>>> THIS IS A TRAVESTY. NO ONE SHOULD VOTE FOR THIS.
THIS IS A SAD DAY.
THE CURTAIN IS COMING DOWN ON
THIS HOUSE BECAUSE THE MAJORITY
HAS NO IDEA ABOUT PROCESS AND
PROCEDURE.
PROCEDURE. >> TRYING TO PUT A RIBBON ON A
SHAM PROCESS DOESN’T MAKE IT ANY
LESS OF A SHAM.
>> WHEN YOU LOOK THROUGH THIS
RESOLUTION AND YOU SEE HOW
ONE-SIDED, HOW SOVIET-STYLE THIS
IS RUNNING, THIS IS THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA.
DON’T RUN A SHAM PROCESS, A
TAINTED PROCESS LIKE THIS
RESOLUTION ENSURES.
RESOLUTION ENSURES. >> THAT’S ABOUT HOW THAT WENT
TODAY.
TODAY. A FORMER REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN,
JUSTIN AMASH OF MICHIGAN VOTED
WITH THE DEMOCRATS ON TODAY’S
RESOLUTION.
RESOLUTION. BEFORE TODAY’S VOTE, THE NOW
INDEPENDENT POSTED, QUOTE, THIS
PRESIDENT WILL BE IN POWER FOR
ONLY A SHORT TIME, BUT EXCUSING
HIS MISBEHAVIOR WILL FOREVER
TARNISH YOUR NAME.
TO MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES,
STEP OUTSIDE YOUR MEDIA AND A
SOCIAL BUBBLE.
SOCIAL BUBBLE. HISTORY WILL
HISTORY WILL DISINGENUOUS, FRIVOLOUS AND
FALSE DEFENSES OF THIS MAN.
WE WELCOME BACK STEVE SCHMIDT,
FORMER REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST WHO
WORKED FOR AMONG OTHERS DICK
CHENEY, JOHN McCAIN.
HE HAS SINCE LEFT THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY AND IS NOW BACK WITH US
HAVING CONSULTED FOR THE FORMER
INDEPENDENT POLITICAL CAMPAIGN
OF HOWARD SCHULTZ.
MY FRIEND, I WANT TO START YOU
OFF WITH HOW CONSEQUENTIAL YOU
THINK TODAY WAS, AND THEN TALK
ABOUT THESE TIMES WE’RE LIVING
IN RIGHT NOW.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
>> WHAT WE SEE RIGHT NOW, WHAT
WE KNOW HAPPENED IS IN MY EYES A
PROFOUND ABUSE OF POWER BY THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
WHO CALLED A FOREIGN HEAD OF
STATE, WITHHELD U.S. MILITARY
AID, ASKED FOR THE FOREIGN HEAD
OF STATE TO LAUNCH AN
INVESTIGATION INTO A U.S.
CITIZEN TO AID HIS CAMPAIGN FOR
2020.
2020. THAT CITIZEN HAPPENING TO BE THE
SON OF A POLITICAL OPPONENT.
IF YOU CAN DO THAT TO THE FORMER
VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES, IT MEANS YOU CAN DO THAT
TO ANYBODY.
TO ANYBODY. AND IF THAT’S OKAY TO ASK A
FOREIGN HEAD OF STATE TO
INVESTIGATE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN,
THAT MEANS IT’S OKAY FOR THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
TO SEE SOMEONE SAY ON TELEVISION
WHO DOESN’T LIKE THE CRITICISM
OF HIM AND ORDER THE IRS, LET’S
SAY TO INVESTIGATE THEM, OR TO
TARGET THAT INDIVIDUAL WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
IN A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC
WHERE THE RULE OF LAW IS
SUPREME, THAT IS SIMPLY
UNACCEPTABLE.
UNACCEPTABLE. IS A PRESIDENT, NOT AN EMPEROR.
