Impeachment

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, for the information of all of our colleagues, earlier this afternoon, my friend the Democratic leader and I had a cordial conversation. We discussed a potential path forward following the House Democrats' precedent-breaking impeachment of President Trump. Our conversation was cordial, but my friend from New York continues to insist on departing from the unanimous bipartisan precedent that 100 Senators approved before the beginning of President Clinton's trial.

Back in 1999, Senators recognized that there might well be disagreements about questions that would arise at the middle and end of the trial, such as witnesses. Here is what happened: All 100 Senators endorsed a commonsense solution. We divided the process into two stages. The first resolution passed unanimously before the trial began. It laid the groundwork, such as scheduling and structured early steps like opening arguments. Mid-trial questions such as witnesses were left until the middle of the trial when Senators could make a more informed judgment about that more contentious issue. All 100 Senators, including me, including Mr. Schumer, and a number of our colleagues on both sides who were here in 1999 endorsed the first resolution as a bipartisan, minimalist first step.

As of today, however, we remain at an impasse because my friend the Democratic leader continues to demand a new and different set of rules for President Trump. He wants to break from that unanimous bipartisan precedent and force an all-or-nothing approach. My colleague wants a special pretrial guarantee of certain witnesses whom the House Democrats themselves did not bother to pursue as they assembled their case, or he wants to proceed without giving any organizational resolution whatsoever. As I said, we remain at an impasse on these logistics.

For myself, I continue to believe that the unanimous bipartisan precedent that was good enough for President Clinton ought to be good enough for President Trump. Fair is fair.

Now, of course, there is the matter of the Articles of Impeachment themselves. It is a highly unusual step. The House continues to hem and haw about whether and when she intends to take the normal next step and transmit the House's accusations over here to the Senate. Some House Democrats imply they are withholding the articles for some kind of leverage so they can dictate the Senate process to Senators.

I admit, I am not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want; but, alas, if they can figure that out, they can explain it. Meanwhile, other House Democrats seem to be suggesting they prefer never to transmit the articles. That is fine with me, and the Speaker of the House herself has been unclear on this. Her message has been somewhat muddled.

So here is where we are, Mr. President. We have a curious situation where, following House Democrats' rush to impeachment, following weeks of pronouncement about the urgency of the situation, the prosecutors appear to have developed cold feet. The House Democrat prosecution seems to have gotten cold feet and to be unsure of whether they even want to proceed to the trial.

As I said, a very unusual spectacle and, in my view, certainly not one that reflects well on the House. So we will see whether House Democrats ever want to work up the courage to actually take their accusations to trial.

Let me close with this: I am proud that the Senate came together today to confirm more well-qualified nominees and to pass major legislation for the American people.

I wish all of my colleagues a merry Christmas, happy holidays, and a joyous new year. I hope everyone enjoys this important time with their families and loved ones. We will see you in 2020.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source