THE BIDENS, THEY WANT TO USE THIS TRIAL TO DO IT INSTEAD SO LET'S CALL HUNTER BIDEN LET'S SMEAR THE BIDENS LET'S SUCCEED IN THE TRIAL WITH WHAT WE COULDN'T DO WITH THIS SCHEME

THAT IS THE GOAL NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER RUDY GIULIANI, WHO SAID HE WAS GOING TO PRESENT HIS REPORT TO SOME OF THE SENATORS PRESENTED HIS REPORT, MAYBE YOU WILL GET TO SEE WHAT IS IN RUDY GIULIANI'S REPORT, MAYBE YOU WILL GET TO SEE SOME DOCUMENTS SMEARING THE BIDENS, PRODUCED BY — WHO KNOWS MAYBE THESE SAME RUSSIAN CORRUPT FORMER PROSECUTORS BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT WHAT THAT IS ABOUT, IT IS ABOUT COMPLETING THE OBJECT THROUGH OTHER MEANS, THE MEANS OF THIS TRIAL YOU MAY HEAR THE ARGUMENT THAT WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING WHEN HE IS OBSTRUCTING CONGRESS IS PROTECTING THE OFFICE FOR FUTURE PRESIDENTS

BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT TO DONALD TRUMP THAN PROTECTING THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY FOR FUTURE PRESIDENTS AND I SUPPOSE WHEN HE WITHHELD MILITARY AID FROM UKRAINE, HE WAS TRYING TO PROTECT FUTURE PRESIDENTS AND WHEN HE SOUGHT TO COERCE A FOREIGN POWER TO INTERVENE IN THE ELECTIONS, HE WAS DOING IT FOR FUTURE PRESIDENTS I DON'T THINK THAT ARGUMENT GOES VERY FAR BUT I EXPECT YOU WILL HEAR IT I EXPECT YOU WILL HEAR IT

YOU MAY HEAR AN ARGUMENT THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT CORRUPTION AND HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT BURDEN SHARING I WON'T SPEND MUCH TIME ON THAT BECAUSE YOU'VE HEARD THE EVIDENCE ON THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION THIS HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH CORRUPTION AND EVERY BIT OF EVIDENCE IT HADDING INTO DO WITH FIGHTING CORRUPTION OR BURDEN SHARING, INDEED, NOTHING ABOUT THE BURDEN CHANGED BETWEEN THE TIME HE FROZE THE AID AND THE TIME HE RELEASED THE AID NO EFFORT TOKER GET OTHERS CONTRIBUTE MORE, EUROPE CONTRIBUTES A GREAT DEAL AS IT IS, THIS IS AN AFTER THE FACT RATIONALLATION

I WOULD LIKE RATIONALIZATION IT IS AMONG THE DOCUMENTS THEY REFUSE TO TURN OVER THEY WILL SHOW YOU WHAT AN AFTER THE AN AFTER THE FACT ARGUMENT YOU WILL HEAR OBAMA DID IT THE FORM OF OBAMA DID IT, THE FORM IS ALSO OBAMA ALSO WITHHELD AID

I THINK THAT IS AN INSULT TO OUR INTELLIGENCE THE ARGUMENT IS OBAMA WITHHELD AID FROM EGYPT AND HE MADE A CONDITION WITH IT OBAMA WITHHELD AID FROM EGYPT AFTER THEY HAD A REVOLUTION AND CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGED HE DIDN'T HIDE IT FROM CONGRESS IN FACT, CONGRESS SUPPORTED IT

AND YES, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE WITHHELD AID FOR A GOOD POLICY REASON NOT A CORRUPT EFFORT TO GET HELP IN YOUR ELECTION THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG THEY CAN RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AID THAT IS WITHHELD FOR A MALICIOUS PURPOSE AND AID THAT IS HELD IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT YOU WILL HEAR THE OBAMA DID IT ARGUMENT

YOU WILL HEAR THE CALL WAS PERFECT YOU WILL HEAR THE CALL WAS PERFECT NOW, I SUSPECT THE REASON THEY WILL MAKE THE ARGUMENT THE CALL WAS PERFECT IS BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT INSISTS THAT THEY DO I DON'T THINK THEY REALLY WANT TO HAVE TO MAKE THAT ARGUMENT YOU WOULDN'T EITHER

