[Pages S645-S666]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

TRIAL OF DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will convene as a Court of
Impeachment.

Prayer

The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
Almighty God, our shelter from the storms, give our Senate jurors
discernment that will rescue our Nation from ruin. Illuminate their
minds with Your truth as You speak through the whispers of conscience.
Remind them that the seeds they plant now will bring a harvest. May the
choices they make bring blessings, healing, and prosperity to our land.
We pray in Your merciful Name. Amen.

Pledge of Allegiance

The President pro tempore led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

The Journal

And if there is no objection, the Journal of proceedings of the trial
are approved to date.
I would ask the Sergeant at Arms to make the proclamation.
The Acting Sergeant at Arms, Jennifer A. Hemingway, made the
proclamation as follows:

Hear ye! Hear ye! All persons are commanded to keep
silence, on pain of imprisonment, while the Senate of the
United States is sitting for the trial of the Article of
Impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives against
Donald John Trump, former President of the United States.

Recognition of the Majority Leader

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Democratic leader is recognized.

Order of Business

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, for the information of Senators, it is my
understanding the schedule today will be similar to yesterday's
proceedings.
We will plan to take a short break every 2, 3 hours, and we will
accommodate a 30-minute recess for dinner, assuming it is needed.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Pursuant to the provisions of S. Res. 47,
the managers for the House of Representatives have 8 hours remaining to
make the presentation of their case.
The Senate will now hear you, and the Presiding Officer recognizes
Mr. Manager Raskin to continue the presentation of the case for the
House of Representatives.

Managers' Presentation--Resumed

Mr. Manager RASKIN. Mr. President, thank you.
Distinguished Senators, Representative DeGette of Colorado will now
show how the insurrectionists themselves believed that they were
following President Trump's marching orders.
Ms. Manager DeGETTE. My friends and colleagues, yesterday was an
emotionally wrenching day. As I watched the footage of the violence in
the Capitol Building, my own experience flooded back to me. I was one
of the unlucky Members who was stuck in the House Gallery along with
Congresswoman Dean.
As the House floor was cleared beneath of us of Members and staff, we
could see the mob pounding on the door to the House Chamber. We could
see the Capitol Police officers inside the Chamber pull their guns and
point them at the intruders. Then we heard gunshots on the other side,
and we flung ourselves down on the floor and removed our Member pins.
Then we heard pounding on the very flimsy Gallery doors right up above
us. Finally, after that situation for some time, we were told to run
out of the door at the end of the Gallery.
As we ran through a line of police toward the staircase, this is what
I saw: the SWAT team pointing automatic weapons at marauders on the
floor. Looking at these people makes you wonder: Who sent them here?
In the next few minutes, I want to step back from the horrors of the
attack itself and look at January 6 from a totally different
perspective--the perspective of the insurrectionists themselves.
Their own statements before, during, and after the attack make clear
the attack was done for Donald Trump, at his instructions and to
fulfill his wishes. Donald Trump had sent them there.
They truly believed that the whole intrusion was at the President's
orders, and we know that because they said so. Many of them actually
posed for pictures, bragging about it on social media, and they tagged
Mr. Trump in tweets.
Folks, this was not a hidden crime. The President told them to be
there, and so they actually believed they would face no punishment.
The defense argued in their briefs, and they argued again here on
Tuesday that the insurrectionists were acting on their own, that they
were not incited by President Trump or acting at his direction. This is
in their brief:

They did so of their own accord and for their own reasons,
and are being criminally prosecuted.

But that is just not the case. It is not what the insurrectionists
actually said. They said they came here because the President
instructed them to do so.
Leading up to the attack, the insurrectionists said they were coming
to DC for President Trump. He invited them with clear instructions for
a specific time and place and with clear orders: Stop to fight--or to
fight to stop th certification in Congress by any means necessary.

The crowd at Donald Trump's speech echoed and chanted his words, and
when people in the crowd followed his

[[Page S646]]

direction and marched to the Capitol, they chanted the same words as
they breached this building.
Now, let's return to the speech for a moment. During the rally,
President Trump led the crowd in a ``Stop the steal'' chant. Here is
what that chant sounded like from the crowd's perspective:
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

President TRUMP. (Inaudible.) And to use a favorite term
that all of you people really came up with: We will stop the
steal.
(People chanting: ``Yeah.'')
(People chanting: ``Stop the steal.'')

Soon after, the President basked as the crowd chanted, ``Fight for
Trump.'' And when he incited the crowd to show strength, people
responded: ``Storm the Capitol.'' ``Invade the Capitol.'' Here are both
of those moments but from the crowd's perspective:
(Video presentation of 1-6-20201.)

(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.'')
President TRUMP. Thank you.
Unidentified Speaker. Yes.
Unidentified Speaker. Invade the Capitol Building.

We also have another perspective from this moment, online extremist
chatter. At the same time as the people in the crowd shouted, ``Take
the Capitol Building,'' as President Trump said, ``Show strength,'' a
person posted to Parler saying:

Time to fight. Civil war is upon us.

Another user said:

We are going to have a civil war. Get ready!

An analysis found that members of ``Civil War'' quadrupled on Parler
in the hour after Donald Trump said, ``Show strength.''
When the insurrectionists got to the Capitol, they continued those
rally cries. Insurrectionists holding Confederate flags and brandishing
weapons cheered the President's very words:
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. (Inaudible.)
Unidentified Speaker. Fight. Fight. Come on, man.
(Inaudible.)
(People chanting. ``Stop the steal.'')

You heard them chanting ``Stop the steal,'' and as the crowd chanted
at the rally, the crowd at the Capitol made clear who they were doing
this for. They also chanted ``Fight for Trump.''
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.'')

And it wasn't just that they were doing this for Mr. Trump. They were
following his instructions. They said he had invited them, and, in
fact, as we heard, he had invited them.
As one man explained on a livestream he taped from inside the
Capitol, ``Our president wants us here. . . . We wait and take orders
from our president.''
Footage from inside the Capitol shows when the insurrectionists first
got into the building and confronted police, the mob screamed at the
officers that they were listening to President Trump.
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. Stand down. You're outnumbered.
There's a fucking million of us out there, and we are
listening to Trump, your boss.

The insurrectionists argued with law enforcement that they shouldn't
even be fighting them because they believed that the Commander in Chief
was ordering this. This was the person's understanding.
When President-Elect Biden went on television that day to demand an
end to the siege, one woman asked this:
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. Does he not realize President Trump
called us to siege the place?

The examples of these types of comments are endless. Don't worry. I
won't play all of them. But it wasn't just the words of the
insurrectionists that proved that they did this in response to orders
from their Commander in Chief. We can see this in the fact that they
were not hiding.
One rioter, in a livestream at the Capitol said:

He'll be happy. We're fighting for Trump.

(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. Let's call Trump, yes. Dude, dude,
let's tell Trump.
Unidentified Speaker. Trump would be very upset.
Unidentified Speaker. They'd be like, no. Just say we love
them. We love you, bro.
Unidentified Speaker. No, he'll be happy. What do you mean?
We're fighting for Trump.

And, again, this was not an isolated incident. The individuals in
this slide posted photos of themselves committing these crimes. Trump
supporters who had broken into the Capitol were taking selfies,
streaming live videos, and posing. In fact, they wanted the President
to know: ``This is me!'' In fact, you can see the person wrote on his
own posting: ``This is me!''
And if there were any remaining doubt, after hours of prompting, when
President Trump finally told the insurrectionists to go home, only then
did some of them begin to listen.
As you previously saw, at 4:17 p.m., Mr. Trump released a prerecorded
video saying to the mob:

Go home. We love you. You're very special.

Shortly after he tweeted this video, a few of the insurrectionists
who had seen it could be claiming victory--heard claiming victory--and
telling people to go home because of Donald Trump's message and
instructions.
You saw earlier the insurrectionist Jacob Chansley, who told someone:

We won the day.

A little before that video of Chansley, he said the same thing to the
crowd through a bullhorn and instructed them to go home because of the
video that President Trump had tweeted. Let's watch.
(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. Today is ours, ladies and gentlemen.
We won the day. Today is ours. We won the day. That's right.
Donald Trump has asked everybody to just go home. You can
look it up on his Twitter. He just did a video. It's a minute
long. He asked everybody to go home.

Even after the attack, the insurrectionists made clear to law
enforcement that they were just following President Trump's orders.
They didn't shy away from their crimes because they thought they were
following orders from the Commander in Chief and so they would not be
punished.
They were wrong. After the attack, there were dozens of arrests.
These were Federal offenses, including assaulting the police. When law
enforcement interviewed the people who were at the Capitol on January
6, they, once again, said it was because the President told them to be
there.
Robert Sanford was seen in this widely circulated video throwing a
fire extinguisher that struck a Capitol Police officer outside the
building.
(Video presentation of 1-6-2021.)
A witness told the FBI that Sanford said he had traveled to
Washington, DC, on a bus with a group of people. The group had gone to
the White House and listened to Donald J. Trump's speech and then had
followed the President's instructions and gone to the Capitol.
Folks, the insurrectionists didn't just make this up. As Sanford's
lawyer explained:

You're being told, ``You gotta fight like hell.'' Does
``fight like hell'' mean you throw things at people? Maybe.

The lawyer added that his client ``wouldn't have been there if it
wasn't for the president.''
Now, Sanford wasn't the exception; he was the rule. In their
statements after the attack, insurrectionists routinely echoed what
they had said before and during the attack: They were there because the
President told them to be.
Now, look, the lawyers who are saying that their clients were told to
commit these acts by Mr. Trump, well, they know that putting the blame
on the President doesn't exonerate their clients. They are just saying
it, frankly, because that is exactly what happened.
Another Trump supporter who has been federally charged is Texas real
estate agent Jennifer Ryan. Now, Ms. Ryan has given many TV interviews
in which she says she was only doing what the President asked her and
others to do. She also recorded video before the rally talking about
the mob's plans for violence, and here is what she said.
(Text of video presentation.)

Ms. RYAN. Personally, I do not feel a sense of shame or
guilt from my heart for what I was doing. I thought I was
following my President. I thought I was following what we
were called to do. He asked us to fly there. He asked us to
be there. So I was doing what he asked us to do.
Ultimately, yes, we were going in solidarity with President
Trump. President Trump requested that we be in DC on the 6th,
so this was our way of going and stopping the steal.
If it comes down to work--guess what--I'm going to be
there. We're all going to be up

[[Page S647]]

here, and we're going to be breaking those windows.

Yet another Trump supporter who was arrested after breaching the
Capitol, Douglas Sweet, explained in a media interview why he did it.
Referring to Donald Trump, Mr. Sweet said:

He said, ``Hey, I need my digital soldiers to show up on
January 6.'' And we all did.

Some of these individuals who joined in the attack on our Capitol did
so as part of violent, racist groups, which have been officially
condemned by our government. Daniel Goodwyn is a self-proclaimed member
of the Proud Boys. He was one of many. On November 7, Goodwyn tweeted a
picture showing a Proud Boys logo surrounded by ``Stand Back'' and
``Stand By'' and, again, ``Stand back and stand by!'' and ``Await
orders from our Commander in Chief.''
Look closely at this slide. You are looking at an image of Goodwyn's
own tweet. He was such a loyal follower of President Trump that he used
the President's photo as his own profile picture on Twitter.
Now, remember, President Trump told them to ``Stand back and stand
by'' at the debate. They took it as a call to arms. And when he called
them to arms, they were all ready to act. They were waiting for their
orders, which they got on January 6.
And Goodwyn followed those orders. He stood ready as others broke
into the windows of the Capitol and climbed inside. Here he is on
another of the insurrectionist live streams in one of the first floor
hallways of the building.
When it became clear that Donald Trump was not going to save these
folks from prosecution, when it became clear that the Commander in
Chief had given false commands that went against this country, some of
his supporters even expressed regret, and they said they felt duped.
Here is Jacob Chansley again, whom we saw in a video claiming victory
after the President told the rioters to go home. Earlier in the
afternoon, as you will recall, Chansley carried a spear as he breached
the Capitol, entered the Senate through the Gallery, and went right
here, onto the Senate floor.
Chansley left a threatening note for Vice President Pence, right
there on the Senate dais. It read:

It's only a matter of time. Justice is coming.

On January 7, Chansley spoke to the FBI, and he said that he came as
part of a group effort with other ``patriots'' from Arizona at the
request of the President that all ``patriots'' come to DC on January 6,
2021.
On January 14, Chansley's lawyer gave an interview to Chris Cuomo, in
which he said that Chansley was there ``at the invitation of our
President, who said [he would] wal down Pennsylvania Avenue with him.''
In fact, Chansley's lawyer now says that Chansley felt duped by the
President, and he regrets what the President brought him to do.

This man, who ran through our halls, who ran into this Chamber, who
sat right there on the dais, and who wrote a note for Vice President
Pence that he was coming for him--he and those with him declared they
would remove us from office if we went against Donald Trump. Now he is
saying he would not have done any of that if Mr. Trump had told him not
to.
Chansley is not alone in his postarrest confession that he was
following the directions of Donald Trump. As more and more of these
people have been charged, the confession and the regret simply
cascades. More and more insurrectionists are admitting that they came
at Trump's direction.
When Riley June Williams, known for allegedly helping steal a laptop
from Speaker Pelosi's office, appeared in court on January 21, her
lawyer said to the judge: ``It is regrettable that Ms. Williams took
the President's bait and went inside the Capitol.''
Troy Smocks, who was in the Capitol riot on January 6, posted online
that day: ``[T]oday President Trump told Us to `fight like hell.''' He
also posted that the President ``said that Our cause was a matter of
national security.''
Samuel Fisher was charged with disorderly conduct and illegally being
in the Capitol on January 6. That day, before the attack on this
building, he wrote on his website: ``Trump just needs to fire the bat
signal . . . '' and ``then the pain comes.''
The lawyer for Dominic Pezzola, a leader of the Proud Boys, who was
the first person to break inside the Capitol, said that President Trump
effectively told his client and others:

People of the country, come on down, let people know what
you think. [The] logical thinking was, ``He invited us
down.''

Pezzola's lawyer went on:

These were people acting in a way they have never acted
before, and it begs the question, ``Who lit the fuse?''

On January 6, we know who lit the fuse. Donald Trump told these
insurrectionists to come to the Capitol and stop the steal. And they
did come to the Capitol, and they tried to stop the certification. They
came because he told them to. And they did stop our proceedings, but
only temporarily, because he told them to.
Have you noticed, throughout this presentation, the uncanny
similarity, over and over and over again, of what all these people are
saying? They said what Donald Trump said, and they echo each other:
Stand back and stand by. Stop the steal. Fight like hell. Trump sent
us. We are listening to Trump.
The riots that day left at least 7 people dead; more than 150 people
injured; Members, Senators, and our staffs all traumatized to this day;
damage and pain to our Capitol; damage and pain to Americans; damage to
our police force; and damage to other nations who have always seen us
as a bastion of democracy.
All of these people who have been arrested and charged, they are
being held accountable for their actions. Their leader, the man who
incited them, must be held accountable as well. But, as I said earlier,
you don't have to take my word for it that the insurrectionists acted
at Donald Trump's direction. They said so. They were invited here. They
were invited by the President of the United States.
(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. We were invited here. We were
invited. Hey, we were invited here. We were invited by the
President of the United States.

Mr. Manager RASKIN. Senators, Representative DeGette just showed how
the insurrectionists believed and understood themselves to be following
President Trump's marching orders. She explained in chilling detail how
they were acting in perfect alignment with his political instructions
and his explicit strategy to retain power.
They did what he told them to do. This pro-Trump insurrection did not
spring into life out of thin air. We saw how Trump spent months
cultivating America's most dangerous extremist groups. We saw how he
riled them up with corrosive lies and violent rhetoric, so much so that
they were ready and eager for their most dangerous mission,
invalidating the will of the people to keep Donald Trump in office.
We must remember that this was not the first time Donald Trump had
inflamed and incited a mob. Trump knew that his incitement would result
in violence not only because of the thousands of violent messages that
were posted all over the forums and the widespread news of preparations
for violence among extremist groups and his communications on Twitter
with the insurrectionists themselves; he knew it also because he had
seen many of the exact same groups he was mobilizing participate in
extremist violence before. Moreover, he had seen clearly how his own
incitement of violence in praise after the violence took place
galvanized, encouraged, and electrified these extremist followers.
These tactics were road-tested.
January 6 was a culmination of the President's actions, not an
aberration from them. The insurrection was the most violent and
dangerous episode--so far--in Donald Trump's continuing pattern and
practice of inciting violence. But I emphasize ``so far.''
Earlier, Congresswoman Plaskett showed several episodes of Trump's
incitement that took place during the Presidential election. But his
encouragement of violence against other public officials who he thought
had crossed him long predates the 2020 campaign.
The incitement of violence is always dangerous, but it is uniquely
intolerable when done by the President of the United States of America.
But that became the norm.
On President Trump's watch, White supremacists and extremist groups
have spread like wildfire across the land. His own Department of
Homeland

[[Page S648]]

Security called homegrown terrorism the No. 1 threat facing Americans
today. But no matter how many people inside and outside government
begged him to condemn extreme elements promoting violence and, indeed,
civil war in America and race war in America, he just wouldn't do it,
and that is because he wanted to incite and provoke their violence for
his own political gain and for his own strategic objectives.
Ever since he became President, Trump revealed what he thought of
political violence for his side. He praised it, and he encouraged it.
Right now, I am going to play for you just a few clips from over the
years when the President's words successfully incited his supporters
into assaulting his opponents.
(Text of video presentation.)

