MR. SWALWELL WILL MAKE HIS WAY
TO THE CAMERA AND WILL BE
TALKING TO US MOMENTARILY.
THE D.O.J. VETERAN, THE FORMER
ACTING SOLICITOR GENERAL RAHAL
OF THE UNITED STATES WHO HAS
ARGUED DOZENS OF CASES BEFORE
THE SUPREME COURT IS OF COUNSEL
TO US FOR THIS CONVERSATION.
NEAL, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS,
NUMBER ONE, ABOUT THEIR
LAWYERING.
I DON’T THINK PEOPLE WATCHING
HAVE ANY OTHER REACTION EXCEPT
THEIR LAWYERING WAS RELENTLESS
AND EFFECTIVE.
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE
RELITIGATING THIS DECISION NOT
TO HAVE WITNESSES FOREVER, BUT
YOU HEARD MR. RASKIN SAY HAD
THEY GONE THERE, THE OTHER SIDE
WOULD HAVE LIKELY TURNED IT INTO
A CIRCUS AND YOU WOULD HAVE HAD
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE HAVE TO
APPEAR IN THE SENATE CHAMBER AS
A WITNESS.
MY SECOND QUESTION FOR YOU,
PLEASE ADDRESS A TOPIC THAT IS
TAKING OFF AMONG LAWYERS BOTH
AMATEUR AND PROFESSIONAL,
ESPECIALLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA ABOUT
THIS CLAUSE OF THE 14th
AMENDMENT THAT BY A SIMPLE 51
VOTE THEY COULD USE TO BAR THE
PRESIDENT -- THE FORMER
PRESIDENT FROM FUTURE OFFICE.
>>> FIRST OF ALL, WATCHING THEM
JUST NOW, THE HOUSE MANAGERS DID
BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL WORK IN
PROSECUTING THIS CASE, SOME OF
THE BEST ORAL ADVOCACY I’VE SEEN
IN MY LIFE.
THE PRESS CONFERENCE THEY
SOUNDED A LITTLE DEFENSIVE,
WHICH IS NATURAL BECAUSE
EVERYONE IS BEATING THEM UP ON
THIS OR THAT.
NOBODY SHOULD TAKE ANYTHING AWAY
FROM THIS PERFORMANCE.
IT WAS A PERFORMANCE FOR THE
AGES AND THERE WAS A TRAGIC VOTE
IN WHICH THE SENATE READ THE
IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE OUGHT OF
CONSTITUTION AT LEAST FOR
JANUARY AND NOT FOR LIKE SOME
MINOR THING.
THE ALLEGATIONS HERE WITH AN
INSURRECTION OF THE CAPITOL AND
NOT JUST ON ANY DAY OF THE
CAPITOL, NOT LIKE THEY WERE
VOTING ON NATIONAL CHOCOLATE DAY
OR SOMETHING BUT ON LITERALLY
THE SACRED DUTY THEY HAVE, WHICH
COUNTING THE VOTES AND PEACEFUL
TRANSFER OF POWER.
I THINK IT IS A TRAGIC DAY
DESPITE THE AMAZING PERFORMANCE
BY THOSE LAWYERS. THERE ARE TWO BRIGHT SPORTS, THE
THERE ARE TWO BRIGHT SPORTS, THE
MOST IMPART -- IM PARTISAN
IMPEACHMENT VOTE.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON WAS IMPEACHED
AND PRESIDENT CLINTON AND THE
ONLY TIME THERE WAS A CROSSOVER
WAS RAHMOMNEY AND NOW THERE ARE
SEVEN.
AND THE SECOND IS THE McCONNELL STATEMENT.
STATEMENT. McCONNELL COULD HAVE SAID TISK,
McCONNELL COULD HAVE SAID TISK,
TISK, AND HE COULDWENT WAY FURTH
THAN EVEN CHUCK SCHUMER DID IN
ATTACKING TRUMP.
I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED BY
SCHUMER’S COMMENTS BECAUSE
SCHUMER BASICALLY MADE IT ALL OUT TO BE TRUMP RIOTERS TO THE
OUT TO BE TRUMP RIOTERS TO THE
CAPITOL TO STOP THE CERTIFICATE
IF I HAVE CASE AND
-- CERTIFICATE IF I HAVE CASE
-- CERTIFICATION.
THESE SENATORS DID THAT AND 126
MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE.
THESE SENATORS TODAY, SOME OF
THEM VOTED TO ACQUIT THEMSELVES.
