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, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2020 No. 19 Senate The Senate met at 1:13 p.m. and was onment, while the Senate of the United managers, as they have framed their called to order by the Chief Justice of States is sitting for the trial of the articles case, they have explained—and this is the United States. of impeachment exhibited by the House of pointed out in our trial memorandum— Representatives against Donald John Trump, that in the House Judiciary Committee f President of the United States. report, they specify that the standard TRIAL OF DONALD J. TRUMP, The CHIEF JUSTICE. The majority they have to meet is to show that this PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED leader is recognized. is a sham investigation; it is a bogus STATES ORDER OF PROCEDURE investigation. These investigations The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senate Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. Chief Justice, have—there is not any legitimate pub- will convene as a Court of Impeach- today the Senate will conduct up to 8 lic purpose. That is the language: any ment. hours of questions to the parties deliv- ‘‘legitimate public purpose.’’ That is The Chaplain will lead us in prayer. ered in writing to the Chief Justice. As the standard they have set for them- PRAYER a reminder, the two sides will alternate selves in being able to make this claim The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- and answers should be kept to 5 min- under their theory of what an abuse of fered the following prayer: utes or less. power offense can be. Let us pray. The majority side will lead off with a It is a very demanding standard that Divine Shepherd, honor, glory, and question from the Senator from Maine. they have set for themselves to meet, power belong to You. Refresh our Sen- Ms. COLLINS. Mr. Chief Justice. and they have even said—they came The CHIEF JUSTICE. The Senator is ators as they enter a new phase of this up, and they talked a lot about the recognized. impeachment trial. May they realize Bidens. They talked a lot about these Ms. COLLINS. I send a question to that You have appointed them for this issues and 2016 election interference be- the desk on behalf of myself, Senator great service, and they are accountable cause they were saying there is not MURKOWSKI, and Senator ROMNEY. to You. even a scintilla—a scintilla of any evi- Lord, empower them to labor today The CHIEF JUSTICE. This is a ques- dence of anything worth looking into with the dominant purpose of pleasing tion for the counsel for the President: there. And that is the standard that You, knowing that it is never wrong to If President Trump had more than one mo- they would have to meet, showing that do right. Give them resiliency in their tive for his alleged conduct, such as the pur- there is no possible public interest and toil, as they remember Your promise suit of personal political advantage, rooting the President couldn’t have had any that they will reap a bountiful harvest out corruption, and the promotion of na- smidgeon, even, of a public interest if they don’t give up. Help them to fol- tional interests, how should the Senate con- sider more than one motive in its assessment motive because they recognize that low the road of humility that leads to of article I? once you get into a mixed-motive situ- honor, as they find their safety in Mr. Counsel PHILBIN. Mr. Chief Jus- ation—if there is both some personal trusting You. We pray in Your majestic Name. tice, Senators, in response to that motive but also a legitimate public in- Amen. question, there are really two layers to terest motive—it can’t possibly be an my answer because I would like to offense because it would be absurd to PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE point out first that, even if there was have the Senate trying to consider: The Chief Justice led the Pledge of only one motive, the theory of abuse of Well, was it 48 percent legitimate in- Allegiance, as follows: power that the House managers have terest and 52 percent personal interest I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the presented, that the subjective motive or was it the other way, was it 53 per- United States of America, and to the Repub- lic for which it stands, one nation under God, alone can become the basis for an im- cent and 47 percent? You can’t divide it indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. peachable offense, we believe is con- that way. THE JOURNAL stitutionally defective. It is not a per- That is why they recognize that to The CHIEF JUSTICE. If there is no missible way to frame a claim of an have even a remotely coherent theory, objection, the Journal of proceedings of impeachable offense under the Con- the standard they have to set for them- the trial is approved to date. stitution. selves is establishing there is no pos- Without objection, it is so ordered. I will put that aside and address the sible public interest at all for these in- The Sergeant at Arms will make the question of mixed motive. If there were vestigations. And if there is any possi- proclamation. a motive that was of public interest bility, if there is something that shows The Sergeant at Arms, Michael C. and also of some personal interest, we a possible public interest and the Presi- Stenger, made proclamation as follows: think it follows even more clearly that dent could have that possible public in- Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye! All persons are that cannot possibly be the basis for an terest motive, that destroys their case. commanded to keep silent, on pain of impris- impeachable offense. Even the House So once you are into mixed-motive ∑ This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor. S645 . VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:30 Feb 11, 2020 Jkt 099060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4624 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD20\JANUARY\S29JA0.REC S29JA0 sradovich on DSKJLST7X2PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE S646 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 29, 2020 land, it is clear that their case fails. I would also add, in response to the Mr. Manager SCHIFF. One last video, There can’t possibly be an impeachable last question, that if any part of the which is even more important and on offense at all. President’s motivation was a corrupt point for Mr. Bolton—No. 3. Think about it. All elected officials, motive, if it was a causal factor in the (Text of Videotape presentation:) to some extent, have in mind how their action to freeze the aid or withhold the Mr. Counsel PURPURA. And once again, conduct, how their decisions, their pol- meeting, that is enough to convict. It not a single witness in the House record that icy decisions will affect the next elec- would be enough to convict under they compiled and developed under their pro- tion. There is always some personal in- criminal law. cedures that we discussed and will continue terest in the electoral outcome of pol- But here there is no question about to discuss provided any firsthand evidence that the President ever linked the Presi- icy decisions, and there is nothing the President’s motivation. And if you wrong with that. That is part of rep- dential meeting to any of the investigations. have any question about the Presi- Anyone who spoke with the President said resentative democracy. And to start dent’s motivation, it makes it all the that the President made it clear that there saying now that, well, if you have a more essential to call the man who was no linkage between security assistance part motive that is for your personal spoke directly with the President, and investigations. electoral gain that that somehow is whom the President confided in and Mr. Manager SCHIFF. We know that going to become an offense, it doesn’t said he was holding up this aid because is not correct, right? Because, of make any sense and it is totally un- he wanted Ukraine to conduct these course, Mick Mulvaney said that the workable and it can’t be a basis for re- political investigations that would help money was linked to these investiga- moving a President from office. him in the next election—if you have tions. He said, in acknowledging a quid The bottom line is, once you are into any question about whether it was a pro quo, that they do it all the time, any mixed-motive situation, once it is factor, the factor, a quarter of the fac- and we should just get over it. Gordon established that there is a legitimate tor, all of the factor, there is a witness Sondland also said the President said, public interest that could justify look- a subpoena away who could answer on the one hand, no quid pro quo but ing into something, just asking a ques- that question. also made it clear that Zelensky had to tion about something, the managers’ case fails, and it fails under their own But the overwhelming body of the go to the mic and announce these in- terms. They recognize that they have evidence makes it very clear, on July vestigations.