E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 116 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION

Vol. 166 WASHINGTON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2020 No. 21 House of Representatives The House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on Monday, February 3, 2020, at 1:30 p.m. Senate FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2020

The Senate met at 1:15 p.m. and was THE JOURNAL Mr. Chief Justice, Senators, fellow called to order by the Chief Justice of The CHIEF JUSTICE. If there is no House managers, and counsel for the the United States. objection, the Journal of proceedings of President, I know I speak for my fellow f the trial is approved to date. managers, as well as counsel for the The Deputy Sergeant at Arms will President, in thanking you for your TRIAL OF DONALD J. TRUMP, make the proclamation. careful attention to the arguments PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED The Deputy Sergeant at Arms, Jen- that we have made over the course of STATES nifer Hemingway, made the proclama- many long days. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senate tion as follows: Today, we were greeted to yet an- will convene as a Court of Impeach- Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye! All persons are other development in the case when ment. commanded to keep silent, on pain of impris- the New York Times reported with a The Chaplain will lead us in prayer. onment, while the Senate of the United headline that says: PRAYER States is sitting for the trial of the articles Trump Told Bolton to Help His Ukraine The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- of impeachment exhibited by the House of Pressure Campaign, Book Says fered the following prayer: Representatives against Donald John Trump, The President asked his national security Let us pray. President of the United States. adviser last spring in front of other senior Eternal Lord God, you have summa- The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority advisers to pave the way for a meeting be- leader is recognized. tween Rudolph Giuliani and Ukraine’s new rized ethical behavior in a single sen- leader. tence: Do for others what you would ORDER OF PROCEDURE According to the New York Times: like them to do for you. Remind our Mr. MCCONNELL. For the informa- tion of all colleagues, we will take a More than two months before he asked Senators that they alone are account- Ukraine’s president to investigate his polit- able to You for their conduct. Lord, break about 2 hours in. ical opponents, President Trump directed help them to remember that they can’t The CHIEF JUSTICE. Pursuant to John R. Bolton, then his national security ignore You and get away with it for we the provisions of S. Res. 483, the Senate adviser, to help with his pressure campaign always reap what we sow. has provided up to 4 hours of argument to extract damaging information on Demo- Have Your way, Mighty God. You are by the parties, equally divided, on the crats from Ukrainian officials, according to the potter. Our Senators and we are the question of whether or not it shall be an unpublished manuscript by Mr. Bolton. in order to consider and debate under Mr. Trump gave the instruction, Mr. clay. Mold and make us after Your Bolton wrote, during an Oval Office con- will. Stand up, omnipotent God. the impeachment rules any motion to versation in early May that included the act- Stretch Yourself and let this Nation subpoena witnesses or documents. ing White House chief of staff, Mick and world know that You alone are Mr. Manager SCHIFF, are you a pro- Mulvaney, the president’s personal lawyer sovereign. ponent or opponent? Rudolph W. Giuliani and the White House I pray in the Name of Jesus. Amen. Mr. Manager SCHIFF. Proponent. counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, who is now leading The CHIEF JUSTICE. Please join me The CHIEF JUSTICE. Mr. Cipollone, the President’s impeachment defense. in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to are you a proponent or opponent? You will see in a few moments—and the flag. Mr. CIPOLLONE. Opponent. you will recall Mr. Cipollone sug- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The CHIEF JUSTICE. Mr. SCHIFF, gesting that the House managers were I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the you may proceed. concealing facts from this body. He United States of America, and to the Repub- Mr. Manager SCHIFF. Before I begin, said all the facts should come out. lic for which it stands, one nation under God, Mr. Chief Justice, the House managers Well, there is a new fact which indi- indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. will be reserving the balance of our cates that Mr. Cipollone was one of The CHIEF JUSTICE. Senators, time to respond to the argument of those who were in the loop—yet an- please be seated. counsel for the President. other reason why we ought to hear

∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.

S753

.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 21:48 Feb 12, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE S754 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 from witnesses. Just as we predicted— the House. The evidence in the record The House Republicans’ own expert and it didn’t require any great act of is sufficient. It is sufficient to convict witness in the House, Professor Turley, clairvoyance—the facts will come out. the President on both Articles of Im- said, if you could prove the President They will continue to come out. And peachment—more than sufficient. used our military aid to pressure the question before you today is wheth- But that is simply not how trials Ukraine to investigate a political rival er they will come out in time for you work. As any prosecutor or defense and interfere in our elections, it would to make a complete and informed judg- lawyer would tell you, when a case be an impeachable abuse of power. Sen- ment as to the guilt or innocence of goes to trial, both sides call witnesses ator GRAHAM, too, recognized that, if the President. and subpoena documents to bring be- such evidence existed, it could poten- Now, that Times article goes on to fore the jury. That happens every day tially change his mind on impeach- say: in courtrooms all across America. ment. Mr. Trump told Mr. Bolton to call There is no reason why this impeach- Well, we now have another witness— Volodymyr Zelensky, who had recently won ment trial should be any different. The a fact witness—who would reportedly election as president of Ukraine, to ensure commonsense practice is borne out of say exactly that. Ambassador Bolton’s Mr. Zelensky would meet with Mr. Giuliani, precedence. There has never been— new manuscript, which we will discuss who was planning a trip to Ukraine to dis- never before been—a full Senate im- in more detail in a moment, reportedly cuss the investigations that the President peachment trial without a single wit- confirms that the President told him in sought, in Mr. Bolton’s account. Mr. Bolton ness. In fact, you can see in the slide never made the call, he wrote. no uncertain terms—we are talking that in every one of the 15 prior im- about the former National Security ‘‘Never made the call.’’ Mr. Bolton peachment trials the Senate has called Advisor saying that the President told understood that this was wrong. He un- multiple witnesses. Today we ask you him in no uncertain terms—no aid to follow this body’s uniform prece- derstood that this was not policy. He until investigations, including the dence and your common sense. We urge understood that this was a domestic Bidens. political errand and refused to make you to vote in favor of subpoenaing For a week and a half, the President the call. witnesses and documents. has said no such evidence exists. They Now, I would like to address one The account in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript are wrong. If you have any doubt about question at the outset. There has been portrays the most senior White House advis- the evidence, the evidence is at your ers as early witnesses in the effort that they much back and forth about whether if fingertips. The question is: Will you let have sought to distance the President from. the House believes it has sufficient evi- dence to convict, which we do, why do all of us, including the American peo- Including the White House Counsel. ple, hear—simply hear—the evidence Over several pages— we need more witnesses and docu- ments? So I would like to be clear. The and make up their own minds? And you According to the Times— evidence presented over the past week can make up your own minds, but will Mr. Bolton laid out Mr. Trump’s fixation on and a half strongly supports a vote to we let the American people hear all of Ukraine and the president’s belief, based on convict the President. The evidence is the evidence? a mix of scattershot events, assertions and You will recall that Ambassador outright conspiracy theories, that Ukraine overwhelming. We have a mountain of evidence. It is direct, it is corroborated Bolton, the President’s former Na- tried to undermine his chances of winning tional Security Advisor, is one of the the presidency in 2016. by multiple sources, and it proves that witnesses we asked for last Tuesday. As he began to realize the extent and aims the President committed grave im- of the pressure campaign, Mr. Bolton began peachable offenses to cheat in the next We did not know, at the time, what he to object, he wrote in the book, affirming the election. would say. We didn’t know what kind testimony of a former National Security The evidence confirms that if left in of witness he would be, but Ambas- Council aide, Fiona Hill, who had said that office, President Trump will continue sador Bolton made clear that he was Mr. Bolton warned that Mr. Giuliani was ‘‘a to harm America’s national security. willing to testify and that he had rel- hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody evant, firsthand knowledge that had up.’’ He will continue to seek to corrupt the upcoming election. And he will under- not yet been heard. We urged—we ar- Now, as you might imagine, the mine—he will undermine—our democ- gued—that we all deserved to hear that President denies this. The President racy all to further his own personal evidence, but the President opposed said today: ‘‘I never instructed John gain. him. Now we know why—because John Bolton to set up a meeting for Rudy But this is a fundamental question Bolton could corroborate the rest of Giuliani, one of the greatest corruption that must be addressed: Is this a fair our evidence and confirm the Presi- fighters in America.’’ trial? Is this a fair trial? Is this a fair dent’s guilt. So here you have the President say- trial? Without the ability to call wit- So, today, Senators, we come before ing John Bolton is not telling the nesses and produce documents, the an- you, and we urge again—we argue— truth. Let’s find out. Let’s put John swer is clearly and unequivocally no. It that you let this witness and the other Bolton under oath. Let’s find out who was the President’s decision to contest key witnesses we have identified come is telling the truth. A trial is supposed the facts, and that is his right, but be- forward so you will have all of the in- to be a quest for the truth. Let’s not cause he has chosen to contest the formation available to you when you fear what we will learn. As Mr. facts, he shall not be heard to complain make this consequential decision. Cipollone said, let’s make sure that all that the House wishes to further prove If witnesses are not called here, these facts come out. his guilt to answer the questions he proceedings will be a trial in name Mrs. Manager DEMINGS. Mr. Chief would raise. He complains that few wit- only, and the American people clearly Justice, Senators, counsel for the nesses spoke directly to the President know a fair trial when they see one. President, last Tuesday, at the onset of about his misconduct beyond his damn- Large majorities of the American peo- this trial, we moved for Leader MCCON- ing conversations with Sondland and ple want to hear from witnesses in this NELL’s resolution to be amended to sub- Mulvaney. OK, let’s hear from others, trial, and they have a right to hear poena documents and witnesses from then—the witnesses the House wishes from witnesses in this trial. Let’s hear the outset. This body decided to hold to call directly to the President’s own from them. Let’s look them in the eye, the question over. You have now heard words, his own admissions of guilt, his gain their credibility, and hear what opening arguments from both sides. own confessions of responsibility. If they have to say about the President’s You have seen the evidence that the they did not, all the President’s men actions. House was able to collect. You have would be on their witness list, not ours. For the same reasons, this body heard about the documents and wit- These witnesses and the documents should grant our request to subpoena nesses President Trump blocked from their agencies produced tell the full documents, the documents that the the House’s impeachment inquiry. We story. And I believe that we are inter- President also blocked the House from have vigorously questioned both sides. ested in hearing the full story. You obtaining—documents from the White The President’s counsel has urged should want to hear it. More than that, House, the State Department, the you to decide this case and render your the American people—we know they DOD, and the OMB—that will complete verdict upon the record assembled by want to hear it. the story and provide the whole truth,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.002 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S755 whatever that may be. We ask that you has written a judgment on Articles of the critical evidence we have is the re- subpoena these documents so that you Impeachment without hearing from a sult of career officials who bravely can decide for yourselves. If you have single witness or receiving a single rel- came forward despite the President’s any doubt as to what occurred, let’s evant document from the President, obstruction, but those closest to the look at this additional evidence. whose conduct is on trial. And why? President—some may say, like in the To be clear, we are not asking you to How can we justify this break from musical ‘‘Hamilton,’’ those ‘‘in the track down every single document or precedent? How would we justify it? room when it happened’’—followed his to call every possible witness. We have For what reason would we break prece- instruction. carefully identified only four key wit- dent in these proceedings? The President does not dispute that nesses with direct knowledge, who can There are many compelling reasons these witnesses have information that speak to the specific issues that the beyond precedent that demand sub- is relevant to this trial, that these in- President has disputed, and we have poenas for witnesses and cases and doc- dividuals have personal and direct targeted key documents which we un- uments in this case. knowledge of the President’s actions derstand have already been collected. At this time, I yield to Manager GAR- and motivations and can provide the For example, at the State Department, CIA. very evidence he says now that we they have already been collected. Ms. Manager GARCIA of Texas. Mr. don’t have. This will not cause a substantial Chief Justice, President’s counsel, Sen- The President’s counsel alleged the delay. As I made clear last night, these ators, last week, I shared with you that House managers hid evidence from you. matters can be addressed in a single I was reflecting on my first days at a (Text of Videotape presentation:) week. As we made clear last night, school for baby judges. You all may re- Mr. Counsel CIPOLLONE. [B]ecause as these matters can be addressed in a call that. I mentioned to you that one house managers, really their goal should be single week. We know that from Presi- of the first things they told us was that to give you all of the facts because they’re dent Clinton’s case. There, the Senate we had to be good listeners and be pa- asking you to do something very, very con- voted to approve a motion for wit- tient, and you, as judges in this trial, sequential. nesses on January 27. The next day, it have certainly passed the test. Thank And ask yourself, ask yourself, given the established procedures for those depo- fact you heard today that they didn’t tell you for being good listeners and for you, who doesn’t want to talk about the sitions and adjourned as a Court of Im- being patient with us. It has been quite peachment until February 4. In that facts? Who doesn’t want to talk about the a long journey. facts? brief period, the parties took three We are here today to talk about the Impeachment shouldn’t be a shell game. depositions. The Senate then resumed other thing they told us in baby judge They should give you the facts. its proceedings by voting to accept the school, and that was that we had to Ms. Manager GARCIA of Texas. This deposition testimony into the RECORD. give all of the parties in front of us a is nice rhetoric, but it is simply incor- In this trial, too, let’s do the same. fair hearing—an opportunity to be rect. We should take a brief, 1-week break heard, an opportunity to cross-examine The President’s counsel cherry- for witness testimony and document witnesses, an opportunity to bring evi- picked misleading bits of evidence, collection, during which time the Sen- dence. That is what I want to talk to cited deposition transcripts of wit- ate can return to its normal business. you about today because, in terms of nesses who subsequently corrected The trial should not be allowed to be fundamental fairness, subpoenas by the their testimony in public hearings and different from every other impeach- Senate in this trial would mitigate the said the opposite and, in some cases, ment trial or any other kind of trial damage caused by the President’s simply left out the second half of wit- simply because the President doesn’t wholesale obstruction of the House’s want us to know the truth. The Amer- ness statements. inquiry. The House managers accurately pre- ican people—the American people we The President claims that there is no sented the relevant evidence to you. all represent, the American people we direct evidence of his wrongdoing de- We spent about 20 hours presenting the all love and care about—deserve to spite direct evidence to the contrary know the truth, and a fair trial re- facts and the evidence. The President’s and Ambassador Bolton’s offer to tes- quires it. counsel spent 4 hours focusing on the This is too important of a decision to tify to even more evidence in a trial. facts and the evidence, and that evi- be made without all of the relevant evi- Let’s not forget that the President is dence shows that the President is dence. Before turning to the specific arguing that there is no direct evidence guilty. But to the extent certain facts need for these witnesses and docu- while blocking all of us from getting were shown to you, let’s be very clear: ments, I want to make clear that we that direct evidence. We are not the ones hiding the facts. are not asking you, again, to break It is a remarkable position that they The House managers did not hide that new ground. We are asking quite the have taken. Quite frankly, never, as a evidence. President Trump hid the evi- opposite. We are asking you to simply lawyer or as a former judge, have I ever dence. That is why we are the ones follow the Senate’s unbroken precedent seen anything like this. For the first standing up here, asking you to not let and to do so in a manner that allows time in our history, President Trump the President silence these witnesses you to continue the Senate’s ordinary ordered his entire administration—his and hide these documents. business. entire administration—to defy every We don’t know precisely what the The Senate, in sitting as a Court of single impeachment subpoena. The witnesses will say or what the docu- Impeachment, has heard witness testi- Trump administration has not pro- ments would show, but we all deserve mony in every other—as we have said duced a single document in response to to hear the truth. And, more impor- earlier—15 impeachment trials in the the congressional subpoenas—not a sin- tantly, the American people deserve to history of the Republic. In fact, these gle page, nada. That has never hap- hear the truth. trials had an average of 33 witnesses, pened before. There is no legal privi- Never before has a President been and the Senate has repeatedly subpoe- lege to justify a blanket blocking of all put—put himself above the law and hid naed and received new documents while of these documents. We know that the facts of his offenses from the Amer- adjudicating cases of impeachment. there are more relevant documents. ican people like this one. We cannot let That makes sense. Under our Constitu- There is no dispute about that; it is this President be different. Quite sim- tion, the Senate does not just vote on uncontested. Witnesses have testified ply, the stakes are too high. impeachments, and it does not just de- in exceptional detail about these docu- Second, as this builds on what we bate them. Instead, the Senate is com- ments that exist that the President is have been arguing, the Senate requires manded by the Constitution to try all simply hiding. and should want a complete evi- cases of impeachment. Well, a trial re- President Trump’s blanket order of dentiary record before you vote on the quires witnesses. A trial requires docu- prohibiting the entire executive branch most sacred task that the Constitution ments. This is the American way, and from participating in the impeachment entrusts in every single one of you. this is the American story. investigation also extends to witnesses. I can respect that some of you have If the Senate denies our motions, it There are 12 in all who followed that deep beliefs that the removal of this would be the only time in history it order and refused to testify. Much of President would be divisive. Others,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.003 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S756 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 you may believe that allowing this The process is more than just the ul- Ambassador’s manuscript in the begin- President to remain in the Oval Office timate decision because the faith in ning, and Manager SCHIFF referenced it would be catastrophic to our Republic our institution depends on the percep- as well, but he said directly that the and our democracy. tion of a fair process. A vote against President told him this. But regardless of where you are, re- witnesses and documents undermines Now, the President has publicly gardless of where you land on the spec- that faith. lashed out in recent days at Ambas- trum, you should want a full and com- Senators, the American people want sador Bolton. He says that Ambassador plete record before you make a final a fair trial. The overwhelming major- Bolton is—what Ambassador Bolton is decision and to understand the full ity of Americans, three in four voters— saying is ‘‘nasty’’ and ‘‘untrue.’’ But story. It should not be about party af- three in four—as of this past Tuesday denials in 280 characters is not the filiation; it should be about seeing all believe that this trial should have wit- same as testimony under oath. We the evidence and voting your con- nesses. Now, there is not much that the know that. science based on all the relevant facts. American people agree on these days, Let’s put Ambassador Bolton under It should be about doing impartial jus- but they do agree on that, and they oath and ask him point blank: Did the tice. know what a fair trial is; that it in- President use $391 million of taxpayer Consider the harm done to our insti- volves witnesses and it involves evi- money—military aid intended for an tutions, our constitutional order, and dence. ally at war—to pressure Ukraine to in- the public faith in our democracy if the The American people deserve to vestigate his 2020 opponent? The stakes Senate chooses to close its eyes to know the facts about their President’s are too high not to. learning the full truth about the Presi- conduct and those around him, and I would like to briefly walk you dent’s misconduct. they deserve to have confidence in this through why Ambassador Bolton’s tes- How can the American people have process, confidence that you made the timony is essential to ensuring a fair confidence in the result of a trial with- right decision. In order to have that trial, also addressing some of the ques- out witnesses? confidence, the Senate must call rel- tions that you have asked in the past 2 Third, the President should want a evant witnesses and obtain relevant days. fair trial. He has repeatedly said that First, turning back to Ambassador documents withheld thus far by this publicly; that he wants a trial on the Bolton’s manuscript, the President’s President. The American people de- merits. He specifically said it. You saw counsel has said: No scheme existed. serve a fair trial. a clip that he wanted a fair trial in the And the President’s counsel has cited I now yield to my colleague Manager Senate, and that would have to be with repeated denials, public denials of CROW. witnesses that testify, including John President Trump’s inner circle about Mr. Manager CROW. Mr. Chief Jus- Bolton and Mick Mulvaney. He said Bolton’s allegations—none of them, of tice, Members of the Senate, counsel that he wants a complete and total ex- course, under oath. And as we know for the President, last week the House oneration. from the testimony of Ambassador managers argued for the testimony of Well, whatever you say about this Bolton, how important being sworn in four witnesses: Ambassador John trial, there cannot be a total—an exon- really is. eration without hearing from those Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, Robert Blair, But Ambassador Bolton, as the top witnesses because an acquittal on an and Michael Duffey. And during the national security aide, has direct in- incomplete record after a trial lacking presentations from both parties, it has sight into the President’s inner circle, witnesses and evidence will be no exon- become abundantly clear why the di- and he is willing to testify under oath eration. It will be no vindication—not rect testimony from those witnesses is whether ‘‘everyone was in the loop,’’ as for the President, not for this Cham- so critical, and new evidence continues he testified before. ber, and not for the American people. to underscore that importance. Ambassador Bolton reportedly knows And if the President is telling the So let’s start with John Bolton. The ‘‘new details about senior cabinet offi- truth and he did nothing wrong and the President’s counsel has repeatedly cials who have publicly tried to side- evidence would prove that, then we all stated that the President didn’t per- step involvement,’’ including Secretary know that he would be an enthusiastic sonally tell any of our witnesses that Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney’s knowledge supporter of subpoenas. He would be he linked the military aid to the inves- of the scheme. here probably himself, if he could, urg- tigations. Second, Ambassador Bolton has di- ing you to do subpoenas if he had infor- (Text of Videotape presentation:) rect knowledge of key events outside of mation that would prove he was totally PURPURA: There is simply no evidence the July 25 call that confirm the Presi- not in the wrong. If he is innocent, he anywhere that President Trump ever linked dent’s scheme. Remember, this is ex- should have nothing to hide. His coun- security assistance to any investigations[.] actly the type of direct evidence the sel should be the ones here asking [M]ost of the democrats[’] witnesses have President’s counsel say doesn’t exist. never spoken to the President at all let alone today to subpoena Bolton and about Ukraine security assistance. That is partly because they would like Mulvaney and others for testimony. ... you to believe that the July 25 call The President would be eager to have Not a single witness testified that the makes up all of the evidence of our the people closest to him to testify President himself said that there was any case. The call, of course, is just a part about his innocence. He would be eager connection between any investigations and of the large body of evidence that you to present the documents that show he security assistance, a presidential meeting, have heard about the past week, but it was concerned about corruption and or anything else. is a key part. But Ambassador Bolton burden-sharing. But the fact that he Mr. Manager CROW. Now, that is has critical insight into the President’s has so strenuously opposed the testi- simply not true, as the testimony of misconduct outside of this call, and mony of his closest advisers and all the Ambassador Sondland and the admis- you should hear it. documents speak volumes. sion of Mick Mulvaney make very Take, for example, the July 10 meet- You should issue subpoenas to the clear. ing with U.S. and Ukrainian officials at President so that the President can get The evidence before you proves that the White House. Dr. Hill testified dur- the fair trial that he wanted—but more the President not only linked the aid ing the meeting that Ambassador importantly, so the American people to the investigations, he also condi- Sondland said that he had a deal with can get the fair trial that they deserve. tioned both the White House meeting Mr. Mulvaney to schedule a White The American people deserve a fair and the aid on Ukraine’s announce- House meeting if Ukrainians did the in- trial. ment of the investigations. vestigations. According to Dr. Hill, I said at the onset of this trial that But if you want more, a witness to when Ambassador Bolton learned this, one of the most important decisions acknowledge that the President told he told her to go back to the NSC’s you would make at this moment in his- them directly that the aid was linked, Legal Advisor, John Eisenberg, and tell tory will not be whether you convict or a witness in front of you, then you him, ‘‘I am not a part of whatever drug acquit but whether the President and have the power to ask for it. deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cook- the American people will get a fair I mentioned this portion—there is a ing up on this.’’ We already have cor- trial. slide. I mentioned this portion of the roboration of Dr. Hill’s testimony from