AND SO AS WE THINK ABOUT THE
FUTURE, I THINK WE HAVE TO THINK
ABOUT THAT.
I KNOW I’VE BEEN TALKING FOR A
LONG TIME, ON THE 14th AMENDMENT
THERE IS A SEPARATE CLAUSE IN
THE CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS IF
YOU’VE BEEN AN INSURRECTIONIST,
THEN THE CONGRESS CAN PASS A
BILL TO BASICALLY BAR YOU FROM
FUTURE OFFICE HOLDING.
IT DOES REQUIRE ONLY A SIMPLE
MAJORITY SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO
DO.
HOWEVER, IT MAY ALSO ACQUIRE A
COURT PROCESS TO ADJUDICATE
GUILT OR INNOCENCE.
I THINK WE SHOULD WELLCOME THAT.
I THINK DONALD TRUMP WOULD BE
SCARED OUT OF HIS MIND FOR THAT
COURT PROCESS.
>> NEAL, I THOUGHT I HEARD
CONGRESSMAN RASKIN SAY ON HIS
WAY OUT THE DOOR THAT THEY HAD A
SUPER MAJORITY WHO RECOGNIZED
GUILT.
I’VE GONE THROUGH ALL THE
REPUBLICAN STATEMENTS THAT HAVE
COME THROUGH THE WIRE AND I’M
NOT QUITE AT 67 BUT YOU’VE GOT
THE REPUBLICANS LIKE
McCONNELL -- I READ SENATOR
PORTMAN’S STATEMENT.
THEY’RE NOT DISPUTING ANY OF THE
CONDUCT, WHICH WAS PROVEN
THROUGH VIDEOS, PROVEN THROUGH
TESTIMONY, PROVEN THROUGH THE
EVIDENCE OF PENCE AND THEN IT
WAS THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS
STITCHED TOGETHER IN THE FINAL
HOURS THIS MORNING.
THE CONGRESSWOMAN RECOUNTING AND
GOING ON THE RECORD AND ENTERING
INTO EVIDENCE THIS CALL WITH
McCARTHY WHERE TRUMP CLEARLY
TAKES THE SIDE OF THE
INSURRECTIONISTS.
I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE
CASE, I THOUGHT IT WAS AS STRONG
AGAINST THE CONSTITUTIONALITY
ARGUMENT BUT AS I READ THESE
STATEMENTS AND THE REPUBLICANS
HIDING UNDER THE SKIRT OF WHAT
SOUNDS LUKE AIKE A BOGUS CLAIM O
WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS AND
THE DAY BEFORE THE TRIAL FAR
RIGHT CONSERVATIVE LAWYER CHUCK
COOPER COME OUT IN "THE WALL
STREET JOURNAL" DEBUNKING THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIM, I THOUGHT
THIS WAS SOME OF THE MOST
AIRTIGHT EVIDENCE.
THEY LITERALLY PUT THE
CONSTITUTION UP, WHEN I WAS A
REAP SCHTICK.
THE DEMOCRATS HAD THE LETTER OF
THE LAW ON THEIR SIDE, HAD THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIM AND PLENTY
OF CONSERVATIVE LAWYERS BUT THAT
SEEMS TO BE WHAT THEY’RE HIDING
BEHIND TODAY.
I WONDER WHAT YOU MAKE OF THAT.
>> I THINK IT’S REALLY
UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE THE WHOLE
POINT OUR FOUNDERS, IF YOU READ
THE PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION
DEBATES, THE REASON WHY OUR
FOUNDERS GAVE IT TO THE SENATE
TO VOTE ON IS YOU CAN UNDERSTAND
THEIR REASONS AND THEY HAVE TO
MAKE A DECISION.
HERE PEOPLE LIKE McCONNELL JUST
BASICALLY USE THIS AS A DODGE TO
GET OUT FROM UNDER THE SKIRT AND
SO ON.
THAT’S JUST A HORRIBLE WAY TO
RUN A GOVERNMENT.
THE PRETTY SIDE, HOWEVER, IS
THERE IS, IF NOT A SUPER
MAJORITY, PRETTY DARN CLOSE TO
THAT SAYING THAT TRUMP DID IT.
THAT COULD BE RELEVANT TO
BRIAN’S POINT SETTING UP THE
14th AMENDMENT.
NOBODY WANTS TO GO THROUGH THIS
WHOLE THING AGAIN BUT A WHOLE IN
WHICH YOU HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY
IN THE SENATE SAYING THIS GUY
DID IT, IT’S VERY SIMPLE FOR