(People chanting: ``U.S.A.'')
President TRUMP. See, the first group, I was nice: Oh, take
your time. The second group, I was pretty nice. The third
group, I'll be a little more violent. And the fourth group,
I'll say: Get the hell out of here.
I said: Get him the hell out of here, will you, please? Get
him out of here. Throw him out.
I get a little notice--in case you see the security guys,
they are wonderful security guys. They said: Mr. Trump, there
may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience.
So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato,
knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just
knock the hell--I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.
I promise.

Well, we have seen these clips and many, many more like them before,
but think about the brutal power and effectiveness of his words with
his followers. You heard him. He told his supporters to be a little
more violent, and they responded to his command by literally dragging a
protester across the floor at one of his campaign rallies.
He cried: Get him the hell out of here. Throw him out.
His supporters punched and kicked another protester as he was
escorted from the hall. He told his supporters to knock the hell out of
people who opposed him and promised to pay the legal fees of the
assailants.
Time after time, he encouraged violence. His supporters listened, and
they got the message. But it wasn't just Trump's encouragement of
violence that conditioned his supporters to participate in this
insurrection on January 6; it was also his explicit sanctioning of the
violence after it took place.
Let's watch some of those incidents, beginning with Trump praising
supporters who assaulted a Black protester.
(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP. Lying Ted Cruz.
But we've had a couple that were really violent. And the
particular one, when I said I would like to bang him, that
was a very vicious--you know, it was a guy who was swinging--
very loud and then started swinging at the audience. And you
know what? The audience swung back. And I thought it was
very, very appropriate. He was swinging, he was hitting
people, and the audience hit back. And that is what we need a
little bit more of.
Unidentified Speaker. We will talk to you about that later.
Unidentified Speaker. Yep. There's not going to be time.
Unidentified Speaker. I am sick and tired of you guys. The
last time you came here you did the same thing. Get the hell
out of here.
Unidentified Speaker. You suck.
Unidentified Speaker. Get the hell out of here.
Unidentified Speaker. The last guy did the same thing. Are
you the guardian?
Unidentified Speaker. Yes, and you just broke my glasses.
Unidentified Speaker. The last guy did the same damn thing.
Unidentified Speaker. You just body-slammed me and broke my
glasses.
President TRUMP. Greg is smart. And, by the way, never
wrestle him. Do you understand that? Never.
Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my kind--
(People chanting: ``Jews will not replace us.'')
(People chanting: ``Fuck you, faggots.'')
Unidentified Speaker. What the fuck, you asshole.
Unidentified Speaker. I am not even saying we are not
violent. I'm saying that we fucking didn't aggress. We did
not initiate force against anybody. We are not nonviolent. We
will fucking kill these people if we have to.
President TRUMP. I do think there's blame, yes. I think
there is blame on both sides. You look at--you look at both
sides. I think there is blame on both sides. You also had
people that were very fine people on both sides.

Just in case you didn't catch all of that, the President praised a
Republican candidate who assaulted a journalist as ``my kind'' of guy.
He said there were ``very fine people on both sides'' when the neo-
Nazis, the Klansmen, and Proud Boys invaded the city--the great city of
Charlottesville--and killed Heather Heyer. And he said that an attack
on a Black protester at one of his rallies was very, very appropriate.
Does that sound familiar? Listen to how President Trump responded
when asked abou his own conduct on January 6.

(Text of video presentation.)

Unidentified Speaker. What is your personal responsibility?
President TRUMP. So if you read my speech--and many people
have done it--it has been analyzed, and people thought that
what I said was totally appropriate.

So there the pattern is, staring us in the face. Very, very
``appropriate,'' he said after a man was assaulted at one of his
rallies. ``Totally appropriate'' was how he characterized his
incitement on January 6, meaning that, of course, if given the chance,
he would gladly do it again because why would he not engage in totally
appropriate conduct?
An examination of his past statements makes it clear that when Donald
Trump tells a crowd, as he did on January 6, ``fight like hell or you
won't have a country anymore,'' he meant for them to fight like hell.
On January 6, that became clear to all of America.
Now, let's consider the events, Senators, that took place last year
in Michigan where President Trump demonstrated his willingness and his
ability to incite violence against government officials who he thought
were getting in his way.
When responding to extremist plots in Michigan, Trump showed he knew
how to use the power of a mob to advance his political objectives.
Beginning in March, Trump leveled attacks on Michigan Governor
Gretchen Whitmer for the coronavirus policies in her State.
On March 17, the day after Governor Whitmer pushed the Federal
Government to better support the States on COVID-19, Trump criticized
her handling of the pandemic, tweeting:

Failing Michigan Governor must work harder and be much more
proactive. We are pushing her to get the job done. I stand
with Michigan!

On March 27, he added:

I love Michigan, one of the reasons we are doing such a
GREAT job for them during this horrible Pandemic. Yet your
Governor, Gretchen ``Half'' Whitmer is way in over her ahead,
she doesn't have a clue. Likes blaming everyone for her own
ineptitude! #MAGA.

By April, Trump's rhetorical attacks and name-calling turned to calls
for mass mobilization of his supporters. This was a sign of things to
come.
On April 17, 2020, he tweeted:

LIBERATE MICHIGAN

Not even 2 weeks later, on April 30, his supporters marched on the
Michigan State capitol in Lansing. They stormed the building. Trump's
marching orders were followed by aggressive action on the ground.
(Text of video presentation.)

Unidentified Speaker. We have a right. Let us in.
(People chanting: ``Let us in.''
Unidentified Speaker. Heil Hitler! Heil Hitler.
Unidentified Speaker. You policemen are all cowards. You
betrayed us. The police have betrayed the people.
(People chanting: ``Lock her up up.'')

As the video shows, these militant protesters showed up ready to take
a violent stand. They came armed and tightly packed themselves into the
building with no regard, of course, for social distancing.
This Trump-inspired mob may indeed look familiar to you: Confederate
battle flags, MAGA hats, weapons, camo Army gear--just like the
insurrectionists who showed up and invaded this Chamber on January 6.
The siege of the Michigan State House was effectively a State-level
dress rehearsal for the siege of the U.S. Capitol that Trump incited on
January 6. It was a preview of the coming insurrection.
President Trump's response to these two events was strikingly
similar. Following the armed siege in Lansing, President Trump refused
to condemn the attacks on the Michigan capitol or denounce the violent
lawbreakers. Instead, he did just the opposite. He

[[Page S649]]

upheld the righteousness of his violent followers' cause, and he put
pressure on the victim of the attack to listen to his supporters.
The day after the mob attack in Lansing, Trump told Governor Whitmer
to negotiate with extremists, tweeting that the Governor should just
``give a little'' to the violent men who had stormed the Capitol,
threatening not only the stability of the Michigan government but her
own life.
As you can see, he tweeted:

The Governor of Michigan should give a little, and put out
the fire. These are very good people, but they are angry.
They want their lives back again, safely! See them, talk to
them, make a deal.

The President said heavily armed extremists carrying Confederate
battle flags and pushing past police to overtake the Michigan State
House chamber are ``very good people'' and just negotiate with them.
It is clear he doesn't think that they are at fault in any way at
all. But April 30 wasn't the only time Trump supporters stormed the
Michigan capitol. Emboldened by the praise and his encouragement and
support, they escalated again. Governor Whitmer refused to capitulate
to the President's demand to negotiate with them.
Two weeks later, on May 14, Trump's mob again stormed the State
capitol. This time, as you can see here, one man brought a doll with a
noose around the neck, foreshadowing the appearance of the large
gallows erected outside of this building, downstairs from here, on
January 6, as the crowd chanted--and I still can hear the words ringing
in my ear--``Hang Mike Pence. Hang Mike Pence. Hang Mike Pence.''
Over the coming months, even after a crowd threatening Governor
Whitmer stormed the capitol, Trump continued to assail her in public.
At a rally in Michigan on September 10, Trump whipped up the crowd
against Governor Whitmer saying:

She doesn't have a clue about reopening her own state's
economy.

The crowd cheered.
Then, on October 8, the precise consequences of the President's
incitement to violence were revealed to the whole world.
(Video presentation.)
Look at this. Thirteen men were arrested by the FBI for plotting to
storm the Michigan State capitol building, launch a civil war, kidnap
Governor Whitmer, transport her to Wisconsin, and then try and execute
her.
This was an assassination conspiracy, a kidnapping conspiracy. Look
at the language that they used. In the charging document, the FBI
reported that one of the conspirators said he needed ``200 men'' to
storm the capitol building and take political hostages, including the
Governor. The suspect called it a ``snatch and grab, man. Grab the
[f'ing] Governor.''
One of those men already pled guilty to this conspiracy.
The plot was well organized, just like the one that was coming on
January 6. The men in Michigan even considered building Molotov
cocktails to disarm police vehicles and attempted to construct their
own IEDs--something that actually happened here on January 6. Police
authorities arrested extremists who had weapons and materials to build
explosive devices, including one man found with an assault rifle and
enough materials to make 11 Molotov cocktails.
On September 17, 2020, one of the Michigan conspiracists posted:

When the time comes there will be no need to try and strike
fear through presence. The fear will be manifested through
bullets.

And what did Donald Trump do as President of the United States to
defend one of our Nation's Governors against a plotted kidnapping by
violent insurrections? Did he publicly condemn violent domestic
extremists who hoped and planned to launch a civil war in America? No,
not at all. He further inflamed them by continuing to attack the
Governor who was the object of their hatred in this kidnapping
conspiracy.
The very night this conspiracy became public and that Governor
Whitmer learned that there were 13 men who were planning to kidnap and
likely kill her, Trump did not condemn the violence. He did not
criticize the extremists. He didn't even check on Governor Whitmer's
safety. He chose to vilify Governor Whitmer again and then, amazingly,
took credit for foiling the plot against her, demanding her gratitude,
and then quickly, of course, changed the subject to antifa. He tweeted:

Governor Whitmer . . . has done a terrible job.

He demanded that she thank him for the law enforcement operation that
had foiled the kidnapping conspiracy that had been encouraged by his
rhetoric.
On October 17, a little over a week after these people were arrested
for preparing to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, Donald Trump riled up the
boisterous crowd in Muskegon with more personal attacks on Whitmer,
driving the crowd to chant ``Lock her up. Lock her up.''
He had now seen that some of his followers were prepared to engage in
criminal violence with orchestrated attacks, deadly weapons, and
willing bodies to storm a State capitol building and to attack his
perceived political enemies, and so as the crowd chanted ``Lock her
up,'' he pivoted to his next goal. He told them they couldn't trust the
Governor to administer fair elections in Michigan. He used the crowd
that he knew would readily engage in violence to prepare his followers
for his next and, of course, his paramount political objective:
claiming the election was stolen and inciting insurrectionary action.
He did it again on October 27 during a preelection rally speech in
Lansing, MI, where the capitol had been stormed. Trump openly joked
with the crowd about critics saying his words had provoked the violent
plot against Governor Whitmer. Check it out. It is telling.
(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP. We got to get her going. I don't think she
likes me too much.
(People chanting: ``Lock her up.'')
President TRUMP. See, I don't comment to that because every
time, if I make just even a little bit of a nod, they say:
``The President led them on.'' No, I don't have to lead you
on. Even a little nod, they say: ``The President said.'' Your
Governor, at the urging of her husband, who has abused our
system very badly--the only man allowed in the State of
Michigan--the only man allowed to go sailing is her husband.
Now, your Governor--I don't think she likes me too much. Hey,
hey, hey, hey, I'm the one. It was our people that helped her
out with her problem. I mean, we have to see if it is a
problem, right? People are entitled to say maybe it was a
problem, maybe it wasn't. It was our people--my people--our
people that helped her out.

So President Trump offered them a little winking inside joke about
his constant incitement of the mob and how much can actually be
communicated by him with just a little nod--just a little nod.
He presided over another pounding, rhythmic rendition of his
trademark chant: ``Lock her up. Lock her up.'' Then, referring to the
FBI's foiling of the kidnapping conspiracy, which was deadly serious,
he said that he helped her out with a problem.
(Text of video presentation.)

Maybe it was a problem; maybe it wasn't. We will have to
see.
Maybe it was a problem; maybe it wasn't.

The President of the United States of America--he could not bring
himself to publicly oppose a kidnapping and potential assassination
conspiracy plot against a sitting Governor of one of our 50 States?
Trump knew exactly what he was doing in inciting the January 6 mob--
exactly. He had just seen how easily his words and actions inspired
riots in Michigan. He sent a clear message to his supporters. He
encouraged planning and conspiracies to take over capitol buildings and
threaten public officials who refused to bow down to his political
will.
Is there any chance Donald Trump was surprised by the results of his
own incitement? Let's do what Tom Paine told us to do, use our common
sense, the sense we have in common as citizens.
If we don't draw the line here, what is next? What makes you think
the nightmare with Donald Trump and his lawmaking and violent mobs is
over? If we let him get away with it and then it comes to your
Stat capital or it comes back here again, what are we going to say?

These prior acts of incitement cast a harsh light on Trump's obvious
intent--obvious intent--his unavoidable knowledge of the consequences
of his incitement, the unavoidable knowledge of the consequences of his
incitement, and the clear foreseeability of the violent harm that he
unleashed on our people and our Republic.

[[Page S650]]

January 6 was not some unexpected, radical break from his normal law-
abiding and peaceful disposition. This was his state of mind. This was
his essential M.O. He knew that, egged on by his tweets, his lies, and
his promise of a wild time in Washington to guarantee his grip on
power, his most extreme followers would show up bright and early, ready
to attack, ready to engage in violence, ready to fight like hell for
their hero, just like they answered his call in Michigan.
President Trump has said over and over his supporters are loyal. In
his own words, his supporters are the ``most loyal'' we have seen in
our country's history. He knew that his most hardcore supporters were
willing to direct violence at elected officials--indeed, to attack and
lay siege to a capitol building--and he knew they would be ready to
heed his call on January 6 to stop the steal by using violence to block
the peaceful transfer of power in the United States. He knew they were
coming. He brought them here, and he welcomed them with open arms:

We hear you (and love you) from the Oval Office.

My dear colleagues, is there any political leader in this room who
believes that if he is ever allowed by the Senate to get back into the
Oval Office, Donald Trump would stop at inciting violence to get his
way? Would you bet the lives of more police officers on that? Would you
bet the safety of your family on that? Would you bet the future your
democracy on that?
President Trump declared his conduct totally appropriate, so if he
gets back into office and it happens again, we will have no one to
blame but ourselves.
Mr. Lieu will return now to tell you about President Trump's total
lack of remorse after the insurrection.
Mr. Manager LIEU. Good afternoon. My colleagues walked you through
President Trump's actions leading up to January 6 and then the horrific
events on January 6, and we saw both during the attack as well as in
the days after the attack that this was a President who showed no
remorse and took no accountability--in fact, quite the opposite. As
Representative Raskin showed you, President Trump claimed that his
actions were ``totally appropriate.''
The assertion that everyone thought Donald Trump's actions were
totally appropriate, including people in this room, is, of course,
untrue. It is also dangerous. That is why Members of Congress and U.S.
Senators, former and current administration officials, State and local
officials, all unequivocally confirm what we witnessed with our own
eyes--that Donald Trump's conduct was wrong, it was destructive,
dishonorable, and un-American.
President Trump's lack of remorse and refusal to take accountability
during the attack shows his state of mind. It shows that he intended
the events of January 6 to happen, and when it did, he delighted in it.
President Trump's lack of remorse and refusal to take accountability
after the attack poses its own unique and continuing danger. It sends
the message that it is acceptable to incite a violent insurrection to
overthrow the will of the people and that a President of the United
States can do that and get away with it.
That is why we have to hold President Trump accountable, to send a
message that it is never patriotic to incite a violent attack against
our Nation's Capitol and that future Presidents will know that they
cannot follow in Donald Trump's footsteps and get away with it.
So let's start with the day of the attack. On insurrection day,
January 6, President Trump did not once condemn the attack, not even
once. Even when he finally asked the violent extremists to go home,
which was 3 hours after the attack began, he sends this video, and he
ends it with ``You're very special. We love you.'' That was his message
to people who perpetrated this violent, gruesome attack--``We love
you''--and then 2 hours later, he tweets ``Remember this day forever.''
This is not a man who showed remorse, but it is worse than that.
After that tweet, it took him another full day to even condemn the
attack itself. The very next day, President Trump was eerily silent,
and then at 7:01 p.m., he releases a prerecorded video, and there,
President Trump for the first time, nearly 30 hours after the attack
began, acknowledges and condemns the violent mayhem that occurred. He
said the demonstrators ``defiled the seat of American democracy.'' He
said that these demonstrators didn't represent this country and if they
broke the law, they would pay.
But even in that video, he says more lies. He says in that very same
video that he immediately deployed the National Guard. That, again, is
not true. The National Guard was not deployed until over 2 hours after
the attack began at around 3 p.m. Because of this late deployment, the
National Guard did not arrive until after 5 p.m.
When the Guard was deployed, the Pentagon had released a statement
that showed the list of people--and you saw that list--of folks that
were consulted before deploying the National Guard.
Several people were on their list, including the Vice President.
President Trump was not on that list. You know, as a veteran, I find it
deeply dishonorable that our Commander in Chief did not protect us.
Then, later, he tried to take credit for something he failed to do.
Shameful.
Also, in that video, you should note what it did not say. Absent from
that entire video was any actual acceptance of responsibility for his
actions. Absent from that video was a call to his most fervent
supporters to never do this again. And here was his final message in
that so-called condemnation-of-attack video.
Here is what he actually said:
(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

President TRUMP. And to all of my wonderful supporters, I
know you are disappointed, but I also want you to know that
our incredible journey is only just beginning.