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.005 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S757 other witnesses like Lieutenant Colo- The President has suggested that Mr. with the President himself, urged the nel Vindman. Giuliani wasn’t doing anything im- President that there was no legitimate And we have new corroboration from proper, and he was not involved in con- reason to withhold the aid. Ukraine too. Oleksandr Danylyuk, ducting policy. By their own admis- But if you are not sure, if you think President Zelensky’s former national sion, they said he wasn’t doing policy. this could in any way have been about security advisor, recently confirmed in So let’s ask John Bolton what Giuliani a legitimate policy reason, let’s ask an interview that the ‘‘roadmap [for was doing and whether the investiga- the National Security Advisor, who U.S.-Ukraine relations] should have tions were politically motivated or was in charge of that. If this was sim- been the substance but . . . [the inves- part of our foreign policy. ply a policy dispute, as the President tigations] were raised.’’ He would know. Dr. Hill testified argues, let’s ask John Bolton whether Danylyuk also explained why this that Ambassador Bolton said Mr. that is true. was so problematic. He raised concerns Giuliani was ‘‘a hand grenade,’’ which The President also argues that you that being ‘‘dragged into this internal he explained referred to ‘‘all of the cannot evaluate the President’s subjec- process . . . would be really bad for the statements that Mr. Giuliani was mak- tive intent—that the President can use country. And also, if there’s something ing publicly, that the investigations his power any way he feels is appro- that violates U.S. law, that’s up to the that he was promoting, that the story priate. That is, of course, not the case. U.S. to handle.’’ line he was promoting, the narrative he Whether his intent was corrupt is a Danylyuk elaborated that there were was promoting was going to backfire.’’ central part of this case, as it is in serious things to discuss at the meet- The narrative Mr. Giuliani was pro- nearly every criminal case in the coun- ing, but if instead Ukraine was dragged moting, of course, was asking Ukraine try. As a backup argument, however, into ‘‘internal politics, using our presi- to dig up dirt on Biden. the President’s counsel claims that we dent who was fresh on the job, inexpe- Dr. Hill also testified that Ambas- want you to read the President’s mind. rienced, that could just destroy every- sador Bolton was so concerned, he told (Text of Videotape presentation:) thing.’’ Dr. Hill and other members of the NSC Mr. Counsel SEKULOW. This entire im- Another key defense raised by the staff that ‘‘nobody should be meeting peachment process is about the House man- President has been that Ukraine felt no with Giuliani,’’ and that he was ‘‘close- agers’ insistence that they are able to read ly monitoring what Mr. Giuliani was everybody’s thoughts. They can read pressure, that these investigations are everybody’s intention . . . entirely proper. Well, here is Ukraine doing and the messaging he was send- Mr. Counsel SEKULOW. They think you saying the opposite of that. You know ing out.’’ can read minds. what else Danylyuk said in the inter- So let’s ask Ambassador Bolton: If Mr. PHILBIN. They want to tell you what view? ‘‘It was definitely John who I Mr. Giuliani wasn’t doing anything President Trump thought. trusted,’’ talking about Ambassador wrong, why were you so concerned Mr. Manager CROW. Now, juries, of Bolton. about his behavior that you directed course, are routinely asked to deter- So if you want to know whether your staff to have no part in this? If mine the defendant’s state of mind. Ukrainians felt pressure, call John Mr. Giuliani wasn’t trying to dig up That is central to almost every crimi- Bolton as a witness. He was trusted by dirt on Biden, why did you seem to nal case in the country. And it is dis- Ukraine, and he was there for these think that he could ‘‘blow everything ingenuous for the President’s counsel key meetings, and he was so concerned up’’? to argue that the defendant’s state of that he characterized the scheme as a Fourth, the President has said that mind in unknowable, that it requires a ‘‘drug deal’’ and urged Dr. Hill and oth- there was nothing wrong with the July mind reader, or is anything but the ers to report their concerns to NSC 25 call. But once again the evidence most common element of proof of any legal counsel, who reports to White suggests that Ambassador Bolton crime, constitutional or otherwise. But House Counsel Cipollone. would testify that the opposite is true. if you want more information, let’s ask So let’s ask Ambassador Bolton these According to witness testimony, Am- the President whether John Bolton can questions directly under oath: The bassador Bolton expressed concerns help fill in any gaps about his state of President says Ukraine felt no pres- even before the call that it would be ‘‘a mind. sure, that soliciting these investiga- disaster’’ because he thought there (Text of Videotape presentation:) tions wasn’t improper. Is that true? If could be ‘‘talk of investigations or President TRUMP. If you think about it, it is true, why is Ukraine publicly say- worse.’’ Now, if the President would he knows some of my thoughts. He knows ing that the talk of investigations have you believe that the call was per- what I think about leaders. could destroy everything? And if the fect, as he has repeatedly stated, why Mr. Manager CROW. This case is President’s administration thought don’t we find out? Because all of the about the President’s conduct in this was OK, why did you use the words evidence before you suggests otherwise. Ukraine. John Bolton knows a lot ‘‘drug deal?’’ We should ask him that. And Ukraine knows this is not the about that. Let’s hear from him. A fair Why did you urge your staff to report case. The call was not perfect. trial demands it. It is more than just concerns to lawyers? These are all Danylyuk is clear on this point. He ensuring a fair trial, it is about remem- questions that we can get the answers said: bering that in America, truth matters. to. One thing I can tell you that was clear As Mr. Bolton said on January 30, ‘‘the Third, the President has suggested from this [July 25] call is that the issue of idea that somehow testifying to what the House managers have not presented the investigations is an issue of concern for you think is true is destructive to the Trump. It was clear. any direct evidence about Mr. system of government we have, I think Giuliani’s role in the scheme. But if there is still any uncertainty, is very nearly the reverse, the exact re- (Text of Videotape presentation:) we must ask Ambassador Bolton: If verse of the truth.’’ there was no scheme, how did you As Manager SCHIFF started this out, Ms. Counsel RASKIN. In fact, it appears the House committee wasn’t particularly in- know President Trump would raise in- the truth continues to come out. terested in presenting you with any direct vestigations on the call? What made Again, in an article today, more infor- evidence of what Mayor Giuliani did or why you so concerned the call would be a mation. The truth will come out, and it he did it. Instead, they ask you to rely on ‘‘disaster’’? is continuing to. The question here be- hearsay, speculation, and assumption, evi- Fifth, the President’s main defense, fore this body is, What do you want dence that would be inadmissible in any once again, is that he withheld the your place in history to be? Do you court. military aid for legitimate reasons. want your place in history to be let’s Mr. Manager CROW. Well, once But the evidence doesn’t support that. hear the truth or that we don’t want to again, that is simply not true. But if You have heard a lot. The evidence hear it? you want more evidence, we know that doesn’t support that. Witness testi- Mr. Manager JEFFRIES. Given our Ambassador Bolton has direct evidence mony, emails, and other documents time constraints, we will now summa- of Mr. Giuliani’s role regarding confirm that Ambassador Bolton and rize the reasons why Mr. Mulvaney, Ukraine and expressed concerns about his subordinates on many occasions, Mr. Duffey, and Mr. Blair are also im- it. including through in-person meetings portant.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:20 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.006 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S758 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 Let’s turn first to Mr. Mulvaney. To Well, we know the answer—because Mr. Question. So the demand for an investiga- begin with, Mr. Mulvaney participated Mulvaney will confirm the corrupt tion into the Democrats was part of the rea- in meetings and discussions with Presi- shakedown scheme because Mr. son that he wanted to withhold funding to Ukraine. dent Trump at every single stage of Mulvaney was in the loop. Answer. The look back to what happened this scheme. We just talked about mo- Everyone was in the loop. in 2016— tives and intent. Well, if you want fur- As Ambassador Sondland summa- Question. The investigation into Demo- ther insight into the President’s mo- rized in his testimony on July 19, he crats— tives or intent, further direct evidence emailed several top administration of- Answer.—certainly was part of the thing of why he withheld the military aid ficials, including Mr. Mulvaney, that that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. That is absolutely appropriate. and the White House meeting, you President Zelensky was prepared to re- Question. But to be clear, what you just should call his Acting Chief of Staff, ceive POTUS’s call and would ‘‘assure’’ described is a quid pro quo. It is: Funding who has more access than anyone. President Trump that ‘‘he intends to will not flow unless the investigation into Mr. Mulvaney is important because run a fully transparent investigation the Democratic server happens as well. the President’s counsel continues to and will ‘turn over every stone.’’’ Answer. We do that all the time with for- argue—incorrectly—that our evidence Mr. Mulvaney replied: ‘‘I asked NSC eign policy. We were holding the money at the same time for—what was it? The North- is just hearsay and speculation. Faced to set it up for tomorrow.’’ ern Triangle countries. We were holding up with Ambassador Sondland and Mr. The above email seems clear. Ambas- aid to the Northern Triangle countries so Holmes saying this was all as clear as sador Sondland testified that it was that they would change their policies on im- two plus two equals four, the President clear; that he was confirming to Mr. migration. By the way, and this speaks to an says, ‘‘[T]hey are just guessing.’’ That Mulvaney that he had told President important—I’m sorry? This speaks to an im- is simply not true. The evidence is di- Zelensky he had to tell President portant point, because I heard this yesterday rect, the evidence is compelling and Trump on that July 25 call that he and I can never remember the gentleman would announce the investigation, whose testimony—Was it McKinney, the confirmed by many witnesses, corrobo- guy—was that his name? I don’t know him. rated by text messages, emails, and which he explained was a reference to He testified yesterday. And if you go—and if phone records. But if you want more one of the two phony political inves- you believe those reports—okay? Because evidence, if you want another firsthand tigations that President Trump want- we’ve not seen any transcripts of this. The account of why the aid was withheld ed. And Mr. Mulvaney replies that he only transcript I’ve seen was Sondland’s tes- for the undisputed quid pro quo for will set up the meeting—consistent timony this morning. If you read the news that White House meeting, let’s just with the agreement that Sondland ex- reports and you believe them—what did hear from Mick Mulvaney. plained he reached with Mr. Mulvaney McKinney say yesterday? Well, McKinney Over and over again, Ambassador said yesterday that he was really upset with to condition a meeting on the inves- the political influence in foreign policy. Sondland described to multiple wit- tigations. That was one of the reasons he was so upset nesses how Mr. Mulvaney was directly But if there is any uncertainty, if about this. And I have news for everybody: involved in the President’s scheme. there is any lingering questions about Get over it. There’s going to be political in- Here is some of that testimony. what this means, let’s just question fluence in foreign policy. (Text of Videotape presentation:) Mick Mulvaney under oath. Mr. Manager JEFFRIES. Is that Dr. HILL. So when I came in, Gordon Mr. Mulvaney also matters because what the Constitution requires—‘‘Get Sondland was basically saying, Look, we we have heard several questions from over it’’? Is that good enough for this have a deal here. There will be a meeting. I this distinguished body of Senators body, the world’s greatest deliberative have a deal here with Chief of Staff wanting to understand when or why or Mulvaney, there will be a meeting if the body—‘‘Get over it’’? Ukrainians open up or announce these inves- how the President ordered the hold on The President’s counsel can try to tigations into 2016 and Burisma. And I cut it the security aid. As the head of the Of- emphasize Mr. Mulvaney and his attor- off immediately there. fice of Management and Budget, Mr. neys’ efforts to walk back this state- Ambassador Bolton told me that: I am not Mulvaney has unique insights into all ment, but, as you have seen with your part of this whatever drug deal that of these questions—your questions. own eyes, the statement was unequivo- Mulvaney and Sondland are cooking up. Remember that email exchange be- cal. And even when given the chance in Mr. GOLDMAN. What did you understand tween Mr. Mulvaney and his Deputy, him to mean by the drug deal that Mulvaney real time on that day, on October 17, to and Sondland were cooking up? Rob Blair, on June 27, when Mulvaney deny a quid pro quo, he doubled down. Dr. HILL. I took it to mean investigations asked Blair about whether they could ‘‘Get over it,’’ he said. for a meeting. implement the hold and Blair re- But if you have any questions about Mr. GOLDMAN. Did you go to see the law- sponded that it could be done but that what the real answer is and where the yers? Congress would become ‘‘unhinged’’? truth lies, there is only one way to find Dr. HILL. I certainly did. Mr. Manager SCHIFF. What I want to ask It wasn’t just Congress. It was the out: Let’s all just question Mr. you about is, he makes reference in that independent Government Account- Mulvaney under oath during the Sen- drug deal to a drug deal cooked up by you ability Office that determined that the ate trial. After all, counsel said that and Mulvaney. It’s the reference to President’s hold violated the law. But, cross-examination was the greatest ve- Mulvaney that I want to ask you about. if the President’s counsel is going to hicle in the history of American juris- You’ve testified that Mulvaney was aware of argue—without evidence—that he with- prudence ever invented to ascertain the this quid pro quo, of this condition that the held the aid as part of U.S. foreign pol- truth—your standard. Ukrainians had to meet, that is, announcing icy, it seems to make sense that the Finally, I would like to touch briefly these public investigations to get the White on the importance of Mr. Blair and Mr. House meeting. Is that right? Senate should hear directly from Mr. Ambassador SONDLAND. Yeah. A lot of Mulvaney, who has firsthand knowl- Duffey to this case. people were aware of it . . . edge of exactly these facts. He said so The President’s lawyers have argued Mr. Manager SCHIFF. Including Mr. himself. that withholding foreign aid is entirely Mulvaney. (Text of Videotape presentation:) within his right as Commander in Ambassador SONDLAND. Correct. Mr. MULVANEY: Again, I was involved Chief; that this was a normal, ordinary Mr. Manager JEFFRIES. Remark- with the process by which the money was decision; and that this is all just one ably, the President is still denying the held up temporarily, okay? big policy disagreement. facts, even as they argue that if it is Mr. Manager JEFFRIES. Why We have proven exactly the opposite. true, it is still not impeachable. But if doesn’t President Trump want Mick This can’t be a policy disagreement be- the President did nothing wrong, if he Mulvaney to testify? Why? cause the President’s hold actually held up the aid because of so-called Perhaps here is why: went against U.S. policy. The hold was corruption or burden-sharing reasons, (Text of Videotape presentation:) undertaken outside of the normal channels by a President who, they he should want his chief of staff to Answer. Did he also mention to me in the come testify under oath before this dis- past that the corruption related to the DNC admit, was not conducting policy. The tinguished body and say just that. server, absolutely. No question about that. hold was concealed not only from Con- Why doesn’t he want Mulvaney to ap- But that’s it. And that’s why we held up the gress but from the President’s own offi- pear before the United States Senate? money. cials responsible for Ukraine policy,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.007 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S759 and, most importantly, the hold vio- the aid would prevent the Department President Zelensky, about scheduling lated the law. of Defense from spending the money an Oval Office meeting with President The President has the right to make before the end of the fiscal year, and Zelensky, about the President’s deci- policy, but he does not have the right second, the hold was potentially ille- sion to hold security assistance, about to break the law and coerce an ally gal, as turned out to be the case. communications among his top aides, into helping him cheat in our free and By August 9, DOD told Mr. Duffey di- and about concerns raised by public of- fair elections, and he doesn’t have a rectly that DOD—the Department of ficials with legal counsel. We have right to use hundreds of millions of Defense—could no longer support the heard about Ambassador Bolton’s dollars in taxpayer funds as leverage to Office of Management and Budget’s handwritten notes and book manu- get political dirt on an American cit- claims that the hold would ‘‘not pre- script and Lieutenant Colonel izen who happens to be his political op- clude timely execution’’ of the aid for Vindman’s Presidential policy memo- ponent. Ukraine, our vulnerable ally at war randum. We know of reports about a But if you remain unsure about all of with Russian-backed separatists. Yet, number of emails in early August try- this, who better to ask than Mr. Blair as Mr. Duffey reportedly told Ms. ing to create after-the-fact justifica- or Mr. Duffey? They oversaw and exe- McCusker at the Department of De- tions for the hold, but we haven’t seen cuted the process of withholding the fense on August 30, there was a ‘‘clear any of them. They are at the White aid. They can tell us exactly how unre- direction from POTUS to continue to House being hidden by the President. I lated to business as usual this whole hold’’—clear direction from the Presi- think it is a coverup. shakedown scheme was when it was un- dent of the United States to continue Documents are also at the State De- derway. They can testify about why the hold. So how did Mr. Duffey under- partment, records about the recall of the aid was withheld and whether there stand the ‘‘clear direction’’ to continue Ambassador Yovanovitch, about was any legitimate explanation for the hold? Why is the President claim- Giuliani’s efforts for the President, withholding it. Some of you have asked ing that this wasn’t unlawful when about concerns raised about the hold, that very question. DOD—the Department of Defense—re- about the Ukrainian reaction to the Multiple officials—including Ambas- peatedly warned his administration hold and when exactly they learned sador Sondland, Ambassador Taylor, that it was? Wouldn’t we all like to ask about it, and about negotiations with David Holmes, Lieutenant Colonel Mr. Duffey these questions? the Ukrainians for an Oval Office meet- Vindman, Jennifer Williams, and Mark Finally, here is another reason why ing. We know about Ambassador Tay- Sandy—all testified that they were we know this was not business as lor’s first-person cable and notes and never given a credible explanation for usual. On July 29, Mr. Duffey—a polit- Mr. Kent’s memos to file. We know the hold. So let’s ask Mr. Blair and ical appointee with zero relevant expe- about Mr. Sondland’s emails with let’s ask Mr. Duffey if this happens all rience—abruptly seized responsibility Pompeo and Brechbuhl and Mulvaney the time, as Mick Mulvaney suggests. for withholding the aid from Mark and Perry, but we haven’t seen them. Why, at this time, in connection with Sandy, a career Office of Management They are sitting in the State Depart- this scheme, were all of those witnesses and Budget official—seized the respon- ment. left in the dark? sibility from a career official. Mr. DOD and OMB also have records— Despite the President’s refusal to Duffey provided no credible expla- records about President Trump’s hold produce a single document and to nation for that decision. on military aid to Ukraine, about the produce a shred of information in this Mr. Sandy testified that nothing like justification for the hold, about hiding impeachment inquiry undertaken in that had ever happened in his entire the hold from Congress and trying to the House, his administration did governmental career. Let’s think about justify the hold after the fact, and produce 192 pages of Ukraine-related that. If this is as routine as the Presi- about why the hold was lifted, but we email records in Freedom of Informa- dent claims, why is a career official haven’t seen them. They are at DOD tion Act lawsuits, albeit in heavily re- saying he has never seen anything like and OMB. Why haven’t we seen them? dacted form. These documents confirm this happen before? Mr. Duffey knows Because the President directed all his Mr. Duffey’s central role in executing why. Shouldn’t we just take the time agencies not to produce them. the hold. He is on nearly every single to ask him? This trial should not reward the impeachment release—nearly every The American people deserve a fair President’s really unprecedented ob- single email. trial. The Constitution deserves a fair struction by allowing him to control Here is an important email from that trial. The President deserves a fair what evidence you see and what will production. trial. A fair trial means witnesses. A remain hidden. You should ask for Just 90 minutes after the July 25 call, fair trial means documents. A fair trial these documents on behalf of the Mr. Duffey emailed officials at the De- means evidence. No one is above the American people, and you should ask partment of Defense that they should law. for these documents to get the truth ‘‘hold off on any additional DOD obli- I yield to my distinguished colleague, yourself. gations of these funds.’’ Mr. Duffey Manager LOFGREN. Now, let’s come back to the issue of added that the request was ‘‘sensitive’’ Ms. Manager LOFGREN. Mr. Chief delay, since the President’s lawyers and that they should keep this infor- Justice and Senators, it is not just have suggested that having witnesses mation ‘‘closely held.’’ The timing is about hearing from witnesses; you need and documents would make this trial important because if the aid wasn’t documents. The documents don’t lie. take too long. There will be lengthy linked to the July 25 call and if it There are specific documents relevant court battles, they say. The President wasn’t related, why the sensitive, to this impeachment trial in the cus- might even invoke executive privilege closely held request made within 2 tody of the White House, OMB, DOD, for the very first time in this entire hours of that call? Let’s just ask Mr. and the State Department, and the impeachment process. It would be bet- Duffey. President has hidden them from us. ter, we are told, to skip straight to the Mr. Duffey and Mr. Blair can testify I am not going to go through each final verdict, to break from centuries about the concerns raised by DOD to category again in detail, but here are of precedent and end this trial without the Office of Management and Budget some observations. hearing from a single witness and with- about the illegality of the hold and This is, of course, an impeachment out reviewing a single document that why it remained in place even after case against the President of the the President ordered hidden. Respect- DOD warned the administration that it United States. Nothing could be more fully, that shouldn’t happen. would violate the Impoundment Con- important. And the most important House managers aren’t interested in trol Act. documents—documents that go di- delaying these proceedings. We are in- Now, the President, of course, has rectly to who knew what when—are terested in the full truth; in a trial disputed this fact, but we have dem- being held by the executive branch. that is fair to the parties and to the onstrated that OMB was warned re- Many of these records are at the American people; in the facts that the peatedly by DOD officials of two White House. The White House has President’s counsel agrees are so crit- things: first, continuing to withhold records about the phone calls with ical to this trial. It is why we said we

