Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
World
Maanvi Singh in San Francisco (now) and Joan E Greve in Washington (earlier)

Impeachment inquiry: contentious hearing concludes after eight hours – as it happened

Live political reporting continues on Thursday’s blog:

Summary

Here’s a recap of today:

  • Four constitutional law experts testified on Donald Trump’s conduct rises to the level of impeachable offenses.
  • Three scholars called by Democratic members of the committee said that the president’s handling of Ukraine military aid and the leveraging of his office for personal gain are impeachable offenses.
  • A law professor that the Republicans called to testify said that the evidence is too thin, and the reasons for impeaching the president too narrow to justify a case against the president now.
  • One of the experts, Pamela Karlan, apologized after the First Lady criticized her for punning off Barron Trump’s name to make the point that the president is not a king.
  • Donald Trump cut short his attendance at the Nato summit after a video captured world leaders apparently ridiculing him.
  • The Trump administration approved a new rule that will cut nearly 70,000 people from the federal food stamp program.

Report: Attorney General Barr's prosecutor isn't able to back right-wing conspiracy theory about the origins of the Russia investigation

William Barr’s hand-picked prosecutor wasn’t able to provide evidence that to support right-wing suspicions that the FBI’s Russia investigation was a setup, the Washington Post reports:

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s office contacted U.S. Attorney John Durham, the prosecutor Barr personally tapped to lead a separate review of the 2016 probe into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, the people said. The inspector general also contacted several U.S. intelligence agencies.

Among Horowitz’s questions: whether a Maltese professor who interacted with a Trump campaign adviser was actually a U.S. intelligence asset deployed to ensnare the campaign, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the inspector general’s findings have not been made public.

But the intelligence agencies said the professor was not among their assets, the people said. And Durham informed Horowitz’s office that his investigation had not produced any evidence that might contradict the inspector general’s findings on that point.

NBC appears to have confirmed the Post’s reporting.

The Justice Department IG has an upcoming report investigating the origins of Russia investigation, separate from the one being conducted by Barr’s prosecutor.

Updated

What's next in the impeachment inquiry?

The House Judiciary Committee is expected to soon announce future hearings, including testimony from the attornies for the Republicans and Democrats on the Hosue Intelligence committee, who will present the reports and findings from the investigation so far.

After that, the Judiciary Committee will likely draw up articles of impeachment, vote on them. The exact timing of when all of this will happen is still unclear. It’s also unclear which articles the committee will draft.

The House Intelligence report released yesterday makes a case for obstruction of justice and abuse of power.

Hearing ends, after 8 hours

Chairman Nadler gaveled the hearing closed, after delivering his closing remarks.

Trump put his own interests above the national interest, Nadler said. Trump asked a“foreign government to intervene in our elections, then got caught, then obstructed the investigators twice.”

“The constitution has a solution for a president who places his personal or political interests above those in the nation, the power of impeachment,” Nadler concluded.

When Republican member Louie Gohmert tried to get Nadler’s attention (with a unanimous consent request), Nadler responded “Too late” and banged his gavel. “Typical,” Gohmert could be heard mumbling.

Doug Collins, center, said it’s too early to consider impeachment.
Doug Collins, center, said it’s too early to consider impeachment. Photograph: Andrew Harnik/AP

A very animated Doug Collins said, “This is not a time to play hide the ball” and repeatedly called for Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff testify before the Judiciary Committee.

He said it was “too early” to hold these hearings and that lawmakers had not talked to enough “fact witnesses”. The Democrats, he said, are “so obsessed with the election next year, they just gloss over things.”

Collins also repeated a Republican talking point that Ukraine only became aware that aid was being withheld “one month after” the Trump-Zelenskiy phone call. However, Pentagon official Laura Cooper testified that Ukraine was aware of the aid in early July, before the call.

Updated

Questioning ends in Judiciary Committee hearing

Representative Jerry Nadler, the leading Democrat on the committee, and Doug Collins, the leading Republican are now giving closing statements.

Read the key takeaways from today’s testimonies:

Constitutional law scholar Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan testified before the House Judiciary Committee on the constitutional grounds for impeaching Trump.
Constitutional law scholar Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan testified before the House Judiciary Committee on the constitutional grounds for impeaching Trump. Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Pamela Karlan made a distinction between Trump’s political positions on foreign affairs and his right to solicit electoral interference from foreign powers.

“Yes there is political influence in our foreign affairs,” she said. “We’ve exited climate accords, we’ve taken different positions on Nato than we would have taken if his opponent won.”

That’s different from partisan politics in the context of electoral manipulation, she said.

“If we get over that or get used to that, we will cease to become the democracy that we are now”

Witness Pamela Karlan apologized for making a put out of Barron Trump’s name.

“It was wrong of me to do that...I do regret having said that,” she said, adding that she’s happy to apologize though the president hasn’t apologized for offensive comments he’s made in the past.