BUT THEY HAVE A CLIENT TO REPRESENT AND SO THEY WILL MAKE THE ARGUMENT THE CALL WAS PERFECT AND THEY WILL ALSO MAKE THE ARGUMENT UKRAINE THIS THINKS THE CALL WAS PERFECT THAT MEANS UKRAINE WANTS A FUTURE UKRAINE KNOWS IT IS BEHOLDEN TO US FOR AID UKRAINE HASN'T GOTTEN IN THROUGH THE DOOR OF THE WHITE HOUSE

UKRAINE KNOWS IF THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THEY WERE SHAKEN DOWN BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL MAKE THEM PAY SO WHEN YOU HEAR THEM SAY UKRAINE FELT NO PRESSURE AND THEIR PROOF IS BECAUSE THE UKRAINE PRESIDENT DOESN'T WANT TO CALL THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES A BAD NAME, YOU WILL KNOW WHY, BECAUSE THEY NEED AMERICA THEY NEED AMERICA THE FRAMERS DID NOT EXPECT YOU TO LEAVE YOUR COMMON SENSE AT THE DOOR NOW, YOU WILL HEAR THE DEFENSE, THE PRESIDENT SAID THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO

THE PRESIDENT SAID THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO I GUESS THAT IS THE END OF THE STORY THIS IS A PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LAW, IF THE DEFENDANT SAID HE DIDN'T DO IT, HE COULDN'T HAVE DONE IT IF THE DEFENDANT SAYS HE DIDN'T DO IT, HE COULDN'T HAVE DONE IT THAT DOESN'T HOLD UP IN ANY COURT IN THE LAND, IT SHOULDN'T HOLD UP HERE

YOU WILL HEAR THE ARGUMENT, NO HARM, NO FOUL THEY GOT THE MONEY THEY GOT THE MONEY AND THEY GOT THE MEETING EVEN THOUGH THEY DIDN'T THEY GOT THE MEETING ON THE SIDELINE OF THE U

N, KIND OF A DRIVE BY BUT THEY GOT A MEETING NO HARM, NO FOUL RIGHT? A MEETING ON THE SIDELINES IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING AS A HEAD OF STATE MEETING IN THE OVAL OFFICE OF COURSE NOT

WHY DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE WAS SAYING WHEN AM I GOING TO GET TO COME TO TOWN HE CERTAINLY RECOGNIZES THE DIFFERENCE AND WE SHOULD TOO ONCE MORE, EVERY BIT OF HARM AND EVERY BIT OF FOUL IN WITHHOLDING AID AND RELEASING IT ONLY WHEN YOU ARE CAUGHT RUSSIAN KNOWS NOW ABOUT THE WEDGE IN OUR RELATIONS WITH UKRAINE THE MOMENT RUSSIA FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS, AND I HAVE TO IMAGINE GIVEN HOW GOOD THEIR INTEL SERVICES ARE, THEY DID NOT HAVE TO WAIT FOR POLITICO TO BREAK THE STORY ANYMORE THAN UKRAINE DID

I WOULD HAVE TO EXPECT THE ROPINGS WOULD HAVE FOUND OUT ABOUT AS EARLY AS UKRAINIANS DID NOT EARLIER THE MOMENT UKRAINE LEARNED AND RUSSIA LEARNED THERE WAS HARM BECAUSE UKRAINE KNEW THEY COULDN'T TRUST US, RUSSIA KNEW THEY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF US, THERE WAS IMMEDIATE HARM AND BECAUSE SOMEONE IS CAUGHT, BECAUSE DOESN'T MAKE THAT SCHEME ANY LESS CRIMINAL AND CORRUPT YOU GET NO PASS WHEN YOU GET CAUGHT

NOW, I EXPECT ONE OF THE DEFENSES YOU WILL SEE IS THEY WILL PLAY YOU CERTAIN TESTIMONY FROM THE HOUSE WHERE MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE ASK QUESTIONS LIKE DID THE PRESIDENT EVER SAY HE WAS BRIBING UKRAINE DID YOU EVER SEE HIM BRIBE UKRAINE DID YOU HEAR HIM SAY THAT HE WAS GOING TO BRIBE UKRAINE DID YOU PERSONALLY SEE THIS YOURSELF AND IF YOU DIDN'T SEE IT, IF HE DIDN'T LAY IT OUT FOR YOU, THEN IT COULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED

TWO PLUS TWO DOES NOT EQUAL FOUR YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CONSIDER ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR A TELEVISED CONFESSION BY THE PRESIDENT AND EVEN THEN, DON'T CONSIDER IT SO I IMAGINE YOU WILL HEAR SOME OF THAT TESTIMONY WHERE WITNESSES ARE ASKED, DID THE PRESIDENT EVER TELL YOU HE WAS CONDITIONING THE AID, NEVER MIND THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT DON'T NECESSARILY TALK TO THE PRESIDENT BUT I EXPECT YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THAT AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU WILL HEAR THE DEFENSE WE CLAIM PRIVILEGE, YOU CAN'T IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT OVER THE EXERCISE OF PRIVILEGE NEVER MIND THE FACT THAT THEY NEVER CLAIMED PRIVILEGE

THEY NEVER ASSERTED PRIVILEGE AND YOU KNOW WHY? YOU KNOW WHY THEY NEVER ACTUALLY INVOKED PRIVILEGE IN THE HOUSE? IS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT IF THEY DID THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO PRODUCE THE DOCUMENTS AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO SHOW WHAT THEY WERE REDACTING AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO EVEN THAT THEY KNEW THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESS TESTIMONY, THERE WAS NO PRIVILEGE SO THEY DIDN'T WANT TO EVEN INVOKE IT ALL THEY WOULD SAY IS, MAYBE SOME DAY

BUT YOU WILL HEAR THAT YOU CAN'T BE IMPEACHED FOR A CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE THEY NEVER MADE SO WHAT DO ALL THESE DEFENSES MEAN? WHAT DO THEY MEAN? WHAT DO THEY MEAN WHEN YOU ADD THEM ALL UP? WHAT THEY MEAN IS UNDER ARTICLE TWO THE PRESIDENT CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS THAT IS REALLY IT YOU KNOW, THAT IS REALLY IT STRIPPED OF ALL THE DETAIL AND ALL THE HISTRIONICS

ROBERT KENNEDY ONCE SAID MORAL COURAGE IS A RARER — THE ONE ESSENTIAL VITAL QUALITY FOR THOSE WHO SEEK TO CHANGE THE WORLD, WHICH YIELDS MOST PAINFULLY TO CHANGE MORAL COURAGE IS A RARER COMMODITY THAN BRAVERY IN BATTLE I HAVE TO SAY WHEN I FIRST READ THAT I WASN'T SURE I AGREED MORAL COURAGE IS A RARER QUALITY THAN BRAVERY IN BATTLE I WASN'T SURE I REALLY AGREED AND FOR A DEMOCRAT NOT TO AGREE WITH A KENNEDY — AFTER ALL, WHAT COULD BE MORE BRAVE THAN COURAGE IN BATTLE? BUT THEN I GOT TO VISIT, AS I KNOW YOU HAVE, OUR SERVICE MEMBERS AROUND THE WORLD, AND SEE JUST HOW BLESSED WE ARE WITH AN ABUNDANCE OF HEROES BY THE MILLIONS WHO HAVE JOINED THE SERVICE OF THIS COUNTRY, SERVICE MEMBERS WHO EVER DAY DEMONSTRATE THE MOST INCREDIBLE BRAVERY

I JUST HAVE THE GREATEST RESPECT FOR THEM FOR PEOPLE LIKE JASON CRW, AND JOHN McCAIN AND SO MANY OTHERS WHO SERVED IN THIS BODY AND THE OTHER OR WHO NEVER SERVED IN OFFICE, BY THE MILLIONS ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY AND ALL AROUND THE WORLD, MOST INCREDIBLE RESPECT IT IS AN AMAZING THING HOW COMMON IS THEIR UNCOMMON BRAVERY MY FATHER IS 92, PROBABLY WATCHING, PART OF THE GREATEST GENERATION LEFT HIGH SCHOOL TO JOIN THE SERVICE

HE TRIED TO LIST IN THE MARINE CORE AND HE FAILED THE PHYSICAL END OF WORLD WAR II, FAILED THE PHYSICAL BAD EYE SIGHT AND FLAT FEET HE WENT TO TRY TO ENLIST IN THE ARMY, THINKING MAYBE I WILL GET A DIFFERENT EXAMINING PHYSICIAN SAME STANDARD

SAME PHYSICIAN HE SAID WEREN'T YOU HERE TWO WEEKS AGO, HE SAID YEAH, HE SAID DO YOU WANT TO GET IN THAT BAD, HE SAID YEAH, HE WAS IN THE ARMY THE WAR WAS OVER SO HE NEVER LEFT THE UNITED STATES AND WHEN HE LEFT THE SERVICE HE WENT TO THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AND MID-WAY THROUGH, HE WANTED TO GET ON WITH HIS LIFE AND HE LEFT COLLEGE AND WENT OUT INTO THE BUSINESS WORLD SOMETHING HE ALWAYS REGRETTED

LEAVING COLLEGE EARLY BUT I THINK IN MANY WAYS HE GOT A BETTER EDUCATION THAN I DID I THINK THAT — I WAS LUCKY TO GET A GOOD EDUCATION BUT I THINK THOSE LIKE JASON AND OTHERS WHO SERVED IN THE MILITARY AND ALSO WENT TO SCHOOL, GOT THE BEST EDUCATION I THINK THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS YOU CAN ONLY LEARN BY BEING IN THE MILITARY CERTAINLY YOU CAN'T LEARN I THINK ABOUT WAR WITHOUT GOING TO WAR

AND MAYBE THERE ARE THINGS YOU JUST CAN'T LEARN ABOUT LIFE WITHOUT GOING TO WAR SO THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE SERVED I THINK HAVE THE MOST COMPLETE EDUCATION THERE IS BUT EVEN SO, IS MORAL COURAGE REALLY MORE RARE THAN THAT ON THE BATTLEFIELD? AND THEN I SAW WHAT ROBERT KENNEDY MEANT BY MORAL COURAGE FEW HE SAID ARE WILLING TO BRAVE THE DISAPPROVAL OF THEIR FELLOWS, THEIR COLLEAGUES AND THE RATH OF THEIR SOCIETY AND THEN UNDERSTOD HOW RARE MORAL COURAGE IS

HOW MANY OF US ARE WILLING TO BRAVE THE DISAPPROVAL OF OUR FELLOWS, COLLEAGUES AND THE RATH OF SOCIETY THERE IS A DIFFERENT KIND OF FRATERNITY OR SWORN AMONG THOSE WHO SORORITY THAN THOSE WHO SERVED IT IS WHY I THINK THERE IS A CERTAIN CHEMISTRY BETWEEN MEMBERS WHO REMEMBER THE SWING DISTRICTS AND STATES BECAUSE THEY CAN STEP INTO EACH OTHER'S SHOES AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE IN THIS FELLOWSHIP OF OFFICE HOLDERS UNDERSTAND THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T IS THAT REAL POLITICAL COURAGE DOESN'T COME WITH DISAGREEING WITH OUR OPPONENTS, BUT FROM DISAGREEING WITH OUR FRIENDS AND WITH OUR OWN PARTY BECAUSE IT MEANS HAVING TO STAIR DOWN ACCUSATIONS OF DISLOYALTY AND BETRAYAL

SHE IS A DEMOCRAT IN NAME ONLY HE IS A DEMOCRAT IN NAME ONLY WHAT I SAID LAST NIGHT, IF IT RESINATED WITH ANYONE IN THIS CHAMBER, DIDN'T REQUIRE COURAGE MY VIEWS AS HEART FELT AS THEY ARE, REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY CONSTITUENTS WHAT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN OUR HEART FELT VIEWS OF RIGHT AND WRONG ARE IN CONFLICT WITH THE POPULAR OPINION OF OUR CONSTITUENTS? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN OUR DEVOTION TO OUR VALUES, TO OUR LOVE OF COUNTRY, TO PART FROM THE MOMENTARY PASSION OF A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE BACK HOME, THOSE ARE THE TIMES THAT TRY OUR SOULS

CBS NEWS REPORTED LAST NIGHT THAT A TRUMP CONFIDENT SAID GOP SENATORS WERE WARNED VOTE AGAINST THE PRESIDENT AND YOUR HEAD WILL BE ON A PIKE NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS TROW VOTE AGAINST THE PRESIDENT AND YOUR HEAD WILL BE ON A PIKE I HAVE TO SAY WHEN I READ THAT, AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS TRUE, WHEN I READ THAT I WAS STRUCK BY THE IRONY I HOPE IT IS NOT TRUE

I HOPE IT IS NOT TRUE BUT I WAS STRUCK BY THE IRONY OF THE IDEA WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A PRESIDENT WHO WOULD MAKE HIMSELF A MONARCH, THAT WHOEVER THAT WAS WOULD USE A HEAD ON A PIKE JUST THIS WEEK AMERICA LOST A HERO HE PASSED AWAY ON MONDAY, THE DAY BEFORE THE TRIAL BEGAN SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE KNOWN OR SERVED WITH HIM