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.009 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S760 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 won’t go to court; we will follow all the President’s legal rights or cause undue two phone calls with President rulings of the Chief Justice. We can get delay. Zelensky. All 17 witnesses testified the witness depositions done in a week. Here is why. Let’s focus on John about the President’s conduct regard- In fact, I know we can because if you, Bolton, since this week’s revelations ing Ukraine. We aren’t interested in the Senators, order it, that is the law. confirm the importance of his testi- asking about anything other than You have the sole power to try im- mony. Ukraine. That is simply a bogus argu- peachments. First, as a private citizen, John ment. If questions or objections come up, Bolton is fully protected by the First The Constitution uses the words including objections based on executive Amendment if he wants to testify. ‘‘sole power’’ only twice: first, when it privilege, the Senate itself and the There is no basis for imposing prior re- gives the House sole power to impeach; Chief Justice, in the first instance, can straint for censoring him just because and, second, article 1, section 3, where resolve them. We aren’t suggesting some of his testimony could include it gives the Senate sole power to try that the President waive executive conversations with the President. That impeachments. privilege. We simply suggest that the is commonplace. As long as his testi- Here is what it says: Chief Justice can resolve issues related mony isn’t classified, it is shielded by The Senate shall have the sole Power to to any assertion of executive privilege. the free speech clause of the First try all Impeachments. . . . When the Presi- As the Supreme Court recognized in Amendment. dent of the United States is tried, the Chief the case of Judge Walter Nixon, judges Ambassador Bolton has written a Justice shall preside. will stay out of disputes over how the book. It is inconceivable that he is for- Now, I think that provision in the Senate exercises its sole power to try bidden from telling the U.S. Senate, Constitution means something. It is up impeachments. That ensures there will sitting as a High Court of Impeach- to the Senate to decide how to try this be no unnecessary delay, and it is why ment, information that shortly will be impeachment with fairness, with wit- we propose we suspend the trial for 1 in print. nesses, and documents. Privileges asserted can be decided week, and that during that time, you If the President did attempt to in- using the process that you devise. That go back to business as usual. While the voke executive privilege, he would fail. is not unconstitutional. It is what the trial is suspended, we will take witness It is true for separate reasons. First, claims of executive privilege always in- Constitution provides. depositions and review the documents You have the power. You decide. volve a balancing of interests. The Su- that are provided at your direction. Please decide for a fair trial that would preme Court confirmed in U.S. v. The four witnesses you should hear yield the truth and serve our Constitu- Nixon—the Nixon tapes case—that ex- from are readily available. Ambassador tion and the American people. Bolton has already said he will appear. ecutive privilege can be overcome by a I yield now to Manager SCHIFF. We can and would move quickly to de- need for evidence in a criminal trial. Mr. Manager SCHIFF. Senators, be- pose these witnesses within a week of That is even more true here in an im- fore we yield to counsel for the Presi- the issuance of subpoenas. The docu- peachment trial of the President of the dent, I would like to take a moment by ments, too, are ready to be produced. United States, which is probably the talking about what I think is at stake We are ready to review them quickly most important interest under the here. A ‘‘no’’ vote on the question be- and to present additional evidence. Constitution. It would certainly out- fore you will have long-lasting and Meanwhile, the Senate can continue weigh any claim of privilege. harmful consequences long after this going about its important legislative Precedent confirms the point. To impeachment trial is over. work, as it did during the depositions name just a few, National Security Ad- We agree with the President’s coun- in the Clinton impeachment trial. visors for President Carter, Zbigniew sel on this much: This will set a new The President’s opposition to this Brzezinski; President Clinton, Samuel precedent. This will be cited in im- suggestion says a lot. The President is Berger; President George W. Bush, peachment trials from this point to the the architect of the very delay he Condoleezza Rice; and President end of history. You can bet in every warns against. He could easily avoid it. Obama, Susan Rice, testified in con- impeachment that follows, whether it He could move things along. He could gressional investigations. These advi- is a Presidential impeachment or the stop trying to silence witnesses and sors discussed their communications impeachment of a judge, if that judge hide evidence. I think he is afraid the with top government officials, includ- or President believes that it is to his or truth will come out. He hopes his ing the Presidents they served. There her advantage that there shall be a threats of continued delay, however is no reason why all of these officials trial with no witnesses, they will cite unjustified, will cause you to throw up could testify in the normal course of the case of Donald J. Trump. They will your hands and give up on a fair trial. events and hearings, but Ambassador make the argument that you can adju- Please don’t give up. This is too impor- Bolton, a former official, couldn’t tes- dicate the guilt or innocence of the tant for our democracy. tify in the most important trial there party who is accused without hearing A decision to forgo witnesses and could possibly be. from a single witness, without review- documents at this trial would be a big The second reason is the President ing a single document. And I would departure from Senate precedent. When waived any claim of executive privilege submit that will be a very dangerous the Senate investigated Watergate, it about Ambassador Bolton’s testimony. and long-lasting precedent that we will heard from the highest White House of- All 17 witnesses testified in the House all have to live with. ficials. That happened because a bipar- about these matters without any asser- President Trump’s wholesale obstruc- tisan majority of the Senate insisted. tion of privilege by the President. tion of Congress strikes at the heart of We got to the truth then because the President Trump, as well as his law- our Constitution and democratic sys- Senate came together and put a fair yers and senior officials, have publicly tem of separation of powers. Make no proceeding above party loyalty. discussed and tweeted about these mistake. The President’s actions in We should all want the truth, and so issues at some length. The President this impeachment inquiry constitute we ask you to do it again—that you put has also directly denied reports about an attack on congressional oversight aside any politics, party loyalty. Be- what Ambassador Bolton will say in on the coequal nature of this branch of lieve in your President, which we un- his forthcoming book. Under these cir- government, not just on the House but derstand and sympathize with, but sub- cumstances, the President cannot be on the Senate’s ability, as well, to con- poena the documents and the witnesses allowed to tell his version of his story duct its oversight, to serve as a check necessary to make this a fair trial, to to the public while using executive and balance on this President and hear and see the evidence you need to privilege to silence a key witness who every President that follows. impartially administer justice. would contradict him. You shouldn’t If the Senate allows President Now, there has been a lot of discus- let the President escape responsibility Trump’s obstruction to stand, it effec- sion of executive privilege during this only to later see clearly what happened tively nullifies the impeachment trial. Even if the President asserts ex- in Ambassador Bolton’s book. power. It will allow future Presidents ecutive privilege—something he has There are no national security risks to decide whether they want their mis- not yet done—it wouldn’t harm the here. The President has declassified the conduct to be investigated or not,

VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:24 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.010 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S761 whether they would like to participate to the House. Hear the witnesses they we can agree we had a fair trial. At in an impeachment investigation or refuse to make available to the House, least we can agree that the House had not. That is a power of the Congress. just as this body has done in every sin- a fair opportunity to present its case. That is not a power of the President. gle impeachment trial until now. At least we can agree that the Presi- By permitting a categorical obstruc- Let the American people know that dent had a fair opportunity to present tion, it turns the impeachment power you understand they deserve the truth. their case—if we have a fair trial. And against itself. Let them know you still care about the we can disagree about the verdict, but How we respond to this unprece- truth, that the truth still matters. we can all agree the system worked as dented obstruction will shape future Though much divides us, on this we it was intended. We had a fair trial, debates between our branches of gov- should agree: A trial, stripped of all its and we reached a decision. ernment and the executive forever. And trappings, should be a search for the Rob this country of a fair trial, and it is not just impeachment. The ability truth, and that requires witnesses and there can be no representation that the of Congress to conduct meaningful and testimony. verdict has any meaning. How could it, probing oversight—oversight that, by Now, you may have seen just this afternoon, the President’s former Chief if the result is baked in by the process? its nature, is intended to be a check Assure the American people, whatever and balance on the awesome powers of of Staff, General Kelly, said ‘‘a Senate trial without witnesses is a job only the result may be, that at least they the executive branch—hinges on our got a fair shake. willingness to call witnesses and com- half done.’’ A trial without witnesses is pel documents that President Trump is only half a trial. Well, I have to say I There is a reason why the American hiding with no valid justification, no can’t agree. A trial without witnesses people want to hear from witnesses, precedential support. is no trial at all. You either have a and it is not just about curiosity. It is If we tell the President, effectively, trial or you don’t. And if you are going because they recognize that in every ‘‘You can act corruptly, you can abuse to have a real trial, you need to hear courtroom in America that is just what the powers of your office to coerce a from the people who have firsthand in- happens. And if it doesn’t happen here, foreign government to helping you formation. Now, we have presented the government has become arbitrary; cheat in an election by withholding some of them to you, but you know as there is one person who is entitled to a military aid, and when you are caught, well as we there are others that you different standard, and that is the you can further abuse your powers by should hear from. President of the United States. And concealing the evidence of your wrong- Let me close this portion with words, that is the last thing the Founders in- doing,’’ the President becomes unac- I think, more powerful than General tended. countable to anyone. Our government Kelly’s. They come from John Adams, Mr. Chief Justice, we reserve the bal- is no longer a government with three who in 1776 wrote: Together with the ance of our time. coequal branches. The President effec- right to vote, those who wrote our Con- The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you, tively, for all intents and purposes, be- stitution considered the right to trial Mr. Manager. by jury ‘‘the heart and lungs, the main- comes above the law. The majority leader is recognized. This is, of course, the opposite of spring and the center wheel’’ of our lib- what the Framers intended. They pur- erties, without which ‘‘the body must RECESS posely entrusted the power of impeach- die, the watch must run down, the gov- Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, ment to the legislative branch so that ernment must become arbitrary.’’ I request that the Senate take a 15- it may protect the American people Now, what does that mean? Without minute recess. from a President who believes that he a fair trial, the government must be- The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- can do whatever he wants. come arbitrary. Now, of course, he is tion, so ordered. So we must consider how our actions talking about the right of an average will reverberate for decades to come citizen to a trial by jury. There being no objection, at 2:49 and the impact they will have on the Well, if in courtrooms all across p.m., the Senate, sitting as a Court of functioning of our democracy. And as America, when someone is tried but Impeachment, recessed until 3:40 p.m.; we consider this critical decision, it is they are a person of influence and whereupon the Senate reassembled important to remember that no matter power, they can declare at the begin- when called to order by the CHIEF JUS- what you decide to do here, whether ning of the trial ‘‘If the government’s TICE. you decide to hear witnesses and rel- case is so good, let them prove it with- The CHIEF JUSTICE. Please be seat- evant testimony, the facts will come out witnesses’’; if people of power and ed. out in the end. Even over the course of influence can insist to the judge that We are ready to hear the presen- this trial, we have seen so many addi- the House, that the prosecutors, that tation from counsel for the President. tional facts come to light. The facts the government, that the people must Mr. Counsel PHILBIN. Mr. Chief Jus- will come out. In all of their horror, prove their case without witnesses or tice, Members of the Senate, the House they will come out, and there are more documents, a right reserved only for managers have said throughout their court documents and deadlines under the powerful—because, you know, only presentation and throughout all of the the Freedom of Information Act. Wit- Donald Trump—only Donald Trump, of proceedings here again and again that nesses will tell their stories in future any defendant in America can insist on you can’t have a trial without wit- congressional hearings, in books, and a trial with no witnesses—if that nesses and documents, as if it is just in the media. This week has made that should be true in courts throughout the that simple. If you are going to have a abundantly clear. land, then, as Adams wrote, the gov- The documents the President is hid- ernment becomes arbitrary because trial, there have to be new witnesses ing will come out. The witnesses the whether you have a fair trial or no and documents. But it is not that sim- President is concealing will tell their trial at all depends on whether you are ple. It is really a trope that is being stories. And we will be asked why we a person of power and influence like used to disguise the real issues, the didn’t want to hear that information Donald J. Trump. real decisions that you would be mak- when we had the chance, when we The body will die. The clock will run ing on this decision about witnesses, could consider its relevance and impor- down. And our government becomes ar- because there is a lot more at stake. tance in making this most serious deci- bitrary. The importance of a fair trial Let me unpack that and explain what sion. What answer shall we give if we here is not less than in every court- is really at stake there. do not pursue the truth now, if we room in America; it is greater than in The first is this idea that, if you allow it to remain hidden until it is too any courtroom in America because we come to trial, you have to always go to late to consider on the profound issue set the example for America. witnesses, have new witnesses come in, of the President’s innocence or guilt? I said at the outset, and I will repeat but that is not true. In every legal sys- What we are asking you to do on be- again: Your decision on guilt or inno- tem and in our legal systems on both half of the American people is simple: cence is important, but it is not the the civil and criminal sides, there is a Use your sole power to try this im- most important decision. If we have a way to decide right up front, in some peachment by holding a fair trial. Get fair trial, however that trial turns out, quick way, whether there is really a the documents they refuse to provide whatever your verdict may be, at least triable issue, whether you really need

VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:09 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE S762 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 to go to all the trouble of calling in you are going to have a trial, there just John Bolton, and they didn’t go new witnesses and having more evi- has to be witnesses,’’ as if the most or- through the process. When other wit- dence in something like that. There is dinary thing is you get to trial and nesses were subpoenaed—when Dr. not here. There is no need for that be- then start subpoenaing new witnesses Kupperman—Charlie Kupperman—went cause these Articles of Impeachment, and documents. That is not true either, to court, they withdrew the subpoena. on their face, are defective, and we and we pointed this out. And now to say that ‘‘Well, fairness de- have explained that. Let me start with In the regular courts, the way things mands that this body has to do all that the second article, the obstruction work is you have got to do a lot of work’’—that sets a new precedent, as charge. work preparing a trial—called dis- well, and it changes—it would change We have explained that that charge covery—to find out about witnesses for all of the future the relationship be- is really trying to say that it is an im- and depose them and find out about tween the House and the Senate in im- peachable offense for the President to documents before you get to trial. You peachment inquiries. It would mean defend the separation of powers. That can’t show up the day of trial and say: that the Senate has to become the in- can’t be right. It is also the case that Oh, Your Honor, actually, we are not vestigatory body. no witnesses are going to say anything ready. We didn’t subpoena John Bolton And the principles that they assert— that makes any difference to the sec- or witness X or witness Y, and now we they did a process that wasn’t fair. ond Article of Impeachment. That all want to subpoena that witness. Now we They did a process that was arbitrary, has to do with the validity of the want to do discovery. that arbitrarily denied the President grounds the President asserted, the And why does that matter here? Be- rights. They did a process that fact that he asserted longstanding con- cause here, to show up not having done wouldn’t allow witnesses, and then stitutional prerogatives of the execu- the work and to expect that work to be they came here on the first night—re- tive branch in specific ways to resist done in the Senate, by this body, has member when we were all here until 2 specific deficiencies in the subpoenas grave consequences for the institu- o’clock—and in very belligerent terms that were issued. No fact witness is tional interests of this body, and it sets said to the Members of this body: You going to come in and say anything that a precedent—really sets an important are on trial. It will be treachery if you relates in any way to that. It is not precedent for two bodies—for the Sen- don’t do what the House managers say. going to make any difference. ate and for the House—because what That is not right. When it was their On the first Article of Impeachment, the Senate accepts as an impeachment errors, when they were arbitrary and that, too, is defective on its face. We coming from the House determines not they didn’t provide fairness, they can’t have explained. We heard it again just precedent for the Senate but, real- project that onto this body to try to today here. They have this subjective ly, precedent for the House in the fu- say that you have to make up for their theory of impeachment that will show ture as well. errors, and if you don’t, the fault lies abuse of power by focusing just on the If the procedures used in the House here. President’s subjective motives, and to bring this proceeding here to this Now, they also suggest that it is not they said again today, here, that the stage are accepted, if the Senate says going to take a long time, that they way they can show the President did ‘‘Yes, we will start calling new wit- only want a few witnesses. But, of something wrong is that he defied the nesses because you didn’t get the job course, if things are opened up to wit- foreign policy of the United States. I done in whatever process you used to nesses and it is going to be fair, it is talked about that before, this theory get it here,’’ then that becomes the not just one side; it is not just the wit- that he defied the agencies within the new normal. And that is important in a nesses that they would want. The executive branch. He wasn’t following couple of ways. President would have to be permitted the policy of the executive branch. One is, as we have pointed out, the to have witnesses. That is not a constitutionally coherent totally unprecedented process that was And with all respect, Mr. Chief Jus- statement. used in the House that violated all no- tice, the idea that if a subpoena is sent The theory of abuse of power that tions of due process. There are prece- to a senior adviser to the President and they have framed in the first Article of dents going back 150 years in the the President determines that he will Impeachment will do grave damage to House, ensuring that someone accused stand by the principle of immunity the separation of powers under our in an impeachment hearing in the that has been asserted by virtually Constitution because it would become House has due process rights to be rep- every President since Nixon, that that so malleable that they could pour into resented by counsel, to cross-examine will just be resolved by the Senate it anything they want to find illicit witnesses, to be able to present evi- right here, whether or not that privi- motives for some perfectly permissible dence. They didn’t allow the President lege exists, by the Chief Justice sitting action. It becomes so malleable that it to do that, and if this body says that is as the Presiding Officer—that doesn’t is no different than maladministra- OK, then that becomes the new normal. make sense. That is not the way it tion—the exact ground that the Fram- And they stand up here, the House works. ers rejected during the Constitutional managers, and say this body will be un- The Senate, even when the Chief Jus- Convention. fair if this body doesn’t call the wit- tice is the Presiding Officer here, can’t The Constitution defines specific of- nesses. They talk about fairness. Where unilaterally decide the privileges of the fenses. It limits and constrains the im- was the fairness in that proceeding in executive branch. That dispute would peachment power. the House? have to be resolved in another way, and Now, there is also the fact that we And Manager SCHIFF says that things it could involve litigation, and it could actually heard from a lot of witnesses. would be arbitrary if you don’t do what take a lot of time. We have heard from a lot of witnesses they said and call the witnesses they So the idea that this will all be done in the proceedings so far. You have want. Well, wasn’t it arbitrary in the quickly if everyone just does what the heard 192 video clips, by our count, House when they wouldn’t allow the House managers say is not realistic. It from 13 different witnesses. There were President to be represented by counsel, is not the way that the process would 17 witnesses deposed in closed hearings wouldn’t allow the President to call actually have to play out in accord in the House, and 12 of them testified witnesses? There was no precedent in a with the Constitution, and that has an- again in open hearings. You have got Presidential impeachment inquiry to other significant consequence, again all of those transcripts, so you can see have open hearings where the Presi- affecting this institution as a prece- the witnesses’ testimony there. The dent and his counsel were excluded. dent going forward because what it key portions have been played for you It also would set a precedent to allow suggests—the new normal that would on the screens. And you have got over a package, a proceeding, from the be created then—is kind of an express 28,000 pages of documents and tran- House to come here that the House path for precisely the sort of impeach- scripts. You have got a lot of evidence managers say ‘‘Well, now we need new ment that the Framers most feared. already. witnesses; we haven’t done all the The Framers recognized that im- But there is another principle that work,’’ and it is witnesses they didn’t peachments could be done for illegit- they overlook when they say ‘‘Well, if even try to get. They didn’t subpoena imate reasons. They recognized that