President Trump not only failed to show remorse or take
accountability, he made clear he is just beginning.
For days, he did not address the Nation after this attack. We needed
our Commander in Chief to lead, to unite a grieving country, to comfort
us. But what did President Trump do? Nothing. Silence. We are all aware
that a violent mob murdered a police officer. It took President Trump 3
days before he lowered the flag of the United States of America--3
days--and President Trump, who was Commander in Chief at the time, did
not attend and pay respects to the officer who lay in state in the very
building that he died defending.
Now, some people have argued that President Trump made a mistake;
that he gets a mulligan, but we know President Trump didn't make a
mistake because, you see, if you or I make a mistake when something
very bad happens, we would show remorse; we would accept
responsibility. President Trump didn't do any of that. Why not? Because
he intended for what happened on January 6. And how do we know that? He
told us.
On January 12, as President Trump was boarding Air Force One, headed
to Texas--and you saw this video before, and I am going to show it
again--he was asked by a reporter:

What is your role in what happened at the Capitol? What is
your personal responsibility?

This was his response:
(Text of video presentation of 1-12-2021.)

President TRUMP. But they've analyzed my speech and my
words and my final paragraph, my final sentence, and
everybody, to the T, thought it was totally appropriate.

On January 12, President Trump had seen the violent attack on the
Capitol. He knew people had died, and his message to all of us was that
his conduct was totally appropriate.
I am a former prosecutor, and we are trained to recognize lack of
remorse, but it doesn't take a prosecutor to understand that President
Trump was not showing remorse; he was showing defiance. He was telling
us that he would do this again; that he could do this again; that he
and future Presidents can run for national election, lose an election,
inflame the supporters for months, and then incite an insurrection and
that that would be totally appropriate.
One week after the attack, on January 13, President Trump, in
response to continuing bipartisan criticism, released another video.
Here is part of what he said:
(Text of video presentation of 1-13-2021.)

President TRUMP. I want to be very clear. I unequivocally
condemn the violence that

[[Page S651]]

we saw last week. Violence and vandalism have absolutely no
place in our country and no place in our movement.

President Trump, of course, needed to make that statement. He needed
to unequivocally condemn that attack, but he also needed to mean those
words. You saw Donald Trump tweet endless attacks--sometimes 108 tweets
in a day--and in public speeches and across rallies, repeating words of
``Fight'' and ``Stop the steal'' and ``Never surrender.'' You know what
it looks like when President Trump wants to convey a message.
Forcefully, loudly, and repeatedly he does that.
This video, sent after a week of the attack, was not that. We know
this because, in this video, he again does not show remorse and does
not take responsibility. He again does not acknowledge his role in the
insurrection. He does not say in that video, for example, ``Everything
I said in the months prior went too far,'' and he does not say the one
sentence that matters. He does not say the one sentence that would stop
future political violence: ``The election was not stolen.'' He still
hasn't said that sentence. That is why National Guard troops, in full
body armor, still patrol outside.
Reports from the White House also confirm that President Trump
believed he was ``forced by the bipartisan furor after the insurrection
to acknowledge the new administration.'' We know he did not stand
behind his belated condemnation because those around him confirmed it.
Behind closed doors, sources confirmed that President Trump still
refused to directly acknowledge his election loss to Joe Biden. He
refused to even attend the peaceful transition of power--the first
President in modern history. President Trump even, reportedly, while
watching the impeachment vote, ``focused his ire'' on the Republicans
who voted for his impeachment, peppering aides with questions about
``what he could do to exact revenge.''
President Trump has made clear that, if he is not held accountable,
he will not be accountable. He will not stop. Now, President Trump
would have his base and the world believe that his conduct was totally
appropriate. It is important to impeach that falsehood, to make clear
to his supporters and everyone watching that what Donald Trump did was
not acceptable--in fact, quite the opposite.
People in his own party--State officials, former officials, current
officials, Members of Congress--have, unambiguously and passionately,
said that what Donald Trump did was ``disgraceful,'' ``shameful,'' and
have called his behavior ``existential'' and ``wrong,'' and they have
said that his actions gave rise to one of the darkest chapters in
United States' history.
Let's hear what some of these officials had to say. Here are
Governors Spencer Cox, Charlie Baker, Mike DeWine, Larry Hogan, and
Phil Scott.
(Text of video presentation of 1-11-2021.)

Mr. Cox. And people have to be held accountable. And yes,
that includes the President.

(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. Baker. It's important to remember that they were the
culmination of months of President Trump repeating over and
over again that the American electoral system is a fraud.
After he stoked the flames of outrage for weeks leading up to
the events of yesterday, he refused t adequately prepare the
U.S. Capitol for the possibility of violence and left it nearly
defenseless. His remarks during and after the travesty of the attack on
the Capitol were disgraceful.

(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. DeWine. President Trump's continued refusal to accept
the election results without producing credible evidence of a
rigged election has stirred the fire that has threatened to
burn down our democracy. This incendiary speech yesterday,
the one he gave preceding the march, that he gave to the
protesters, served only to fan those flames.

(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. Hogan. I proudly stood by my father's side at age 12 on
the floor of the House Chamber as we both took the oath of
office, an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the
United States. It's clear to me that President Trump has
abandoned this sacred oath.

(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. Scott. Seeing our Capitol, a symbol of democracy around
the world, stormed by an angry mob was heartbreaking. And let
me be clear: These actions were not patriotic, and these
people are not patriots. The fact that these flames of hate
and insurrection were lit by the President of the United
States will be remembered as one of the darkest chapters in
our Nation's history.

One of the darkest chapters in our Nation's history.
Former members of the Trump administration, longstanding Republicans,
also made clear that President Trump incited this insurrection and that
it went against our democracy.
The President's former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, declared:

[T]oday's violent assault on our Capitol, an effort to
subjugate American democracy by mob rule, was fomented by Mr.
Trump.

Former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly spoke on this as well,
and I would like to play an audio clip of what he said.
(Text of audio presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. Kelly. [W]hat happened on Capitol Hill . . . was a
direct result of him poisoning the minds of people with the
lies and the fraud.

If you couldn't hear that, what John Kelly said about President Trump
was that what happened on Capitol Hill was a direct result of his
poisoning the minds of people with the lies and the fraud.
Former Speaker of the House John Boehner declared:

[T]he invasion of our Capitol by a mob, incited by lies
from some entrusted with power, is a disgrace to all who
sacrificed to build our Republic.

This was echoed by former Trump official after former Trump official.
Here is what former National Security Advisors John Bolton and H.R.
McMaster, former White House Communications Director Alyssa Farah, and
former Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said:
(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. Tapper. Let me just ask you: Do you think President
Trump has blood on his hands?
Mr. Bolton. I think he does. Look, I agree with Bill Barr.
I think he did incite this mob with the clear intention of
having them disrupt the electoral college certification and
delay it to give him more time. I don't think there's any
question about it.

(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

Mr. McMaster. There are many reasons for this assault on
the Capitol, but foremost among them was the President's
exhortations, was the President's sustained disinformation.

(Text of video presentation of 1-17-2021.)

Mr. McMaster. We've seen a President stoking fears amidst
these crises.

(Text of video presentation of 1-17-2021.)

Ms. Farah. First and foremost, I want to say that what
happened at the Capitol was unacceptable, un-American,
undemocratic.

(Text of video presentation of 1-8-2021.)

Mr. Mulvaney. I think everybody recognizes that what
happened on Wednesday is different. You can go down the long
litany of things that people complained about with Donald
Trump, and I could probably defend almost all of them. Many
of them were policy differences; many of them were stylistic
differences, but Wednesday was different. Wednesday was
existential. Wednesday is one of those things that struck to
the very heart of what it means to be an American, and it was
wrong.

Mick Mulvaney, President Trump's former Chief of Staff, is clearly
saying what we all felt--that January 6 was different. It was
existential. It was wrong. It was un-American.
This sentiment was echoed not just from people outside the
administration but from people inside the Trump administration. Perhaps
the most telling was the flood of resignations from people inside
President Trump's administration with firsthand access to President
Trump. His own officials felt so betrayed by his conduct that numerous
officials resigned in protest days before the end of President Trump's
term. Sixteen officials resigned in protest--16. They all took this
dramatic action of resigning because they saw the clear link between
President Trump's conduct and the violent insurrection.
Here is some of what they said.
Secretary DeVos, who was in the administration the entire term, told
President Trump in her resignation letter:

[T]here is no mistaking the impact your rhetoric had on the
situation, and it is an inflection point for me.

Secretary Chao, who was in the administration the entire term,
explained:

[[Page S652]]

Yesterday, our country experienced a traumatic and entirely
avoidable event as supporters of the President stormed the
Capitol building following a rally he addressed. As I'm sure
is the case with many of you, it has deeply troubled me in a
way I simply cannot set aside.

Deputy Costello told his associates the attack was his ``breaking
point'' and, he hoped, ``a wake-up call.''
These rebukes and resignations from President Trump's own
administration make clear that President Trump's conduct was anything
but totally appropriate. They also remind us that this can and must be
a wake-up call.
As Representative Fred Upton so eloquently put it, ``[President
Trump] expressed no regrets for last week's violent insurrection at the
U.S. Capitol. This sends exactly the wrong signal to those of us who
support the very core of our democratic principles and took a solemn
oath to the Constitution. . . . It is time to say: Enough is enough.''
Now, no one is saying here that President Trump cannot contest the
election. Of course, he can. But what President Trump did, as his
former Chief of Staff explained, was different. It was dishonorable, it
was un-American, and it resulted in fatalities. President Trump spent
months inflaming his supporters, spread lies to incite a violent attack
on our Capitol, on our law enforcement, and on all of us.
And then he lied again to his base to tell them that this was all OK,
that this was all acceptable. And that is why President Trump is so
dangerous--because he would have all of us, all Americans, believe that
any President who comes after him can do exactly the same thing.
That is why lack of remorse is an important factor in impeachment,
because impeachment, conviction, and disqualification is not just about
the past. It is about the future. It is making sure that no future
official, no future President does the same exact thing President Trump
does.
President Trump's lack of remorse shows that he will undoubtedly
cause future harm if allowed, because he still refuses to account for
his previous grave crime against our government.
You know, I am not afraid of Donald Trump running again in 4 years. I
am afraid he is going to run again and lose because he can do this
again.
We are in an unusual situation because, despite President Trump's
claim that everyone thinks what he did was fine, so many have come out
and spoken so strongly and passionately about what happened here.
I would like to highlight a statement by Representative Anthony
Gonzalez. He said:

The Vice President and both chambers of Congress had their
lives put in grave danger as a result of the President's
actions in the events leading up to and on January 6th.
During the attack itself, the President abandoned his post
while many members asked for help, thus further endangering
all present. These are fundamental threats not just to
people's lives but to the very foundation of our Republic.

And now I would like to show what Members of Congress said leading up
to the most bipartisan impeachment vote in U.S. history, because I do
want everyone watching, especially President Trump's supporters, to see
firsthand what I believe we all feel--that what President Trump did was
not appropriate, that it was not American, and that it absolutely
cannot stand.
(Text of Videotape presentation 1/7/2021.)

Ms. CHENEY. What he has done and what he has caused here is
something that we've never seen before in our history.

(Text of Videotape presentation 1/7/2021.)

Mr. KINZINGER. All indications are that the president has
become unmoored not just from his duty or even his oath but
from reality itself.

(Text of video presentation of 1-12-2021.)

Mr. KATKO. The President's role in this insurrection is
undeniable. Both on social media ahead of January 6 and in
his speech that day, he deliberately promoted baseless
theories creating a combustible environment of misinformation
and division. To allow the President of the United States to
incite this attack without consequences is a direct threat to
the future of [this] democracy.

After this trial, I hope you will come together and cast your vote
and make absolutely clear how we, as a Congress and as a nation, feel
about what Donald Trump did by convicting him, and to prevent this from
being ``only the beginning,'' as President Trump said, and to deter
future Presidents who do not like the outcome of a national election
from believing they can follow in President Trump's footsteps.
It is what our Constitution requires. It is what our country
deserves.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Representative DeGette will now return to show
how extremists were emboldened by the insurrection and planned to
attack the inauguration.
Ms. Manager DeGETTE. My colleagues have showed you the overwhelming
evidence of how President Trump's conduct assembled, incited, and
inflamed the mob. We showed how and why this attack, this violence, was
not only foreseeable but preventable. We showed that President Trump
knew his conduct could and would result in violence, and that when the
attack occurred, he did not fulfill his duty as Commander in Chief and
defend us. Instead, he was delighted.
Donald Trump incited a violent insurrection and he failed to defend
our Nation, our Capitol, this Congress, and our law enforcement from
the attack he incited.
Now I want to turn to the impact, the long-term harm of this conduct.
My colleagues and I will walk through the breadth and gravity of this
harm.
I would like to start with the effect President Trump's conduct had
on our domestic security. We saw firsthand how Donald Trump's conduct
emboldened and escalated domestic violence extremists. These folks are
known in the law enforcement community as DVEs.
These threats were and are made worse by President Trump's refusal to
take accountability and his refusal to forcibly denounce what his own
FBI identified as some of the most dangerous elements of our country.
Even as the attack was underway, he tweeted words of support to his
violent supporters, and then, in the aftermath on January 7, President
Trump made it clear this was only the beginning.
(Text of video presentation of 1-7-2021.)

President TRUMP. And to all of my wonderful supporters, I
know you are disappointed, but I also want you to know that
our incredible journey is only just beginning.

And he was right. Unless we take action, the violence is only just
beginning. In the aftermath of the attack, we saw a huge rise in
threats from domestic violence extremists, including specific threats
to the inauguration in DC, and also to all 50 State capitols. Our
intelligence Agencies confirmed that, in addition to these specific
threats, President Trump's conduct emboldened the very same violent
groups who initiated the attack and sparked new violent coalitions.
These groups believe that they are following his orders. They believe
that their acts of insurrection and violence are patriotic.
Violence is never patriotic, and it is never American. It is not the
Democratic way, and it is not the Republican way.
After the attack, the Nation's top defense and law enforcement
Agencies reported an increase in credible threats to the inauguration
from Donald Trump's supporters.
On January 13, 2021, a joint intelligence bulletin issued by the
Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the National
Counterterrorism Center found:

Since the 6 January event, violent online rhetoric
regarding the 20 January Presidential Inauguration has
increased, with some calling for unspecified `justice' for
the 6 January fatal shooting by law enforcement of a
participant who had illegally entered the Capitol Building,
and another posting that `many' armed individuals would
return on 19 January.

The Agencies also made clear why these threats were escalating,
especially regarding the inauguration. The report explained that a
primary motivating factor was:

The shared false narrative of a ``stolen'' election and
opposition to the change in control of the executive and
legislative branches of the Federal Government may lead some
individuals to adopt the belief that there is no political
solution to address their grievances and that violent action
is necessary.

