A Transcript You Must Read
The Video Below
Trump's Lawyer Pat Cipollone DESTROYS Adam Schiff & Democrats "Hypocrisy" In FIERY SPEECH
It is very difficult to sit and listen to Mr. Schiff tell the tale he just told. Let's remember how we got here. They made false allegations about a telephone call. The President of the United States declassified that telephone call and released it to the public. How's that for transparency?
When Mr. Schiff realized there was nothing to his allegations, he focused on a second telephone call. He and his colleagues made false allegations about that call as well. The President then declassified and released that telephone call too. Again, complete transparency—something unprecedented for any President of the United States.
When Mr. Schiff saw that his allegations were false and he knew it, what did he do? He went to the House and manufactured a fraudulent version of the call. He read it to the American people without telling them it was completely fake.
Do you want to talk about due process? Never before in the history of our country has a President been confronted with an impeachment proceeding like this. It wasn’t conducted by the Judiciary Committee. Mr. Nadler, who claimed he was experienced in impeachment, was sidelined. Instead, proceedings took place in a basement of the House of Representatives. The President was forbidden from attending, denied the right to have a lawyer present. Even Mr. Schiff’s Republican colleagues were not allowed into the proceedings. Information was selectively leaked, witnesses were threatened, and good public servants were told they would be held in contempt if they didn’t comply with Schiff’s demands.
The President was not allowed to call witnesses. There is still evidence in the SCIF that has not been made available. Why? What are they hiding? They held onto the articles of impeachment for 33 days while claiming they had an overwhelming case—yet they weren’t even prepared to make an opening argument. That’s because they have no case. When you look at these articles of impeachment, they are not only ridiculous but dangerous to our Republic.
The idea that invoking constitutional rights to protect the executive branch is considered obstruction is absurd. Every President since George Washington has done this. What Mr. Schiff demanded was a wholesale trampling of constitutional rights, the kind of thing our State Department would criticize if it happened in another country. And yet, he had the audacity to come into the Senate and claim they have no use for courts.
Let me give you an example. Charlie Kupperman, the Deputy National Security Adviser, was subpoenaed by Mr. Schiff. Like any American, he had to hire a lawyer and went to court to ask a judge for guidance. What did Schiff do? He withdrew the subpoena to avoid a legal ruling and never reissued it. Then, he came here and asked the Senate to do the work he refused to do himself. They had a chance to litigate and chose not to, yet now they demand the Senate to act in their place. That is obstruction—not going to court. It is an act of patriotism to defend constitutional rights. If they can do this to the President, they can do it to any American citizen, and that is dangerous.
Even legal scholar Laurence Tribe, who has been advising them, admitted during the Clinton impeachment that it is dangerous to suggest invoking constitutional rights is impeachable. Yet here we are. The House concocted a process never seen before. They locked the President out. They refused to release documents that we requested—documents that would have shown Schiff’s staff was working with the whistleblower. They demand transparency from others but refuse to provide it themselves.
And then, Mr. Nadler has the nerve to lecture the Senate. In their brief, they claim they have overwhelming evidence—yet on the first day, they say they need more evidence. If I went to any court in this country and claimed my case was overwhelming but I wasn’t ready to present it yet, I’d be thrown out in two seconds. That’s exactly what should happen here.
What are the stakes? There’s an election in nine months. A partisan impeachment is like stealing an election. That’s exactly what this is—an attempt to steal an election in an election year. Some of you should be in Iowa campaigning, but instead, we’re here dealing with this because they are not ready to go. The American people won’t stand for it.
They’re not just trying to remove the President; they’re trying to remove him from the ballot. They won’t say it outright, but that’s their goal. They want the Senate to deny Americans their right to choose their President in an election year. That’s never been done before, and it should not be done now. The reason no one has attempted this before is simple—because it would be a disaster for our country. No one thought it would be a good idea to deny the American people their right to vote based on a fraudulent investigation conducted in secret with no due process.
It is long past time we start this so we can end this ridiculous charade and move forward with the election. Thank you.