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:42 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.014 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S763 there could be partisan impeachments. It is not the process that the Framers have the right to call witnesses and to And if this is the new normal, this is had in mind, and it is not something cross-examine Mr. Volker. George the very epitome of a partisan im- the Senate should condone in this case. Kent, the Deputy Assistant Secretary peachment. There was bipartisan oppo- The Senate is not here to do the inves- of State for the Bureau of European sition to it in the House, and it was tigatory work that the House didn’t do. and Eurasian Affairs, you saw his testi- rushed through with unfair proce- Where there has been a process that mony. They called him. If we have wit- dures—78 days total of inquiry. Think denied all due process, that produced a nesses, we have the right to call that about that. In Nixon there had been in- record that can’t be relied upon, the re- witness and to cross-examine Deputy vestigating committees, and there was action from this body should be to re- Assistant Secretary Kent. a special prosecutor long before the ject the Articles of Impeachment, not The former United States Ambas- House Judiciary Committee started its to condone and put its imprimatur on sador to Ukraine, Ambassador investigation. the way the proceedings were handled Yovanovitch, they called her. You saw In Clinton there was a special coun- in the House and not to prolong mat- that testimony. We did not have the sel—an independent counsel for the ters further by trying to redo work opportunity to cross-examine her. If we better part of a year before the House that the House failed to do by not seek- have witnesses, we would have to call Judiciary Committee even started ing evidence and not doing a fair and her. hearings. legitimate process to bring the Articles Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Sec- Everything from start to finish in of Impeachment here. retary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, this case, from September 24 until the Thank you. and Eurasia, they called her. You saw Articles of Impeachment were consid- The CHIEF JUSTICE. Mr. Sekulow. her witness testimony right here. We ered in the Judiciary Committee, was Mr. Counsel SEKULOW. Mr. Chief did not have the opportunity to cross- done in 78 days—in 78 days—and for 71 Justice, Members of the Senate, over a examine her. We would have to be of them, the President was entirely 7-day period you did hear evidence. You given that opportunity. locked out. heard evidence from 13 different wit- These are the witnesses against the So the new normal would be nesses, 192 video clips, and as my col- President. Laura Cooper, Deputy Sec- slapdash: Get it done quickly, unfair league the Deputy White House Coun- retary of Defense for Russia and Eur- procedures in the House to impeach a sel said, over 28,000 pages of documents. asia—again, the same thing. President; then bring it to the Senate, You heard testimony from Gordon David Hale, the Under Secretary of and then all the real work of investiga- Sondland. He is the United States Am- State for Political Affairs. He was tion and discovery is going to have to bassador to the European Union. You called by the House. You saw his testi- take place with that impeachment heard that testimony. He testified in mony. We never had the opportunity to hanging over the President’s head, and the House proceedings. I did not have cross-examine him. If we have wit- that is a particular thing the Framers an opportunity to cross-examine him. nesses, we have to have the oppor- also were concerned about. I mentioned If we get witnesses, I have to have that tunity to do that. this the other day. There were other witnesses that were In Federalist No. 65 Hamilton warned opportunity. specifically about what he called—I am William Taylor, former Acting called where you saw their testimony quoting—‘‘the injury to the innocent, United States Ambassador to Ukraine, or heard their testimony or it was re- from the procrastinated determination testified. You heard his testimony. We ferred to. Catherine Croft, Special Ad- of the charges which might be brought didn’t get the opportunity to cross-ex- viser for Ukraine negotiation, Depart- against them’’ because he understood amine him. He would be called. ment of State; Mark Sandy, the Dep- that if an impeachment charge from Tim Morrison, the former senior di- uty Associate Director for National Se- the House wasn’t resolved quickly, if it rector for Europe and Russia of the Na- curity Programs; and Christopher An- was hanging over the President’s head, tional Security Council. You saw his derson, Special Adviser for Ukraine Ne- that in itself would be a problem. And testimony. They put it up. We didn’t gotiations, Department of State—you that is why they structured the im- get an opportunity—we did not have an heard their testimony referred to. We peachment process so that the Senate opportunity to cross-examine him. did not have the opportunity to cross- could be able to swiftly determine im- Jennifer Williams, special adviser on examine them. peachments that were brought. That Europe and Russia for Vice President So this isn’t going to happen, if wit- also suggests that is why there is a sys- MIKE PENCE. You saw her testimony. nesses are called in a week. Now, that tem for having thorough investiga- They put it up. I did not have the op- is just the witnesses that have been tions, a thorough process done in the portunity to cross-examine her. If we produced that you have seen by the House. call witnesses, we would have to have House managers. And Hamilton explained that delay that opportunity. You are being called upon to make after the impeachment would afford an David Holmes, political counsel to consequential constitutional deci- opportunity for ‘‘intrigue and corrup- the United States Embassy in Ukraine. sions—consequential decisions for our tion,’’ and it would also be, as he put You saw testimony from him. We were Constitution. We talked about the bur- it, ‘‘the detriment to the State, from not able to cross-examine him. If he is den of proof. I said this before, and I the prolonged inaction of men whose called or if we get witnesses, we will will say it again. Thirty-one times the firm and faithful execution of their call the Ambassador, and we will cross- managers said they proved their case. duty might have exposed them to the examine. Twenty-nine times they said the evi- persecution of an intemperate or de- LTC Alexander Vindman. You saw dence was overwhelming. Manager signing majority in the House of Rep- his testimony. He appeared before the NADLER—he didn’t only say it was resentatives.’’ And that is what has House. We didn’t have the opportunity overwhelming in his view, on page 739 happened here. to cross-examine him. If we call wit- of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, he is And if you create a system now that nesses, we will, of course, have that very clear. He says not only is it makes the new normal a half-baked, right to cross-examine him. strong, there is no doubt. That is what slapdash process in the House—just get Fiona Hill. She is the former senior he said. ‘‘The one thing the House man- the impeachment done and get it over director for Europe and Russia on the agers think the President counsel got to the Senate—and then once the National Security Council. She testi- right is quoting me’’—talking about President is impeached and you have fied for the House. If we have wit- Mr. NADLER, Manager NADLER—‘‘as the head of the executive branch, the nesses, we have the opportunity to call saying ‘beyond any doubt.’ It is, in- leader of the free world, having some- her then and cross-examine Fiona Hill. deed, beyond any doubt.’’ thing like that hanging over his head, Kurt Volker, former United States Now, of course, we think that they then we will slow everything down, and Representative for Ukraine Negotia- have not proven their case by any then we will start doing the investiga- tions. They called him; we did not have stretch of any proper constitutional tion and just drag it out. That is all the opportunity to cross-examine. If we analysis. part of what makes this even more po- are calling witnesses—these are wit- In the Clinton investigation, they litical, especially in an election year. nesses you have heard from—we would talk about witnesses being called, but

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:42 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.016 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S764 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 the three witnesses that were called How many constitutional challenges the Senate shall try the impeachment, had either testified before the grand will we have in this body because they not merely deliberate about it, not jury or before the House committee. placed the burden on you that they merely think about it, not merely won- There weren’t new witnesses. What Mr. would not take themselves in putting der about it. I know you are the great- Philbin said is correct; that under our their case forward? If we look at our est deliberative body in the world, but constitutional design, they are sup- constitutional framework and our con- not even you can deliberate in a trial posed to investigate; you are to delib- stitutional structure, that is not the without witnesses. But Mr. Sekulow erate. But what they are asking you to way it is supposed to work. would rewrite the Constitution: Your do is now become the investigative Now, our opposition to this motion is job is not to try the case, he says; your agency, the investigative body. rather straightforward, as I have said. job is merely to deliberate. That is not If they needed all this additional evi- We came here ready to try the case on what the Founders had in mind—not by dence, which they said they don’t the record that they presented, the a long shot. need—and, by the way, not only did record that the managers told us was Now, Mr. Philbin says none of these they say it in the RECORD, this is House overwhelming and complete. witnesses would have relevance on arti- Manager NADLER when he was on CNN Mr. SCHIFF went through every sen- cle II—I guess conceding that they back on the 15th of this month: ‘‘We tence of the Articles of Impeachment would have relevant evidence under ar- brought the articles of impeachment. just a few days ago and said: Proved, ticle I. But that is not true either. Because, despite the fact that we didn’t proved, proved. But the problem is that Imagine what you will see when you hear from many witnesses we [could] what is proved, proved, proved is not hear from the witnesses who ran the have heard from, we heard from enough an impeachable offense. You could Office of Management and Budget or witnesses to prove the case beyond any have witnesses that prove a lot of imagine what you will see when you doubt at all.’’ things, but if there is not a violation of read the documents from the Office of The same can be said from Rep- the law, if it doesn’t meet the constitu- Management and Budget. What you resentative LOFGREN: tional required process, the constitu- will see is what they have covered up. You know, we have evidence proving the tional required substantive issues of do What you will see is the motive for case through, for example, at the meeting these articles—these allegations rise to their complete obstruction of Congress. when Bolton said it was a drug deal, well, we When you see not the redacted emails, have fact witnesses. Hill was there, Vindman the level sufficient for a removal of of- was there, Sondland was there. fice for a duly elected President of the not the fully blacked-out emails that they deigned to give in the litigation So this idea that they haven’t had United States? It doesn’t and espe- and Freedom of Information Act, but witnesses, that is the smoke screen. cially so—especially so—when we are when you see what is under those You have heard from a lot of witnesses. in an election year. redactions, you will have proof of mo- The problem with the case, the prob- I am not going to take the time— tive. When you see those documents, lem with their position is, even with your time, which is precious, to go over you will see just how fallacious these all of those witnesses, it doesn’t prove each and every allegation about wit- nonassertions of executive privilege up an impeachable offense. The articles nesses that I can. I could do it. I could fail. stand here for a long time. I am not are. You will see, in essence, what they I think it is very dangerous if the going to do that. I am just going to say have covered up. It could not be more House runs up—which they did—Arti- this: They created the record. Do not relevant to whether their panoply of cles of Impeachment quickly, so quick- allow them to penalize the country and legal argumentation to justify ‘‘we ly that they are clamoring for evi- the Constitution because they failed to shall fight all subpoenas’’ is merely a dence, despite the fact that they put do their job. coverup in a legal window dressing. So all of this evidence forward. They got With that Mr. Chief Justice, we yield these witnesses and documents are their wish of an impeachment by our time. critical on both articles. Christmas. That was the goal. But now The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you, Now, you also heard Mr. Philbin they want you to do the work they counsel. argue—and, again, this is where we ex- failed to do. The House managers have 30 minutes pected we would be at the end of the But, as I said, time and time again remaining. proceeding, which is, essentially, they we heard: You didn’t hear from wit- Mr. Manager SCHIFF. Thank you, proved their case. They proved their nesses. You didn’t hear from many wit- Mr. Chief Justice, Senators: I want to case. We pretty much all know what nesses. Mr. SCHIFF modified that a lit- walk through some of the arguments has gone on here. We all understand tle bit today, a little bit. You heard that you just heard from the Presi- just what this President did. No one from a lot of witnesses. But if we go dent’s counsel. really disputes that anymore. So what? down the road of witnesses, this is not The first argument was made by Mr. So what? It is a version of the a 1-week process. Remember, I talked Philbin. Mr. Philbin began by saying Dershowitz defense. So what? The about the waving the wand and Ukrain- the House managers assert that you President can do no wrong. The Presi- ian corruption was gone? You are not can’t have a trial without witnesses, dent is the State. If the President be- going to have a witness wand here, and he said: ‘‘It’s not that simple.’’ Ac- lieves that corrupt conduct would help where, OK, you got a week to do this tually, it is. It is pretty simple. It is him get reelected, if he believes shak- and get it done. There is no way that pretty simple. In every courthouse, in ing down an ally and withholding mili- would be proper under due process. every State, in every county in the tary aid, if he believes soliciting for- But, you know, due process is supposed country, where they have trials, they eign interference in our election, to be for the person accused, and they have witnesses. And I think you heard whether it be from the Ukrainians or are turning it on its head. They Mr. Philbin tie himself into knots as to the Russians or the Israeli Prime Min- brought the articles before you. They why this should be the first trial in ister or anyone else in any form it may are the ones that rushed the case up which witnesses are not necessary. take, so what? He has a God-given and then held it before you could actu- But, you know, some things are just as right to abuse his power, and there is ally start proceeding, but they are the simple as they appear. A trial without nothing you can do about it. It is the ones who passed the articles before witnesses is simply not a trial. You Dershowitz principle of constitutional Christmas. could call it something else, but it is lawlessness. That is the end-all argu- You know, we talked a lot about the not a trial. ment for them. You don’t need to hear court system and the fact that they Now, Mr. Sekulow said something witnesses who will prove the Presi- were seeking witnesses, and when it very interesting. He said: The House dent’s misconduct because he has a got close to actually having a court investigates, and the Senate delib- right to be as corrupt as he chooses proceeding, they decided that they erates. Well, he would rewrite our Con- under our Constitution, and there is didn’t want to have that witness go stitution with that argument because nothing you can do about it. God help through that proceeding, and they ac- the last time I checked the Constitu- us if that argument succeeds. tually withdrew the subpoena to move tion, it said that the House shall have Now, they say that these witnesses the case out. the sole power of impeachment, and already testified, and so you don’t need

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:42 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.017 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S765 to hear from anybody. There are wit- have looked at the issue of a Congress’s That is a really hard argument to nesses who already testified, so the power to enforce subpoenas against make. I credit them for making it with House doesn’t get to call witnesses in witnesses or documents, the courts a straight face, but that is the char- the Senate. That would be like a crimi- have said the power to compel compli- acter of it: You should have fought nal trial in any courthouse in America ance with a subpoena is coequal and co- harder to overcome our stonewalling where the defendant, if he’s rich and extensive with the power to legislate and obstruction. powerful enough, can say to the judge: because you can’t do one without the Now, they also say the Chief Justice Hey, Judge, the prosecution got to other. If we can’t find out whether the cannot decide issues of privilege. No, have witnesses in the grand jury. They President is breaking the law, vio- the Chief Justice can’t make those de- don’t get to call anyone here. They had lating the Impoundment Control Act or cisions. You need to let us litigate this their chance in the grand jury. They any other—whether he is withholding up and down the court system. called witnesses in the grand jury. aid that we appropriated for an ally— That is a pretty remarkable argu- They don’t get to call witnesses here. how can we legislate a fix to make sure ment because the Senate rules allow That is not how it works in any that this never happens again? We the presiding officer to make judg- courtroom in America, and it is not can’t. If we can’t get answers, we can’t ments and to rule on issues of evidence, how it should work in this courtroom. legislate. materiality, and privilege. That is per- Of course, you heard the argument That is a proposition indicated by mitted under your own rules. We don’t again repeated time and time again: every court in the land. And, of course, need to go up and down the courts. We The House is saying they are not ready in the context of impeachment, the have got a perfectly good judge right for trial. Of course, we never said we courts have said that is never more im- here. weren’t ready for trial. We came here portant—never more important. Now, you heard our proposal yester- very prepared for trial. I would submit Now, I don’t know why, after saying day that we take a week—just a week— to you, the President’s team came here he would sue us—and we had to expect to depose the witnesses that we feel are unprepared for trial, unprepared for the that, like Don McGahn, where we are relevant, that they feel are relevant, fact that there would be, as we all an- still in court 9 months later. I don’t and that the Justice rules are rel- ticipated, a daily drip of new disclo- know why he changed his mind, but I evant—just one week. Now, they can sures that would send them back on suspect it is for the reason that if this say that the Constitution requires their heels. We came here to try a trial goes forward and he keeps this to them to go to court, but, of course, it case—prepared to try a case—and, yes, himself, it will be very difficult to ex- doesn’t. There is absolutely no con- we had, I hope, the not unreasonable plain to the country why he saved it stitutional impediment from these fine expectation that in trying that case, for the book. When he knew informa- lawyers saying: You know, that is emi- like in every courtroom in America, we tion of direct relevance and con- nently reasonable. We will allow a neu- could call witnesses. That is not a lack sequence to a decision that you have to tral party, the Chief Justice of the of preparation. That is the presence of make about whether the President of United States of America, to rule on the United States should be removed common sense. whether a witness is material or imma- from office, it would be very difficult They didn’t try to get Bolton, they terial, whether they have been called argue. Someone said: They didn’t even to explain why that is saved for a book. Well, I would submit to you, it would for purposes of probative evidence or try to get Bolton. harassment, and whether you are mak- Now, of course, we did try to get be equally difficult for you to explain ing a proper claim of privilege or mere- Bolton, and what he said when he re- as it would be for him. But you can ask him that question: Why are you willing ly trying to hide crime or fraud. fused to show up voluntarily is: If you The concern they have is not that the to testify before the Senate but not the subpoena me, I will sue you. I will sue Chief Justice will be unfair, but rather House? And you should ask him that you. that he will be fair. But do not make He said basically what Don McGahn question. any mistake about it. Do not let them told us 9 months ago: I will sue you; Now, it was said, and it has the char- suggest that there is something con- good luck with that. acter of ‘‘you should have fought hard- Now, the public argument that was er to overcome our obstruction.’’ The stitutionally impermissible or it would made by his counsel was that he and House should have fought harder to violate the President’s rights to allow Dr. Kupperman, out of, you know, just overcome our stonewalling. Shame on the Chief Justice of the United States due diligence, they just want a court to the House for not fighting harder to to make those decisions in this court, opine that it is OK for them to come overcome our stonewalling. If only because he is empowered to do so by forward and testify. As soon as the they had fought harder to overcome your rules and by the Constitution, court blesses their testimony, they are our stonewalling, maybe they could which gives you the sole power to try more than willing to come in. They have gotten these witnesses earlier. impeachments. In the sole exercise of just are going to court to get a court That is a really hard argument to your power to try impeachments, you opinion saying they can do it. make while they are stonewalling: You can say: We will allow the Chief Jus- And so, of course, we said to them: If should have tried harder. You should tice to make those decisions. that is your real motivation, there is a have taken the years that would be Now, Mr. Sekulow said that you have court about to rule on this very issue necessary to overcome our heard the testimony of 13 witnesses. of absolute immunity. stonewalling. And I think the impression is meant to And very shortly thereafter, that And the reason why that argument is be given, if not to you—we know other- court did. That was the court—Judge in such bad faith? As I pointed out to wise—maybe the people watching at Jackson in the McGahn case—and the you yesterday, while they are in this home, that they must have been in be- judge said that his argument about ab- body arguing the House was derelict, tween errands while watching the Sen- solute immunity—which, yes, Presi- slapdash, they should have fought ate trial and missed where those 13 wit- dents have always dreamed about and harder and longer and endlessly to nesses came before the Senate and tes- asserted but which has never succeeded overcome our stonewalling—while they tified. in any court in the land—it was ridi- are making that argument to you that But of course, you heard no live tes- culed in the case of Harriet Miers. It the House should have fought up and timony in this body. There wasn’t any was made short shrift in the case of down the courts from the district to live testimony before this body, and I Don McGahn, where the judge said: No, the court of appeals to the Supreme don’t recall any of you in that super- we don’t have Kings here. In the 250 Court and back again—they are in the secret basement bunker they have been years of jurisprudence, there is not a courthouse arguing the opposite. They talking about. Now, I will admit, there single case to support the proposition are in the courthouse saying: Judge, were 100 Members eligible to be there. that the President can simply say that they are trying to enforce a subpoena So maybe I missed one of you, but I my advisers are absolutely immune on Don McGahn. You need to throw it don’t think you were there for the live from process. out. They don’t have the jurisdiction. testimony in the House. And, of course, in every other non- This is nonjusticiable. You can’t hear Now, Mr. Sekulow says the President impeachment context where the courts this case. was deprived of his right of calling

