Trump impeachment: on Principles & Values

Adam Schiff: Firing FBI's Comey for hidden reasons is obstructing justice

"The allegations in the Times piece, if accurate, provide further potential evidence that the White House was engaged in an effort to obstruct justice," Schiff told The Washington Post.

Schiff, the top Democrat on the House intelligence Committee, said if true that Sessions gathered info on Comey, that Sessions may have been "trying to set up some predicate for firing [Comey] without disclosing what the true reason was." "If this was part of an effort to conceal the real motive for firing Comey, that's very pertinent to obstruction of justice," Schiff told the Post.

Adam Schiff: Anyone excerpt the president would have been indicted

And your work speaks of a president who committed countless acts of obstruction of justice that in my opinion and that of many other prosecutors, had it been anyone else in the country, they would have been indicted.

You would not tell us whether you would have indicted the president but for the OLC only that you could not. So the Justice Department will have to make that decision when the president leaves office, both as to the crime of obstruction of justice and as to the campaign finance fraud that individual one directed and coordinated and for which Michael Cohen went to jail.

Adam Schiff: Congress must decide on impeachment, not Mueller

You would not tell us whether the counterintelligence investigation revealed whether people still serving within the administration pose a risk of compromise and should never have been given a security clearance, so we must find out.

We did not bother to ask whether financial inducements from any Gulf nations were influencing U.S. policy since it is outside the four corners of your report, and so we must find out.

You would not tell us whether the president should be impeached, nor did we ask you since it is our responsibility to determine the proper remedy for the conduct outlined in your report. Whether we decide to impeach the president in the house or we do not, we must take any action necessary to protect the country while he is in office.

Adam Schiff: Challenges to subpoenas not impeachable, stonewalling is

SCHIFF: Going to court is not an impeachable offense. Stonewalling completely, refusing to comply with the oversight of Congress, particularly during an impeachment inquiry is an impeachable offense. I think this may be the most serious of the articles, because it would fundamentally alter the balance of power and allow for much greater misconduct in the chief executive of the country.

Adam Schiff: Impeachment: Can't turn away from cheating in next election

They don't want the American people to see the facts. They realize what's been presented in the House is already overwhelming, but there's more damning evidence to be had, and they don't want the American people to see that, and I think that's disgraceful. I hope that the senators will insist on getting the documents, on hearing from the witnesses, on making up their own mind even if there are some senators who have decided this president can do nothing wrong.

Adam Schiff: Made case for impeachment guilt, but not for removal

I didn't have time to ask who "they" were. We had been getting feedback during the course of the trial, sometimes directly from senators. But the best sources of information came from Sen. Schumer's staff, passed on to my staff in whispers and handwritten notes. Were these questions coming from Democratic senators, like Joe Manchin from West Virginia, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, or Doug Jones of Alabama? If so, we were in trouble.

Or was this feedback coming from Republican senators, several of whom had kept their cards close to the vest? If the Republican senators were asking, that meant their minds were still open to conviction, and that was good, even though at this point in the trial they had yet to hear the defense case.

Adam Schiff: Senators believed Trump guilty, but no reason to convict

This was the central question: Why should he be removed? He was the president of their party. He was putting conservative judges on the court. He was lowering their taxes. Why remove him? The president's Senate defenders believed there had been no quid pro quo. But I could see now that that wasn't it at all.

For the past three years, Republicans had confided their serious misgivings about the president. And the question wasn't so much "Why should he be removed?" as "Why should I be the one to remove him? Why should I risk my seat, my career and future? Why should I?"

Beto O`Rourke: Future Justice Dept. should follow facts on Trump

O'Rourke: I would want my Justice Department, any future administration's Justice Department to follow the facts and the truth and to make sure at the end of the day that there is accountability and justice without this idea, this experiment of American Democracy comes to a close. We were attacked unlike any other time in our 243 year history. We have a president who has yet to acknowledge it and a president who has yet to be brought to justice. So yes, at the end of the day, justice is important.

Al Green: Introduced motion to impeach Trump

The debate is roiling House Democrats, with progressives forcing a debate over the issue even as vulnerable incumbents, particularly members in districts that favored Trump, worry it could jeopardize their future in Congress.

Earlier this month, 58 House Democrats led by Rep. Al Green (D-Texas)--nearly a third of their caucus--voted to begin debate on articles of impeachment against Trump, despite calls by Democratic leadership to spike the measure. And now those on the other side of the debate are already fretting about how far their colleagues and the Democratic base will try to take the issue ahead of the midterms.

Amy Klobuchar: Trump's actions make Russia great again, not America

Amy Klobuchar: President focusing on personal interests risks democracy

KLOBUCHAR: I have made it very clear that this is impeachable conduct and I've called for an impeachment proceeding. I just believe our job as jurors is to look at each count and make a decision. But let me make very clear that what this impeachment proceeding about is really our democracy at stake. This is a president that not only with regard to his conduct with Ukraine, but every step of the way puts his own private interests, his own partisan interests, his own political interests in front of our country's interest, and this is wrong. This is a pattern with this man. And it goes to everything from how he has betrayed our farmers, to sucking up to Vladimir Putin every minute of the day. That is what this guy does. And I think it is very, very important that we have a president that's going to put our country first.

Andrew Yang: Impeachment won't solve problems that got Trump elected

Andrew Yang: Impeachment: Open to pardoning Trump if elected

YANG: My focus is on solving the problems that got Donald Trump elected and moving the country forward. If you look around the world, unfortunately, it's developing countries that have fallen into a pattern of the new president or the new leader prosecuting and sometimes imprisoning the former leader. That's not a precedent that's been set here in the U.S.

Barbara Bollier: Supports impeachment because no one is above the law

During an interview this week, she didn't go so far as to support Trump's impeachment, but she voiced support for the impeachment inquiry underway in the House. "If we're doing something like this, we should do it in a non-partisan way," she said, adding that the allegations are serious and "no one is above the law."