In other words, President Trump's spreading of inflammatory
disinformation about the election incited the insurrection on January 6
and may lead to further violence.
Online, just as they did prior to the January 6 attack, Trump
supporters

[[Page S653]]

took to the internet to organize and document their desire and plans
for future violence at President Biden's inauguration. And indeed, in
the days shortly after the attack, several posters on extremist social
media websites made further plans for violence.
They posted:

Many of us will return on January 19, 2021, carrying our
weapons, in support of our nation's resolve, to which [sic]
the world will never forget!!! We will come in numbers that
no standing army or police agency can match.
We took the building once [and] we can take it again.

Other users, eager to participate in additional attacks, confirmed
that they were waiting on President Trump's instructions about what to
do next.
Referring to a future planned attack, a user on the online platform
known as Gab posted:

I'd like to come do this, but want to know, does our
President want us there? Awaiting instructions.

In fact, in the days leading up to the inauguration, multiple
individuals--many, potentially, in an attempt to carry out the plots
that I just previewed--were arrested in Washington, DC, including on
serious weapons charges.
One of those men was Couy Griffin, the founder of Cowboys for Trump,
who took part in the Capitol attack and was also arrested on January
17.
Here is what he said about his plans for violence.
(Text of video presentation of 1-17-2021.)

Mr. Griffin. You know, you want to say that that was a mob?
You want to say that was violence? No, sir. No ma'am. No. We
could have a Second Amendment rally on those same steps that
we had that rally yesterday. You know, and if we do, then
it's going to be a sad day, because there is going to be
blood running out of that building. But at the end of the
day, you mark my word, we will plant our flag on the desk of
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.

``Blood running out of that building''--this building, the Capitol,
where all of us are right now.
Now, the name Couy Griffin may sound familiar because he previously
faced controversy for a May 2020 video, where he said:

Mr. Griffin. The only good Democrat is a dead Democrat.

Hear it from him yourself.
(Text of video presentation of 5-27-2021.)

Mr. Griffin. What I've come to the conclusion is, the only
good Democrat is a dead Democrat.

Now, when he said this, President Trump actually retweeted Griffin
and thanked him for that sentiment.
When Donald Trump retweeted this, he was no stranger to Griffin. In
fact, in March 2019, over a year earlier, Griffin and Trump had spoken
on the phone for nearly 30 minutes.
President Trump's conduct, without a doubt, made it clear that he
supported Griffin. In fact, Griffin even said so himself.
As Griffin later said about President Trump retweeting his
inflammatory comment about the dead Democrats:

It really means a lot to me, because I know that the
president of the United States has my back.

Remember, this is a man who was here on January 6, who was arrested
after threatening to come back here to make blood come running out of
this building.
Threats like Griffin's have triggered a deployment of forces the
likes of which we have never seen. There were approximately 25,000
National Guard troops brought in from around the country to protect DC
leading up to and on Inauguration Day.
As you know, many of those troops are still here.
Take a look at that.
These were scenes that played out all over the country. Five days
following the siege on the Capitol, on January 11, 2021, the FBI
warned:

Armed protests are being planned at all 50 State capitols
from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the U.S.
Capitol from 17 January through 20 January.

As a result, at least 21 States activated their National Guards in
preparation for potential attacks. President Trump's incitement has
reverberated around the country, prompting massive law enforcement
mobilization in several State capitols, including in Washington,
Illinois, Michigan, and Georgia.
Look at these photos. This is what Donald Trump has done to America.
This massive deployment of law enforcement has cost the taxpayers
dearly. The National Guard deployment to DC alone is expected to cost
at least $480 million. The bills are also racking up in the States.
North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin have
each spent about half a million dollars to safeguard their capitols in
the run up to the inauguration. Ohio spent $1.2 million over this same
2-week period. And, remember, this is at a time when State budgets are
already suffering under the weight of the pandemic.
Our brave servicemembers showed up. Thanks to their dedication and
their vigilance, the inauguration and the days leading up to it
mercifully proceeded without incident. In fact, after news broke of law
enforcement's preparedness for further attacks, leaders of the Proud
Boys and the Three Percenters militia, the organizers of the Million
MAGA March, they all now told their followers to avoid protests at or
leading up to the inauguration for fear that law enforcement would
crush them and arrest rioters who showed up.
Thank God there wasn't an insurrection sequel here on January 20, but
look at the price we have paid--the price that we are still paying. It
is not just dollars and cents. This Capitol has become a fortress, as
State capitols have all across the country. Our constituents no longer
have access to their elected representatives. Every Democrat and
Republican, including people who came here on January 6 peacefully, is
paying the price. And it is not just a loss of access; it is a dimming
of their freedom. It is a dimming of all of our freedom.
We must uphold our oaths, as the tens of thousands of law enforcement
officers have done in the wake of January 6, because if we do not,
President Trump's mob stands ready for more attacks.
Now, this should be no surprise. Having a Commander in Chief who
incites violence has given life to the existing violent groups he spent
years cultivating and has inspired new coalitions among extremist
groups who actually view January as a success. According to the FBI,
President Trump's assemblage of his mob was particularly dangerous
because ``in-person engagement between DVEs of differing ideological
goals during the Capitol breach likely served to foster connections,
which may increase DVEs' willingness, capability, and motivation to
attack and undermine a government they view as illegitimate.''
In other words, they all got to talking to each other.
This bulletin by our own Intelligence Committee was also confirmed by
concrete evidence. Rioters celebrated their roles in the January 6
attack on social media. They boasted about their success in breaching
the Capitol and forcing Members of Congress and the Vice President to
evacuate. Take, for example, rightwing provocateur, Nick Fuentes. The
day before the Capitol insurrection, Fuentes said this on his internet
show:
(Text of video presentation of 1-5-2021.)

Mr. Fuentes. What can you and I do to a State legislator
besides kill them? Although we should not kill them--I am not
advising that. But, I mean, what else can you do, right?

Fuentes was at the Capitol on January 6 and praised the insurrection
on a live stream as ``glorious'' and ``awe inspiring.'' He later said:

We forced a joint session of Congress and the vice
president to evacuate because Trump supporters were banging
down and then successfully burst through the doors.

Fuentes was not the only provocateur to revel in the violence.
According to Mike Dunn, a member of the Boogaloo Bois--an anti-
government movement whose adherents helped lead multiple groups in
storming the Capitol--the Boogaloo Bois will be ``working overtime'' to
capitalize on the January 6 riots and hope it will lead to more action.
They said:

Just know there is more to come.

Proud Boys members were bragging about the attack on the Capitol. One
post on the Proud Boys telegram channel said:

People saw what we can do, they know what's up, they want
in.

The leader of the Proud Boys himself sent the same message. Enrique
Tarrio said the Proud Boys would be active during Biden's Presidency.
Tarrio stated:

[[Page S654]]

You're definitely going to see more of us.

Extremist groups are also boasting that the attack on our Capitol is
a boon for their recruitment efforts. Three Percent Security Force
leader, Chris Hill, says he has been contacted by several people
interested in joining since the insurrection. As one expert who focuses
on domestic extremism, Jared Holt, explained:

By all measurable effects this was for far-right extremists
one of the most successful attacks that they've ever
launched. . . . They're talking about this as the first stab
in a greater revolution.

As indicated by Mr. Holt, their perceived success has given them
encouragement to continue and to escalate attacks. Intelligence
agencies have also noted that these extremist groups will unfortunately
be targeting vulnerabl minority communities in the U.S.

A January 27, 2021, DHS bulletin warned ``long-standing racial and
ethnic tension'' of the sort that led to a man killing 23 people at an
El Paso Walmart in 2019 would continue to grow and motivate further
attacks.
The January 13 Joint Intelligence Bulletin report stated that in
addition to the other types of violence listed, ``DVEs may be inspired
to carry out more violence, including violence against racial, ethnic,
and religious minorities and associated institutions, journalists,
members of the LGBTQ+ community, and other targets common among some
DVEs.''
These prejudiced elements could be seen, visibly, in the crowd that
attacked the Capitol.
Pictured here is Robert Packer. Robert Packer is an avowed White
supremacist and Holocaust denier who proudly wore that sweatshirt,
which states ``Camp Auschwitz.''
These prejudiced elements could also be heard from the crowds. As you
have heard, the insurrectionists that attacked the Capitol on January 6
hurled racial slurs, including at Black police officers.
One officer described the trauma he experienced when the rioters
seized the Capitol. He said:

I'm a Black officer. There was a lot of racism that day. I
was called racial slurs, and in the moment, I didn't process
this as traumatic. I was just trying to survive. I just
wanted to get home, to see my daughter again. I couldn't show
weakness. I finally reached a safe place, surrounded by
officers, I was able to cry. To let it out. To attempt to
process it.

These extremist groups were emboldened because President Trump told
them repeatedly that their insurrectionist activities were the pinnacle
of patriotism. Well, let today be the day that we reclaim the
definition of patriotism.
Impeachment is not to punish but to prevent. We are not here to
punish Donald Trump. We are here to prevent the seeds of hatred that he
planted from bearing any more fruit. As my colleagues showed, this is
not the first time that President Trump inspired violence, but it must
be the last time that he is given a platform to do so. This must be our
wake-up call. We must condemn it because the threat is not over.
President Trump refused to condemn this type of violence. Instead,
over and over again, he has encouraged it. Our response must be
different this time. We simply cannot sweep this under the rug. We must
take a united stand, all of us, that this is not American.
Think back to August 2017, when a young woman was murdered during a
White supremacist rally in Charlottesville, VA. Her name was Heather
Heyer. Her mother's name is Susan Bro. Ms. Bro has been a steadfast
advocate for her daughter's memory. In a 2018 interview, she expressed
concern that people had rushed too quickly to reconciliation without
accountability.
(Text of video presentation of 8-11-2018.)

Ms. BRO. If you rush to heal, if you rush to ``everybody
grab each other and sing `Kumbaya,' '' we've accomplished
nothing, and we will be right back here in a few years.

``We will be right back here in a few years.'' Those were her words
in 2018, 3 years ago. Her daughter's murderer, he was held to account,
but our Nation did not impose any meaningful accountability on a
President who, at the time, said that there were ``very fine people on
both sides.''
And, now, where are we, 3 years later? I would argue we are not just
back where we were. I would argue things are worse. In 2017, it was
unfathomable to most of us to think that Charlottesville could happen,
just as it was unfathomable to most of us that the Capitol could have
been breached on January 6. Frankly, what unfathomable horrors await us
if we do not stand up now and say: No, this is not America, and we will
not just express condolences and denunciations. We won't just close the
book and try to move on. We will act to make sure this never happens
again.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Representatives Cicilline and Lieu will now come
to show the harm done and the damage done to Congress and our
Democratic process.
Mr. Cicilline.
Mr. Manager CICILLINE. Mr. President, distinguished Senators, you
just heard from my colleague Manager DeGette how the conduct of Donald
Trump dramatically increased the threats to our security and emboldened
violent domestic extremists.
I would like to now turn to the harm that was caused here, inside
these walls, as a result of the conduct on January 6--the harm to us,
to Congress, to those who serve our country, and to the constitutional
processes as the Trump mob tried to stop the election certification
process.
The attack on January 6 is one of the bloodiest intrusions of the
Capitol since the British invaded in the War of 1812 and burned it to
the ground. And you have heard in painstaking detail the President's
mob posed an immediate and serious threat to the continuity and
constitutional succession of the United States Government with the
first, second, and third in line to the Presidency. The Vice President,
the Speaker of the House, and the President pro tempore were all
together and faced a common threat in the same location, and we have
seen the first and the second were purposely targeted by these
attackers.
These were not idle threats. The mob, as you recall, chanted:

Hang Mike Pence.

(Text of video presentation.)

(People chanting: ``Hang Mike Pence.'')

The charging documents show that the rioters said they would have
killed Vice President Pence and Speaker Pelosi had they found them.
Dawn Bancroft and Diana Santos-Smith, two of the rioters charged in
the attack, were caught on tape discussing the brutal violence that
they hoped to inflict on Speaker Pelosi had she not been rushed out to
safety. They said:

We broke into the Capitol. . . . We got inside, we did our
part. We were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin'
brain but we didn't find her.

Senators, simply put, this mob was trying to overthrow our
government, and it came perilously close to reaching the first three
people in line to the Presidency.
It wasn't just the Vice President and the Speaker; rioters were
prepared to attack any Member of Congress they found. Thomas Edward
Caldwell, Donovan Ray Crowl, and Jessica Marie Watkins, three militia
members, were also charged for their role in the attack. They discussed
trapping us inside the underground tunnels.
The indictment quotes social media chatter with Caldwell:

All members are in the tunnels under [the] capitol seal
them in. Turn on gas.
All legislators are down in the Tunnels 3 floors down.
Do like we had to do when I was in the Corps, start tearing
out floors, go from top to bottom.

Never did any of us imagine that we or our colleagues would face
mortal peril by a mob riled up by the President of the United States,
the leader of the free world, but we did, all because Donald Trump
could not accept his election defeat.
Trump chose himself above the people, above our institutions, above
our democracy, above all of you. You know, we have heard Trump espouse
for years now his ``America First'' policy. But his true North Star
isn't America's well-being. It is not ``Country First'' like our dear
departed colleague John McCain. No, his directive is Trump first, no
matter the cost, no matter the threat to our democracy.
But each and every one of us in this room must agree on one thing: We
can never allow the kind of violent attack that occurred on January 6
to ever happen again in this country.
In the immediate aftermath, we heard many disturbing accounts from

[[Page S655]]

many Members of Congress about what they experienced that day. Here are
some of the reactions.
Following the attack, Representative Dusty Johnson expressed concerns
that we had gotten to the point where so many of us had sown the seeds
of anger and division.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. JOHNSON. (Inaudible), and there was some fear, to be
sure, but overwhelmingly the emotion that I experienced was
one of anger. I just could not believe that this was
happening. I could not believe that we had gotten to this
point where so many of us had sewn these seeds of anger and
of division, and we had (inaudible) powder keg, and literally
we were starting to see this powder keg light up, and it
was--frankly, I was furious.

Representative Jason Crow compared the events of this day to his time
in Afghanistan as an Army Ranger, something Senator Reed knows
something about.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. CROW. What I felt in the Capitol behind us is something
that I hadn't felt since I was in Afghanistan when I was an
Army Ranger. And to think that as a Member of Congress, in
2021, in the U.S. Capitol on the House floor, that I was
preparing to fight my way out of the people's House against a
mob is just beyond troubling.

Representative Pat Fallon was humbled by his experience on January 6.
He described the events as ``surreal'' as they unfolded here in the
Capitol.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. FALLON. It was something that I just never thought--I
just never thought I'd see this in our Nation's Capitol and
particularly in the House Chamber. It was surreal when it was
unfolding.
Well, you know, what was interesting was the bravery and
courage of some of my fellow Members. When we got to a point
where the mob was banging on the doors, and then all that
kept them from breaching that--the Chamber itself was the
doors and then some furniture that we had moved (inaudible)
Capitol Police. And they needed to be augmented, and so Tony
Gonzales, the new Representative from Texas, and Ronny
Jackson and Troy Nehls and Markwayne Mullin stepped in, and
we broke off furniture. Some of the (inaudible) big giant
poles, wooden poles, and we turned them upside down, and we
were ready to actually have to street fight in the House
Chamber. It was unbelievable.

Many Members that day wondered if they would ever see their families
again as the rioters breached the Capitol and they were outnumbered and
trapped inside. They were calling loved ones to say goodbye.
Representative Dan Kildee was one of them. Listen to how he described
the impact of the riot on him.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. KILDEE. I was laying on the floor trying to, you know,
(inaudible) myself sort of (inaudible). And, you know,
(inaudible) we were concerned that this mob might come in and
that might (inaudible) identify Members of Congress.
I called my wife, and, you know, it wasn't till I heard her
voice that I thought, wow, this is like one of those calls
you hear about.

While most coverage focused on the extreme danger posed to Members
and the Capitol Police, who were targets of this attack, there were
lots of other people in the Capitol working on January 6 as well, from
personal aides to floor employees, cleaning staff, food service
workers. We can't forget all the people who were in harm's way that
day. These employees experienced trauma. Some cowered, hiding places
just a few feet away from where this rabid crowd had assembled. Many
were just kids, 20-somethings who came here to work because they
believed in their country and they believed in working to make it
better. Others were dedicated food service workers, all working
incredibly hard to make sure that we can come here to do our job. These
workers are the lifeblood of the legislative branch. They deserve
better.
You already heard from Speaker Pelosi's staff--staff that was hiding
under the conference table, cowering in the dark, making sure that the
attackers couldn't hear them. I would like to share with you what some
other staffers went through. Listen as two staffers recall what they
experienced that day
(Text of video presentation.)