HE WAS A REPUBLICAN FROM ILLINOIS AND ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE JULY 1974, AS THE INQUIRY WAS COMING TO A CLOSE, HE BEGAN MEETING WITH A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE THREE OTHER REPUBLICANS AND THREE DEMOCRATS HERE IN THE SENATE THEY MIGHT HAVE CALLED THEM THE GANG OF SEVEN THEY GATHERED AND THEY TALKED AND LABORED OVER LANGUAGE AND ULTIMATELY HELPED DEVELOP A BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THE ARTICLES THAT LED A GROUP OF REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO TELL PRESIDENT NIXON HE MUST RESIGN

SOME SAY THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT MIGHT NOT HAVE MOVED FORWARD WERE IT NOT FOR THOSE FOUR COURAGEOUS REPUBLICANS HE CREDITED NIXON WITH GIVING HIM HIS SEAT, WITH GETTING HIM ELECTED HE DID IT BECAUSE HE SAID BECAUSE SEEING ALL THE EVIDENCE IT WAS SOMETHING WE HAD TO DO BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE WAS THERE ONE OF HIS AIDES SAID HE FELT AN OBLIGATION TO THE CONSTITUTION TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT NOW SOON MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WILL FACE THE MOST MOMENTOUS OF DECISIONS

NOT AS I SAID AT THE OUTSET BETWEEN GET OR INNOCENCE, SHOULD THERE BE A FAIR TRIAL SHALL THE HOUSE BE ABLE TO PRESENT ITS CASE WITH WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS THROUGH THE USE OF SUBPOENAS AS HAS BEEN THE CASE IN EVERY IMPEACHMENT TRIAL IN HISTORY NOW, THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS HAVE BEEN MAKING THEIR CASE OUTSIDE OF THIS CHAMBER, THREATENING TO STALL THESE PROCEEDING WITH THE ASSERTION OF FALSE CLAIMS OF PRIVILEGE HAVING PERSUADED THIS BODY TO POSTPONE CONSIDERATION OF THE WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS, THEY NOW APPEAR TO BE PREPARING THE GROUND TO SAY IT WILL BE TOO LATE TO CONSIDER THEM NEXT WEEK BUT CONSIDER THIS, OF THE HUNDREDS OF DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE SUBPOENAS, THERE IS NO CLAIM AND NONE HAS BEEN ASSERTED TO THE AGREE THAT YOU COULD MAKE A CLAIM, THAT CLAIM HAS BEEN WAVED

TO THE INDUSTRY THAT A CLAIM WOULD ATTACH, IT DOES NOT CONCEAL MISCONDUCT AND ONCE MORE, TO THE DEGREE OVER WHETHER A PRIVILEGE APPLIED, WE HAVE A PERFECTLY GOOD JUDGE SITTING BEHIND ME, EMPOWERED TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WHEN THE CHIEF JUSTICE DECIDES WHERE A NARROW APPLICATION OF PRIVILEGE OUT TO APPLY, YOU WILL STILL HAVE THE POWER TO OVERRULE HIM HOW OFTEN DO YOU GET A CHANCE TO OVERRULE A CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT? YOU HAVE TO ADMIT IT IS EVER LEGISLATORS' DREAM SO LET US NOT BE FOOLED BY THE ARGUMENT THAT IT WILL TAKE TOO LONG OR PERSUADED THE TRIAL MUST BE OVER BY THE STATE OF THE UNION

THIS IS NO PARKING TICKET, NO SHOPLIFTING CASE, IT IS A MATTER OF HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS HOW LONG IS TOO LONG TO HAVE A FAIR TRIAL, FAIR TO THE PRESIDENT AND FAIR TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DO NOT AGREE ON MUCH BUT THEY WILL NOT FORGIVE BEING DEPRIVED OF THE TRUTH AND CERTAINLY NOT BECAUSE IT TOOK A BACK SEAT TO EXPEDIENCY THE AMERICAN CRISIS, THOMAS PANE PROCEED THOSE WHO EXPECT TO REAP THE BLESSINGS OF FREEDOM MUST UNDERGO THE FATIGUE OF SUPPORTING IT IS IT TOO MUCH FATIGUE TO CALL WITNESSES AND HAVE A FAIR TRIAL? ARE THE BLESSINGS OF FREEDOM SO MEAGER THAT WE WILL NOT ENDURE THE FATIGUE OF A REAL TRIAL WITH WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS

PRESIDENT LINCOLN TO CONGRESS IN DECEMBER, 1862, SAID THIS: FELLOW CITIZENS WE CANNOT ESCAPE HISTORY WE WILL BE REMEMBERED IN SPITE OF OURSELVES NO PERSONAL SIGNIFICANCE OR INSIGNIFICANCE CAN SPARE ONE OR ANOTHER OF US THE FIERY TRIAL THROUGH WHICH WE PASS WILL LIGHT US DOWN IN HONOR OR DISHONOR TO THE LATEST GENERATION I THINK HE WAS THE MOST INTERESTING PRESIDENT IN HISTORY HE MAY BE THE MOST INTERESTING PERSON IN OUR HISTORY

THIS MAN WHO STARTED OUT POOR HE HAD NOTHING NO MONEY NO EDUCATION HE EDUCATED HIMSELF

EDUCATED HIMSELF BUT HE HAD A BRAIN IN THAT HEAD, A BRILLIANCE IN THAT MIND, MADE HIM ONE OF THE MOST IN HISTORY I THINK HE IS THE MOST INTERESTING CHARACTER IN OUR HISTORY I THINK A LOT ABOUT HISTORY AS I KNOW YOU DO SOMETIMES I THINK ABOUT HOW UNFORGIVING HISTORY CAN BE OF OUR CONDUCT

WE CAN DO A LIFETIME'S WORK, DRAFT THE MOST WONDERFUL LEGISLATION, HELP OUR CONSTITUENTS AND YET WE MAY BE REMEMBERED FOR NONE OF THAT FOR A SINGLE DECISION WE MAY BE REMEMBERED, AFFECTING THE COURSE OF OUR COUNTRY I BELIEVE THIS MAY BE ONE OF THOSE MOMENTS A MOMENT WE NEVER THOUGHT WE WOULD SEE A MOMENT WHEN OUR DEMOCRACY WAS GRAVELY THREATENED FROM WITHIN

RUSSIA TOO HAS A CONSTITUTION IT IS NOT A BAD CONSTITUTION IT IS JUST A MEANINGLESS ONE IN RUSSIA, MAY HAVE TRIAL BY TELEPHONE THEY HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS WE DO TO A TRIAL

THEY HEAR EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES BUT BEFORE THE VERDICT IS RENDERED THE JUDGE PICKS UP THE TELEPHONE AND CALLS THE RIGHT PERSON TO FIND OUT HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO TURN OUT TRIAL BY TELEPHONE IS THAT WHAT WE HAVE HERE? TRIAL BY TELEPHONE? SOMEONE ON THE OTHER END OF THE PHONE DICTATING WHAT THIS TRIAL SHOULD LOOK LIKE THE FOUNDERS GAVE US MORE THAN WORDS, THEY GAVE US INSPIRATION

THEY MAY HAVE RECEDED INTO MYTHOLOGY BUT THEY INSPIRE US STILL AND MORE THAN US THEY INSPIRE THE REST OF THE WORLD THEY INSPIRE THE REST OF THE WORLD FROM THEIR PRISON CELLS IN TURKEY JOURNALISTS LOOK TO US FROM THEIR INTERNM THEY LOOK TO US BECAUSE WE ARE THE INDISPENSABLE NATION THEY LOOK TO US BECAUSE WE HAVE A RULE OF LAW

THEY LOOK TO US BECAUSE NO ONE IS ABOVE THAT LAW AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SEPARATES US FROM THOSE PEOPLE IS THE RIGHT TO A TRIAL RIGHT TO A TRIAL AMERICANS GET A FAIR TRIAL AND SO I ASK YOU, I IMPLORE YOU, GIVE AMERICA A FAIR TRIAL

GIVE AMERICA A FAIR TRIAL SHE'S WORTH IT THANK YOU >> THE MAJORITY LEADER IS RECOGNIZED >> WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED

THE SENATE IS ADJOURNED >>> HELLO EVERYONE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FOR THIS SPECIAL REPORT AS THE SENATE HAS FINISHED DAY FOUR OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S IMPEACHMENT TRIAL FRIDAY WAS HOUSE MANAGERS FINAL CHANCES TO ARGUE THE CASE FOR THE PRESIDENT'S REMOVAL FROM OFFICE