Ben Sasse: Idea that there's no truth is corrosive to democracy

Bernie Sanders: Trump a corrupt president, worthy of impeachment

Bernie Sanders: Trump think he is above the law, but nobody is

SANDERS: Well, I think the people of this country are catching on to the degree that this president thinks he is above the law. And what the American people are saying: Nobody is above the law. And I think what the American people are also saying is, in fact, that if this president did break the law, he should be prosecuted like any other individual who breaks the law. But at the end of the day, what we need to do is to bring our people together not just in opposition to Trump. The initial question that somebody raised here was that we are a divided nation. You know what? I kind of reject that.

Bernie Sanders: Trump has documentedly lied thousands of times as President

Sanders: We have a president who is a pathological liar. We have a president who is running the most corrupt administration in the modern history of this country. And we have a president who is a fraud, because during his campaign he told working people one thing, and he ended up doing something else. I believe, and I will personally be doing this in the coming weeks and months, is making the case that we have a president who has sold out the working families of this country, who wants to cut social security, Medicare, and Medicaid, after he promised he would not do that, and who has documentedly lied thousands of times since he is president. And the case to be made is, yeah, certainly, I disagree with Trump on virtually all of his policies, but what conservatives, I think, understand, is that we cannot have a president with that temperament, who is dishonoring the presidency of the United States.

Beto O`Rourke: Impeach Trump to get facts & assure accountability

Beto O`Rourke: Impeachment: Can't fail those who sacrificed for our country

Bill Clinton: Lying about sex is not an abuse of presidential power

Bill Clinton: International support for Clinton during impeachment

The difference this time around, he added, is how democratic governments have responded. "Democratic countries around the world really dismissed the Clinton impeachment as a kind of a personal peccadillo turned into a self-righteous American democratic process run amok," he said. "This time, democratic countries see the future of American democracy at stake, and are worried about its viability, and therefore look at this as totally different than the Clinton case."

Bill Clinton: Christianity Today 1998: Clinton morally unable to lead

2019: We have done our best to give evangelical Trump supporters their due, to try to understand their point of view, to see the prudential nature of so many political decisions they have made regarding Mr. Trump. To use an old cliche, it's time to call a spade a spade, to say that no matter how many hands we win in this political poker game, we are playing with a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence.

Bill de Blasio: Impeach Trump, but Dems should talk about working people

We need more talk about working people and their lives. For example, are we really ready -- and I ask people on this stage this question -- are we ready to make sure that the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes? That's something every American wants to know about. That's something they want answers to right now.

So, yeah, move for impeachment, but don't forget to do the people's business and to stand up for working people, because that's how we're actually going to beat Donald Trump. The best impeachment is beating him in the election of 2020.

Bill O`Brien: Impeachment: There has to be a quid pro quo; none there

Brian Kemp: Call off Georgia runoff election; it's a scam

Carly Fiorina: Vital to impeach Trump; not sure about removal from office

Cheri Bustos: Democrat from Trump-won district opposes impeachment

Democrats like Bustos say they are waiting for the outcome of a special counsel investigation into Trump associates' ties to Russia, which has raised the specter of indictments in Trump's inner circle and even an obstruction of justice charge against the president himself. Other Democrats say the president's handling of race issues and business conflicts of interest already present grounds for impeachment.

Chris Janicek: Impeachment about upholding rule of law

Colin Powell: First Amendment means the press can criticize the president

Powell criticized Trump for "insulting everybody," from world leaders to blacks to immigrants to women, and for calling the media the "enemy of the people." "How can a president get up and say that the media is the enemy of Americans? Hasn't he read the First Amendment? You're not supposed to like everything the press says or what anyone says in the First Amendment, that's why we have a First Amendment, to protect that kind of speech," Powell said.

Cory Booker: Supports impeachment investigation necessary to get to truth

BOOKER: It was a few weeks of seeing a president who wants to undermine constitutional intent and say that he's above the law. He has not been complying with subpoenas. He has not been complying with legitimate congressional inquiries to continue the investigation that Mueller very specifically said it's on Congress to continue after he clearly indicated that there is potential corruption and obstruction of justice. This president is not above the law. He should not be able to stop the checks and balances on the executive. I feel like we have a moral obligation now to investigate this president. Impeachment proceedings will give us more legal leverage to get the information Congress needs to get to the bottom of what his administration has done while they're in office.

Cory Booker: Trump is acting as an authoritarian against the Constitution

BOOKER: I've read the report. I've read the redacted versions of the report. We have something that is astonishing going on in the United States of the America. We have a president that is not acting like the leader of the free world. He's acting like an authoritarian against the actual Constitution that he swore an oath to uphold. And so this is a difference with a lot of us on this debate stage. I believe that we in the United States Congress should start impeachment proceedings immediately. He is now stonewalling Congress, not subjecting himself to the checks and balances. We swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. When we look back in history at what happened when a president of the United States started acting more like an authoritarian leader than the leader of the free world, the question is, is what will we have done? And I believe the Congress should do its job.

Cory Booker: Trump undermines constitutional intent: no one above the law

BOOKER: It was seeing a president who wants to undermine constitutional intent. He has not been complying with subpoenas. He has not been complying with legitimate congressional inquiries to continue the investigation that Mueller very specifically said it's on Congress now to continue. This president is not above the law. He should not be able to stop the checks and balances on the executive. And I feel like we have a moral obligation now to investigate this president.

Cory Booker: Impeachment: We need a moral moment, not a political one

Daniel Gade: Bothered by Congress trying to embarrass president

Democratic Party: Sue Trump for conspiracy with Russia to win 2016 election

The multi-million-dollar lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court says that "In the Trump campaign, Russia found a willing and active partner in this effort" to mount "a brazen attack on American Democracy" based on "preexisting relationships with Russia and Russian oligarchs" with Trump.

The common purpose of the scheme, according to the Democratic National Committee, was to "bolster Trump and denigrate the Democratic Party nominee," Hillary Clinton, while boosting the candidate of Trump, "whose policies would benefit the Kremlin."