Unidentified Speaker. But then we were seeing on Twitter
and iPhones and hearing from some of the police officers on
the floor that the building had been breached, you know.
``Building breached''--those are two words I had never heard.
Unidentified Speaker. That was particularly stressful,
being in a room close to where things were happening and not
really knowing what was happening and seeing it come in live
and getting texts from people, you know, ``Are you OK?'' And,
truthfully, I didn't know what was happening. I heard:
``Shots fired. Shots fired. Shots fired. Show me your hands.
Show me your hands.'' Then I did not know if they were right
outside, if there were lots of people with weapons, if there
were one shooter, if they had--you know, I didn't know what
it looked like. I just knew that there were shots fired
outside of the House Chamber.

According to reports, one Republican Senate staffer whose office was
not far from the floor ``took a steel rod and barricaded his door as
the rioters banged on his door trying to break in.''
The New York Times also reported that a senior Black staffer was
under lockdown for 6 hours during the insurrection and was so disturbed
about these events, she quit her job.
Another staffer who was on the floor of the House that day described
that what happened on January 6 still echoes in his mind. Listen to him
describe the moments just before this indelible image.
(Text of video presentation.)

Unidentified Speaker. I heard blasts, and I could see the
window panes on the House main door sort of pop, and I
figured that, you know, obviously I knew they were at the
door, and they figured out a way to break the glass. And the
last thing I remember before I walked off the floor was
several police officers had drawn their guns and had their
guns trained on the door.
Clearly, it was--I didn't think there was anything else I
could do, and I didn't want to be there for what was about to
occur. So I got to the top of the stairs. The stairway was
pretty packed, and right about that point, I don't know
whether it was a police officer or somebody else said, ``They
are right behind us. Run.''
For me, what I keep thinking about--and, again, there isn't
a day that has gone by since January 6 that at some point in
the day I haven't kind of gone back and picked up some little
thing, but the sound of those window panes popping, I won't
forget that sound.

``I won't forget that sound.'' How long will the sound of window
panes breaking haunt this staffer? And he isn't alone. There are
countless people still living with the trauma of what happened that
day. This includes, by the way, another group of people who were with
us in the Capitol that day, and that is the press. They were in danger,
particularly after years of being derided by President Trump as fake
news.
Kristin Wilson, a reporter for CNN, recently tweeted about her
experience. She said:

I have 14 people on my team. We were scattered everywhere.
Two of them were on crutches and couldn't have run if they
had to. They had to anyway.
One was trapped in the House Chamber and had to crawl out
to hide.
Four of us barricaded ourselves in a room off the Senate
Chamber. Every bang on the door of them trying to come
through I can still hear in my head.

The janitorial and custodial staff in the Capitol, the people who day
after day tend to our home away from home, were also traumatized, but
we don't talk about them and the harm they suffered often enough.
One janitorial worker recounts how he was so scared, he had to hide
in the closet during the attack. He said:

I was all by myself. I didn't know what was going on.

Another employee, a mother of three, said:

The insurrection shattered all my sense of security at
work.

An employee of the Capitol said:

I hope nothing else happens because these people were
talking about killing us, killing Federal employees, killing
the police.

Another employee was afraid to work on Inauguration Day, saying:

I honestly fear for my life. I've got two children at home.

For many of the Black and Brown staff, the trauma was made worse by
the many painful symbols of hate that were on full display that day.
Insurrectionists waved Confederate flags and hurled the most disgusting
racial slurs at dedicated Capitol workers.
Then, after all of that, these same workers, many of them people of
color, were forced to clean up the mess left by mobs of White
nationalists. One member of the janitorial staff reflected how terrible
he felt when he had to clean up feces that had been smeared on the
wall, blood of the rioter who had died, broken glass, and other objects
strewn all over the floor. He said:

I felt bad. I felt degraded.

Let's also not forget that this violent attack happened in the middle
of a

[[Page S656]]

global pandemic. Social distancing was impossible because we were
hiding for our lives in cramped quarters for long periods of time.
Since January 6, at least seven Members who hid with other Members of
Congress have tested positive for COVID-19.
At least 38 Capitol Police officers have either tested positive or
been exposed, and nearly 200 National Guard troops, who were deployed
to our Nation's Capital to provide all of us protection, have tested
positive. The Capitol Police and the National Guard came here to keep
us safe, to serve. They put their lives in danger. They deserve better
than this. We all did.
That brings me to the next harm. Now, all of us in this room made it
out alive, but not everyone was so lucky. Three law enforcement
officers tragically lost their lives as a result of the riot on January
6. These officers were Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, Capitol
Police Officer Howard Liebengood, and Metropolitan Police Officer
Jeffrey Smith. All honorably served to protect and defend.
My colleague Mr. Swalwell told you about Officer Sicknick, who was a
42-year-old military veteran who dedicated his entire life to public
service. On January 6, he fought a mob of rioters as they streamed into
the Capitol and ultimately lost his life protecting us.
Officer Liebengood was a 15-year veteran of the Capitol Police. His
father served as Sergeant at Arms here in the Senate, and Officer
Liebengood followed his extraordinary example of public service.
Officer Smith served 12 years with the Metropolitan Police
Department. He heeded the call of January 6 by coming to stand with
Capitol Police to help secure our democracy.
Earlier, my colleague Manager Swalwell showed you terrible videos of
the police being physically abused and injured. You remember what
happened to Officer Fanone and Officer Hodges of the MPD, but there
were scores of other officers whose names we don't know who were also
brutalized that day. Injuries to the U.S. Capitol Police and the
Metropolitan Police Department were concussions, irritated lungs, and
serious injuries caused by repeated blows from bats, poles, and clubs.
Capitol Police officers also sustained injuries that will be with
them for the rest of their lives. One officer lost the tip of a right
index finger.
In a statement issued on January 7, the chairman of the Capitol
Police Officers' Union said:

I have officers who were not issued helmets prior to the
attack who have sustained brain injuries. One officer has two
cracked ribs and two smashed spinal discs. One officer is
going to lose his eye, and another was stabbed with a metal
fence stake.

In total, at least 81 members of Capitol Police and of 65 members of
the Metropolitan Police Department were injured during the attack on
January 6.
Former Capitol Police Chief Sund described the insurrection as
violent, unlike anything he had seen in his 30-year career in law
enforcement.
DC Police Chief Robert J. Contee III, who had spoken with an officer
who had been beaten and injured with a stun gun, said:

I've talked to officers who have done two tours of Iraq who
said this was scarier to them than their time in combat.

Of course, the physical violence is not the only thing that will have
a lasting effect on our brave sworn officers. Trump's mob verbally
denigrated their patriotism, questioned their loyalty, and yelled
racial slurs. They called them ``traitors,'' ``Nazis,'' ``un-American''
for protecting us.
For example, in our next clip, a rioter wearing a hunting jacket
accosts a police officer.
(Text of video presentation:)

Unidentified Speaker. Are you an American? Act like one.
(Inaudible.)
Unidentified Speaker. Don't yell at them.
Unidentified Speaker. You have no idea what the fuck you're
doing.
Unidentified Speaker. Now once again (inaudible). Not one
idea.
Unidentified Speaker. Stand up for America. Goddamn it.
Unidentified Speaker. Get the fuck out of here.
Unidentified Speaker. Don't talk to me, motherfucker.
Unidentified Speaker. No, they work for us. Fuck them.

Listen to how the Trump mob talked to these officers. You heard that
with your own ears.
(Text of video presentation:)

Unidentified Speaker. Fuck you. Fuck you, bitch. Fuck you.
Fucking traitors. You are fucking.
Unidentified Speaker. You call me a motherfucker.
Unidentified Speaker. You are a fucking traitor to your
country. You are a fucking traitor.
Unidentified Speaker. Yeah, traitor.
Unidentified Speaker. Fucking call me a (inaudible).
``F'ing traitor''--so much for backing the blue.

Just a couple more examples.
(Text of video presentation:)

Unidentified Speaker. Hand over your paycheck. Fuck you
guys. You can't even call yourself American. You broke your
fucking oath today. 1776, bitch.
Unidentified Speaker. (Inaudible) pepper spray, officers.
(People chanting: ``Traitor.'')
(People chanting: ``Go home.'')
(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.'')
(People chanting: ``Traitor.'')

They called law enforcement officers ``traitors.'' You have to
wonder, who are these rioters sworn to? To whom do they believe the
police owe their loyalty? To the people? To the Constitution? To our
democracy? Or to Donald Trump?
Even those who were not outwardly injured, the mental toll has been
significant. Several Capitol Police officers have reportedly threatened
self-harm in the days following the riot. And in one case, an officer
voluntarily turned in her gun because she was afraid of what might
happen.
Black police officers were also met with racist vitriol. You heard
Lead Manager Raskin reference a Black police officer who was weary from
racialized violence that he had experienced that day, saying:

Tears just started streaming down my face. I said, ``what
the eff, man? Is this America?''

``Is this America?'' Lead Manager Raskin asked: ``Is this America?''
What is your answer to that question? Is this OK? If not, what are we
going to do about it?
These people matter--these matter who risked their lives for us. So I
ask you, respectfully, to consider them--the police officers, the staff
of this building--when you cast your vote. These people are in deep
pain because they showed up here to serve, to serve the American
people, to serve their government, to serve all of us. And I ask each
of you when you cast your vote to remember them and honor them and act
in service of them, as they deserve.
I also want to recognize that fou individuals--four insurrectionist--
also lost their lives during the attack. These people were led here by
the words and actions of an individual who made them believe that they
were patriots.

The loss of human life is, of course, the most consequential, but
that was not the only damage brought that day. The Trump mob also
damaged this building. They defiled some of the most sacred places:
Statuary Hall, the Rotunda, where some of America's greatest champions,
Presidents, Supreme Court Justices, civil rights heroes, and other
defenders are honored after their death. Trump's violent mob had little
respect for this place.
This video shows the wreckage left in the Senate Parliamentarian's
office by the insurrectionists.
(Text of video presentation.)
A bust of President Zachary Taylor was smeared with what appeared to
be blood. An empty picture frame presumably robbed of its content was
found on the floor. And videos of the insurrection captured one man
stealing a framed photo, another one tearing a scroll from the wall and
ripping it up and throwing those pieces on the floor. A sign paying
tribute to John Lewis was also shamefully destroyed, and only a broken
piece of the memorial was found on the ground next to a trash can. The
photo of Mr. Lewis was gone.
The damage done to this building is a stain on all of us and on the
dignity of our democracy.
The attack we saw had a purpose: Stop the certification. Stop our
democratic process. Fortunately, they did not prevail.
Newspapers across America on January 21, the day after the
inauguration, proclaimed:

Democracy has prevailed.

President-Elect Biden said that in his inauguration speech. The
headline was

[[Page S657]]

in so many places because the world's oldest constitutional democracy
and the principles underlying it had been attacked and challenged.
This wasn't just an attack on the Capitol Building and the dedicated
people inside. It was an attack on what we were elected to preserve--
our democracy.
This attack on our elections, on the peaceful transfer of power from
one President to the next didn't even happen during the Civil War. But
it did just happen because of the cold, calculated, and conspiratorial
acts of our former President Donald J. Trump.
We showed you that the insurrectionists were deliberate, that they
came looking for Vice President Pence and Speaker Pelosi, ready to
kill. When President Trump incited a lawless mob to attack our process,
he was attacking our democracy. He was trying to become King and rule
over us, against the will of the people and the valid results of the
election.
For the first time ever in our history, a sitting President actively
instigated his supporters to violently disrupt the process that
provides for the peaceful transfer of power from one President to the
next.
Think about that for a moment. What if President Trump had been
successful? What if he had succeeded in overturning the will of the
people and our constitutional processes? Who among us is willing to
risk that outcome by letting Trump's constitutional crimes go
unanswered?
The Founders included impeachment in our Constitution, not as a
punishment but to prevent. We have to prevent every President--today,
tomorrow, or anytime in the future--from believing that this conduct is
acceptable.
Today, we have to stand up for our democracy and ensure we remain a
country governed by the people, for the people by telling Donald Trump
and people all across this country and all across the world that his
crimes will not and cannot stand.

Recess

Mr. SCHUMER. I ask unanimous consent that the House stand in recess
for 15 minutes.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will stand in recess.
Mr. SCHUMER. I ask unanimous consent that the House stand in recess
for 15 minutes--the Senate, the Senate.
There being no objection, at 2:10 p.m., the Senate, sitting as a
Court of Impeachment, recessed until 2:45 p.m.; whereupon the Senate
reassembled when called to order by the President pro tempore.

Managers' Presentation--Continued

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will come to order.
Manager Raskin.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. Castro will now return to address the harm visited upon America's
national security by these events and the damage to our international
reputation.
Mr. Manager CASTRO of Texas. My colleagues discussed with you the
many harms to our Nation as a result of President Trump's conduct. Now
I would like to spend some time talking about the harm to our national
security and our standing in the world.
On January 6, when President Trump incited a mob to march to the
Capitol, he led them to a building that houses some of our Nation's
most sensitive information. Consider who was part of that mob. Some of
the individuals were on the FBI watch list. The past behavior of some
individuals led here by President Trump so alarmed investigators that
their names had been added to the national Terrorist Screening
Database, and at least one of the insurrectionists may have intended to
steal information and give it to a foreign adversary.
According to charging documents, Riley Williams allegedly helped
steal a laptop from Speaker Pelosi's office to ``send the computer
device to a friend in Russia, who then planned to sell the device to
SVR, Russia's foreign intelligence service.''
While we can't be certain if or how many foreign spies infiltrated
the crowd or at least coordinated with those who did, we can be sure
that any enemy who wanted access to our secrets would have wanted to be
part of that mob inside these halls.
The point is this: Many of the insurrectionists that President Trump
incited to invade this Chamber were dangerous--people on the FBI watch
list, violent extremists, White supremacists. And these
insurrectionists incited by President Trump threatened our national
security. Stealing laptops, again, from Speaker Pelosi's office; taking
documents from Leader McConnell's desk; snapping photographs, as you
saw in the videos earlier, in sensitive areas; ransacking your offices;
rifling through your desks.
The President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, knew the
risk of anyone reaching the Capitol. He swore an oath to preserve,
protect, and defend this country. And yet, he incited them here to
break into the Capitol.
Senators, as you all know, we have spent trillions of dollars
building the strongest military in the world and billions of dollars on
the most sophisticated weaponry on the planet to prevent the kind of
attack that occurred at this Capitol on January 6. Here is what the
insurrectionists incited by President Trump did.
(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

Unidentified Speaker. Hey, let's take a seat, people. Let's
take a seat.
Unidentified Speaker. You be Nancy Pelosi.
Unidentified Speaker. Let's vote on some shit.
Unidentified Speaker. Oh, my God. We did this shit. We took
this shit.
Unidentified Speaker. She's in the House. The House is on
the other side.
Unidentified Speaker. I want to just get a snap of that.
Unidentified Speaker. Yeah, take a picture.

In many ways, this room is sacred and so are the traditions that it
represents. They have been carried on for centuries.
Congress has declared war 11 times on this floor, including entering
World War II--where Congress passed the Civil Rights Act and expanded
the right to vote to ensure that no matter your race or your gender,
you have a voice in our Nation.
This floor is where history has been made. And now, our intelligence
agencies and law enforcement agencies have the burden to figure out
exactly what was stolen, taken, ransacked, and compromised.
As acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin explained, ``Materials were
stolen, and we have to identify what was done, mitigate that, and it
could have potential national security equities.''
These investigations are necessary now because of the actions of
President Trump. And it wasn't just the people that he led here the
intelligence agencies have to look into, it is also what they took and
what they gathered, and it was the very fact that this building, with
so much sensitive information and some classified information, that
this Capitol was breached.
Think about it. Every foreign adversary considering attacking this
building got to watch a dress rehearsal, and they saw that this Capitol
could be overtaken.
As Elizabeth Neumann, a former Trump administration official, stated,
``[Y]ou have terrorists who would love to destroy the Capitol. They
just saw how easy it was to penetrate. We just exposed a huge
vulnerability.'
And it is not just the Capitol, this attack has implications for all
government buildings.
Senator Rubio made this point well.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. RUBIO. If you're a terrorist right now and you're
sitting out there watching this, you're saying to yourself,
hey, it's not that hard to get into the Capitol. Maybe it's
not hard to get into the White House or the Supreme Court
building or somewhere else.

Our government, our intelligence agencies, and our law enforcement
have implemented additional safety measures since the attack on January
6, but while we secure this physical space, what message will we send
the rest of the world?
We already know what message our adversaries took from January 6.
This is how some of them responded after the attack.
For America's adversaries, there was no greater proof of the
fallibility of Western democracy than the sight of the U.S. Capitol
shrouded in smoke and besieged by a mob whipped up by their unwillingly
outgoing president.
To make matters worse, our adversaries are even using the events of
January 6 not only to denigrate America but to justify their own anti-
democratic behavior, calling America hypocritical.

[[Page S658]]

Here is what the Chinese Government is saying. The spokesperson for
China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the Capitol riots ``should
spark `deep reflection' among U.S. lawmakers regarding how they discuss
the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, suggesting that the U.S. is
hypocritical in denouncing Beijing's crackdown in the city while it
struggles with its own unrest at home.''
The Global Times, an outlet affiliated with the Chinese Communist
Party, even tweeted a series of side-by-side photos of two events: the
siege of the U.S. Capitol and a July 2019 incident in which pro-
democracy protesters in Hong Kong broke into the city's Legislative
Council building.
Think about that. President Trump gave the Chinese Government an
opening to create a false equivalency between Hongkongers protesting
for democracy and violent insurrections trying to overthrow it.
As Representative Gallagher described in realtime:
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. GALLAGHER. If we don't think other countries around the
world are watching this happen right now, if we don't think
the Chinese Communist Party is sitting back and laughing,
then we're deluding ourselves. So call it off, Mr. President.
We need you to call this off.

Russia has also seized on this violent attack against our government,
decrying that democracy is ``over.'' The chairman of the Russian upper
house of Parliament's International Affairs Committee said:

The celebration of democracy is over. This is, alas,
actually the bottom. I say this without a hint of gloating.
America is no longer charting the course, and therefore has
lost all its rights to set it. And especially to impose it on
others.

They are using President Trump's incitement of an insurrection to
declare that democracy is over.
In Iran, the Supreme Leader is using President Trump's incitement of
an insurrection to mock America. He said of the situation in the United
States:

This is their democracy and human rights, this is their
election scandal, these are their values. These values are
being mocked by the whole world. Even their friends are
laughing at them.

These statements are serious and pervasive. According to a joint
threat assessment bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security,
the FBI, and eight other law enforcement entities, ``Since the incident
at the U.S. Capitol on 6 January, Russian, Iranian, and Chinese
influence actors have seized the opportunity to amplify narratives in
furtherance of their policy interest amid the presidential
transition.''
We cannot let them use what happened on January 6 to define us, who
we are, and what we stand for. We get to define ourselves by how we
respond to the attack of January 6.
Some might be tempted to say and point out that our adversaries are
always going to be critical of the United States. But following the
insurrection on January 6, even our allies are speaking up. Canadian
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said:

What we witnessed was an assault on democracy by violent
rioters, incited by the current president and other
politicians. As shocking, deeply disturbing and frankly
saddening as that event remains--we have also seen this week
that democracy is resilient in America, our closest ally and
neighbor.

The German Foreign Minister said:

This closing of ranks begins with holding those accountable
who are responsible for such escalations. That includes the
violent rioters and also includes their instigators.

The world is watching and wondering whether we are who we say we are
because when other countries have known chaos, our Constitution has
helped keep order in America. This is why we have a Constitution. We
must stand up for the rule of law because the rule of law doesn't just
stand up by itself.
After the insurrection, my colleagues on the House Foreign Affairs
Committee, the chairman and the ranking member, issued a bipartisan
statement that said:

America has always been a beacon of freedom to the world;
proof that free and fair elections are achievable, and that
democracy works. But what happened at the Capitol today has
scarred our reputation and has damaged our standing in the
world.
Today's violence--an inevitable result when leaders in
positions of power misled the public--will certainly empower
dictators and damage struggling democracies.

And that is true. For generations, the United States has been a North
Star in the world for freedom, democracy, and human rights because
America is not only a nation for many, it is also an idea. It is the
light that gives hope to people struggling for democracy in autocratic
regimes, the light that inspires people fighting across the world for
fundamental human rights, and the light that inspires us to believe in
something larger than ourselves.
This trial is an opportunity to respond and to send a message back to
the world.
I say this as somebody who loves my country, our country, just as all
of you do. There is a lot of courage in this room, a lot of courage
that has been demonstrated in the lives of the people in this room.
Some folks have stood up for the civil rights of fellow Americans and
risked their careers and their reputations, their livelihoods and their
safety in standing up for civil rights. Many Members of Congress have
risked their lives in service to our country, in uniform: in fighting
in the jungles of Vietnam, in patrolling the mountains of Afghanistan.
You served our country because you were willing to sacrifice to defend
our Nation as we know it and as the world knows it. Although most of
you have traded in your uniforms for public service, your country needs
you one more time.
The world watched President Trump tell his big lie. The world watched
his supporters come to Washington at his invitation, and the world
watched as he told his supporters to march here to the Capitol.
President Trump, our Commander in Chief at the time, failed to take any
action to defend us as he utterly failed in his duty to preserve,
protect, and defend. Now the world is watching us, wondering whether
our constitutional Republic is going to respond the way it should, the
way it is supposed to--whether the rule of law will prevail over mob
rule. The answer to that question has consequences far beyond our own
borders. Think of the consequences to our diplomats and negotiators as
they sit at tables around the world to enforce our agenda on trade, the
economy, and human rights.
To fail to convict a President of the United States who incited a
deadly insurrection, who acted in concert with a violent mob, who
interfered with the certification of the electoral college votes, who
abdicated his duty as Commander in Chief, would be to forfeit the power
of our example as a North Star for freedom, democracy, human rights,
and most of all, the rule of law. To convict Donald Trump would mean
that America stands for the rule of law no matter who violates it. Let
us show the world that January 6 was not America, and let us remind the
world that we are truly their North Star.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Representative Neguse and I will now address the
First Amendment argument that is being offered by President Trump's
lawyers to try to excuse his incitement to this insurrection. Mr.
Neguse will begin.
Mr. Manager NEGUSE. Mr. President, distinguished Senators, good
afternoon.
You have heard over the course of the last several days that
President Trump incited an insurrection, but, as Lead Manager Raskin
mentioned, as we prepare to close, we would be remiss if we didn't just
briefly address, apparently, the principal defense the President will
offer to excuse his conduct, and that is this notion that he can't be
held accountable for what happened on January 6 because his actions are
somehow protected by the First Amendment.
Now, let's stop for a moment and try to really understand the
argument they are making. According to President Trump, everything he
did--everything we showed you that he did--was perfectly OK for him to
do and for a future President to do again, and the Constitution,
apparently, in their view, forbids you from doing anything to stop it.
That can't be right. It can't be, and it isn't right.
Their argument is meant as a distraction. They are concerned not with
the facts that actually occurred, the facts that we have proven, but
with an alternative set of facts where President Trump did nothing but
deliver a controversial speech at a rally. Of course, that is not what
we have charged in the Article of Impeachment, and it is not what
happened.

[[Page S659]]

You will hear from my colleague Lead Manager Raskin of the many
myriad reasons why this argument that they make is wrong on the law
completely, not just around the edges. They make major, fundamental
mistakes of constitutional law, the kind that Lead Manager Raskin tells
me wouldn't cut it in his first-year law course, which, of course, he
certainly would know, as he has taught this subject for decades.
That explains why so many lawyers who have dedicated their lives to
protecting free speech, including many of the Nation's most prominent
conservative free speech lawyers, have described President Trump's
First Amendment claims as ``legally frivolous.'' Here is another quote
from a recent letter from prominent free speech lawyers:

The First Amendment is no bar to the Senate convicting
former President Trump and disqualifying him from holding
future office.

Their argument is wrong on the facts, wrong on the law, and would
flip the Constitution upside down.
Let's start with the facts because, as you will see, his free speech
claim depends on an account of what he did, of why we are here, that
has no basis in the evidence. To hear his lawyers tell it, he was just
some guy at a rally, expressing unpopular opinions. They would have you
believe that this whole impeachment is because he said things that one
may disagree with. Really?
Make no mistake, they will do anything to avoid talking about the
facts of this case. That, I can assure you. Instead, we expect they
will talk about a lot of other speeches, including some given by
Democratic officials, and they will insist, with indignation, that the
First Amendment protects all of this as though it were exactly the
same.
We trust you to know the difference because you have seen the
evidence that we have seen. You have seen, as we have proven over the
last 3 days, that his arguments completely misdescribe the reality of
what happened on January 6. They leave out everything that matters
about why we are here and what he did.
President Trump wasn't just some guy with political opinions who
showed up at a rally on January 6 and delivered controversial remarks.
He was th President of the United States, and he had spent months--
months--using the unique power of that office, of his bully pulpit, to
spread that big lie that the election had been stolen; to convince his
followers to stop the steal; to assemble just blocks away from here on
January 6 at the very moment that we were meeting to count the
electoral college votes, where he knew--where it had been widely
reported--that they were primed and eager and ready for violence at his
signal. Then, standing in the middle of that explosive situation, in
that powder keg that he had created over the course of months, before a
crowd filled with people who were poised for violence at his signal, he
struck a match, and he aimed it straight at this building, at us.

You have seen all of that evidence. There is no denying it. That is
why the House impeached him. That is why he is on trial. No President,
no matter the politics or the politics of the followers--conservative,
liberal, or anything else--can do what President Trump did because this
isn't about politics; it is about his refusal to accept the outcome of
the election and his decision to incite an insurrection. There is no
serious argument that the First Amendment protects that, and it would
be extraordinarily dangerous for the United States Senate to conclude
otherwise, to tell future Presidents that they can do exactly what
President Trump did and get away with it, to set the precedent that
this is acceptable, that now this is a constitutionally protected way
to respond to losing an election.
You will notice something that Lead Manager Raskin and I noticed,
which is that, by all accounts, it doesn't appear that President
Trump's lawyers disagree. I mean, they don't insist that if the facts
we have charged, the facts that we have proven, the facts supported by
overwhelming evidence are true, as, of course, you now know they are,
that there is nothing you can do. They are not arguing that it is OK
for a person to incite a mob to violence--at least I don't think they
are arguing that. Instead, what they are doing is offering a radically
different version of what happened that day, totally inconsistent with
the evidence. Then they insist that if that fictional version of
events, if that alternate reality were true, well then he may be
protected by the First Amendment.
That is their argument, but you are here to adjudicate real evidence,
real facts, not hypothetical ones, and for that reason alone, you
should reject their argument because it has been advanced to defend a
situation that bears no resemblance to the actual facts of this case.
With that, I want to turn it over to my colleague Lead Manager Raskin
to address the many legal flaws, as I mentioned, in President Trump's
position.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Mr. Neguse has explained why President Trump's
last-ditch First Amendment argument has got nothing to do with the
actual facts of the case. He has been impeached for inciting a violent
insurrection against the government. Inciting a violent insurrection is
not protected by free speech. There is no First Amendment defense to
impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors. The idea itself is
absurd.
The whole First Amendment smokescreen is a completely irrelevant
distraction from the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors governing
a President who has violated his oath of office. Yet President Trump,
we know, has a good way of treating up as down and wrong as right. He
tried to pull off the biggest election fraud in American history by
overturning the results of the 2020 election even as he insisted that
his own fraud was, in fact, an effort to stop the steal, to stop a
fraud--a vast conspiracy that he blamed on local and State officials of
both political parties, the media, election officials, the judiciary--
Federal, State--and Members of Congress. Anybody who wouldn't go along
with him was part of the conspiracy.
He violated his oath of office by inciting mob violence to prevent
Congress from counting electoral college votes as we were assigned to
do by the 12th Amendment and the Electoral Count Act. He even attacked
Vice President Pence at a rally for violating his oath of office and
going along with an egregious assault on democracy.
Now he argues that the Congress is violating his free speech rights
when it was Donald Trump who incited an insurrection as an attack
against us, that halted speech and debate on the floor of the House and
Senate during the peaceful transfer of power, and that imperiled the
very constitutional order that protects freedom of speech in the first
place along with all of our other fundamental rights.
As a matter of law, it is a matter of logic. President Trump's brazen
attempt to invoke the First Amendment now won't hold up in any way.
The basic flaw, of course, is that it completely ignores the fact
that he was the President of the United States--a public official. He
swears an oath as President that nobody else swears. In exchange, he is
given greater powers than anyone else in the entire country--maybe on
Earth. He or she promises to preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States and our government institutions and
our people.
And, as we all know, the power we entrust to people in public office,
in government office--especially, our Presidents--comes with special
obligations to uphold the laws and the integrity of our Republic, and
we all support that.
Now, what if a President publicly--say a President publicly and on a
daily basis advocated replacing the Constitution with a totalitarian
form of government and urged States to secede from the Union and swore
an oath of loyalty to a foreign leader or a foreign government.
Well, as a private citizen, you couldn't do anything about people
using those words to advocate totalitarianism, to advocate secession
from the Union, to swear an oath of personal loyalty to a foreign
leader or foreign government or country. You couldn't. That is totally
protected. If you tried to prosecute somebody for that, as a
prosecutor, you would lose.
But it is simply inconceivable, unthinkable that a President could do
any of these things--get up and swear an oath to foreign governments or
leaders, advocate totalitarianism, advocate secession, and not be
impeached

[[Page S660]]

for it. It is just unthinkable that that could happen.
Would that violate their First Amendment rights?
The opposite view pressed here by President Trump's counsel would
leave the Nation powerless to respond to a President who would use his
unmatched power, privilege, and prestige of his or her office--the
famous bully pulpit--in ways that risk the ruin of the Republic, all
for his or her own ambition and corruption and lust for power.
Everyone should be clear: There is nothing remotely exotic about what
we are saying. It should be common sense to everybody--common sense--
about this understanding of the First Amendment as it applies to public
servants--cops, firefighters, teachers, everybody across the land.
My daughter, who I mentioned early in the trial, she is a teacher in
a public school. The courts have said teachers teach, but if they go
off script and they start advocating totalitarianism, treason, or what
have you, they are not living up to the duties of their office as
teacher. They can be fired.
Everybody knows that, and it happens all the time, by the way,
including to cops and firefighters and people on the frontlines. It
happens all the time. In fact, it happened countless times to people
fired by President Trump for their statements or ideas about things,
including on election fraud, not long ago. There are people in the
government who lost their jobs because the President didn't like what
they said or what they wrote.
Now, as I mentioned yesterday--and I can't help but repeat it--
Justice Scalia got it exactly right on this. He wrote on these cases
about how the First Amendment affects people who take on a public
office, who take on public employment, and he summed it up like this.
He said:

You can't ride with the cops but root for the robbers.
You can't ride with the cops but root for the robbers.

That is what Justice Scalia said, and when it comes to the peaceful
transfer of power, to the rule of law, to respecting election outcomes,
our President, whoever he or she is, must choose the side of the
Constitution--must--and not the side of the insurrection or the coup or
anybody who is coming against us.
And if he or she chooses the wrong side, I am sorry, there is nothing
in this First Amendment or anywhere else in the Constitution that can
excuse your betrayal of your oath of office. It is not a free speech
question.
But there is more. Let's play make-believe and pretend that President
Trump was just a run-of-the-mill private citizen--as my colleague Mr.
Neguse said, just another guy at the rally--who is just expressing a
deeply unpopular opinion, because we shouldn't overlook the fact that,
while there were thousands of people in that violent mob, they
represent a tiny, tiny, tiny part of less than 1 percent of the
population, and the vast majority of the American people reject the
kind of seditious mob violence that we saw on January 6.
But let's say that he was just another guy in the crowd that day. It
is a bedrock principle that nobody--nobody--can incite a riot. The
First Amendment doesn't protect it.
Key case? Brandenburg v. Ohio. There is no First amendment protection
for speech directed to inciting and producing imminent lawless action
and likely to produce such action.
And for all the reasons you have heard, based on the voluminous,
comprehensive, totally unrefuted--and we think irrefutable, but we are
eager to hear our colleagues--based on all the evidence you have heard,
and for all the reasons you have heard, that definition of proscribable
speech fits President Trump's conduct perfectly. This is a classic case
of incitement.
And you don't have to take my word for it. The 144 free speech
lawyers, which Mr. Neguse mentioned, who include many of the Nation's
most dedicated, most uncompromising free speech advocates--unlike Mr.
Trump, of course--but these people agree that there is a powerful case
for conviction under the Brandenburg standard, even if the President of
the United States were just to be treated like some guy in the crowd.
And they add:

The First Amendment is no defense to the article of
impeachment leveled against the former President . . .

And I mention the Brandenburg standard not because it applies here.
Of course, it doesn't. This is an impeachment. It is not a criminal
trial, and there is no risk of jail time. Let's be clear about that.
The President doesn't go to jail for 1 week, 1 day, 1 hour, or 1 minute
based on impeachment and conviction and disqualification from further
office.
Rather, I mention it to emphasize that absolutely nobody in America
would be protected by the First Amendment if they did all the things
that Donald Trump did. Nobody made Donald Trump run for President and
swear an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution on
January 20, 2017. But when he did, by virtue of swearing that oath and
entering this high office, he took upon himself a duty to affirm and
take care that our laws would be faithfully execute under his
leadership--all of the laws, the laws against Federal destruction of
property, all of the laws. We expected him in everything he said and
everything he did to protect and preserve and defend our constitutional
system, including the separation of powers. But, instead, he betrayed
us, and as Representative Cheney said, it was the greatest betrayal of
a Presidential oath in the history of the United States of America--the
greatest.

As I mentioned yesterday, President Trump is not even close to the
proverbial citizen who falsely shouts ``fire'' in a crowded theater. He
is like the now proverbial municipal fire chief who incites a mob to go
set the theater on fire, and not only refuses to put out the fire but
encourages the mob to keep going as the blaze spreads.
We would hold that fire chief accountable. We would forbid him from
that job ever again, and that is exactly what must happen here.
There are hundreds of millions of citizens who can be President.
Donald Trump has disqualified himself, and you must disqualify him too.
Just like the fire chief who sends the mob, President Trump perverted
his office by attacking the very Constitution he was sworn to uphold.
In fact, that is one reason why this free speech rhetoric at this trial
is so insidious. His conduct represented the most devastating and
dangerous assault by a government official on our Constitution,
including the First Amendment, in living memory. We wouldn't have free
speech or any of the rights if we didn't have the rule of law and
peaceful transfer of power and a democracy where the outcome of the
election is accepted by the candidate who lost. We had it all the way
up until 2020.
And the central purposes of the First Amendment are democratic self-
government and civic truth seeking--two purposes that President Trump
sought to undermine, not advance, in the course of his conduct as we
have definitively demonstrated at this trial.
The violence he incited threatened all of our freedoms. It threatened
the very constitutional order that protects free speech, due process,
religious free exercise, the right to vote, equal protection, and the
many other fundamental rights that we all treasure and cherish as
citizens of the United States.
The First Amendment does not create some superpower immunity from
impeachment for a President who attacks the Constitution in word, in
deed, while rejecting the outcome of an election he happened to lose.
If anything, President Trump's conduct was an assault on the First
Amendment and equal protection rights that millions of Americans
exercised when they voted last year, often under extraordinarily
difficult and arduous circumstances.
Remember, the First Amendment protects the right of the people to
speak about the great issues of our day, to debate during elections,
and then to participate in politics by selecting the people who will be
our leaders.
And remember, in American democracy those of us who aspire and attain
the public office are nothing but the servants of the people--nothing.
Not the masters of the people--we have no kings here. We have no czars.
Here, the people govern, President Ford said--the people.
The most important words of the Constitution are the first three--
``We the People.''

[[Page S661]]

But all this--all this--means little if a President who dislikes the
election results can incite violence to try to replace and usurp the
will of the people as expressed in the States, ignore the judicial
branch of government, and then run over the legislative branch of
government with a mob.
President Trump's high crimes and misdemeanors sought to nullify the
political rights and sovereignty of the American people--our right as a
people to deliberate, to form opinions, to persuade each other to vote,
and then to decide who our President will be--the sovereignty of the
people. That is an attack on the First Amendment, I would say.
In addition, President Trump's actions were a direct attack on our
own freedom of speech here in the Capitol.
Members of Congress are sent here to speak for their constituents.
That is why we have our own little ``mini free speech'' clause--the
speech and debate clause. That is literally our job when we come here
and represent the views of our people.
The attack that President Trump incited forced Members of Congress to
stop speaking and to literally flee for our lives and the lives of our
staffs and our families. The man whose statements and actions halted
the speech in Congress--speech related to the peaceful transfer of
power--has no right, no right, to claim that free speech principles
prevent this body from exercising its constitutional power to hold him
accountable for his offense against us.
You know, Voltaire said famously, and our Founders knew it:

I may disagree with everything you say, but I will defend
with my life your right to say it.

President Trump says: Because I disagree with everything you say, I
will overturn your popular election and incite insurrection against the
government.
And we might take a moment to consider another Voltaire insight,
which a high school teacher of mine told me when her student asked:
When was the beginning of the Enlightenment?
And she said: I think it was when Voltaire said:

Anyone who can make you believe absurdities, can make you
commit atrocities.

There is no merit whatsoever to any of the free speech rhetoric--the
empty free speech rhetoric--you may hear from President Trump's
lawyers. He attacked the First Amendment. He attacked the Constitution.
He betrayed his oath of office. Presidents don't have any right to do
that. It is forbidden so that our Republic may survive. The people are
far more important than that.
The precedent he asks you to create, which would allow any future
President to do precisely what he did, is self-evidently dangerous, and
so there can be no doubt--none at all--that the President lacks any
First Amendment excuse or defense or immunity. He incited a violent
insurrection against our government. He must be convicted.
And now I am going to call up Representative Dean, who will explain
why, contrary to the President's claims, the House provided him with
all the process that was due to him.
I am sorry. Mr. Lieu is going to do that.
Mr. Manager LIEU. Thank you for your time and your attention.
We all heard President Trump's attorneys on Tuesday, and as part of
President Trump's efforts to avoid talking about his own conduct, to
avoid talking about anything related to this constitutional crime, we
expect that President Trump will raise due process objections.
His due process claims are without merit. Under the Constitution, the
House has ``the sole Power of Impeachment.'' That provision confirms
that the House functions as a grand jury or a prosecutor. The House
decides whether to bring charges.
Now, on other impeachment cases, the House can provide certain
deliberative and procedural privileges to the person being impeached,
but those are exactly that--privileges. They are discretionary. The
House has the power to decide its own rules, how it wants to pass the
Article of Impeachment, and in this case, the House debated the Article
of Impeachment and passed it on a bipartisan vote.
I am a former prosecutor. I just want to add that I have had
opportunities to decide whether to bring charges, and when you see a
crime committed in plain view, prosecutors don't have to spend months
investigating before they bring charges. I know that in this case, in
fact, hundreds of people have been arrested and charged by prosecutors
for the violence on January 6. There was no reason for the House to
wait to impeach the man at the very top that incited the violence.
I would also like to emphasize that the House had good reason to move
quickly. This was an exigent circumstance. This was not a case where
there was hidden conduct or some conspiracy that required months and
maybe years of investigation.
This case has not raised very complicated legal issues. The gravity
of the President's conduct demanded the clearest of responses from the
legislature, particularly given that the President was still in office
at the time the House approved this Article and rumors of further
violence echoed around the country. They still do.
There must be absolutely no doubt that Congress will act decisively
against a President who incites violence against us. That is why the
House moved quickly here, and President Trump, who created that
emergency, cannot be here to complain that the House impeached him too
quickly for the emergency he caused.
Another point on the due process question: Earlier in this trial,
President Trump's attorneys suggested that the House somehow
deliberately delayed the transmission of this Article of Impeachment.
That is simply not accurate.
When the House adopted this Article of Impeachment on a bipartisan
vote, we were ready to begin trial, but the Senate was not in session
at the time. And when we inquired as to our options, Senate officials
told us, clearly, and in no uncertain terms, that if the Clerk of the
House attempted to deliver the Article of Impeachment to the Secretary
of the Senate before the Senate reconvened, that the Clerk of the House
would have been turned back at the door. That is why the trial did not
begin then--another reason why the President's objections of due
process are meritless.
Finally, let me just conclude that you all are going to see and have
seen a full presentation of evidence by the House, and you are going to
hear a full presentation by the President's attorneys. You are going to
be able to ask questions. The Senate has the sole power to try all
impeachments. President Trump is receiving any and all process that he
is due right here in this Chamber.
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Mr. President, Senators, in just a moment, my
colleague, Mr. Neguse, will return to show that we have established,
with overwhelming evidence, that President Trump engaged in high crimes
and misdemeanors. Before Mr. Neguse comes up, though, I would like to
emphasize what should be an uncontroversial point but is really key to
understand.
If we have proven to you the conduct that we have alleged in this
Article, then President Trump has indeed committed a high crime and
misdemeanor under the Constitution. Incitement of insurrection under
these circumstances is, undoubtedly, in the words of George Mason from
the Constitutional Convention, a ``great and dangerous'' offense
against the Republic. Indeed, it is hard to think of a greater or more
dangerous offense against the Republic than this one.
So to be very precise about this, I hope we all can agree today that
if a President does incite a violent insurrection against the
government, he can be impeached for it. I hope we all can agree that
that is a constitutional crime.
Another key point: While President Trump's lawyers may be arguing
otherwise, the question here is not whether President Trump committed a
crime under the Federal Code or DC law or the law of any State.
Impeachment does not result in criminal penalties, as we keep
emphasizing. No one spends a day in jail. There are not even criminal
or civil fines. Centuries of history, not to mention the constitutional
text, structure, and original intent and understanding, all confirm the
teaching of James Wilson, another Framer, who wrote ``that impeachments
and offenses come not within the sphere of ordinary jurisprudence.''
Simply put,

[[Page S662]]

impeachment was created for a purpose separate and distinct from
criminal punishment. It was created to prevent and deter elected
officials who swear an oath to represent America but then commit
dangerous offense against our Republic. That is a constitutional crime.

And Senators, what greater offense could one commit than to incite
the violent insurrection at our seat of government during the peaceful
transfer of power--in circumstances where violence is foreseeable,
where a crowd is poised for violence, to provoke a mob of thousands to
attack us with weapons and sticks and poles, to bludgeon and beat our
law enforcement officers and to deface these sacred walls and to trash
the place and to do so while seeking to stop us from fulfilling our own
oaths, our own duties to uphold the Constitution by counting the votes
from our free and fair elections and then to sit back and watch in
delight as insurrectionists attack us, violating a sacred oath and
engaging in a profound dereliction and desertion of duty.
How can we assure that our Commander in Chief will protect, preserve,
and defend our Constitution if we don't hold a President accountable in
a circumstance like this? What is impeachable conduct, if not this? I
challenge you all to think about it. If you think this is not
impeachable, what is? What would be?
If President Trump's lawyers endorse his breathtaking assertion that
his conduct in inciting these events was totally appropriate and the
Senate acquits Donald Trump, then any President could incite and
provoke insurrectionary violence against us again. If you don't find
this a high crime and misdemeanor today, you have set a new, terrible
standard for Presidential misconduct in the United States of America.
The only real question here is the factual one. Did we prove that
Donald Trump, while President of the United States, incite a violent
insurrection against the government?
Incitement, of course, is an inherently fact-based and fact-intensive
judgment, which is why we commend you all for your scrupulous attention
to everything that took place, but we believe that we have shown you
overwhelming evidence in this case that would convince anyone using
their common sense that this was indeed incitement--meaning that Donald
Trump's conduct encouraged violence; the violence was foreseeable; and
he acted willfully in the actions that incurred violence.
Mr. Neguse will take you through that evidence again--not the whole
thing. We are almost done. We are almost done, but we don't want it to
be said that they never proved this or they never proved that because
my magnificent team of managers has stayed up night after night after
night, through weeks, to compile all of the factual evidence, and we
have put it before you and we have put it before all of you in this
public trial because we love our country that much.
Mr. Neguse will show you that we have proven our case and that
President Trump committed this impeachable offense that we impeached
him for on January 13 and that you should convict him. And when he is
finished, I will return and explain why it is dangerous for us to
ignore this and why you must convict, and then we will rest.
Mr. Neguse.
Mr. Manager NEGUSE. Mr. President, distinguished Senators, good
afternoon, again. As my colleague, Lead Manager Raskin, has mentioned,
I know it has been a long few days, and I want to say thank you. We are
very grateful for your patience, for your attention, and the attention
that you have paid to every one of our managers as they presented our
case.
As Lead Manager Raskin mentioned, I hope, I trust, that we could all
agree that if a President incites a violent insurrection against our
government, that that is impeachable conduct.
So what I would like to do as we close our case is just walk you
through why our evidence overwhelmingly establishes that President
Trump committed that offense.
Now, as you consider that question, that question as to whether the
President incited insurrection, there are three questions that
reasonably come to mind: Was violence foreseeable; did he encourage
violence; and did he act willfully?
I am going to show you why the answer to every one of those questions
has to be yes.
First, let's start with foreseeability. Was it foreseeable that
violence would erupt on January 6 if President Trump lit a spark? Was
it predictable that the crowd at the Save America rally was poised on a
hair trigger for violence, that they would fight, literally, if
provoked to do so? Of course, it was.
When President Trump stood up to that podium on January 6, he knew
that many in that crowd were inflamed, were armed, were ready for
violence. It was an explosive situation, and he knew it. We have shown
you the evidence on this point. You have seen it--the images, the
videos, the articles, and the pattern which showed that the violence on
that terrible day was entirely foreseeable.
We have showed you how this all began with the big lie, the claim
that the election was rigged, and that President Trump and his
supporters were the victims of a massive fraud, a massive conspiracy to
rip away their votes.
We have showed you how President Trump spread that lie, and how, over
the course of months, with his support and encouragement, it inflamed
part of his base, resulting in death threats, real-world violence, and
increasingly extreme calls to stop the steal.
We established that after he lost the election, the President was
willing to do just about anything to prevent the peaceful transfer of
power; that he tried everything he could do to stop it.
You will recall the evidence on the screen: him pressuring and
threatening State election officials, attacking them to the point of
literally calling them enemies of the state, threatening at least one
of them with criminal penalties; then, attacking Senators, Members of
Congress, all across the media; pressuring the Justice Department,
prompting outcries from assistant U.S. attorneys, not to mention his
own Attorney General, reportedly telling him that the stolen election
claims were ``BS''--not my phrase, his.
And then, as January 6 approached, he moved on to attacking his own
Vice President openly and savagely.
We have recounted, throughout that entire period, all the ways in
which President Trump inflamed his supporters with lies that the
election was stolen. As every single one of us knows, nothing in this
country is more sacred--nothing--than our right to vote, our voice, and
here you have the President of the United States telling his supporters
that their voice, that their rights as Americans were being stolen from
them, ripped away. That made them angry, angry enough to stop the
steal, to fight like hell to stop the steal.
And we showed you this. You saw the endless tweets, the rallies, and
the statements encouraging and spreading that big lie. You saw that he
did this over and over again with the same message each time: You must
fight to win it back. You must never surrender, no matter what.
And remember, each time, his supporters along the way showed
violence. He endorsed it, encouraged it, and praised it. It was all
part of that same demand to stop the steal and fight like hell.
Remember the video that Manager Plaskett showed you from Texas? Some
of his supporters encircling a bus of campaign workers on a highway?
People easily could have been killed--easily. What did he do? He
tweeted and made a joke about it at a rally, called them patriots and
held them out as an example of what it means to stop the steal.
When he told his supporters to stop the steal, they took up arms to
literally intimidate officials to overturn the election results. You
saw the evidence and so did he, and he welcomed it.
When President Trump attacked Georgia's secretary of state for
certifying the results, his supporters sent death threats. You saw
those in great detail from Manager Dean. What did he do? He attacked
the election officials further.
When his supporters gathered together to have a second Million MAGA
rally--that is the rally that Manager Plaskett showed you, a rally
about the stolen election--he tweeted that the fight had just begun.
What happened next? It is not rocket science.

[[Page S663]]

Fights broke out, stabbings, serious violence.
Now, President Trump, like all of us, he saw what happened at that
rally. He saw all the violence, the burning, and chaos. How did he
respond? He tweeted praise of the event, and then--see it on the
screen--he bought $50 million--$50 million worth of ads to further
promote his message to those exact same people. He immediately joined
forces with that very same group. He joined forces with the same people
who had just erupted into violence.
Was violence predictable? Was it obvious that the crowd on January 6
was poised for violence, prepared for it? Absolutely. And this isn't
just clear looking back in time; it was widely recognized at the time.
In the days leading up to January 6, there were dozens, hundreds of
warnings. And he knew it. He knew the rally would explode if provoked.
He knew all it would take was a slight push.
Remember, you heard from Manager Plaskett the chatter on social media
websites that the Trump administration monitored and were known to the
Trump operation. It showed that the people he invited to the January 6
rally took this as a serious call to arms, that this was not just any
attack, it was to storm the Capitol, if necessary, to stop the steal.
And it wasn't just clear on these websites that the Trump
administration was monitoring; the FBI issued reports about this
credible threat, a threat to target us. Law enforcement made six
arrests the night before. Six arrests. Newspapers across the city
warned of the risk of violence.
There can be no doubt that the risk of violence was foreseeable.
What did he do in the days leading up to the rally? Did he calm the
situation? Ask yourself, I mean, did he call for peace? No. He didn't
do that. He spread his big lie, the most dangerous lie, as I mentioned,
that Americans' votes were being stolen and that the final act of theft
would occur here in the Capitol. Then he assembled all of those
supporters. He invited them to an organized event on a specific day at
a specific time matched perfectly to coincide with the joint session of
Congress, to coincide with the steal that he had told them to stop by
any and all means.
Again, he was told by law enforcement and all over the news that
these people were armed and ready for real violence. He knew it. He
knew it perfectly well, that he had created this powder keg at his
rally. He knew just how combustible that situation was. He knew there
were people before him who had prepared, who were armed and armored. He
knew they would jump to violence at any signal, at any sign from him
that he needed them to fight, that he needed them to stop the steal,
and we all know what happened next.

Second question. Did he encourage the violence? Standing in that
powder keg, did he light a match? Everyone knows the answer to that
question. The hours of video you all have watched leave no doubt. Just
remember what he said on January 6.
(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

President TRUMP. All of us here today do not want to see
our election victory stolen.
There's never been anything like this. It's a pure theft in
American history. Everybody knows it. Make no mistake, this
election was stolen from you, from me, from the country.

In the opening of--
(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP. We will never give up. We will never
concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's
theft involved.
And to use a favorite term that all of you people really
came up with: ``We will stop the steal. We will stop the
steal.''
We will not let them silence your voices. We're not going
to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.
(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.''
President TRUMP. Thank you.
(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.'')
President TRUMP. You have to get your people to fight
because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You
have to show strength, and you have to be strong. And we
fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell,
you're not going to have a country anymore.

You may remember at the outset of this trial, I told you would hear
three phrases over and over and over again: The big lie that the
election had been stolen, ``stop the steal and never concede,'' and
``fight like hell to stop that steal.'' You heard those phrases
throughout the course of this trial, video after video, statement after
statement, telling his supporters that they should be patriots, to
fight hard, stop the steal. On that day, that day, where did he direct
the crowd's ire? He directed them here to Congress. He quite literally
in one part of that speech pointed at us. He told them to ``fight like
hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a
country anymore.''
And here is the thing. That wasn't metaphorical. It wasn't
rhetorical. He already made it perfectly clear that when he said
``fight,'' he meant it. And when followers, in fact, fought, when they
engaged in violence, he praised and honored them as patriots. He
implied that it was OK to break the law because the election was being
stolen. You heard it. You remember the clip that Manager Dean showed
you earlier in this trial. He told them--the quote is on the screen--
``When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very
different rules.''
Remember how all of his supporters--some of his supporters across
social media were treating this as a war, talking about bringing in the
cavalry? Well, President Trump made clear what those different rules
were. He had been making it clear for months.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. Giuliani. So let's have trial by combat.
President TRUMP. And, Rudy, you did a great job. He's got
guts. You know what? He's got guts, unlike a lot of people in
the Republican Party. He's got guts. He fights.

His message was crystal clear, and it was understood immediately,
instantly by his followers. And we don't have to guess. We don't have
to guess as to how they reacted. We can look at how people reacted to
what he said. You saw them, and you saw the violence. It is pretty
simple: He said it, and they did it. And we know this because they told
us. They told us in real time during the attack. You saw the
affidavits, the interviews on social media and on live TV. They were
doing this for him because he asked them to.
It wasn't just insurrectionists who confirmed this. Many, many
people, including current and former officials, immediately recognized
that the President had incited the crowd, that he alone was capable of
stopping the violence, that he did this, and he had to call it off
because he was the only one who could.
Let's see what Representative McCarthy, Representative Gallagher,
Chris Christie, Representative Kinzinger, and Representative Katko had
to say.
(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. McCARTHY. I could not be sadder or more disappointed
with the way our country looks at this very moment. People
are getting hurt. Anyone involved in this, if you're hearing
me, hear me loud and clear: This is not the American way.
Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. President, you have got to stop this.
You are the only person who can call this off. Call it off.
Mr. Christie. It's pretty simple. The President caused this
protest to occur. He's the only one who could make it stop.
What the President says is not good enough.
The President has to come out and tell his supporters to
leave the Capitol grounds and to allow the Congress to do
their business peacefully, and anything short of that is an
abrogation of his responsibility.
Mr. KINZINGER. You know, a guy that knows how to tweet very
aggressively on Twitter, you know, puts out one of the
weakest statements on one of the saddest days in American
history.
Mr. KATKO. The President's role in this insurrection is
undeniable, both on social media ahead of January 6 and in
his speech that day. He deliberately promoted baseless
theories, creating a combustible environment of
disinformation and division. To allow the President of the
United States to incite this attack without consequences is a
direct threat to the future of this democracy.

Did the President encourage violence? Yes, no doubt that he did.
Final question: Did the President act willfully in his actions that
encouraged violence? Well, let's look at the facts. He stood before an
armed, angry crowd known to be ready for violence at his provocation.
And what did he do? He provoked them. He aimed them here, told them to
``fight like hell.'' And that is exactly what they did.
And his conduct throughout the rest of that terrible day really only
confirms that he acted willfully, that he incited the crowd and then
engaged in the dereliction of duty while he continued inflaming the
violence. And, again, we don't have to guess what he thought because he
told us.

[[Page S664]]

Remember the video he released at 4:17 p.m.? Lead Manager Raskin
showed that to you yesterday, the one where he said:

We had an election that was stolen from us.

Remember the tweet that he put out just a couple hours later, 6:01
p.m., on January 6? You have seen it many times. You could see it on
the slide:

These are the things that happen when a sacred landslide
election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped
away.

That is what he was focused on, spreading the big lie and praising
the mob that attacked us and our government.
You heard Manager Cicilline describe reports that the President was
delighted, enthusiastic, confused that others didn't share his
excitement as he watched the attack unfold on TV. He cared more about
pressing his efforts to overturn the election than he did about saving
lives, our lives.
Look at what President Trump did that day after the rally. It is
important. He did virtually nothing.
We have seen--Manager Castro mentioned this--that when President
Trump wants to stop something, he does so simply, easily, quickly. But
aside from four tweets and a short clip during the over 5-hour long
attack, he did nothing.
On January 6, he didn't condemn the attack, didn't condemn the
attackers, didn't say that he would send help to defend us or defend
law enforcement. He didn't react to the violence with shock or horror
or dismay, as we did. He didn't immediately rush to Twitter and demand
in the clearest possible terms that the mob disperse, that they stop
it, that they retreat. Instead, he issued messages in the afternoon
that sided with them, the insurrectionists who had left police officers
battered and bloodied.
He reacted exactly the way someone would react if they were delighted
and exactly unlike how a person would react if they were angry at how
their followers were acting.
Again, ask yourself how many lives would have been saved, how much
pain and trauma would have been avoided if he had reacted the way that
a President of the United States is supposed to act.
There are two parts of President Trump's failure here--his
dereliction of duty--that I just have to emphasize for a moment.
First is what he did to Vice President Mike Pence, the Vice President
of the United States of America. His own Vice President was in this
building with an armed mob shouting ``Hang him,'' the same armed mob
that set up gallows outside. You saw those pictures.
And what did President Trump do? He attacked him more. He singled him
out by name. It is honestly hard to fathom.
Second, our law enforcement--the brave officers who were sacrificing
their lives to defend us, who could not evacuate or seek cover because
they were protecting us. I am not going to go through again what my
fellow managers showed you yesterday, but let me just say this: Those
officers serve us faithfully and dutifully, and they follow their
oaths. They deserve a President who upholds his, who would not risk
their lives and safety to retain power, a President who would preserve,
protect, and defend them. But that is not what he did.
When they, the police, still barricaded and being attacked with
poles--he said in his video to the people attacking them:

We love you. You're very special.

What more could we possibly need to know about President Trump's
state of mind?
Senators, the evidence is clear. We showed you statements, videos,
affidavits that prove President Trump incited an insurrection--an
insurrection that h alone had the power to stop. And the fact that he
didn't stop it, the fact that he incited a lawless attack and abdicated
his duty to defend us from it, the fact that he actually further
inflamed the mob--further inflamed that mob attacking his Vice
President while assassins were pursuing him in this Capitol--more than
requires conviction and disqualification.

We humbly--humbly ask you to convict President Trump for the crime
for which he is overwhelmingly guilty because if you don't, if we
pretend this didn't happen or, worse, if we let it go unanswered, who
is to say it won't happen again?
Mr. Manager RASKIN. Mr. President, Members of the Senate, first of
all, thank you for your close attention and seriousness of purpose that
you have demonstrated over the last few days. Thank you also for your
courtesy to the House managers as we have come over here, strangers in
a strange land, to make our case before this distinguished and august
body.
We are about to close. And I am proud that our managers have been so
disciplined and so focused. I think we are closing somewhere between 5
and 6 hours under the time that you have allotted to us, but we think
we have been able to tell you everything we need to say. We will,
obviously, have the opportunity to address your questions and then to
do a final closing when we get there.
I just wanted to leave you with a few thoughts. And, again, I am not
going to retraumatize you by going through the evidence once again. I
just wanted to leave you with a few thoughts to consider as you enter
upon this very high and difficult duty that you have to render
impartial justice in this case, as you have all sworn to do.
And I wanted to start simply by saying that, in the history of
humanity, democracy is an extremely rare and fragile and precarious and
transitory thing. Abraham Lincoln knew that when he spoke from the
battlefield and vowed that ``government of the people, by the people,
[and] for the people shall not perish from the earth.'' He was speaking
not long after the Republic was created, and he was trying to prove
that point, that we would not allow it to perish from the Earth.
For most of history, the norm has been dictators, autocrats, bullies,
despots, tirades, cowards who take over our government--for most of the
history of the world--and that is why America is such a miracle. We
were founded on the extraordinary principles of the inalienable rights
of the people and the consent of the governed and the fundamental
equality of all of us.
You know, when Lincoln said ``government of the people, by the
people, [and] for the people'' and he hearkened back to the Declaration
of Independence, when he said ``Four score and seven years ago,'' he
knew that that wasn't how we started. We started imperfectly. We
started as a slave republic. Lincoln knew that. But he was struggling
to make the country better.
And however flawed the Founders were as men in their times, they
inscribed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution all
the beautiful principles that we needed to open America up to
successive waves of political struggle and constitutional change and
transformation in the country so we really would become something much
more like Lincoln's beautiful vision of ``government of the people, by
the people, [and] for the people''--the world's greatest, multiracial,
multireligious, multiethnic constitutional democracy, the envy of the
world, as Tom Paine said, an asylum for humanity where people would
come.
Think about the preamble, those first three words pregnant with such
meaning, ``We the People,'' and then all of the purposes of our
government put into that one action-packed sentence: ``We the People .
. . in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure
domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
general Welfare, and [preserve] to ourselves and our Posterity'' the
blessings of liberty.
And then, right after that first sentence--the mission statement for
America, the Constitution--what happens? Article I. The Congress is
created: All legislative powers herein are reserved to the Congress of
the United States.
You see what just happened? The sovereign power of the people to
launch the country and create the Constitution flowed right into
Congress. And then you get in article I, section 8 comprehensive, vast
powers that all of you know so well--the power to regulate commerce
domestically and internationally, the power to declare war, the power
to raise budgets and taxes and to spend money, the power to govern the
seat of government, and on and on and on.

[[Page S665]]

And then, even in article 1, section 8, clause 18, all other powers
``necessary and proper'' to the foregoing powers. That is all of us.
Then you get to article II, the President, four short paragraphs. And
the fourth paragraph is all about what? Impeachment--how you get rid of
a President who commits high crimes and misdemeanors.
What is the core job of the President? To take care that the laws are
faithfully executed.
And our Framers were so fearful of Presidents becoming tyrants and
wanting to become Kings and despots that they put the oath of office
right into the Constitution. They inscribed it into the Constitution:
to ``preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States.''
We have got the power to impeach the President. The President doesn't
have the power to impeach us. Think about that. The popular branch of
government has the power to impeach the President. The President does
not have the power to impeach us.
And, as I said before, all of us who aspire and attain a public
office are nothing but the servants of the people. And the way the
Framers would have it is the moment that we no longer acted as servants
of the people but as masters of the people, as violators of the
people's rights, that was the time to impeach, remove, convict,
disqualify, start all over again, because the interests of the people
are so much greater than the interests of one person--any one person,
even the greatest person in the country. The interests of the people
are what count.
Now, when we sit down and we close, our distinguished counterparts,
the defense counsel, who have waited very patiently--and thank you--
will stand up and seek to defend the President's conduct on the facts,
as I think they will.
It has already been decided by the Senate on Tuesday that the Senate
has constitutional jurisdiction over this impeachment case brought to
you by the United States House of Representatives. So we have put that
jurisdictional, constitutional issue to bed. It is over. It has already
been voted on.
This is a trial on the facts of what happened. And incitement, as we
said, is a fact-intensive investigation and judgment that each of you
will have to make.
We have made our very best effort to set forth every single relevant
fact that we know in the most objective and honest light. We trust and
we hope that the defense will understand the constitutional gravity and
solemnity of this trial by focusing like a laser beam on the facts and
not return to the constitutional argument that has already been decided
by the Senate.
Just as a defense lawyer who loses a motion to dismiss on a
constitutional basis in a criminal case must let that go and then focus
on the facts which are being presented by the prosecutors in detail,
they must let this constitutional jurisdictional argument go--not just
because it is frivolous and wrong, as nearly every expert scholar in
America opined, but because it is not relevant to the jury's
consideration of the facts of the case.
So our friends must work to answer all of the overwhelming, detailed,
specific, factual, and documentary evidence we have introduced of the
President's clear and overwhelming guilt in inciting violent
insurrection against the Union.
Donald Trump, last week, turned down our invitation to come testify
about his actions, and, therefore, we have not been able to ask him any
questions directly as of this point. Therefore, during the course of
their 16-hour-allotted presentation, we would pose these preliminary
questions to his lawyers, which I think are on everyone's minds right
now and which we would have asked Mr. Trump himself if he had chosen to
come and testify about his actions and inactions when we invited him
last week:
One, why did President Trump not tell his supporters to stop the
attack on the Capitol as soon as he learned of it?
Why did President Trump do nothing to stop the attack for at least 2
hours after the attack began?
As our constitutional Commander in Chief, why did he do nothing to
send help to our overwhelmed and besieged law enforcement officers for
at least 2 hours on January 6 after the attack began?
On January 6, why did President Trump not at any point that day
condemn the violent insurrection and the insurrectionists?
And I will add a legal question that I hope his distinguished counsel
will address: If a President did invite a violent insurrection against
our government, as, of course, we allege and think we have proven in
this case--but just in general, if a President incited a violent
insurrection against our government--would that be a high crime and
misdemeanor? Can we all agree, at least, on that?
Senators, I have talked a lot about common sense in this trial
because I think, I believe that is all you need to arrive at the right
answer here.
You know, when Tom Paine wrote ``Common Sense,'' the pamphlet that
launched the American Revolution, he said that common sense really
meant two different things:
One, common sense is the understanding that we all have without
advanced learning and education. Common sense is the sense accessible
to everybody. But common sense is also the sense that we all have in
common, as a community.
Senators, America, we need to exercise our common sense about what
happened. Let's not get caught up in a lot of outlandish lawyers'
theories here. Exercise your common sense about what just took place in
our country.
Tom Paine wasn't an American, as you know, but he came over to help
us in our great revolutionary struggle against the Kings and Queens and
the tyrants. And in 1776, in ``The Crisis,'' he wrote these beautiful
words. It was a very tough time for the country. People didn't know
which way things were going to go. Were we going to win, against all
hope, because for most of the rest of human history it had been the
Kings and the Queens and the tyrants and the nobles lording it over the
common people? Could political self-government work in America was the
question. And Paine wrote this pamphlet called ``The Crisis,'' and in
it he said these beautiful words. And, with your permission, I'm going
to update the language a little bit, pursuant to the suggestion of
Speaker Pelosi, so as not to offend modern sensibilities. OK
But he said: These are the times that try men and women's souls.
These are the times that try men and women's souls. The summer soldier
and the sunshine patriot will shrink at this moment from the service of
their cause and their country; but everyone who stands with us now will
win the love and the favor and the affection of every man and every
woman for all time. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered, but we
have this saving consolation: The more difficult the struggle, the more
glorious, in the end, will be our victory.
Good luck in your deliberations.
We do conclude our presentation.
Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you. Thank you. Now, I have two--we are going to
do the adjournment resolution in a moment. I have two other things that
we have to do. They are quick.
First, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to
make several unanimous consent requests as if in legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Unanimous Consent Agreement

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Friday,
February 12, from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. that, notwithstanding
adjournment, the Senate be able to receive House messages and executive
matters, committees be authorized to report legislative and executive
matters, and Senators be allowed to submit statements for the record,
introduce bills and resolutions, and make cosponsor requests, and,
where applicable, the Secretary of the Senate, on behalf of the
Presiding Officer, be permitted to refer such matters.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Unanimous Consent Agreement--Reading of Washington's Farewell Address

Mr. SCHUMER. And a second request, poignantly appropriate at this
moment: I ask unanimous consent that, pursuant to the order of the
Senate of January 24, 1901, the traditional reading of Washington's
Farewell Address take place on Monday, February

[[Page S666]]

22, following the prayer and pledge; further, that Senator Portman be
recognized to deliver the address.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________