THEY SAY HE AND HIS ADMINISTRATION COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE BY WITHHOLDING AID FROM UKRAINE TO PRESSURE THE COUNTRY INTO PUBLICLY ANNOUNCING AN INVESTIGATION INTO JOE BIDEN THEN DEMOCRATS ARGUED THE PRESIDENT OBSTRUCTED CONGRESS' CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED RESPONSIBILITY TO INVESTIGATE THOSE ACTIONS LEAD IMPEACHMENT MANAGER ADAM SCHIFF LAYED OUT WHY HE SAYS AMERICANS SHOULD CARE ABOUT THIS >> WHY DOES UKRAINE MATTER TO THE UNITED STATES? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SMALL COUNTRY, MANY PEOPLE KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT WELL, THIS SMALL COUNTRY, THIS ALLY OF OURS IS A COUNTRY HUNGRY FOR REFORM AND EAGER FOR A STRONGER RELATION WITH ITS MOST IMPORTANT ALLY THE UNITED STATES

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OURSELVES AND WHAT IT MEANS TO THE STRENGTH OF OUR OWN DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRACIES AROUND THE WORLD, COUNTRIES LIKE UKRAINE, ARE FIGHTING OUR FIGHT AT LEAST THAT USED TO BE OUR FIGHT AND GOD HELP US IF IT IS NOT OUR FIGHT STILL >> AS WE MENTIONED, BEGINNING SATURDAY PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LEGAL TEAM WILL GET ITS CHANCE TO PRESENT A DEFENSE THE PRESIDENTS LEAD ATTORNEY JAY SEKULOW SPOKE ABOUT WHAT THE DEFENSE MIGHT LOOK LIKE

>> I THINK YOU WILL SEE — I GUESS I WOULD CALL IT A TRAILER COMING ATTRACTIONS BEST WAY TO SAY IT WE HAVE THREE HOURS TO PUT IT OUT WE WILL TAKE WHATEVER TIME IS APPROPRIATE TO LAY OUT WHAT THE CASE WILL LOOK LIKE

NEXT WEEK IS WHEN YOU WILL SEE THE FULL PRESENTATION THERE WILL BE PLENTY TO SEE >> ALL RIGHT WELCOME BEFORE WE LOOK AHEAD TO TOMORROW, I WANT TO GET YOUR TAKE AWAYS FROM THE LAST THREE DAYS

MOLLY, DID DEMOCRATS DO A GOOD JOB OF LAYING OUT THEIR CASE? >> THEY MADE A CASE AND THEY KEPT MAKING THE CASE AND THEN MADE IT SOME MORE DEPENDS ON WHO THE JURY IS IF THE JURY IS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THE VOTERS WHO ARE GOING TO COME OUT FOR THE SENATORS, IN NOVEMBER, THEN, YOU KNOW, IT WILL BE A MATTER OF HOW DEMOCRATS ARE ABLE TO CONDENSE WHAT WE HEARD INTO SMALL BITE SIZE PACKAGE I DON'T THINK — I AM NOT SURE HOW MANY INDIVIDUALS WERE TUNED IN WATCHING EVERY DAY

THERE WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION BUT ADAM SCHIFF SEEMED TO SCORE POINTS A, RHETORICAL POINTS, IN TERMS OF WHETHER HE WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO MAKE THAT CASE AND MAKE IT UNDERSTANDABLE SO IT IS NOT AS CONFUSING AND DISJOINTED AS IT HAD BEEN, THAT IS UNCLEAR >> JOEL, WHAT ABOUT YOU? DO YOU THINK DEMOCRATS MADE THE BEST POSSIBLE CASE THEY COULD, GIVEN, YOU KNOW, THE CONSTRAINTS OF TIME AND OF THE EVIDENCE THEY HAD AVAILABLE AND OF THE, YOU KNOW, VENUE? >> I AM SOMEONE WHO IS UNAFRAID TO QUESTION WHEN DEMOCRATS DON'T DO WELL, I HAVE TO SAY, THIS WAS A REMARKABLE DISPLAY BY ADAM SCHIFF AND THOSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS AS SOMEBODY WHO THOUGHT ABOUT THIS EVIDENCE AND REALLY NEVER HAD IT LAYEDITUTE MYSELF, PUTTING MYSELF IN THE POSITION OF THOSE SENATORS, THERE WAS A THOROUGH CASE THAT WAS LAYED FORWARD HERE

