Impeachment

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I have been in the Senate now for two Presidential impeachment trials, and I can tell you that this is never a situation I want to find our country in--not back then and certainly not today--when the odds of bipartisan cooperation, even on responsibilities as solemn as these, are brutally low.

In spite of this, I called for impeachment proceedings to begin in the House in July of this past year, and I did so because of the gravity of the threats to our democracy that has been outlined in Mueller's report. At the time, I felt, if we did not fully explore those threats, we would fall short of our constitutional duty and set a precedent of congressional indifference to potentially flagrant violations of our Constitution--ones that could jeopardize our core democratic institutions.

After hearing both sides' presentations and after reviewing every available source of information and testimony, I believe it is painfully clear that the President of the United States has abused his power and obstructed Congress and that he should be removed from office.

I want to talk about how I reached this conclusion, which I did not do lightly, and take a few minutes to reflect on the consequence of the decision each of us is individually about to make.

Throughout the trial, the contrast between the presentations by the House managers and the President's defense team could not have been starker or more damning for the President.

The House managers built an ironclad case that shows the President abused his power and obstructed Congress in ways that present grave, urgent threats to our national security and to the rule of law. Over the course of their arguments, it became undeniably clear: The corruption we have learned so much about in recent months starts at the very top--with the President of the United States.

President Trump demanded a foreign government to intervene in our elections for his own political gain, and he did so by withholding American taxpayer dollars and by ignoring congressional authority. The President's associates acted with his full knowledge and consent, and he himself pressured Ukraine's leader, knowing how much Ukraine depended on United States support. These actions have already made us less secure as a nation. By delaying vital military aid to Ukraine--a key partner--President Trump has emboldened Russia, one of our chief adversaries, and he has undermined our credibility with other allies worldwide.

Critically, the President has also given every indication he will continue to put his own interests ahead of American interests, including in our upcoming elections, and he has, time and again, refused to recognize Congress's constitutional authority to oversee the executive branch. In addition, information continues to come out that further implicates the President and demonstrates not only his intent to abuse the power of our highest office but his direct personal engagement and efforts to do so.

To summarize, the House's arguments made it impossible to ignore a reality our Founders deeply feared--a President who betrays our national security for his own personal benefit and disregards the system of checks and balances on which our democratic institutions depend, who believes he is above the law--contrary to the most fundamental American principles.

The President's defense did not directly refute those charges against the President or the thorough case that the House presented. In fact, the President's defense only served to illustrate how indefensible the President's actions were. We heard complaints from the President's defense about the House's process, which the President refused to engage in.

We heard a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukrainian election interference even though the President's own advisers repeatedly explained to him that Russia, not Ukraine, interfered in our 2016 election.

We heard the denial of a quid pro quo that, as the House managers laid out in excruciating detail, was borne out not only on the President's July 25 call with President Zelensky but in hundreds of documents from before and after that call.

We did not, however, hear any substantive defense of the President's actions. Tellingly, the President's defense vehemently opposed commonsense requests for the President's own key aides to testify and for the consideration of his aides' documents as part of this trial.

If the President were as innocent as he claims, surely, his aides and his administration's materials would bear those claims out, and he would want them considered. He and his team do not.

In 1999, I said that, if we were to remove a sitting President, none of us should have any doubts. Based on the facts we have heard today and the distraction and obfuscation that has been offered in response, none of us should have any doubts that the President committed the impeachable offenses of which he is accused.

What we now know is the President of the United States demanded that a foreign government interfere in our elections to help him win his upcoming campaign. That truth is indisputable. The question is, What does each of us as an individual do with that information?

In sitting here, I have been reminded that this trial is so much larger than any one of us--larger than any political party and much larger than President Trump. It is fundamentally about whether we will stand up for the institutions that secure our autonomy as a people-- institutions we hope to leave stronger for our children and grandchildren.

To go a step further, really, this trial is about freedom in our country because, if the President feels he owes his office to a foreign government, not to Americans, then whom does the President truly serve? How can he be trusted? If foreign governments can skew our elections in their favor, if they interfere with Americans at the ballot box this November, then are Americans truly represented in the White House? Is there any American who is really free if a President can owe his election to an entity outside and aside from the American people and if foreign governments can help to decide who is in our highest office?

These questions and their chilling answers have led me to my final decision, and I hope others consider them carefully as they make their own.

I also want to speak for a minute about fear. There are really two different kinds at work in this moment. One is the fear of political consequences. I remember how many Members of Congress felt compelled to vote for the war in Iraq. The political pressure was palpable. That kind of political fear is palpable again today, but fear of political consequences must never supersede concern for our country, and we should be fearful for our country today.

We should be fearful for our future, for our safety, and the rule of law if the evidence we have heard cannot persuade this body to act on the painful truth before us. Our President has betrayed the public trust, flagrantly violated our laws, and proved himself a threat to our national security. So I ask my colleagues how they want to feel not in this moment here today but in the years ahead and as part of our Nation's history as more information continues to come out about this administration--and it will--as we get closer to an election we still have a unique opportunity to help protect, and as we explain this difficult but pivotal time to our grandchildren. Looking back, whom or what will you want to have stood for--this President or our country?

I believe, as Representative Schiff said so simply and powerfully, that in America, ``right matters.''

But I also note right matters only because so many people have, throughout our history, stood up for what is right, even when-- especially when--it may be difficult.

Today each U.S. Senator is called to do the same.

Thank you, Mr. President.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source