VerDate Sep 11 2014 00:42 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G31JA6.018 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S766 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 these witnesses himself and cross-ex- yesterday: What is the limiting prin- Jefferson once said: ‘‘I consider trial amining these witnesses in the House, ciple in the Dershowitz argument? If a by jury as the only anchor . . . yet but that is not true either because the President can corruptly seek foreign imagined by man, by which a govern- President was eligible to call witnesses interference in his election because he ment can be held to the principles of in his defense in the Judiciary Com- believes that his election is in the na- its constitution’’—the only anchor yet mittee and chose not to do so. If the tional interest, then, you cannot im- imagined by man by which a govern- President’s counsel felt that, you peach him for it, no matter how dam- ment can be held to the principles of know, Bill Taylor says that he spoke aging it may be to our national secu- its constitution. I would submit to you, with Sondland right after this phone rity. What is the limiting principle? remove that anchor, and we are adrift, call with the President, and Sondland And I suppose the limiting principle but if we hold true, if we have faith talked about how the military aid was is only this: It only requires the Presi- that the ship of state can survive the conditioned on these investigations, dent to believe that his reelection is in truth, this storm shall pass. the President wanted Zelensky in a the national interest. Well, it would re- I yield back. public box, and I would really like to quire an extraordinary level of self-re- flection and insight for a President of The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you, cross-examine that West Point grad Mr. Manager. and Vietnam vet because I don’t be- the United States to conclude that his Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice. lieve him, you know, they could have own reelection was not in the national called Bill Taylor in the Judiciary interest—not unprecedented, mind you. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority Committee and cross-examined him, or I think that was the decision that LBJ leader is recognized. they could have called Mick Mulvaney ultimately arrived at, but I would not Mr. MCCONNELL. I suggest the ab- and put him under oath and let him want to consider that a meaningful sence of a quorum. contradict what we know John Bolton limitation on Presidential power, and The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will would say. But of course, they didn’t do neither should you. call the roll. Finally, counsel expressed some that. No, they said merely: Just get it The senior assistant legislative clerk indignance—indignance—that we over with in the House. For all there, it proceeded to call the roll. should suggest that it is not just the was too quick, too slapdash. Get it over Senate—it is not just the President, Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, with in the House, because, as the rather, who is on trial here but it is I ask unanimous consent that the order President said, when it comes to the also the Senate; how dare the House for the quorum call be rescinded. Senate, we will have a real trial where managers suggest that your decision The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- he gets to call witnesses. But they have should reflect on this body. That is just tion, it is so ordered. changed their tune because now they such a calumny. Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, know what they have really known all Well, let me read you a statement the Democratic leader and I have had along; which is, that those witnesses made by one of your colleagues. This is an opportunity to have a discussion, would deeply incriminate this Presi- what former U.S. Senator John War- and it leads to the following: We will dent. ner, a Republican of Virginia, had to now cast a vote on the witness ques- So, instead, they have fallen back on say: tion. the argument that if we are going to go As conscientious citizens from all walks of down the road to having a real trial, if Once that vote is complete, I would life are trying their best to understand the ask unanimous consent that the Sen- we are going to go down the road in complex impeachment issues now being de- having a real trial, we, the President’s liberated in the U.S. Senate, the rules of evi- ate stand in recess subject to the call lawyers, are going to make you pay. dence are central to the matter. Should the of the Chair. And the form of this argument is: We Senate allow additional sworn testimony The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you. are going to call every witness under from fact witnesses with firsthand knowl- Without objection, it is so ordered. edge and include relevant documents? the Sun. We are going to call every As a lifelong Republican and a retired The question is, Shall it be in order witness that testified before the House. member of the U.S. Senate, who once served to consider and debate under the im- We are going to call every witness that as a juror in a Presidential impeachment peachment rules any motion to sub- we can think of that would help smear trial, I am mindful of the difficult respon- poena witnesses or documents? the Bidens. We are going to keep you sibilities those currently serving now shoul- The yeas and nays are required under here until kingdom come. That is es- der. I believe, as I am sure you do, that not S. Res. 483. only is the President on trial, but in many sentially the argument that they are ways, so is the Senate itself. As such, I am The clerk will call the roll. making when Mr. Sekulow says: We are strongly supportive of the efforts of my The senior assistant legislative clerk going to bring in Fiona Hill, and we are former Republican Senate colleagues who called the roll. going to bring in Tim Morrison, and we are considering that the Senate accept the The CHIEF JUSTICE. Are there any are going to bring in this witness and introduction of additional evidence that they deem relevant. Senators in the Chamber wising to bring in that witness. change his or her vote? You have the sole power to try this Not long ago Senators of both major par- ties always worked to accommodate fellow case. You do not have to allow the The result was announced—yeas 49, colleagues with differing points of view to nays 51, as follows: President’s lawyers to abuse your time arrive at outcomes that would best serve the or this process. You have the power to nation’s interests. If witnesses are sup- [Rollcall Vote No. 27] decide: No, we gave each side 24 hours pressed in this trial and a majority of Ameri- YEAS—49 cans are left believing the trial was a sham, to make their arguments. We are going Baldwin Hassan Rosen to give each side a shared week to call I can only imagine the lasting damage done Bennet Heinrich Sanders their witnesses. You have that power. to the Senate, and to our fragile national Blumenthal Hirono Schatz consensus. The Senate embraces its legacy Booker Jones Schumer If you didn’t, you couldn’t have con- and delivers for the American people by Brown Kaine stricted the amount of time for our ar- Shaheen avoiding the risk. Cantwell King Sinema gument. You can likewise determine Throughout the long life of our nation, fed- Cardin Klobuchar Smith how much time should be taken with eral and state judicial systems have largely Carper Leahy Stabenow Casey Manchin supported the judicial norms of evidence, Tester witness testimony. Collins Markey witnesses and relevant documents. I respect- Udall Now, Mr. Sekulow ended his argu- Coons Menendez ment against witnesses with where Mr. fully urge the Senate to be guided by the Van Hollen rules of evidence and follow our nation’s ju- Cortez Masto Merkley Philbin essentially began. It all comes Duckworth Murphy Warner dicial norms, precedents and institutions to Warren back to the Dershowitz principle. What Durbin Murray uphold the Constitution and the rule of law Feinstein Peters Whitehouse is the point of witnesses if the Presi- by welcoming relevant witnesses and docu- Gillibrand Reed Wyden dent can do whatever he wants under ments as part of this impeachment trial. Harris Romney article II? What is the point of calling That is your colleague, former Sen- witnesses? What is the point of having ator John Warner. NAYS—51 a trial if the President can do whatever Senators, there is a storm blowing Alexander Braun Cotton through this Capitol. Its winds are Barrasso Burr Cramer he wants under article II? Blackburn Capito Crapo The only constraining principle—and strong, and they move us in uncertain Blunt Cassidy Cruz I think that one of the Senators asked and dangerous directions. Boozman Cornyn Daines

VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:09 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S767 Enzi Lankford Rounds President Johnson, Chief Justice NAYS—47 Ernst Lee Rubio Baldwin Hassan Fischer Loeffler Sasse Chase, as Presiding Officer, cast tie- Rosen Bennet Heinrich Gardner McConnell Scott (FL) breaking votes on both March 31 and Sanders Blumenthal Hirono Graham McSally Scott (SC) Schatz April 2, 1868? Booker Jones Grassley Moran Shelby Schumer Brown Kaine Hawley Murkowski Sullivan The CHIEF JUSTICE. I am, Mr. Shaheen Cantwell King Hoeven Paul Thune Leader. The one concerned a motion to Sinema Cardin Klobuchar Hyde-Smith Perdue Tillis Smith adjourn. The other concerned a motion Carper Leahy Inhofe Portman Toomey Stabenow to close deliberations. I do not regard Casey Manchin Johnson Risch Wicker Tester Coons Markey Kennedy Roberts Young those isolated episodes 150 years ago as Udall Cortez Masto Menendez sufficient to support a general author- Van Hollen The motion was rejected. Duckworth Merkley ity to break ties. Warner RECESS SUBJECT TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIR Durbin Murphy If the Members of this body, elected Feinstein Murray Warren The CHIEF JUSTICE. Under the pre- Whitehouse by the people and accountable to them, Gillibrand Peters vious order, the Senate stands in recess Harris Reed Wyden subject to the call of the Chair. divide equally on a motion, the normal rule is that the motion fails. The motion to table is agreed to; the Thereupon, at 5:42 p.m., the Senate, amendment is tabled. sitting as a Court of Impeachment, re- I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a dif- The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Demo- cessed until 7:13 p.m.; whereupon the cratic leader is recognized. Senate reassembled when called to ferent branch of government, to assert AMENDMENT NO. 1296 order by the CHIEF JUSTICE. the power to change that result so that The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senate the motion would succeed. Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I send an amendment to the desk to sub- will come to order. The majority leader AMENDMENT NO. 1295 is recognized. poena John R. Bolton, and I ask that it (Purpose: To subpoena certain rel- be read. PROVIDING FOR RELATED PROCEDURES CON- evant witnesses and documents.) CERNING THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I AGAINST DONALD JOHN TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF read the amendment. THE UNITED STATES send an amendment to the desk to sub- The senior assistant legislative clerk Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, poena Mulvaney, Bolton, Duffey, Blair, read as follows: I send a resolution to the desk, and I and the White House, OMB, DOD, and The Senator from New York [Mr. SCHUMER] ask the clerk to report. State Department documents, and I proposes an amendment numbered 1296. Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will ask that it be read. The amendment is as follows: report the resolution by title. The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will (Purpose: To subpoena John Robert Bolton) report. The legislative clerk read as follows: At the appropriate place in the resolving A resolution (S. Res. 488) to provide for re- The senior assistant legislative clerk clause, insert the following: lated procedures concerning the articles of read as follows: SEC. lll. Notwithstanding any other impeachment against Donald John Trump, The Senator from New York [Mr. SCHUMER] provision of this resolution, pursuant to President of the United States. proposes an amendment numbered 1295. rules V and VI of the Rules of Procedure and Resolved, That the record in this case shall Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Im- be closed, and no motion with respect to re- Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I peachment Trials, the Chief Justice of the opening the record shall be in order for the ask unanimous consent that the United States, through the Secretary of the duration of these proceedings. amendment be considered as read. Senate, shall issue a subpoena for the taking The Senate shall proceed to final argu- of testimony of John Robert Bolton, and the ments as provided in the impeachment rules, The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- Sergeant at Arms is authorized to utilize the waiving the two person rule contained in tion, it is so ordered. services of the Deputy Sergeant at Arms or Rule XXII of the Rules of Procedure and (The amendment is printed in today’s any other employee of the Senate in serving Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Im- RECORD under ‘‘Text of Amendments.’’) the subpoena authorized to be issued by this peachment Trials. Such arguments shall The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority section. begin at 11:00 am on Monday, February 3, 2020, and not exceed four hours, and be equal- leader is recognized. MOTION TO TABLE ly divided between the House and the Presi- MOTION TO TABLE The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority dent to be used as under the Rules of Im- Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, leader is recognized. peachment. I move to table the amendment, and I Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, At the conclusion of the final arguments ask for the yeas and nays. I move to table the amendment, and I by the House and the President, the court of ask for the yeas and nays. impeachment shall stand adjourned until 4:00 The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there a suffi- pm on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at which cient second? The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there a suffi- cient second? time the Senate, without intervening action There is a sufficient second. There is a sufficient second. or debate shall vote on the Articles of Im- The clerk will call the roll. peachment. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Thereupon, the Senate, sitting as a The senior assistant legislative clerk Court of Impeachment, proceeded to The CHIEF JUSTICE. Does any Mem- called the roll. consider the resolution. ber in the Chamber wish to change his The CHIEF JUSTICE. Are there any The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority or her vote? Senators in the Chamber wishing to leader. The result was announced—yeas 53, vote or change his or her vote? Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, nays 47, as follows: The result was announced—yeas 51, I ask unanimous consent that the [Rollcall Vote No. 28] nays 49, as follows: Democratic leader or designee be al- YEAS—53 [Rollcall Vote No. 29] lowed to offer up four amendments to Alexander Fischer Perdue YEAS—51 the resolution; further, that I be recog- Barrasso Gardner Portman Alexander Fischer Paul nized to make a motion to table the Blackburn Graham Risch Barrasso Gardner Perdue amendment after it has been reported Blunt Grassley Roberts Blackburn Graham Portman Boozman Hawley Romney Blunt Grassley Risch with no intervening action or debate. Braun Hoeven Boozman Hawley Roberts The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there objec- Rounds Burr Hyde-Smith Rubio Braun Hoeven Rounds tion? Without objection, it is so or- Capito Inhofe Sasse Burr Hyde-Smith Rubio Cassidy Johnson Capito Inhofe Sasse dered. Scott (FL) Collins Kennedy Cassidy Johnson Scott (FL) Scott (SC) The Democratic leader is recognized. Cornyn Lankford Cornyn Kennedy Scott (SC) Shelby Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I Cotton Lee Cotton Lankford Shelby have a parliamentary inquiry. Cramer Loeffler Sullivan Cramer Lee Sullivan The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Demo- Crapo McConnell Thune Crapo Loeffler Thune Tillis cratic leader will state the inquiry. Cruz McSally Cruz McConnell Tillis Daines Moran Toomey Daines McSally Toomey Mr. SCHUMER. Is the Chief Justice Enzi Murkowski Wicker Enzi Moran Wicker aware that in the impeachment trial of Ernst Paul Young Ernst Murkowski Young