THEY HAD TO BE COMPELLED BY THE >>> FOR THESE SENATORS, TALKING ABOUT THE CONGRESSMEN RAILSBACK WHO RECENTLY PASSED AWAY AND HIS PLACE IN HISTORY BECAUSE OF HOW HE ACTED IN THE MOMENT DURING THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT SITUATION AND ALMOST LAYING OUT A CHALLENGE TO THESE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY TODAY HOW HISTORY IS GOING TO LOOK AT THEM ARE THEY GOING TO BE VIEWED AND HAILED LIKE SOMEONE LIKE CONGRESSMAN RAILSBACK? DEMOCRATS COULD NOT BE MORE HAPPY I WAS SPEAKING WITH SOMEONE IN SENATE LEADERSHIP AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THEY'RE HAPPIEST WITH, CAUCUS UNITY WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT REPUBLICANS WOULD LOSE VOTES HERE, WHETHER THEY LOSE PEOPLE LIKE ROMNEY OR COLLINS

DEMOCRATS HAD THE POTENTIAL TO LOSE VOTES AS WELL YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT THE DOUG JONES OF THE WORLD ON THE FINAL VOTE, I'M SURE THAT WILL COME UP DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LOCK STEP BEHIND CHUCK SCHUMER AND THE STRATEGY THAT'S BEEN LAID FORWARD HERE BY THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP AND BY THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGER DEMOCRATS FEEL REALLY GOOD GOING INTO THE PRESIDENT'S DEFENSE THIS WEEKEND

>> LESLIE, I WANT TO ASK YOU NOW, YOU JUST HEARD JOEL SAY ANY OPEN MINDED MEMBER OF THAT BODY WOULD BE SORT OF SWAYED OR OPEN TO THESE ARGUMENTS THE DEMOCRATS ARE MAKING BECAUSE THEY WERE SO STRONG DO YOU AGREE AND DO YOU THINK REPUBLICANS HAVE IN ANY WAY CHANGED THEIR MINDS THE WAY THEY CAME INTO THIS TRIAL THREE DAYS AGO? HAS THERE BEEN ANY MOVEMENT THREE DAYS LATER? >> I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH MY ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE ON THE LEFT IF ANYTHING, THEY HAVE ENTRENCHED THEMSELVES EVEN DEEPER INTO THIS PARTISAN FIGHT IF THERE WAS MOVEMENT THAT HAPPENED, IT HAPPENED ON THE HOUSE SIDE WITH DEMOCRATS MOVING OVER ACROSS THE AISLE THE SENATE IS BASICALLY — THE REPUBLICAN SENATE, YOU'RE HEARING ALREADY SENATOR TED CRUZ, NOT SOMEBODY WHO CAME IN OPEN MINDED, BUT HE'S SAID IT'S A SHAM IMPEACHMENT

THOSE MESSAGES ARE GOING TO BE ECHOED EVEN LOUDER TOMORROW TERE'S THIS CONVERSATION NOW HAPPENING WHERE A LOT OF THEM ARE SAYING THE DEMOCRATS FEEL THEY HAVE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY TO TELL THE FLY OVER STATES WHAT THEY DID IN 2016 IS NOT RIGHT, THIS IS ALL ABOUT UNDOING 2016 AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO STAND FOR THAT SO IT COULD NOT BE MORE DIVIDED THAN I THINK — AND WE'RE REALLY GOING TO HEAR — THE HEAT I THINK IS COMING TOMORROW >> SO YOU'RE SAYING — >> TO JUMP OVER THOUGH AT THE SAME TIME

THE DEMOCRATIC CASE THAT WAS LAID OUT, ASIDE FROM THE MOMENTS FROM, SAY, JERRY NADLER, WHERE HE EXPLICITLY CALLED THE PRESIDENT A DICTATOR AND SCHIFF HINTED AT THAT IN HIS CLOSING REMARKS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE — THE REPUBLICANS ARE GO BEING TO HAVE A HIGH BAR TO JUMP OVER >> WHAT STOOD OUT WITH THE DEMOCRATS TODAY AS THEY FOCUSED ON ARTICLE 2? TODAY THEY FOCUSED ON OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS DID THEY HAVE A STRONG CASE? I THOUGHT TO ME THE STRONGEST ARGUMENTS THEY MADE WERE ONES LOOKING FORWARD BEYOND THIS

Source: Youtube