>> 100% AGREE. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
BUT I WANT TO GO TO ONE OF THE
HUNDRED JURORS, CHRIS VAN HOLLEN
FROM MARYLAND.
FROM MARYLAND. YOUR THOUGHTS AT THE END OF THE
TUMULT KWUS AND FOR YOU I’M SURE
FRUSTRATING DAY.
FRUSTRATING DAY. >> CHRIS, FRUSTRATING AND REALLY
DISGRACEFUL FOR THE SENATE AND
THE COUNTRY.
THE COUNTRY. BECAUSE TODAY WAS REALLY THE
FINAL MOMENT OF TRUTH.
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD
HAVE A FAIR TRIAL MEANING
CALLING RELEVANT WITNESSES AND
DOCUMENTS WHICH IS THE WAY YOU
CONDUCT TRIALS ALL OVER THE
COUNTRY AND REPUBLICANS VOTED
NO.
NO. THEY THEN VOTED DOWN MY
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW THE
CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED
STATES TO DETERMINE WHICH
WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS WERE
RELEVANT.
RELEVANT. I COULD THINK OF NO MORE
IMPARTIAL, NO MORE FAIR WAY THAN
TO RESOLVE THESE ISSUES THAN TO
ALLOW THE CHIEF JUSTICE TO DO IT
JUST LIKE IN COURTS EVERY DAY
AROUND THE COUNTRY AND THEY SAID
NO TO THAT.
SO THIS IS THE FIRST IMPEACHMENT
TRIAL IN THE HISTORY OF THE
UNITED STATES WITH NO WITNESSES
AND DOCUMENTS AND THAT IS A
DISGRACE ON THE SENATE.
WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO SEEK THE
TRUTH, NOT BURY IT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO GET YU
REACTION TO THE STATEMENTS OF
YOUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES THAT
THEY’VE PUT OUT.
LAMAR ALEXANDER WILL TAKE THAT
FOR EXAMPLE AND WE’LL DIVE INTO
A VARIETY OF THE STATEMENTS BUT
SENATOR ALEXANDER SAYING THAT
THE THE CASE WAS -- TO HIS MIND
IT WAS PROVEN BY THE HOUSE
MANAGERS.
MANAGERS. IT ESTABLISHED WHAT THE
PRESIDENT DID.
PRESIDENT DID. BUT THAT THE REMEDY IS NOT
REMOVAL, THAT YOU DON’T REMOVE A
PRESIDENT WHO IS INAPPROPRIATE
AND THEN LATER IN AN INTERVIEW
WITH "THE NEW YORK TIMES" SAYING
BUT THERE IS TAX CUTS AND GUTTED
REGULATION AND JUDGES ON THE
COURT.
COURT. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?
>> WELL, LOOK, I READ THAT VERY
CAREFULLY.
CAREFULLY. SENATOR ALEXANDER’S STATEMENT.
HE SAID IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE,
THAT THE PRESIDENT HAD A LAPSE
IN JUDGMENT.
IN JUDGMENT. THIS IS LIKE TALKING ABOUT
JAYWALKING AND A SPEEDING
TICKET, ESPECIALLY AFTER HAVING
FOUND -- AFTER HAVING FOUND THAT
THE HOUSE MANAGERS PROVED ALL OF
THE FACTS IN THE ABUSE OF POWER
CLAIM.
CLAIM. HAVING ESTABLISHED THAT, IN
FACT, THE PRESIDENT AND HIS
LAWYERS ARE DECEIVING THE SENATE
AND DECEIVING THE COUNTRY WHEN
THEY SAY THE PRESIDENT DID NOT
HOLD UP THE AID IN ORDER TO GET
THESE POLITICAL CONCESSIONS,
ESSENTIALLY WHAT SENATOR
ALEXANDER SAID IS THE HOUSE
PROVED THE CASE WHEN IT COMES TO
ABUSE OF POWER BUT WE’RE NOT
DOING TO HAVE ANY REMEDY,
CERTAINLY NOT IN THE FORM OF
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. SO I FOUND THE CONCLUSION VERY
DISSATISFYING AND THE PROBLEM
WE’VE GOT HERE NOW IS
ESTABLISHING THE PRECEDENT FIRST
FOR HAVING A RIGGED TRIAL WITH
NO WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS, AND
SECOND FOR HAVING NO
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE PRESIDENT
FOR THESE INCREDIBLY WRONGFUL
ACTS AND CRIMES AGAINST THE
CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION. >> I’M CURIOUS, BECAUSE OF THE
REPORTING ABOUT THAT MAY MEETING
THAT PAT CIPOLLONE WAS PRESENT
IN, ACCORDING TO THE
CHARACTERIZE IS OF SOMEONE WHO
READ JOHN BOLTON’S MANUSCRIPT,
WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE IN THE
ROOM WITH PAT CIPOLLONE WHO IS A
FACT WITNESS WHO MAY HAVE TO A
DEGREE WE’RE STILL NOT CLEAR ON
BEEN ENMESHED IN THE VERY SCHEME
AT ISSUE IN THE IMPEACHMENT
TRIAL.
TRIAL. >> WELL THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT.
HE WAS IN THE ROOM.
THAT MAKES HIM A FACT WITNESS.
HE WAS PART ABOUT HATCHING THIS
PLOT AND SCHEME FROM EARLY ON
AND NOW HE’S IN FRONT OF THE
UNITED STATES SENATE
PARTICIPATING IN WHAT SEEMS TO
BE, AS THE TRUTH COMES OUT,
CLEARLY DECEIVING THE UNITED
STATES SENATE.
STATES SENATE. TO BE PART OF A LEGAL TEAM
KNOWINGLY MISREPRESENTING THE
FACTS AND THAT IS TRUE IF JOHN
BOLTON IS TELLING THE TRUTH AND
I SUSPECT HE IS, THEN THAT
REALLY RAISES THE QUESTION OF
THAT THE PRESIDENT’S LEAD LAWYER
IN THIS CASE AND THERE MAY WELL
BE ETHICS PANELS AND OTHERS THAT
REVIEW THIS SITUATION WHEN ALL
OF THE FACTS COME IN.