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:55 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE S768 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 The witness shall be examined by not more NAYS—49 There is a sufficient second. than 2 persons each on behalf of the Man- The clerk will call the roll. Baldwin Hassan Rosen agers and counsel for the President. The wit- Bennet Heinrich Sanders ness may be accompanies by counsel. The The legislative clerk called the roll. Blumenthal Hirono Schatz scope of the examination by the Managers The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there any Booker Jones Schumer and counsel for both parties shall be limited Brown Kaine Member in the Chamber who wishes to Shaheen to subject matters reflected in the Senate Cantwell King Sinema vote or change his or her vote? Cardin Klobuchar record. The party taking a deposition shall Smith present to the other party, not less than 18 The result was announced—yeas 51, Carper Leahy Stabenow Casey Manchin hours in advance of the deposition, copies of nays 49, as follows: Tester Collins Markey Udall all exhibits which the deposing party intends [Rollcall Vote No. 30] Coons Menendez Van Hollen to enter into the deposition. No exhibits out- Cortez Masto Merkley side of the Senate record shall be employed, YEAS—51 Duckworth Murphy Warner except for articles and materials in the Alexander Fischer Paul Durbin Murray Warren press, including electronic media. Any party Barrasso Gardner Perdue Feinstein Peters Whitehouse Blackburn Graham Portman Gillibrand Reed Wyden may interrogate the witness as if the witness Blunt Grassley Risch Harris Romney were declared adverse. The deposition shall be videotaped and a Boozman Hawley Roberts The motion to table is agreed to; the transcript of the proceeding shall be made. Braun Hoeven Rounds amendment is tabled. The deposition shall be conducted in private. Burr Hyde-Smith Rubio Capito Inhofe Sasse The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Demo- No person shall be admitted to the deposi- Cassidy Johnson Scott (FL) cratic leader is recognized. tion except for the following: The witness, Cornyn Kennedy Scott (SC) counsel for the witness, the Managers on the AMENDMENT NO. 1297 Cotton Lankford Shelby part of the House of Representatives, counsel Cramer Lee Sullivan Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I for the Managers, counsel for the President, Crapo Loeffler Thune send an amendment to the desk to sub- and the Chief Justice; further, such persons Cruz McConnell Tillis poena John R. Bolton; providing fur- whose presence is required to make and pre- Daines McSally Toomey ther that there be 1 day for a deposi- serve a record of the proceeding in Enzi Moran Wicker Ernst Murkowski Young tion, presided over by the Chief Jus- videotaped and transcript forms, and staff tice, and 1 day for live testimony be- members to the Chief Justice whose presence NAYS—49 is required to assist the Chief Justice in pre- fore the Senate, both of which must siding over the deposition, or for other pur- Baldwin Harris Reed Romney occur within 5 days of the adoption of poses, as determined by the Chief Justice. Bennet Hassan Blumenthal Heinrich Rosen the underlying resolution, and I ask All persons present must maintain the con- Booker Hirono Sanders that it be read. fidentiality of the proceeding. Brown Jones Schatz The Chief Justice at the deposition shall The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will Cantwell Kaine Schumer report. file the videotaped and transcribed records of Cardin King Shaheen the deposition with the Secretary of the Sen- Carper Klobuchar Sinema The senior assistant legislative clerk Smith ate, who shall maintain them as confidential Casey Leahy read as follows: Stabenow proceedings of the Senate. The Sergeant at Collins Manchin Tester The Senator from New York [Mr. SCHUMER] Arms is authorized to make available for re- Coons Markey proposes an amendment numbered 1297. view at secure locations, any of the video- Udall Cortez Masto Menendez Van Hollen Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chief Justice, I tapes or transcribed deposition records to Duckworth Merkley Warner ask unanimous consent that the Members of the Senate, one designated staff Durbin Murphy Warren amendment be considered as read. member per Senator, and the Chief Justice. Feinstein Murray Whitehouse The Senate may direct the Secretary of the Gillibrand Peters Wyden The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- Senate to distribute such materials, and to tion, it is so ordered. use whichever means of dissemination, in- The motion to table is agreed to; the The amendment is as follows: cluding printing as Senate documents, print- amendment is tabled. (Purpose: To subpoena John Robert Bolton) ing in the Congressional Record, photo- and The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senator At the appropriate place in the matter fol- video- duplication, and electronic dissemina- from Maryland. tion, he determines to be appropriate to ac- lowing the resolving clause, insert the fol- AMENDMENT NO. 1298 lowing: complish any distribution of the videotaped Notwithstanding any other provision of or transcribed deposition records that he is Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chief Justice, this resolution, pursuant to rules V and VI of directed to make pursuant to this paragraph. I send an amendment to the desk to The deposition authorized by this resolu- the Rules of Procedure and Practice in the tion shall be deemed to be proceedings before have the Chief Justice rule on motions Senate When Sitting on Impeachment the Senate for purposes of rule XXIX of the to subpoena witnesses and documents Trials, the Chief Justice of the United Standing Rules of the Senate, sections 101, and to rule on any assertion of privi- States, through the Secretary of the Senate, 102, and 104 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. lege, and I ask that it be read. shall issue a subpoena for the taking of testi- 191, 192, and 194), sections 703, 705, and 707 of The CHIEF JUSTICE. The clerk will mony on oral deposition and subsequent tes- the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (2 timony before the Senate of John Robert U.S.C. 288b, 288d, and 288f), sections 6002 and report. Bolton, and the Sergeant at Arms is author- 6005 of title 18, United States Code, and sec- The senior assistant legislative clerk ized to utilize the services of the Deputy Ser- tion 1365 of title 28, United States Code. The read as follows: geant at Arms or any other employee of the Secretary of the Senate shall arrange for The Senator from Maryland [Mr. VAN HOL- Senate in serving the subpoena authorized to stenographic assistance, including LEN] proposes an amendment numbered 1298. be issued by this paragraph. videotaping, to record the depositions as pro- The deposition authorized by this resolu- vided in section 205. Such expenses as may be At the appropriate place in the matter fol- tion shall be taken before, and presided over necessary shall be paid from the ‘‘Appropria- lowing the resolving clause, insert the fol- by, the Chief Justice of the United States, tion Account—Miscellaneous Items’’ in the lowing: who shall administer to the witness the oath contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers Notwithstanding any other provision of prescribed by rule XXV of the Rules of Pro- approved by the Secretary. this resolution, the Presiding Officer shall cedure and Practice in the Senate When Sit- The deposition authorized by this resolu- issue a subpoena for any witness or any doc- ting on Impeachment Trials. The Chief Jus- tion may be conducted for a period of time ument that a Senator or a party moves to tice shall have authority to rule, as an ini- not to exceed 1 day. The period of time for subpoena if the Presiding Officer determines tial matter, upon any question arising out of the subsequent testimony before the Senate that the witness or document is likely to the deposition. All objections to a question authorized by this resolution shall not ex- have probative evidence relevant to either shall be noted by the Chief Justice upon the ceed 1 day. The deposition and the subse- article of impeachment before the Senate, record of the deposition but the examination quent testimony before the Senate shall both and, consistent with the authority of the shall proceed, and the witness shall answer be completed not later than 5 days after the Presiding Officer to rule on all questions of such question. The witness may refuse to an- date on which this resolution is adopted. evidence, shall rule on any assertion of privi- swer a question only when necessary to pre- The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority lege. serve a legally recognized privilege, or con- leader is recognized. stitutional right, and must identify such The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority MOTION TO TABLE privilege cited if refusing to answer a ques- leader is recognized. Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, tion. MOTION TO TABLE Examination of the witness at a deposition I move to table the amendment, and I shall be conducted by the Managers on the ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, part of the House of Representatives or their The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there a suffi- I move to table the amendment, and I counsel, and by counsel for the President. cient second? ask for the yeas and nays.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:18 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S769 The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there a suffi- Durbin Manchin Shaheen At the conclusion of the final arguments Feinstein Markey Sinema by the House and the President, the court of cient second? Gillibrand Menendez There is a sufficient second. Smith impeachment shall stand adjourned until 4:00 Harris Merkley Stabenow pm on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at which The clerk will call the roll. Hassan Murphy Tester time the Senate, without intervening action The senior assistant legislative clerk Heinrich Murray Udall Hirono Peters or debate shall vote on the Articles of Im- called the roll. Van Hollen peachment. Jones Reed Warner The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there any Kaine Rosen Warren Senator in the Chamber wishing to King Sanders Whitehouse f Klobuchar Schatz vote or change his or her vote? Wyden The result was announced—yeas 53, Leahy Schumer AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND nays 47, as follows: The resolution (S. Res. 488) was PROPOSED [Rollcall Vote No. 31] agreed to. YEAS—53 (The resolution is printed in today’s SA 1295. Mr. SCHUMER proposed an Alexander Fischer Perdue RECORD under ‘‘Submitted Resolu- amendment to the resolution S. Res. 488, to Barrasso Gardner Portman tions.’’) provide for related procedures concerning Blackburn Graham Risch UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT—PRINTING OF the articles of impeachment against Donald John Trump, President of the United States. Blunt Grassley Roberts STATEMENTS IN THE RECORD AND PRINTING Boozman Hawley Romney OF SENATE DOCUMENT OF IMPEACHMENT SA 1296. Mr. SCHUMER proposed an Braun Hoeven Rounds amendment to the resolution S. Res. 488, Burr Hyde-Smith PROCEEDINGS Rubio The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority supra. Capito Inhofe Sasse Cassidy Johnson SA 1297. Mr. SCHUMER proposed an Scott (FL) leader is recognized. Collins Kennedy amendment to the resolution S. Res. 488, Scott (SC) Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, Cornyn Lankford supra. Shelby Cotton Lee I ask unanimous consent that the Sec- Sullivan retary be authorized to include state- SA 1298. Mr. VAN HOLLEN proposed an Cramer Loeffler amendment to the resolution S. Res. 488, Crapo McConnell Thune ments of Senators explaining their supra. Cruz McSally Tillis votes, either given or submitted during Daines Moran Toomey Enzi Murkowski Wicker the legislative sessions of the Senate f Ernst Paul Young on Monday, February 3; Tuesday, Feb- ruary 4; and Wednesday, February 5; NAYS—47 TEXT OF AMENDMENTS along with the full record of the Sen- Baldwin Hassan Rosen Mr. SCHUMER proposed an Bennet Heinrich Sanders ate’s proceedings and the filings by the SA 1295. Blumenthal Hirono Schatz parties in a Senate document printed amendment to the resolution S. Res. Booker Jones Schumer under the supervision of the Secretary 488, to provide for related procedures Brown Kaine Shaheen of the Senate that will complete the concerning the articles of impeach- Cantwell King Sinema Cardin Klobuchar documentation of the Senate’s han- ment against Donald John Trump, Smith dling of these impeachment pro- President of the United States; as fol- Carper Leahy Stabenow Casey Manchin Tester ceedings. lows: Coons Markey Udall The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- Cortez Masto Menendez At the appropriate place in the matter fol- Van Hollen Duckworth Merkley tion, so ordered. lowing the resolving clause, insert the fol- Durbin Murphy Warner f lowing: Feinstein Murray Warren EC Gillibrand Peters Whitehouse SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND S . lllll. Notwithstanding any other Harris Reed Wyden SENATE RESOLUTIONS provision of this resolution, pursuant to rules V and VI of the Rules of Procedure and The motion to table is agreed to; the The following concurrent resolutions Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Im- amendment is tabled. and Senate resolutions were read, and peachment Trials— The CHIEF JUSTICE. The question referred (or acted upon), as indicated: (1) the Chief Justice of the United States, occurs on the adoption of S. Res. 488. By Mr. MCCONNELL: through the Secretary of the Senate, shall Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, S. Res. 488. A resolution to provide for re- issue a subpoena— I ask for the yeas and nays. lated procedures concerning the articles of (A) for the taking of testimony of— The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there a suffi- impeachment against Donald John Trump, (i) John Robert Bolton; cient second? President of the United States; considered (ii) John Michael ‘‘Mick’’ Mulvaney; There is a sufficient second. and agreed to. (iii) Michael P. Duffey; and The clerk will call the roll. f (iv) Robert B. Blair; The legislative clerk called the roll. (B) to the Acting Chief of Staff of the SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS White House commanding him to produce, The CHIEF JUSTICE. Is there any for the time period from January 1, 2019, to Member in the Chamber who wishes to SENATE RESOLUTION 488—TO PRO- the present, all documents, communications, vote or change his or her vote? and other records within the possession, cus- The result was announced—yeas 53, VIDE FOR RELATED PROCE- tody, or control of the White House, includ- nays 47, as follows: DURES CONCERNING THE ARTI- ing the National Security Council, referring [Rollcall Vote No. 32] CLES OF IMPEACHMENT or relating to— YEAS—53 AGAINST DONALD JOHN TRUMP, (i) all meetings and calls between Presi- PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED dent Trump and the President of Ukraine, Alexander Fischer Perdue including documents, communications, and Barrasso Gardner STATES Portman other records related to the scheduling of, Blackburn Graham Risch Mr. MCCONNELL submitted the fol- preparation for, and follow-up from the Blunt Grassley Roberts lowing resolution; which was consid- Boozman Hawley Romney President’s April 21 and July 25, 2019 tele- Braun Hoeven Rounds ered and agreed to: phone calls, as well as the President’s Sep- Burr Hyde-Smith Rubio S. RES. 488 tember 25, 2019 meeting with the President of Capito Inhofe Sasse Resolved, That the record in this case shall Ukraine in New York; Cassidy Johnson Scott (FL) (ii) all investigations, inquiries, or other Collins Kennedy be closed, and no motion with respect to re- Scott (SC) probes related to Ukraine, including any Cornyn Lankford opening the record shall be in order for the Shelby Cotton Lee duration of these proceedings. that relate in any way to— Cramer Loeffler Sullivan The Senate shall proceed to final argu- (I) former Vice President Joseph Biden; Crapo McConnell Thune ments as provided in the impeachment rules, (II) Hunter Biden and any of his associates; Cruz McSally Tillis waiving the two person rule contained in (III) Burisma Holdings Limited (also Daines Moran Toomey Rule XXII of the Rules of Procedure and known as ‘‘Burisma’’); Enzi Murkowski Wicker Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Im- (IV) interference or involvement by Young Ernst Paul peachment Trials. Such arguments shall Ukraine in the 2016 United States election; NAYS—47 begin at 11:00 am on Monday, February 3, (V) the Democratic National Committee; Baldwin Brown Casey 2020, and not exceed four hours, and be equal- or Bennet Cantwell Coons ly divided between the House and the Presi- (VI) CrowdStrike; Blumenthal Cardin Cortez Masto dent to be used as under the Rules of Im- (iii) the actual or potential suspension, Booker Carper Duckworth peachment. withholding, delaying, freezing, or releasing

VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:19 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE S770 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 of United States foreign assistance, military quest for documents from the House Perma- freezing, or releasing of United States for- assistance, or security assistance of any kind nent Select Committee on Intelligence, the eign assistance, military assistance, or secu- to Ukraine, including but not limited to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, rity assistance to Ukraine, including all Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and the House Committee on Foreign Af- meetings, calls, or other engagements with (USAI) and Foreign Military Financing fairs, including, but not limited to, docu- Ukrainian officials regarding potential or ac- (FMF); ments collected that pertain to the hold on tual suspensions, holds, or delays in United (iv) all documents, communications, notes, military and other security assistance to States assistance to Ukraine; and other records created or received by Act- Ukraine, the scheduling of a White House (ii) communications, opinions, advice, ing Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, then-Na- meeting for the president of Ukraine, and counsel, approvals, or concurrences provided tional Security Advisor John R. Bolton, Sen- any requests for investigations by Ukraine; by any employee in the Office of Manage- ior Advisor to the Chief of Staff Robert B. (viii) the complaint submitted by a whis- ment and Budget regarding the actual or po- Blair, and other White House officials relat- tleblower within the Intelligence Commu- tential suspension, withholding, delaying, ing to efforts to— nity on or around August 12, 2019, to the In- freezing, or releasing of security assistance (I) solicit, request, demand, induce, per- spector General of the Intelligence Commu- to Ukraine including legality under the Im- suade, or coerce Ukraine to conduct or an- nity; poundment Control Act; nounce investigations; (ix) all meetings or calls, including re- (iii) Associate Director Michael Duffey (II) offer, schedule, cancel, or withhold a quests for or records of meetings or tele- taking over duties related to apportionments White House meeting for Ukraine’s presi- phone calls, scheduling items, calendar en- of USAI or FMF from Deputy Associate Di- dent; or tries, White House visitor records, and email rector Mark Sandy or any other Office of (III) hold and then release military and or text messages using personal or work-re- Management and Budget employee; other security assistance to Ukraine; lated devices between or among— (iv) all meetings related to the security as- (v) meetings at or involving the White (I) current or former White House officials sistance to Ukraine including but not lim- House that relate to Ukraine, including but or employees, including but not limited to ited to interagency meetings on July 18, 2019, not limited to— President Trump; and July 23, 2019, July 26, 2019, and July 31, 2019, (I) President Zelensky’s inauguration on (II) Rudolph W. Giuliani, Ambassador including any directions provided to staff May 20, 2019, in Kiev, Ukraine, including but Sondland, Victoria Toensing, or Joseph participating in those meetings and any not limited to President Trump’s decision diGenova; and readouts from those meetings; not to attend, to ask Vice President Pence to (x) former United States Ambassador to (v) the decision announced on or about lead the delegation, directing Vice President Ukraine Marie ‘‘Masha’’ Yovanovitch, in- September 11, 2019, to release appropriated Pence not to attend, and the subsequent de- cluding but not limited to the decision to foreign assistance, military assistance, or se- cision about the composition of the delega- end her tour or recall her from the United curity assistance to Ukraine, including but tion of the United States; States Embassy in Kiev; not limited to any notes, memoranda, docu- (II) a meeting at the White House on or (C) to the Acting Director of the Office of mentation or correspondence related to the around May 23, 2019, involving, among oth- Management and Budget commanding him decision; ers, President Trump, then-Special Rep- to produce, for the time period from January (vi) all draft and final versions of talking resentative for Ukraine Negotiations Ambas- 1, 2019, to the present, all documents, com- points related to the withholding or release sador Kurt Volker, then-Energy Secretary munications, and other records within the of foreign assistance, military assistance, or Rick Perry, and United States Ambassador possession, custody, or control of the Office security assistance to Ukraine, including to the European Union Gordon Sondland, as of Management and Budget, referring or re- communications with the Department of De- well as any private meetings or conversa- lating to— fense related to concerns about the accuracy tions with those individuals before or after (i) the actual or potential suspension, of the talking points; and the larger meeting; withholding, delaying, freezing, or releasing (vii) all meetings and calls between Presi- (III) meetings at the White House on or of United States foreign assistance, military dent Trump and the President of Ukraine, about July 10, 2019, involving Ukrainian offi- assistance, or security assistance of any kind including documents, communications, and cials Andriy Yermak and Oleksander to Ukraine, including but not limited to the other records related to the scheduling of, Danylyuk and United States Government of- Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (re- preparation for, and follow-up from the ficials, including, but not limited to, then- ferred to in this section as ‘‘USAI’’) and For- President’s April 21 and July 25, 2019, tele- National Security Advisor John Bolton, Sec- eign Military Financing (referred to in this phone calls, as well as the President’s Sep- retary Perry, Ambassador Volker, and Am- section as ‘‘FMF’’), including but not limited tember 25, 2019, meeting with the President bassador Sondland, to include at least a to— of Ukraine in New York; meeting in Ambassador Bolton’s office and a (I) communications among, between, or re- (D) to the Secretary of State commanding subsequent meeting in the Ward Room; ferring to Director Michael John ‘‘Mick’’ him to produce, for the time period from (IV) a meeting at the White House on or Mulvaney, Assistant to the President Robert January 1, 2019, to the present, all docu- around August 30, 2019, involving President Blair, Acting Director Russell Vought, Asso- ments, communications, and other records Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, ciate Director Michael Duffey, or any other within the possession, custody, or control of and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper; Office of Management and Budget employee; the Department of State, referring or relat- (V) a planned meeting, later cancelled, in (II) communications related to requests by ing to— Warsaw, Poland, on or around September 1, President Trump for information about (i) all meetings and calls between Presi- 2019 between President Trump and President Ukraine security or military assistance and dent Trump and the President of Ukraine, Zelensky, and subsequently attended by Vice responses to those requests; including documents, communications, and President Pence; and (III) communications related to concerns other records related to the scheduling of, (VI) a meeting at the White House on or raised by any Office of Management and preparation for, and follow-up from the around September 11, 2019, involving Presi- Budget employee related to the legality of President’s April 21 and July 25, 2019 tele- dent Trump, Vice President Pence, and Mr. any hold on foreign assistance, military as- phone calls, as well as the President’s Sep- Mulvaney concerning the lifting of the hold sistance, or security assistance to Ukraine; tember 25, 2019 meeting with the President of on security assistance for Ukraine; (IV) communications sent to the Depart- Ukraine in New York; (vi) meetings, telephone calls or conversa- ment of State regarding a hold or block on (ii) the actual or potential suspension, tions related to any occasions in which Na- congressional notifications regarding the re- withholding, delaying, freezing, or releasing tional Security Council officials reported lease of FMF funds to Ukraine; of United States foreign assistance, military concerns to National Security Council law- (V) communications between— assistance, or security assistance of any kind yers, including but not limited to National (aa) officials at the Department of Defense, to Ukraine, including but not limited to the Security Council Legal Advisor, John including but not limited to Undersecretary Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative Eisenberg, regarding matters related to of Defense Elaine McCusker; and (USAI) and Foreign Military Financing Ukraine, including but not limited to— (bb) Associate Director Michael Duffey, (FMF), including but not limited to all com- (I) the decision to delay military assist- Deputy Associate Director Mark Sandy, or munications with the White House, Depart- ance to Ukraine; any other Office of Management and Budget ment of Defense, and the Office of Manage- (II) the July 10, 2019 meeting at the White employee; ment and Budget, as well as the Ukrainian House with Ukrainian officials; (VI) all draft and final versions of the Au- government’s knowledge prior to August 28, (III) the President’s July 25, 2019 call with gust 7, 2019, memorandum prepared by the 2019, of any actual or potential suspension, the President of Ukraine; National Security Division, International withholding, delaying, freezing, or releasing (IV) a September 1, 2019 meeting between Affairs Division, and Office of General Coun- of United States foreign assistance to Ambassador Sondland and a Ukrainian offi- sel of the Office of Management and Budget Ukraine, including all meetings, calls, or cial; and about the release of foreign assistance, secu- other engagements with Ukrainian officials (V) the President’s September 7, 2019 call rity assistance, or security assistance to regarding potential or actual suspensions, with Ambassador Sondland; Ukraine; and holds, or delays in United States assistance (vii) any internal review or assessment (VII) the Ukrainian government’s knowl- to Ukraine; within the White House regarding Ukraine edge prior to August 28, 2019, of any actual or (iii) all documents, communications, matters following the September 9, 2019, re- potential suspension, withholding, delaying, notes, and other records created or received