SO WHAT WE SAW TODAY IS DEEPLY
DISCOURAGING, BECAUSE WHAT IT
INDICATES IS THAT THE
CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS THE
DOCUMENT THAT ALL OF THESE
MEMBERS HAVE SWORN AN OATH TO
PRESERVE, PROTECT, TO UPHOLD, TO
DEFEND AGAINST ALL ENEMY,
FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, THAT THAT
OATH IS SUBORDINATE TO THEIR
LOYALTY TO MAN, TO A PERSON, TO
A PARTY, AND THOSE SHOULD BE
SUBORDINATE TO THEIR
CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS.
CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS. AND YOU LOOK AT THE CAPITOL
DOME, AND YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT
AN HONOR IT IS TO BE SENT TO
WASHINGTON BY THE PEOPLE OF THE
50 STATES TO SERVE THE NATIONAL
INTEREST, TO BE A STEWARD FOR A
BRIEF TIME OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL
REPUBLIC THAT WAS BIRTHED IN
1787.
1787. AND THAT REPUBLIC HAS OFTEN BEEN
REFERRED TO AS THE AMERICAN
EXPERIMENT BECAUSE NO REPUBLIC
HAS ENDURED.
HAS ENDURED. SO HERE WE STAND AT AN HOUR
WHERE THERE IS A QUESTION ON THE
TABLE, AND THE QUESTION IS THE
PRESIDENT ABOVE THE LAW.
IS THERE ANY BEHAVIOR THAT WOULD
BE VIEWED AS INTOLERABLE BY THIS
REPUBLICAN MINORITY IN THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES?
OF REPRESENTATIVES? AND IF THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO,
THEN WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE
CHECKS AND BALANCES OF OUR
SYSTEM CREATED BY THE GENIUSES
IN PHILADELPHIA HAS BEEN
OBLITERATED IN THE YEAR 2019.
SO THIS IS A PROFOUNDLY
IMPORTANT MOMENT.
IMPORTANT MOMENT. >> SO WE’RE ABOUT TO FIND OUT IF
KEVIN McCARTHY, IF MITCH
McCONNELL BELIEVE IN EVERYTHING
YOU JUST LAID OUT?
>> I THINK WE WILL.
I THINK IT’S VERY IMPORTANT THAT
THE PRESIDENT’S MOST VOCAL
CRITICS BE THE MOST VOCIFEROUS
VOICES FOR DEMANDING THAT THIS
BE DONE PROPERLY AND THAT THE
PRESIDENT BE ACCORDED THE
APPROPRIATE LEVELS OF DUE
PROCESS, THAT HE BE TREATED
FAIRLY.
FAIRLY. THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO THIS.
BUT IF THIS IS TO BE ON A
PARTISAN BASIS, WHAT THAT MEANS
IS THAT THE IMPEACHMENT, WHICH
IS CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED,
AND ALEXANDER HAMILTON WRITES
ABOUT IT IN THE FEDERALIST
PAPERS IN ’65 AND ’66, WHAT IT
MEANS IS THE IMPEACHMENT.
WOULD BE VIEWED AS ILLEGITIMATE
BY HALF THE COUNTRY, AND THAT’S
A DISASTER FOR THIS COUNTRY.
WE ARE ONE PEOPLE, AND WE’RE ALL
IN IT TOGETHER, BUT WHAT THIS
WILL DO IN THE END ON A PARTY
LINE VOTE IS JUST EXACERBATE THE
DIVISIONS AND INCREASE THE
HOSTILITY WHAT HAS BECOME TWO
WARRING TRIBES IN WASHINGTON,
D.C.
D.C. BUT NOWHERE IN THIS DOES THERE
SEEM TO BE ANY DEFERENCE TO THE
NATIONAL INTERESTS AND TO THE
OATH.
OATH. AND INTERESTINGLY, THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE COMING FORWARD AND
TESTIFYING AT GREAT RISK AND ARE
TALKING WITH ALARM ABOUT WHAT
THEY SAW, THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE
WHO HAVE SACRIFICED THE MOST.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
TAKEN THE OATH TO THE
CONSTITUTION AND HAVE BEEN
WOUNDED IN COMBAT, FOR EXAMPLE.
THAT HAVE SERVED ON THE FRONT
LINES IN HARM’S WAY.
AND THEY’RE STANDING UP FOR THE