BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
The question now of what's next? For that, we are joined by Democratic congresswoman and Judiciary Committee vice chair, Mary Gay Scanlon.
Congresswoman, thanks for being with us.
Speaker Pelosi is obviously trying to frame this in somber terms, it is not something that Congress as lightly or with partisan intent, he is saying. It is extraordinarily partisan, however. Everyone has dug in.
Do you have any reason to believe that will change as you move ahead with articles of impeachment? Is there any sign of that?
REP. MARY GAY SCANLON (D-PA): Well, I think, as with the speaker, we're hopeful that people will do their constitutional duty. It's not personal. It's not political. It's about the Constitution.
I think we laid out really clearly yesterday with the witnesses, talking about why we have an impeachment clause, why the Founders thought there were certain things that constituted impeachable conduct, and they were the very things we are talking about here. It's foreign interference in our government. It's corrupt elections. It's corruption by our executive.
This Ukraine incident and the cover-up involved really involves all of those things.
COOPER: I mean, it certainly is political. I mean, it has political ramifications. It's hard to see it, I admit it certainly has to do with the Constitution, but is it really fair to say it's not political?
SCANLON: The only folks who were talking about us being an election are our Republican counterparts. They keep saying oh, this is about undoing an election. Impeachment is not about undoing an election. Elections are for, as the speaker suggested earlier today, that when you disagree with someone's morals, where you disagree with their qualifications, or you disagree with their policies, this isn't about any of that. This is about the fact that the current president appears to be undermining our constitution through corruption.
COOPER: I knew the Judiciary Committee is going to have a hearing on Monday, during which you're going to hear from the Intelligence Committee majority and minority counsels. There is a lot of expectation, a full House vote could be held before Christmas.
What do you think of the timeline? And also the argument that, you know, there is nothing in the Constitution about how long this could take or should take?
SCANLON: Right. Well, I think we are just trying to work through it as expeditiously as we can. The report was put out by the Intel Committee this week has a lot of urgency to it. I mean, we saw with the Mueller report, we saw that the president had a welcome news interference by Russia in the 2016 election, and then when he was caught out, tried to cover it up and obstruct that investigation. Now, we have this situation with the Ukraine.
We are looking ahead to the 20 election. He is soliciting interference from another country, and when he got caught out, he is trying to obstruct that investigation, so we really do have a lot of urgency to move quickly because we have another election at stake.
COOPER: Do you have any reservations, though, about moving forward, actually charging the president of the United States in what is akin to an indictment without having heard from people like John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney? Obviously, you wanted to. The White House isn't cooperating. But, you know, Democrats could wait out the court fight and possibly compel them to testify.
SCANLON: Well, I think we have to deal with I think -- you know, we have to play the hand we've been dealt, OK? So, back in May, we asked Don McGahn to come in. He's the president's former White House counsel who allegedly was told by the president to cover up the fact that the president ordered the special counsel to be fired.
We just got a ruling two or three weeks ago that the president wrongly obstructed him from coming before Congress, but now the president has appealed that ruling, so we could be weeks and weeks and months and months further along in this process before we get to hear from those witnesses. So, you know, if the president wants to tell his tale, if there is a tale, a vindicating tale to be told, he has every opportunity to do it, but he has chosen not to, and it's beginning to look like that's because there is no factual defense. That's why we have all this finger-pointing.
COOPER: And are you confident that, when there is a full house vote, there's always one Democratic congressman from New Jersey who says he's going to vote against the articles of impeachment? Do you think he would lose any more members?
SCANLON: I think the bigger questions going to be how many Republicans they lose?
COOPER: Do you think they will lose any?
SCANLON: I think they should.
[20:10:01]
I mean, they already lost one but they threw him out of the party.
COOPER: Congresswoman Scanlon, appreciate your time. Thank you.
SCANLON: Thank you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT