CNN "CNN Newsroom" - Transcript: Interview With Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Let me try to do the same here. Let me bring in Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. He

is a member of Budget and the Appropriations Committee.

So, Senator Van Hollen, a pleasure to have you on. Welcome sir.

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Brooke, great to be with you.

BALDWIN: All right.

So, Senator, you were one of the first to float this idea of the House hanging on to those articles of impeachment until the Senate Republicans agree to this fair trial. Tell the American people why you think it's a good play.

VAN HOLLEN: Oh, it's a good play because the American people deserve a fair trial.

And what Speaker Pelosi is saying is that she won't transfer the articles of impeachment until we get assurances that there will be a fair trial.

We all know that Mitch McConnell, Senator McConnell, said that he was not an impartial juror, that he was going to work in lockstep with the president, who's the defendant in this trial proceeding.

And McConnell has also rejected our very reasonable requests for relevant fact witnesses. I think the American people know that a real trial, that's fair, you get to call your fact witnesses.

And so Pelosi is doing the right thing.

BALDWIN: First, just on process, one of the tricky things is that, in the Constitution, it's very clear as far as what the House and Senate need to do, but there's no clear set of rules on how those articles must make their way from the House to the Senate.

So, Senator Van Hollen, what do you say if Leader McConnell just says, well, we're going to start a trial anyway? What do you do?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, he cannot start a trial without receiving the articles of impeachment.

[15:05:05]

And that's what we're saying. Before those articles get transmitted from the House of Representatives, we have to have assurances, the public needs assurances that this will be a fair process.

And this is all made necessary by the fact that Mitch McConnell made it clear that he was trying to rig the trial. I mean, he said he was going to be talking with the president, taking his lead from the president's lawyers.

That is not the duty of the Senate. We're supposed to try the case. And that means getting to the facts, even more facts. The House has presented lots of facts, but they have a right, under a normal trial proceedings, to call witnesses.

BALDWIN: But -- but...

VAN HOLLEN: So, if we're going to call this a trial, let's make sure we have the opportunity to treat it like a trial.

BALDWIN: I hear you and I hear Democrats wanting this fair trial.

But on the flip side, we have heard your party over and over that Trump is a risk to the country, right, that he poses this clear and present danger. But doesn't slowing down the process, right, hanging on to those articles run counter to that?

VAN HOLLEN: No, we want a speedy trial. This can be done very quickly. There's no need to take a lot of time.

In fact, we have said that these witnesses, we're talking about maybe four hours each. So it would really be the White House trying to hold things up if they refuse to do what you get to have in any normal trial, which is the witnesses you call.

Look, if a witness wants to come down and take the Fifth Amendment, they can do that. But a fair trial requires the calling of witnesses. And that's what we're asking for.

When the House said that they wanted this to move quickly, obviously, we want to speedy trial.

BALDWIN: Yes.

VAN HOLLEN: But that doesn't mean you can't have a fair trial. You can have both.

BALDWIN: You want a fair trial. At the end of the day, though, Senator, your party isn't in power. So what can you realistically do to stop Mitch McConnell?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, again, Speaker Pelosi can insist on the parameters of a fair trial before sending over the articles of impeachment.

And as was reported, later today, Senator McConnell and Senator Schumer will be meeting. And what Senator -- excuse me -- what Speaker Pelosi has said is, she wants to see whether they're going to agree to a fair process, because that's what the American people deserve.

And the American people understand in their gut that, if you're going to have a fair trial, you get to call witnesses and present additional evidence.

The only reason that the president or Mitch McConnell would not agree to this is because the additional evidence that we will be receiving will be even more incriminating, and make it more difficult for Republican senators to vote to acquit the president.

And so that's clearly what they're afraid of. If they had nothing to fear from this evidence and this testimony, then they wouldn't be hiding it.

So, let's...

BALDWIN: Sure. And they would say -- but they would say, all right, Democrats are holding these articles hostage. We want to continue on. We have nothing to hide.

Both sides will have spin both ways.

(CROSSTALK)

VAN HOLLEN: No, no, no. No one's holding -- no, all they have to say is that you get to conduct this trial like any trial in America, right?

In other trials in America, you don't have a political vote to determine who gets to testify or not testify. The judge gets to decide.

Look, if the chief justice would play an active role in this and rule on motions with respect to who gets to be a witness, and that wouldn't be subject to a political veto, that may be one way forward, right?

That would be fair.

BALDWIN: Have you tried talking to -- have you talked to any of these more moderate Republicans about any of this, Senator, the Mitt Romneys, the Susan Collins, the Lisa Murkowskis of the world? Have you talked to them and what are they saying?

VAN HOLLEN: There have been some conversations. They have also made public statements.

And my sense is that at least they're saying that they want a fair trial. But let's -- that means that you have got to ensure these witnesses.

And I think everybody...

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: But are they speaking up to Mitch McConnell? Are they saying, this is how we feel?

VAN HOLLEN: I don't know the answer to that.

I hope everybody will ask them. I think we should have a very public and open conversation with the American people about what constitutes a fair trial. That's why what Speaker Pelosi has done is appropriate and smart, because what she's doing is shining a light on whether or not the process is fair or whether it's rigged.

BALDWIN: Sure. Sure.

And here's my final question, Senator Van Hollen. And that is, a lot of Americans hear the word impeach, and they think, OK, he's out, right? But, no, that that's the Senate's job.

My question is, do you think he should be removed from office, given the evidence you have seen?

VAN HOLLEN: So here's my view, Brooke, which is that the House has produced overwhelming evidence to warrant the impeachment of the president and the removal of the president, but subject to additional evidence.

[15:10:03]

I will very carefully listen to any additional evidence and will not make a final decision or render a verdict until all the evidence is in.

But it's important that the evidence come in. And, as you know, it was the White House that denied the House of Representatives lots of important evidence.

And I think that we're entitled to that. Look, it's the president -- the president said he wanted a big trial in the United States Senate. He wanted to call a lot of witnesses.

It's totally inconsistent for him to say, we want a lot of witnesses, but guess what, I'm ordering White House witnesses not to show up, right? That is not a fair trial. The American people know it.

No matter where they stand on the ultimate question of whether the evidence warrants impeachment and removal, overwhelming, the American people know a fair trial when they see one.

BALDWIN: Well, America will be watching you very closely.

Senator Van Hollen, good luck. Thank you.

VAN HOLLEN: Thank you. You too.

BALDWIN: Coming up next: President Trump insults the late Congressman John Dingell, a man who served his country as both a veteran and the longest serving congressman in U.S. history.

Hear how his wife, current Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, is responding to that today.

And Democrat voters weigh in on how they view impeachment and whether it's worth the potential political price.

You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We will be right back.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source