The DNC said that while it would be impossible "to fully repair the harm caused by the defendants, the DNC has filed this civil complaint to hold the defendants accountable for their misconduct and to ensure transparency."

"No one is above the law," the suit says.

Democratic Party: 2016: GOP obstructed Russia election interference probe

Some Republicans on the House panel agreed that the evidence failed to support the intel agencies' conclusions.

Democrats issued a 22-page report charging that Republicans abdicated their responsibility to conduct a thorough Russia probe, instead cutting off avenues of investigation and refusing to call dozens of potential witnesses.

"The decision to shut down the investigation before key witnesses could be interviewed and vital documentary evidence obtained will prevent us from fully discharging our duty to the House and to the American people," the Democrats said in their report, which identifies 30 witnesses Democrats wanted to call.

Democratic Party: 196 Congressional Dems sue Trump over Emoluments Clause

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, requested all documents related to the donation, in a letter to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. In a separate letter, Cummings also pressed the Trump Organization for details on how the amount was calculated, including an accounting of which governments did business with the Trump Organization. Cummings also asked whether the company plans to claim the Treasury donation as a gift for tax-deduction purposes.

Cummings is one of 196 members of the House & Senate, all Democrats, who have sued Trump claiming violations of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause, which was designed to prevent corruption by foreign influence. Blumenthal v. Trump is pending in US district court.

Donald Trump: OpEd: Trump is dangerous because he isn't tethered to truth

COMEY: I chose that words carefully, "dangerous." At first, I thought, "Is that an overstatement?" And I don't think it is.

Q: Why not?

COMEY: I worry that the norms at the center of this country--we can fight as Americans about guns or taxes, and we always have--but what we have in common is a set of norms. Most importantly, the truth. "We hold these truths to be self-evident," right? And if we lose tethering of our leaders to that truth, what are we? The foundation of this country is in jeopardy when we stop measuring our leaders against that central value of the truth.

Q: Are we losing it?

COMEY: I think we are in part. But I think we're going to outlast it. That there will be damage to that norm. But I liken President Trump in the book to a forest fire. Going to do tremendous damage. Going to damage those important norms. But a forest fire gives healthy things a chance to grow that had no chance before that fire.

Donald Trump: OpEd: Trump demands loyalty, like a mob boss

COMEY: The title comes from a bizarre conversation I had with the president in January of last year, where he asked for my loyalty personally. My loyalty's supposed to be to the American people and to the institution. He said, "I expect loyalty, I need loyalty." And I did not reply.

Q: Why not say no?

COMEY: Because I was caught totally by surprise. Later, he said, again, "I need loyalty." And I said, "You will always get honesty from me." And he paused and said, "Honest loyalty," as if he was proposing some compromise. And I paused and said, "You'll get that from me."

Q: Was that a mistake?

COMEY: Maybe. I felt like he's kidding himself if he thinks I just promised that I'm "amica nostra." But in hindsight, I should've done it differently.

Q: You're comparing the president to a mob boss?

COMEY: I'm talking about that leadership culture [of mob bosses demanding loyalty] me when I think about my experience with the Trump administration.

Donald Trump: OpEd:FBI believes Steele Dossier showed Russian interference

COMEY: That it, at its core, was consistent with the other information we'd gathered during the intelligence investigation. That there was a massive Russian effort underway to interfere with our election with three goals: to dirty up the American democracy so it's not a shining light for others around the world; to hurt Hillary Clinton, who Vladimir Putin personally hated; and to help Donald Trump become elected president. Those allegations are at the core of the Steele dossier, and we already knew that was true from totally separate information. And it was coming from a credible source.

Q: Did you know it had been financed at the beginning by President Trump's political opponents?

COMEY: I was told at some point that the effort had originally been financed by a Republican source to develop opposition research on Trump, and then Democrats were paying for it.

Donald Trump: OpEd: FBI investigation of Hillary's email proves relevance

COMEY: With thousands of emails found on Anthony Weiner's laptop, the question is, "So what do we do now?" I can't see a door that's labeled, "No action here." I can only see two doors: "Speak," and "Conceal."

Q: You knew that candidate Trump is going to say, "This proves everything I've been saying about Hillary Clinton is right." Five previous attorney generals all disagree with you. They say this crossed a line.

COMEY: Yeah, I've heard a lot of that. That was allegedly the reason for my firing.

Q: If you knew that letter would elect Donald Trump, you'd still send it?

COMEY: I would. Because down that path [if the letter was not sent] lies the death of the FBI as an independent force in American life. I was operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump, and if I hide this from the American people, she'll be illegitimate the moment she's elected, the moment this comes out.

Donald Trump: Sued by Democratic Party for 2016 Russia collusion

The named defendants in the lawsuit include Trump's son Donald Trump Jr., his son-in-law Jared Kushner, former campaign chief Paul Manafort and campaign official Richard Gates, and Trump ally Roger Stone. Also named is the Russian Federation, the general staff of the Russian armed force, a Russian intelligence services hacker known as Guccifer 2.0., Wikileaks and its leader Julian Assange, and 10 unidentified people.

"No one is above the law," the suit says. "In the run-up to the 2016 election, Russia mounted a brazen attack on American Democracy. The opening salvo was an attack on the DNC, carried out on American soil."

The suit alleges claims that include conspiracy, computer fraud and abuse, misappropriation of trade secrets, trespass, and other violations of the law.

Donald Trump: OpEd: 18-month investigation alleges $413M in tax fraud

"The Failing New York Times did something I have never seen done before. They used the concept of 'time value of money' in doing a very old, boring and often told hit piece on me." Trump tweeted.

Trump appeared to target the newspaper's reporting that the president actually received today's equivalent of $413 million from his father's real estate holdings.

A Times spokeswoman defended the article : "This is a powerful piece of investigative journalism, the result of 18 months of inquiry and a review of over 100,000 pages of records. It is accurate and fair and we stand behind it."

Donald Trump: Claimed father lent him $1M; actually lent him $60M

Trump's father, Fred, loaned him at least $60.7 million, or $140 million in today's dollars, rather than the $1 million loan Trump previously described on the campaign trail as "small," according to the Times.

Trump's lawyer denied any accusations of fraud and tax evasion, saying "the facts upon which The Times bases its allegations are extremely inaccurate."

While Trump called the story "boring and often told," it went deeper into his family's tax practices and his claims about his wealth than any report previously has.

Donald Trump: If Congress tries to impeach, I'll go to the Supreme Court

"I DID NOTHING WRONG," Trump said. "If the partisan Dems ever tried to Impeach, I would first head to the U.S. Supreme Court."

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1993 that authority for impeachment trials resides in Congress and "nowhere else." The power of impeachment belongs to Congress and proceedings must be launched in the House, according to the U.S. Constitution. If representatives vote to impeach, the case is tried in the Senate.

Donald Trump: OpEd: 1920s law authorizes to get presidential tax returns

If Congress cannot question the people who are making policy, or obtain critical documents, Congress cannot function as a coequal branch of government. If Congress cannot get information about the executive branch, there is no longer any separation of powers, as sanctified in the US constitution. There is only one power--the power of the president to rule as he wishes. Which is what Donald Trump has sought all along.

Donald Trump: OpEd: Trump aides must testify despite "executive privilege"

Trump is treating Congress with contempt--just as he has treated other democratic institutions that have blocked him. Congress should invoke its inherent power under the constitution to hold any official who refuses a congressional subpoena in contempt.

When President Richard Nixon tried to stop key aides from testifying in the Senate Watergate hearings, in 1973, Senator Sam Ervin, chairman of the Watergate select committee, threatened to jail anyone who refused to appear.

When Nixon tried to block the release of incriminating recordings of his discussions with aides, the supreme court decided that a claim of executive privilege did not protect information pertinent to the investigation of potential crimes.

Donald Trump: Foreign-provided opposition info? Read it; maybe call FBI

TRUMP: I think maybe you do both. I think you might want to listen. There's nothing wrong with listening. If somebody called from a country, Norway, "We have information on your opponent." Oh, I think I'd want to hear it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You want that kind of interference in our elections?

TRUMP: It's not an interference. They have information. I think I'd take it. If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI. If I thought there was something wrong. But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, that they come up with oppo research. "Oh, let's call the FBI." The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it, but you go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it, they always have. And that's the way it is. It's called oppo research.

Donald Trump: Analysis: Federal criminal law turns on corrupt intent

Donald Trump: More due process was afforded at Salem Witch Trials

But legal experts say this criticism is based on a misinterpretation of what the Constitution says about impeachment and how much protection it gives the president. The answer: Not much. The Fifth Amendment says no one can be deprived of "life, liberty or property" without due process of law. A president facing an impeachment trial is not at risk of losing life, liberty or property.

Donald Trump: Trump inaccurately claims Mueller report exonerated him

"Complete and total exoneration," Trump wrote in one tweet in March after the Mueller report was released. It's an inaccurate claim he repeated often.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler asked the former special counsel about this claim during a congressional hearing: "Did you actually totally exonerate the president?"

"No," Mueller said.

Mueller's written report was clear on this, too: "If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state," the report reads in part. "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Donald Trump: Pushed false theory that Ukraine framed Russia over meddling

This claim is false, according to the unanimous assessment of the U.S. intelligence community and the former special counsel Robert Mueller, who spent two years investigating Russia's election interference effort. The Russian government, not Ukraine, interfered in the 2016 election "in sweeping and systematic fashion," the Mueller report concluded, working to boost Trump's bid while damaging his Democratic rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Trump repeatedly pushed or referenced a conspiracy theory that Ukraine and the Democrats framed Russia for election meddling in an attempt to discredit his presidency.

Donald Trump: OpEd: Trump's attack on Ukraine politically driven falsehood

Trump's former Russia expert, Fiona Hill, called the idea that Ukraine meddled in 2016 a "fictional narrative" promoted by Russian intelligence and rebuked House Republicans for using it to defend the president against impeachment. "In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests," Hill said in her opening statement to Congress. "I refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the Ukrainian government is a U.S. adversary, and that Ukraine--not Russia --attacked us in 2016."

Donald Trump: Repeatedly blocked impeachment witnesses from testifying

Donald Trump: GAO Report: Withholding allocated Ukraine funds violated law

Donald Trump: Cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment

This is nothing more than an illegal, partisan attempted coup that will, based on recent sentiment, badly fail at the voting booth. You are not just after me, as President, you are after the entire Republican Party. But because of this colossal injustice, our party is more united than it has ever been before. History will judge you harshly as you proceed with this impeachment charade. Your legacy will be that of turning the House of Representatives from a revered legislative body into a Star Chamber of partisan persecution.

Donald Trump: Obstruction of Congress charge is preposterous & dangerous

Your spiteful actions display unfettered contempt for America's founding and your egregious conduct threatens to destroy that which our Founders pledged their very lives to build. Even worse than offending the Founding Fathers, you are offending Americans of faith by continually saying "I pray for the President," when you know this statement is not true, unless it is meant in a negative sense. It is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it, not I!

Donald Trump: OpEd: "Perfect" call a smoking gun rather than exoneration

Here are 4 facts from that July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky:
• Trump tells Zelensky that the US does a lot for Ukraine
• Trump reminds Zelensky that Ukraine doesn't reciprocate
• Trump asks Zelensky for a favor: to look into a debunked conspiracy theory that the hacked Democratic National Committee server is in Ukraine and
• Trump asks Zelensky to look into Joe and Hunter Biden.

Donald Trump: Paid hush money to porn star, lied about Moscow deal

Donald Trump: Unlike Clinton, Trump lacks foreign support at time of need

Thomas Pickering, a former diplomat, said while Clinton was able to turn his close personal relationships with foreign leaders into a reservoir of political support in difficult times, "Trump's willingness to trample" on allied leaders has resulted in what he described as the "Macron effect"--a gradual defection of an erstwhile political friend at a time of need. Macron has openly criticized Trump for diminishing trust in NATO's deterrent by reducing the alliance to a commercial proposition.

Donald Trump: A stacked deck of gross immorality, ethical incompetence

Donald Trump: Raised money for election challenges, most goes to his PAC

Doug Jones: Trump's actions raise concern for national security

As the impeachment battle lines have been drawn, Jones has tried to cast himself as above the fray. "As a U.S. senator, it is my obligation to weigh all the facts fairly before making a decision, and we don't have all the facts yet," Jones said, breaking from many Democrats who believe that the loose transcript of a phone call and a whistleblower report, both already public, prove Trump abused his power by asking a foreign leader for a political favor.

"What I have seen so far raises legitimate concern for our national security and there appears to be evidence of abuse of power. I hope for the sake of our country that we can find the truth together," Jones said.

Doug Jones: Impeachment should include witnesses & documentary evidence

Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL): Senator Johnson just made the case of why we should have witnesses. If he really believes it's thin, it's thin because the president of the United States ordered his top people who were in the room who have firsthand knowledge not to testify. He ordered documents not to be turned over. The American people and the United States Senate deserve to have a full, fair, and complete trial. That means witnesses. It means documents. It means getting the information out now.

Eddie Melton: First Republican governor to support impeachment probe

Elizabeth Warren: Impeachment is about more than Trump

Elizabeth Warren: Prosecute Trump for corruption and violating constitution

Evan Bayh: Compromise between Trump & Dems avoids political food fight

Bayh claimed that the American people may best be served by the House continuing its investigation with Trump's participation, and then leaving the ultimate decision to voters instead of the Senate. "It probably is in the president's best interest to say 'Look, I'll participate, I'll make all my witnesses available if you'll agree to just let the voters decide next fall; issue a report, don't impeach me.' I think there's the middle ground," Bayh said on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures."

Ultimately, however, he was pessimistic about the possibility. "Will they seize that middle ground? Probably not," the former senator said.

Gerald Ford: An "impeachable offense" is whatever the House says it is

Impeachment must be launched in the House. If representatives vote to impeach, the case is tried in the Senate. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution lays out the grounds for removal from office as: "Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

The open-ended constitutional provision raises questions about whether Trump's claim that he has done nothing to merit impeachment holds. Legal experts have long debated how to define "high crimes and misdemeanors," which some say don't necessarily correspond to written law. In 1970, then-Rep. Gerald Ford declared: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history."

Hillary Clinton: Email scandal: no evidence of obstruction of justice

COMEY: Yeah, the intelligence community raised a concern that there might've been mishandling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's personal email server. I didn't focus on it.

Q: It wasn't your order to open the investigation?

COMEY: Correct. What the inspector general raised was, in doing her work on that unclassified system, did she and those around her talk about classified topics?

Q: President Trump and his allies bring up that her staff smashed Blackberries, also whitewashed the server?

COMEY: Yeah. There was evidence that old Blackberries were destroyed, which I think a fair number of people do. And they used a software program to clean the server to make sure there was nothing on it. They did that. But as investigators, our question is, when they did that, are they trying to obstruct justice in some ways? We could never establish evidence that anybody who did that did it with a corrupt intent.

Hillary Clinton: Email scandal: FBI doesn't prosecute carelessness

COMEY: We have a 50 year history of knowing what the Department of Justice will prosecute. They're very unlikely to prosecute a case unless you can show the person clearly knew they were doing something they shouldn't do--evidence of obstruction of justice or disloyalty to the US. Without those, even extreme sloppiness, is handled through administrative discipline. Somebody is not prosecuted. I've gone through 50 years of cases. I don't know of a case where anyone has ever been prosecuted for just being careless, even extremely careless. So the investigators knew that, unless they found something that was a smoking gun, where someone told Secretary Clinton, "You shouldn't be doing this," or where there's an indication of her obstructing justice, the case was unlikely to be prosecuted.

Hillary Clinton: Email scandal: October FBI letter lost election to Trump

COMEY: The norm is, "If you can avoid it, you take no action that might have an impact on an election." I can't see a door that's labeled, "No action here." I can only see two doors: one says, "Speak," the other says, "Conceal."

Q: You could try to find out first whether or not there was evidence there of a crime.

COMEY: Well, maybe. And maybe another director might have done that. But the team is telling you, "We cannot evaluate this material before the election." [I concluded] speaking is really bad; concealing is catastrophic.

Q: Hillary Clinton's convinced that your letter defeated her.

COMEY: I hope not. I honestly don't know. But I was operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump, and if I hide this from the American people, she'll be illegitimate the moment she's elected, the moment this comes out.

Jeff Flake: Impeachment appropriate is Trump fires Special Counsel

Said Flake: "We're begging him: 'Don't go down this road. Don't create a constitutional crisis. Don't force the Congress to take the only remedy that Congress can take. To remind the president of that is the best way to keep him from going down that road. To fire Mueller without cause, I don't know if there is any other remedy left to the legislative branch."

Jeff Van Drew: Switching to GOP driven by opposing impeachment

The image of Van Drew, then, being driven from his party because of impeachment plays directly into Trump's hands. Trump will simplify the story to this: Democrats are so dead-set on impeachment that it's driving moderates right out of the party. And that's a message that will resonate with his base, sure, but also potentially with a public that has grown increasingly skeptical about whether the President should be impeached and removed.

Jerrold Nadler: Would lead impeachment committee very cautiously

If Democrats retake the House in 2018, Nadler will become the party's gatekeeper on the issue. In fact, his expertise in constitutional law--as well as his outsized voice opposing the Clinton impeachment in 1998--was a factor in his selection to lead committee Democrats. While he says impeachment would surely be on the table in a Democrat-led House, it's far from certain it would be the right call--politically or constitutionally. And it'll be up to his committee to tell voters why.

"If we were in the majority & if we decide that the evidence isn't there for impeachment--or even if the evidence is there we decide it would tear the country apart too much--if we decide that, then it's our duty to educate the country why we decided it," Nadler said.

Jerrold Nadler: Clinton provided blood during impeachment; Trump stonewalls

Jerry Nadler: Trump inaccurately claims Mueller report exonerated him

"Complete and total exoneration," Trump wrote in one tweet in March after the Mueller report was released. It's an inaccurate claim he repeated often.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler asked the former special counsel about this claim during a congressional hearing: "Did you actually totally exonerate the president?"

"No," Mueller said.

Mueller's written report was clear on this, too: "If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state," the report reads in part. "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Jerry Nadler: 1998: We're lowering the standard of impeachment

Jim Sensenbrenner: Mueller should have decided impeachable conduct

MUELLER: Our mandate does not go to other ways of addressing conduct; our mandate goes to developing the report.

SENSENBRENNER: There are a couple of statements that you made, "This is not for me to decide," and the implication is this was for this committee to decide. Now, you didn't use the word "impeachable conduct" like Starr did. But there was no statute to prevent you from using the words "impeachable conduct."

Joe Biden: Congress had no choice but to move on impeachment

Joe Biden: We need to defeat Trump AND gain a Senate majority

BIDEN: Well, look, the next president is going to have to do two things. Defeat Donald Trump, that's number one. And, number two, going to have to be able to go into states like Georgia and North Carolina and other places and get a Senate majority. That's what I'll do. And by the way, I learned something about these impeachment trials. I learned, #1, that Donald Trump doesn't want me to be the nominee. That's pretty clear. Secondly, I found out that Vladimir Putin doesn't want me to be president. But the bottom line is, I think we have to ask ourselves the honest question: Who is most likely to do what needs to be done, produce a Democratic majority in the United States Senate, maintain the House, and beat Trump?

Joe Kennedy III: Impeachment is the House standing up for the Constitution

Joe Walsh: Donald Trump is a traitor; that is impeachable

Rep. Mark SANFORD: I would take the vote in terms of inquiry. I don't know that impeachment is the best way to go. Probably censure is.

WALSH: There is enough we know now to vote to impeach this president. He stood on the White House lawn this week and told two foreign governments to interfere in our election. That alone is impeachable. This is a strong term I'm going to use, but I'm going to say it on purpose: Donald Trump is a traitor.

John Bolton: Declined impeachment testimony due to "personal involvement"

Bolton, national security adviser from April 2018 until Sept. 2019, was a central figure in the Senate impeachment trial of Trump following the House's decision to forward two charges to the Senate for consideration: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. After Bolton didn't appear voluntarily before a House impeachment hearing in November, his lawyer told the investigating committees that his client was 'personally involved' in meetings relevant to the inquiry into whether Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine for political reasons.

John Kasich: Asking for foreign help in elections is wrong

KASICH: I can't figure it out. I don't understand it. Of course, it's wrong. I don't know what they're afraid of. Nobody's asking them, "are you for impeachment inquiry? Are you for impeachment?" Nobody's asking them. They're just saying to them, "look, is this right or wrong?" And they won't answer it. And it's a mystery to me.

Julian Castro: Trump should be impeached for obstruction of justice

CASTRO: I was the first of the candidates to call on Congress to begin impeachment proceedings. There are 10 different incidents that Robert Mueller has pointed out where this president either obstructed justice or attempted to obstruct justice. And I believe that they should go forward with impeachment proceedings.

Q: Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, when asked whether or not the president could be charged with a crime after leaving office, his answer was yes. Would you?

CASTRO: As to the question of what my Department of Justice would do, I agree with those who say that a president should not direct an attorney general specifically to prosecute or not prosecute. However, I believe that the evidence is plain and clear and that if it gets that far, that you're likely to see a prosecution of Donald Trump.

Justin Amash: Amash's call for impeachment condemned by Freedom Caucus

Justin Amash: Nobody wins in a trade war

Justin Amash: People want open, honest representation

Kamala Harris: Trump committed crimes in plain sight

Kamala Harris: Impeachment: McConnell doesn't want trial, wants cover-up

Kelly Armstrong: After Ukraine call transcript, everything else is just noise

ARMSTRONG: President Trump got elected because he doesn't do the things the way everybody else does. President Trump said the phone call was perfect. President Zelensky has said on numerous occasions that he didn't--

Q: And you accept all of this?

ARMSTRONG: --feel the pressure. I do. I think you have the transcript and you have the two principals on the phone call that have stated that. After that, everything else is really just noise.

Kelly Loeffler: Impeachment "is a partisan exercise"

Kelly Loeffler: Impeachment: no evidence, no crime

Kelly Loeffler: My first vote will be to end the impeachment sham

Kimberly Graham: Supports impeachment of Trump but voters don't bring it up

Lindsey Graham: Investigate Steele dossier and how FBI handled it

GRAHAM: Mr. Steele was on the payroll of Fusion GPS, who was being paid by the Democratic Party to do opposition research on Donald Trump. That while he was working with the FBI, he was shopping this dossier all over the world. That's not what an informant should do. I want a special counsel to look at not only how Mr. Steele conducted himself, what the FBI did with the dossier. Somebody needs to look. If you believe Robert Mueller should be looking at the Trump campaign, count me in. But if you ignore all this stuff, you're blind.

Q: Do you want Mr. Steele extradited?

GRAHAM: Well, he was asked to appear before our committee. Come in and tell us what you did. He was sued for libel based on the dossier. Mr. Comey told President Trump, "Here's this dossier. It's unverified." The system doesn't work that way.

Lindsey Graham: Now supports Trump, but called him "unfit for office"

Lindsey Graham: Impeachment: Don't need to hear a lot of witnesses

Lindsey Graham: 1998: High crimes don't even have to be a crime

Liz Cheney: Highest ranking GOP House member for impeachment

"The president summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the president," she said in a statement.

Mark Sanford: Supports investigating Trump; prefers censure to impeachment

Rep. Joe WALSH: There is enough we know now to vote to impeach this president. This is a strong term I'm going to use, but I'm going to say it on purpose: Donald Trump is a traitor.

Matt Lieberman: Supports impeachment process; would likely vote to remove

Michael Bennet: Moral obligation to beat Trump, but don't impeach

BENNET: We are four months away from the Iowa Caucuses. And I just want to make sure whatever we do doesn't end up with an acquittal by Mitch McConnell in the Senate, which it surely would. And then President Trump would be running saying that he had been acquitted by the United States Congress. I believe we have a moral obligation to beat Donald Trump. He has to be a single-term president. And we can't do anything that plays into his hands. We need to be smart about how we're running or we're going to give him a second term. We can't do it.

Secretary Julian CASTRO: Senator, I think that folks are making a mistake by not pursuing impeachment. The Mueller Report clearly details that he deserves it. And what's going to happen in the fall of 2020, if they don't impeach him, is that he's going to say, "You see? The Democrats didn't go after me on impeachment, and you know why? Because I didn't do anything wrong."

Mike Conaway: 2016: Russia wanted Hillary loss; no preference on Trump win

"The conclusion that Putin was trying to help Trump, we don't think that's supported by the underlying data," Conaway said in a phone interview, when asked to elaborate on the committee's finding.

He said Republicans on the committee agreed with "98 percent" of the intelligence agencies' findings but broke on that central issue. Conaway described a laborious effort to confirm the intelligence community's findings, enshrined in its January 2017 assessment that Russia and Putin "developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump."

In the end, Conaway said, the committee found that the agencies didn't meet the burden to prove that assessment.

Mitch McConnell: Not an impartial juror about impeachment, at all

Nancy Pelosi: Impeachment showed "the power of the gavel"

Nancy Pelosi: Donald Trump will be impeached forever

Nancy Pelosi: American voters choose president, not foreign government

What we are discussing today is the established fact that the president violated the constitution. It is a matter of fact that the president is an ongoing threat to our national security and the integrity of our elections, the basis of our democracy. Hundreds of historians and legal scholars, regardless of party, have stated that the president committed impeachable offenses. All Americans agree that American voters should choose our president, not some foreign government.

Pete Buttigieg: Won't demand prosecution of Trump; that's AG's call

Pete Buttigieg: Rejecting foreign election interference isn't complicated

BUTTIGIEG: You wouldn't do anything with that dirt. You would call the FBI. This isn't even complicated.

Q: Would you ever look at it?

BUTTIGIEG: The moment that you look at it, you have implicated yourself, and I don't think you would want to do that. Some things are complicated in politics and ethics. This is not. And this is not theoretical either. A foreign, a hostile foreign power successfully attacked our democracy in the last election, and there's no indication that they're going to back off from trying to do it in the next election.

Pete Buttigieg: Impeachment is not just about Trump, but about presidency

Pete Buttigieg: Impeachment should be above politics, but Trump confessed

Under normal circumstances, a president would leave office after something that was revealed recently that barely got any attention at all, which was the president had to confess in writing, in court, to illegally diverting charitable contributions that were supposed to go to veterans. We are absolutely going to confront this president for his wrongdoing, but we're also each running to be the president who will lead this country after the Trump presidency comes to an end one way or the other.

Pete Buttigieg: Congress had no choice but to impeach Trump

Richard Durbin: President is on trial for impeachment, but so is Senate

Richard Nixon: Nixon abused powers to improperly influence election

Robert Reich: Refusing Congress' subpoena fits a dictator, not a president

If Congress cannot question the people who are making policy, or obtain critical documents, Congress cannot function as a coequal branch of government. If Congress cannot get information about the executive branch, there is no longer any separation of powers, as sanctified in the US constitution. There is only one power--the power of the president to rule as he wishes. Which is what Donald Trump has sought all along.

Robert Reich: When Nixon blocked aides' testifying, Dems threatened jail

Trump is treating Congress with contempt--just as he has treated other democratic institutions that have blocked him. Congress should invoke its inherent power under the constitution to hold any official who refuses a congressional subpoena in contempt.

When President Richard Nixon tried to stop key aides from testifying in the Senate Watergate hearings, in 1973, Senator Sam Ervin, chairman of the Watergate select committee, threatened to jail anyone who refused to appear.

When Nixon tried to block the release of incriminating recordings of his discussions with aides, the supreme court decided that a claim of executive privilege did not protect information pertinent to the investigation of potential crimes.

Robert Reich: Removing Trump via 25th amendment may do more damage

Ron Johnson: Impeachment charges are "pretty thin gruel"

Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL): Senator Johnson just made the case of why we should have witnesses. If he really believes it's thin, it's thin because the president of the United States ordered his top people who were in the room who have firsthand knowledge not to testify. He ordered documents not to be turned over. The American people and the United States Senate deserve to have a full, fair, and complete trial. That means witnesses. It means documents. It means getting the information out now.

Rudy Giuliani: Tweeted "quid pro quo" for Ukraine aid that Trump denied

Steve Chabot: Mueller did not determine any impeachable conduct

CHABOT (R-OH): Director Mueller, my Democratic colleagues were very disappointed in your report. They were expecting you to say something along the lines of why President Trump deserves to be impeached, much as Ken Starr did relative to President Clinton 20 years ago. Well, you didn't, so their strategy had to change. Now they allege that there's plenty of evidence in your report to impeach the president, but the American people just didn't read it. And this hearing today is their last best hope to build up some sort of groundswell across America to impeach President Trump. That's what this is really all about today.

Steve Cohen: On impeachment: Russian collusion different from Clinton sex

"There's a difference between colluding with Russia to win an election and obstructing justice ... and having a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky," Cohen said.

While Democrats like Cohen have no qualms about talking impeachment now, he acknowledged there would likely have to be a "smoking gun" to get Republicans and even wary Democrats on board. For Democrats reluctant to even broach the topic, that may mean explicit evidence linking Trump to Russian collusion or obstruction of justice in Mueller's report.

Stuart Meissner: Time to end the impeachment crusade

Ted Lieu: Trump committed all three elements of obstruction of justice

MUELLER: Correct.

LIEU: The second element of obstruction requires a nexus to an official proceeding. You wrote, "by the time of the president's meeting on June 19, 2017, the existence of a grand jury investigation was public knowledge." That would constitute a nexus because a grand jury investigation is an official proceeding, correct?

MUELLER: Yes.

LIEU: The final element of the crime of obstruction to justice [is] intent. You wrote, "the president's effort to limit the scope of the special counsel's investigation was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the president & his campaign's conduct.". That's in the report, correct?

MUELLER: That is in the report.

Ted Lieu: Trump committed obstruction but presidents can't be indicted

MUELLER: That is correct.

LIEU: The fact that their orders by the president were not carried out, that is not a defense to obstruction of justice because a statute itself is quite dry. It says that as long as you endeavor or attempt to obstruct justice, that would also constitute a crime.

MUELLER: I'm not going to get into that at this juncture.

Thomas Perez: Trump 2016 Russian collusion was unprecedented treachery

Tom Perez, the DNC chairman, said, "This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency."

Perez said the Russian government notified the Trump campaign in advance that it had stolen Democratic emails and other information about plans by the party that Russia sought to support Trump's candidacy.

"Rather than reporting Russia's offer to meddle in a U.S. election, the Trump campaign welcomed Russia's help," Perez said. "Trump's closest political adviser, Roger Stone, also appeared to have advance knowledge of specific plans by WikiLeaks to disseminate some of this information."

Tom Ridge: Trump's Ukraine actions an abuse of power

Tom Rooney: 2016: Russia wanted Hillary loss; but did not back Trump

The intelligence community's findings, enshrined in its January 2017 assessment that Russia and Putin "developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump."

Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) emphasized that point on CNN, suggesting that the evidence of Russia's disdain for Clinton was evident but that it did not necessarily support a conclusion that the Russians backed Trump's candidacy. Conaway, too, argues that the discrepancy is an issue of the "analytic tradecraft" that the intelligence agencies used to reach their conclusion.

Tom Steyer: Trump & GOP systematically break the law & democratic norms

But, more than that, we see it in a president who has been breaking the law systematically as a candidate, as a businessperson, and as a president.

There has been bad behavior on both sides--not that there's perfection on one side and absolute horror on the other. But we're seeing a much broader, systematic attempt to disrespect the norms of democracy, to actually disrespect the laws of the United States, and an attack on the rule of law. And that creates an atmosphere where anything can bubble up and anything is bubbling up.

Tom Steyer: Majority of Americans want Trump impeached and removed

STEYER: Almost 80% of registered Democrats want this president impeached and removed from office. If you ask Americans broadly, more people are in favor of that than aren't. So it's not as if I'm representing some small part of the United States. I'm representing most Americans. So, in fact, what we have is a movement that is asking for a different America, which is one that recognizes the rule of law, gets rid of corruption, and treats every American equitably & fairly. And so, if I hear from elected officials that it's not politically expedient, I ask only two questions. Are we telling the truth? Are we standing up for the American people and the Constitution?

Tom Steyer: Republicans did not lose Congress for impeaching Clinton

At the moment, House Democrats, led by Speaker Pelosi, insist that any action toward impeachment--however warranted or urgent--would be too costly politically. This calculation not only answers the wrong question; it's unsupported by the facts. The politics of impeaching the president favors Democrats, and they should move forward with confidence.

There is simply no historical precedent for impeachment leading to serious political peril. Those trying to make this case point to President Bill Clinton, asserting that voters punished the GOP for an impeachment they viewed as overreach. It's true that Republicans lost five seats in the House, but two years later, voters kept the Republican majorities intact and delivered them the White House.

Tom Steyer: Nixon only lost support once impeachment hearings began

Nixon's downfall offers an important lesson: the impeachment process itself can sway public opinion and force a reckoning among the president's partisan defenders. The stage is set for such a shift today.

Tom Steyer: Impeachment reflects the will of the American people

Tom Steyer: Trump officials should testify for court of public opinion

Tommy Tuberville: Impeachment process has been a sham

Trey Gowdy: 2016: Russia wanted Hillary loss; that's same as Trump win

Rep. Trey Gowdy said that the evidence gathered by the committee clearly showed Russia's disdain for Trump's rival, Hillary Clinton, and was "motivated in whole or in part by a desire to harm her candidacy or undermine her Presidency had she prevailed."

Gowdy believes there's no difference between opposing Clinton and backing Trump in what had become, effectively, a two-person race, said a source, adding that Gowdy "disagrees with the conclusion" that the intelligence agencies got it wrong.

"He believes the debate over whether desiring a negative outcome for Clinton necessarily meant Russia had a preference for candidate Trump is a distinction that doesn't make a difference," the source said.

Tulsi Gabbard: Supports impeachment inquiry providing info to Americans

Tulsi Gabbard: Voted "present" because of lack of bipartisan support

Val Demings: Trump failed to bribe Ukraine, but still accountable

Woody Thrasher: I've learned a lot from President Donald Trump

Joe Biden: Keep the Justice Department independent of politics

BIDEN: I don't think it's a good idea that we model ourselves after Trump and say "lock him up." We have to bring this country together.

Q: When Pres. Ford pardoned Pres. Nixon, he said it was to heal the country. What would you do about criminal investigation into Pres. Trump after he leaves office?

BIDEN: I wouldn't direct my Justice Department like this president does. I'd let them make their independent judgment. I would not dictate who should be prosecuted or exonerated. That's not the role of the president. It's "the attorney general of the United States," not "the president's private attorney." If the attorney general's independent judgment was that he violated the law and he should be, in fact, criminally prosecuted, then so be it. But I would not direct it. Follow the law, period.

Joe Biden: Constitutional necessity to impeach; do not re-elect Trump

Joe Biden: No evidence of any corruption by Biden in Ukraine