VerDate Sep 11 2014 01:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A31JA6.012 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE January 31, 2020 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S771 by, Secretary Michael R. Pompeo, Counselor (III) a September 15, 2019 memorandum to (iv) planned or actual meetings with Presi- T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, former Special Rep- file written by Deputy Assistant Secretary dent Trump related to United States foreign resentative for Ukraine Negotiations Ambas- Kent; assistance, military assistance, or security sador Kurt Volker, Deputy Assistant Sec- (vii) all meetings or calls, including but assistance to Ukraine, including but not lim- retary George Kent, then-United States Em- not limited to all requests for or records of ited to any talking points and notes for Sec- bassy in Ukraine Charge d’Affaires William meetings or telephone calls, scheduling retary Mark Esper’s planned or actual meet- B. Taylor, and Ambassador to the European items, calendar entries, State Department ings with President Trump on August 16, Au- Union Gordon Sondland, and other State De- visitor records, and email or text messages gust 19, or August 30, 2019; partment officials, relating to efforts to— using personal or work-related devices, be- (v) the decision announced on or about (I) solicit, request, demand, induce, per- tween or among— September 11, 2019, to release appropriated suade, or coerce Ukraine to conduct or an- (I) current or former State Department of- foreign assistance, military assistance, and nounce investigations; ficials or employees, including but not lim- security assistance to Ukraine, including but (II) offer, schedule, cancel, or withhold a ited to Secretary Michael R. Pompeo, Am- not limited to any notes, memoranda, docu- White House meeting for Ukraine’s presi- bassador Volker, and Ambassador Sondland; mentation or correspondence related to the dent; or and decision; and (III) hold and then release military and (II) Rudolph W. Giuliani, Victoria (vi) all meetings and calls between Presi- other security assistance to Ukraine; Toensing, or Joseph diGenova; and dent Trump and the President of Ukraine, (iv) any meetings or proposed meetings at (viii) the curtailment or recall of former including but not limited to documents, or involving the White House that relate to United States Ambassador to Ukraine Marie communications, and other records related Ukraine, including but not limited to— ‘‘Masha’’ Yovanovitch from the United to the scheduling of, preparation for, and fol- (I) President Zelensky’s inauguration on States Embassy in Kiev, including credible low-up from the President’s April 21 and July 25, 2019 telephone calls, as well as the May 20, 2019, in Kiev, Ukraine, including but threat reports against her and any protec- President’s September 25, 2019 meeting with not limited to President Trump’s decision tive security measures taken in response; the President of Ukraine in New York; and not to attend, to ask Vice President Pence to and (2) the Sergeant at Arms is authorized to lead the delegation, directing Vice President (E) to the Secretary of Defense com- utilize the services of the Deputy Sergeant Pence not to attend, and the subsequent de- manding him to produce, for the time period at Arms or any other employee of the Senate cision about the composition of the delega- from January 1, 2019, to the present, all doc- in serving the subpoena authorized to be tion of the United States; uments, communications, and other records issued by this section. (II) a meeting at the White House on or within the possession, custody, or control of the Department of Defense, referring or re- around May 23, 2019, involving, among oth- SA 1296. Mr. SCHUMER proposed an ers, President Trump, then-Special Rep- lating to— (i) the actual or potential suspension, amendment to the resolution S. Res. resentative for Ukraine Negotiations Ambas- 488, to provide for related procedures sador Kurt Volker, then-Energy Secretary withholding, delaying, freezing, or releasing Rick Perry, and United States Ambassador of United States foreign assistance, military concerning the articles of impeach- to the European Union Gordon Sondland, as assistance, or security assistance of any kind ment against Donald John Trump, well as any private meetings or conversa- to Ukraine, including but not limited to the President of the United States; as fol- tions with those individuals before or after Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative lows: the larger meeting; (USAI) and Foreign Military Financing At the appropriate place in the resolving (III) meetings at the White House on or (FMF), including but not limited to— clause, insert the following: about July 10, 2019, involving Ukrainian offi- (I) communications among or between offi- cials at the Department of Defense, White SEC. lll. Notwithstanding any other cials Andriy Yermak and Oleksander provision of this resolution, pursuant to House, Office of Management and Budget, Danylyuk and United States Government of- rules V and VI of the Rules of Procedure and Department of State, or Office of the Vice ficials, including, but not limited to, then- Practice in the Senate When Sitting on Im- President; National Security Advisor John Bolton, Sec- peachment Trials, the Chief Justice of the (II) documents, communications, notes, or retary Perry, Ambassador Volker, and Am- United States, through the Secretary of the other records created, sent, or received by bassador Sondland, to include at least a Senate, shall issue a subpoena for the taking Secretary Mark Esper, Deputy Secretary meeting in Ambassador Bolton’s office and a of testimony of John Robert Bolton, and the David Norquist, Undersecretary of Defense subsequent meeting in the Ward Room; Sergeant at Arms is authorized to utilize the Elaine McCusker, and Deputy Assistant Sec- (IV) a meeting at the White House on or services of the Deputy Sergeant at Arms or retary of Defense Laura Cooper, or Mr. Eric around August 30, 2019, involving President any other employee of the Senate in serving Chewning; the subpoena authorized to be issued by this Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, (III) draft or final letters from Deputy Sec- section. and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper; retary David Norquist to the Office of Man- (V) a planned meeting, later cancelled, in agement and Budget; and Warsaw, Poland, on or around September 1, SA 1297. Mr. SCHUMER proposed an (IV) unredacted copies of all documents re- amendment to the resolution S. Res. 2019 between President Trump and President leased in response to the September 25, 2019, Zelensky, and subsequently attended by Vice Freedom of Information Act request by the 488, to provide for related procedures President Pence; and Center for Public Integrity (tracking number concerning the articles of impeach- (VI) a meeting at the White House on or 19-F-1934); ment against Donald John Trump, around September 11, 2019, involving Presi- (ii) the Ukrainian government’s knowledge President of the United States; as fol- dent Trump, Vice President Pence, and Mr. prior to August 28, 2019, of any actual or po- lows: Mulvaney concerning the lifting of the hold tential suspension, withholding, delaying, At the appropriate place in the matter fol- on security assistance for Ukraine; freezing, or releasing of United States for- lowing the resolving clause, insert the fol- (v) all communications, including but not eign assistance, military assistance, or secu- lowing: limited to WhatsApp or text messages on pri- rity assistance to Ukraine, including but not Notwithstanding any other provision of vate devices, between current or former limited to all meetings, calls, or other en- this resolution, pursuant to rules V and VI of State Department officials or employees, in- gagements with Ukrainian officials regard- the Rules of Procedure and Practice in the cluding but not limited to Secretary Michael ing potential or actual suspensions, holds, or Senate When Sitting on Impeachment R. Pompeo, Ambassador Volker, Ambassador delays in United States assistance to Trials, the Chief Justice of the United Sondland, Ambassador Taylor, and Deputy Ukraine, including but not limited to— States, through the Secretary of the Senate, Assistant Secretary Kent, and the following: (I) communications received from the De- shall issue a subpoena for the taking of testi- President Zelensky, Andriy Yermak, or indi- partment of State concerning the Ukrainian mony on oral deposition and subsequent tes- viduals or entities associated with or acting Embassy’s inquiries about United States for- timony before the Senate of John Robert in any capacity as a representative, agent, or eign assistance, military assistance, and se- Bolton, and the Sergeant at Arms is author- proxy for President Zelensky before and curity assistance to Ukraine; and ized to utilize the services of the Deputy Ser- after his election; (II) communications received directly from geant at Arms or any other employee of the (vi) all records specifically identified by the Ukrainian Embassy about United States Senate in serving the subpoena authorized to witnesses in the House of Representatives’ foreign assistance, military assistance, and be issued by this paragraph. impeachment inquiry that memorialize key security assistance to Ukraine; The deposition authorized by this resolu- events or concerns, and any records reflect- (iii) communications, opinions, advice, tion shall be taken before, and presided over ing an official response thereto, including counsel, approvals, or concurrences provided by, the Chief Justice of the United States, but not limited to— by the Department of Defense, Office of Man- who shall administer to the witness the oath (I) an August 29, 2019 cable sent by Ambas- agement and Budget, or the White House, on prescribed by rule XXV of the Rules of Pro- sador Taylor to Secretary Pompeo; the legality of any suspension, withholding, cedure and Practice in the Senate When Sit- (II) an August 16, 2019 memorandum to file delaying, freezing, or releasing of United ting on Impeachment Trials. The Chief Jus- written by Deputy Assistant Secretary Kent; States foreign assistance, military assist- tice shall have authority to rule, as an ini- and ance, and security assistance to Ukraine; tial matter, upon any question arising out of

VerDate Sep 11 2014 01:05 Feb 01, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A31JA6.012 S31JAPT1 dlhill on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with SENATE S772 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 31, 2020 the deposition. All objections to a question the deposition with the Secretary of the Sen- peachment against Donald John shall be noted by the Chief Justice upon the ate, who shall maintain them as confidential Trump, President of the United States; record of the deposition but the examination proceedings of the Senate. The Sergeant at as follows: shall proceed, and the witness shall answer Arms is authorized to make available for re- such question. The witness may refuse to an- view at secure locations, any of the video- At the appropriate place in the matter fol- swer a question only when necessary to pre- tapes or transcribed deposition records to lowing the resolving clause, insert the fol- serve a legally recognized privilege, or con- Members of the Senate, one designated staff lowing: stitutional right, and must identify such member per Senator, and the Chief Justice. Notwithstanding any other provision of privilege cited if refusing to answer a ques- The Senate may direct the Secretary of the this resolution, the Presiding Officer shall tion. Senate to distribute such materials, and to issue a subpoena for any witness or any doc- Examination of the witness at a deposition use whichever means of dissemination, in- ument that a Senator or a party moves to shall be conducted by the Managers on the cluding printing as Senate documents, print- subpoena if the Presiding Officer determines part of the House of Representatives or their ing in the Congressional Record, photo- and that the witness or document is likely to counsel, and by counsel for the President. video- duplication, and electronic dissemina- have probative evidence relevant to either The witness shall be examined by not more tion, he determines to be appropriate to ac- article of impeachment before the Senate, than 2 persons each on behalf of the Man- complish any distribution of the videotaped and, consistent with the authority of the agers and counsel for the President. The wit- or transcribed deposition records that he is Presiding Officer to rule on all questions of ness may be accompanies by counsel. The directed to make pursuant to this paragraph. evidence, shall rule on any assertion of privi- scope of the examination by the Managers The deposition authorized by this resolu- lege. and counsel for both parties shall be limited tion shall be deemed to be proceedings before ORDERS FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2020; TUES- to subject matters reflected in the Senate the Senate for purposes of rule XXIX of the DAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2020; AND WEDNESDAY, FEB- record. The party taking a deposition shall Standing Rules of the Senate, sections 101, RUARY 5, 2020 present to the other party, not less than 18 102, and 104 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. hours in advance of the deposition, copies of Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, 191, 192, and 194), sections 703, 705, and 707 of I further ask unanimous consent that all exhibits which the deposing party intends the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (2 to enter into the deposition. No exhibits out- U.S.C. 288b, 288d, and 288f), sections 6002 and when the Senate resumes legislative side of the Senate record shall be employed, 6005 of title 18, United States Code, and sec- session on Monday, February 3; Tues- except for articles and materials in the tion 1365 of title 28, United States Code. The day, February 4; and Wednesday, Feb- press, including electronic media. Any party Secretary of the Senate shall arrange for ruary 5; the Senate be in a period of may interrogate the witness as if the witness stenographic assistance, including morning business with Senators per- were declared adverse. videotaping, to record the depositions as pro- The deposition shall be videotaped and a mitted to speak for up to 10 minutes vided in section 205. Such expenses as may be transcript of the proceeding shall be made. each for debate only. necessary shall be paid from the ‘‘Appropria- The deposition shall be conducted in private. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Without objec- tion Account—Miscellaneous Items’’ in the No person shall be admitted to the deposi- contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers tion, so ordered. tion except for the following: The witness, approved by the Secretary. counsel for the witness, the Managers on the The deposition authorized by this resolu- f part of the House of Representatives, counsel tion may be conducted for a period of time for the Managers, counsel for the President, not to exceed 1 day. The period of time for ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY, and the Chief Justice; further, such persons the subsequent testimony before the Senate FEBRUARY 3, 2020, AT 11 A.M. whose presence is required to make and pre- authorized by this resolution shall not ex- serve a record of the proceeding in Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, ceed 1 day. The deposition and the subse- videotaped and transcript forms, and staff finally, I ask unanimous consent that quent testimony before the Senate shall both members to the Chief Justice whose presence be completed not later than 5 days after the the trial adjourn until 11 a.m., Feb- is required to assist the Chief Justice in pre- date on which this resolution is adopted. ruary 3, and that this order also con- siding over the deposition, or for other pur- stitute the adjournment of the Senate. poses, as determined by the Chief Justice. Mr. VAN HOLLEN proposed There being no objection, at 7:58 All persons present must maintain the con- SA 1298. fidentiality of the proceeding. an amendment to the resolution S. p.m., the Senate, sitting as a Court of The Chief Justice at the deposition shall Res. 488, to provide for related proce- Impeachment, adjourned until Monday, file the videotaped and transcribed records of dures concerning the articles of im- February 3, 2020, at 11 a.m.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 18:20 Feb 14, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4637 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S31JA0.REC S31JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE