CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) is Interviewed about Trump's Impeachment

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: That is why those opening arguments from both sides will be so critical moving forward. Phil Mattingly up on Capitol Hill, thanks very much.

Let's get some more on all of this. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator, thanks so much for joining us. And as you know, the president has added Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz and others to his defense team. What does that tell you about his strategy? SEN. ED MARKEY (D-MA): Well, it tells me that for the first time we are going to have lawyers who will be responsible for defending the actual charge against the president. Which is that he was compromising our national security by withholding $391 million from the Ukraine government unless they engaged in an investigation of the Biden family. There was no defense of that. That was offered in the House of Representatives. So, this will give them a chance to defend.

My concern is that it is a very Trumpian team that has been named. And my fear is that this strategy might be to try to turn this into reality TV. Into the "people's court" rather than a Senate trial that has the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States presiding over this trial. So it remains to be seen what happens, but they will have an opportunity to work with the Democrats to ensure that witnesses and documents which were withheld on the House side are in fact included as part of the actual trial that will be conducted on the Senate floor.

BLITZER: Yes, the president has clearly a very high powered, well- known legal defense team that will represent him in these arguments. What can we expect from the Democrats on Tuesday with the Senate reconvenes for this trial? Will there be multiple amendments to the - let's call, organizing resolution?

MARKEY: Well, to be determined. But the one thing we want uniformly from our side is that we gain access to the witnesses that did not testify on the House side. That's Mick Mulvaney. It's John Bolton.

[17:10:01]

It's others that have firsthand knowledge of what the president was ordering his team to do in the Ukraine for his own political gain. His own electoral gain in his presidential reelection bid. We are going to fight very, very hard to have those witnesses.

And since the House impeachment articles were passed a month ago, there's been an avalanche of new documents which have, in fact, become public. And we want to ensure that all of that information is made available to senators on both sides. We are not sure that the Republicans will vote to make that available to us.

A trial is ultimately a search for the truth. And the truth requires all of those witnesses that have relevant information. All of those documents that shed light on this case to be made available.

BLITZER: Senator -

MARKEY: And if his lawyers engage in the same kind of obstructionism that the president has thus far, then we will have a sham of a trial and not a real one.

BLITZER: Senator Susan Collins of Maine is one of four Republicans you'll certainly be counting on eventually after the opening arguments from both sides to call witnesses, but she says she is still undecided on any particular witnesses. What is the Democratic strategy right now to gain those critical Republican votes? MARKEY: Well, we will continue to talk to the Republican members. I will be talking to them. Others will be talking to them. In the effort to hopefully get four of them out of 53 to agree that witnesses who have direct firsthand knowledge of what the president was doing absolutely have to be heard, not just by the Senate, but by the American people. In many ways, it is not just Donald Trump, but the United States Senate which is on trial.

BLITZER: If Democrats -

MARKEY: And my hope is that enough of them will rise up to the constitutional responsibility to ensure that it is a full and fair trial.

BLITZER: If Democrats do get to call witnesses, why shouldn't the Republicans get to call witnesses at the same time?

MARKEY: Well, I think the test will be relevancy. Do those witnesses have relevant information that goes to this particular charge against Donald Trump that he was seeking to compromise. American national security in order to gain a political advantage against a political rival in the presidential race later on in the year. That would be something that would have to be considered, but it would have to pass the test of relevancy. There's no question that Mick Mulvaney, John Bolton, and others, pass that test with flying colors. So it all depends upon who they are talking about, not just however witnesses to turn the whole proceeding into a side show which is my greatest fear that that is what they would try to do.

BLITZER: And what if they want for example, you know, Hunter Biden to testify?

MARKEY: Well, Hunter Biden has no relevant information about what Donald Trump was trying to do in terms of explaining the investigation -

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: But the president has repeatedly referred to him as part of this whole issue involving Ukraine.

MARKEY: The charge against the president is the ruling that the GAO made yesterday which is that the president illegally withheld the $391 million from the Ukraine government in return for a political favor. Hunter Biden does not know what the president was doing. He does not know what was in the mind of the president in seeking to accomplish that. He doesn't know what he said to Mick Mulvaney, to John Bolton, to others on his staff or at OMB in order to accomplish this goal which he had. So, it would have to pass the test of relevancy. And I don't think calling Hunter Biden in any way would meet that test.

BLITZER: But what if that were the condition for getting the four witnesses you want. How would you vote?

MARKEY: Well, I would vote no. And I would say that the lawyers which the president hired would be then pursuing an agenda which would clearly be trying to turn the whole proceeding into the people's court. Just trying to turn it on the a reality show, just trying to turn it into just a further extension of the goal which Donald Trump has, which is to charge the whole proceeding with being something that is a hoax and a sham without any basis in reality, because these charges are real. The offense against the Constitution is a serious one, and my hope is that his lawyers will treat it that way and not as a side show just to satisfy the president's ambition to turn it into a political circus with partisanship characterizing it rather than the goal to be a patriot that has all of the facts on the table so that the American people can decide.

[17:15:05]

BLITZER: You and your colleagues are all -- 99 of your colleagues are going to be very busy starting next Tuesday, six days a week during the course of this trial. We will see how long it lasts. Senator Ed Markey, thanks so much for joining us.

MARKEY: Thank you. Thanks for having me on.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source