Earlier, Michael Johnson, a Republican representative from Louisiana, read a tweet by First Lady Melania Trump criticizing Karlan’s comment into the public record of the hearing.

Trump administration cuts food stamp program

In other non-impeachment political news, the Trump administration approved a rule that will remove nearly 700,000 people from the federal food-stamp program by tightening work requirements for recipients.

From the AP:

The move by the administration is the latest in its attempt to scale back the social safety net for low-income Americans. It is the first of three proposed rules targeting the Supplemental Nutrition Program, known as SNAP, to be finalized. The program feeds more than 36 million people.

The plan, announced Wednesday, will limit states from exempting work-eligible adults from having to maintain steady employment in order to receive benefits.

The Agriculture Department estimates the change would save roughly $5.5 billion over five years and cut benefits for roughly 688,000 SNAP recipients...

The final rule will be published in the federal register Thursday, and go into effect in April.

Updated

Meanwhile, elsewhere on Capitol Hill...

Those still holed up in the Judiciary Committee hearing can reportedly hear echoes of holiday cheer filtering in from the outside world.

Updated

Several Republicans committee members have read from the memo that Donald Trump released summarizing his July 25 call with the Ukrainian president.

“They never mentioned the 2020 election. They never mentioned military aid,” Kelly Armstrong, a Republican representative from North Dakota, said just now.

Though the rough transcript of the call that Trump released may not contain the phrase “2020 election”, the president does clearly ask Ukraine to conduct investigations, including into Biden, one of his leading rivals in the upcoming elections.

The transcript also shows that Trump transitions directly from talk of military aid that the Ukrainian president says his country needs to talk of a “favor” that Trump needs.

Pushing back against arguments made by Jonathan Turley, who said that Democrats didn’t have enough evidence to make a case for impeachment at this point, Michael Gerhardt said that lawmakers have tried to gather more evidence.

“I might just point out that one of the difficulties with asking for a more thorough investigation is that’s exactly what the House has tried to conduct here,” he said, “The president has refused to comply with subpoenas and other requests for documents.”

Val Demmings, the Democratic representative from Florida who questioned Gerhardt, agreed that Trump was “desperate” to prevent investigations into his actions.

“The president’s obstruction of Congress is pervasive,” she said. “We are facing a categorically blockade by a president who is desperate to prevent any investigation into his wrongdoing.”

“Has a president ever refused to cooperate in an impeachment investigation?” Demmings asked.

“Not until now.” Gerhardt responded.

Updated

Pramila Jayapal, a Democratic representative from Washington, is now questioning Pamela Karlan. Jayapal asked Karlan what Trump’s behavior reveals about the credibility of his claim that he was most concerned about corruption. What, for example, does it mean that Trump allegedly insisted that the Ukrainian president publicly announce an investigation?

“Generally you don’t announce the investigation in a criminal case before you conduct it, because it puts the person under notice that they’re under investigation,” Karlan said.

As for credibility, Karlan said, “I think you ought to make that credibility determination because you have the sole power of impeachment. if I were a member of the House of Representatives I would infer that he was doing it for political reasons.”

Updated

Evening summary

The House judiciary committee is still holding its first public impeachment hearing, but I’m handing the blog over to my west coast colleague Maanvi Singh for the next few hours.

Here’s where the day stands so far:

  • Three legal experts called by Democratic members of the House judiciary committee testified that Trump’s actions toward Ukraine constituted impeachable offenses, a position that was contradicted by the only witness called by Republican members of the panel.
  • The first lady, the White House and Trump’s reelection campaign denounced one of today’s legal experts, Pamela Karlan, after the Stanford law professor made a pun out of Barron Trump’s name. “The president can name his son Barron, but he can’t make him a baron,” Karlan said.
  • Democratic congressman Denny Heck, a member of the House intelligence committee, announced he would not seek reelection – citing his desire to spend more time with family and his chagrin over the Republican response to the impeachment inquiry.
  • Rudy Giuliani reportedly traveled to Europe this week to meet with former Ukrainian prosecutors who helped spread baseless corruption allegations against Joe Biden, even though the president’s personal lawyer is under a microscope because of the impeachment inquiry.
  • Trump canceled his final press conference at the Nato summit in London after a video surfaced of world leaders mocking the president’s lengthy comments to reporters yesterday.

Maanvi will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

Updated

First lady lashes out against legal expert for Barron pun

The first lady has now added her voice to the Republican chorus criticizing Pamela Karlan, accusing the Stanford law professor of invading the privacy of her son by making a pun out of Barron Trump’s name.

Karlan said earlier at today’s hearing, “The president can name his son Barron, but he can’t make him a baron,” making a point about the constitution not allowing the president to distribute titles of nobility.

Republicans are now arguing that the mere mention of Barron’s name equates to a political attack meant to drag the first son into the impeachment inquiry.

Updated

Republican congressman Tom McClintock began his five minutes of questions by asking the legal experts testifying today if they had voted for Trump in the 2016 election.

This question sparked immediate pushback from Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, who argued the witnesses should not have to disclose how they cast their ballots.

Chairman Jerry Nadler interjected to say that McClintock was free to ask the question but witnesses were not obligated to answer. None of the witnesses raised their hands to say they voted for Trump, but Harvard law professor Noah Feldman emphasized the lack of response should not be taken as a sign that they oppose the president.

The House judiciary committee has reconvened its first public impeachment hearing, and members of the panel have resumed their five-minute rounds of questioning of today’s witnesses.

Republican congressman Andy Biggs kicked off questioning after the brief recess, and Democratic congressman Ted Lieu is now speaking. After Lieu, there should be 18 members of the panel left, so the hearing could conclude around 6pm ET, but it may stretch even longer.

Updated

The House judiciary committee has once again recessed its impeachment hearing for five minutes, with more than a dozen members of the panel still needing to question today’s witnesses.

Just before chairman Jerry Nadler briefly adjourned the hearing, Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell accused George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley of acting as the Republicans’ defense attorney in support of the president. “That’s not my intention, sir,” Turley replied.

The president’s reelection campaign has now called on Democrats to repudiate Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan for making a pun out of Barron Trump’s name to make a point about the Constitution not allowing presidents to distrubute titles of nobility.

“Every Democrat in Congress should immediately repudiate Pamela Karlan and call on her to personally apologize to the President and the First Lady for mocking their son on national TV,” said Kayleigh McEnany, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary.

Karlan initially said at today’s hearing, “The president can name his son Barron, but he can’t make him a baron,” prompting some laughter in the hearing room.

Republican congressman attacks legal experts for donating to Democrats

Republican congressman Matt Gaetz used his five minutes of questioning to criticize the three legal experts called by Democrats on the House judiciary committee for previously donating to Democratic candidates.

Gaetz especially went after Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, asking why she donated $2,000 to Hillary Clinton. Karlan responded that she had been donating a lot of money at the time because of all the “poor” people in the United States.

Gaetz also accused Karlan of being “mean” for making a pun out of the name of the president’s son, Barron Trump. As Karlan was trying to respond to Gaetz’s questions, the congressman told the only woman on the panel, “You don’t get to interrupt me on this time.”

After two weeks of high-stakes hearings that included “star witnesses,” an attache with the cadence and authority of Walter Cronkite, a decorated do-gooder in uniform, a British-born Russia expert who inspired fan clubs around the world and a bombshell-lobbing hotelier-turned ambassador, the distinguished panel of academics was perhaps not the made-for-TV cast these impeachment hearings had thrived on. The witnesses painted in vivid detail the actions of a president hellbent on pressuring a foreign government to harm his political rival.

Constitutional scholars are sworn in prior to testifying before the House judiciary committee.
Constitutional scholars are sworn in prior to testifying before the House judiciary committee. Photograph: Win McNamee/Getty Images

By contrast the professors’ testimony was conceptual and high-minded. They legitimized their assertions with quotations from the Founding Fathers, references to historical treaties and pleasantries that might require an advanced degree to follow. Words like “perfidy” and “necromancy” obscured their more relatable references to a pet goldendoodle and Thanksgiving dinner.

But aside from snarky tweets, the dulcet testimony is also providing Democrats a clear rationale for removing Trump from office that they can clip and reference in the weeks to come.

“If we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy,” said Noah Feldman, a professor at Harvard Law School. “We live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship.”

White House criticizes legal expert for 'classless move'

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham lashed out against Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan for making a pun out of Barron Trump’s name during today’s impeachment hearing.

Grisham accused Karlan of disrepecting the first son’s privacy by making his name a punchline. “What is being done to this country is no laughing matter,” Grisham said.

It’s important to note Karlan was not at all mocking Barron Trump himself. She used his name to make a light-hearted joke about how presidents cannot distribute titles of nobility. “The president can name his son Barron, but he can’t make him a baron,” Karlan said, prompting some laughter in the hearing room.

Republican congressman presses Graham to request phone records from Schiff and Biden

Meanwhile, as the House judiciary committee’s impeachment hearing continues, a Republican congressman is pressing Senate judiciary committee chairman Lindsey Graham to subpoena the phone records of Adam Schiff and Joe Biden, among others.

The request comes after the release of the House intelligence committee’s report on the impeachment inquiry, which included call records from Rudy Giuliani and one of his former associates, Lev Parnas.

The records showed Giuliani in contact with Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House intelligence committee, and an official at the office of management and budget as the president’s personal lawyer started peddling baseless corruption allegations againt Biden.

Republican congressman Jim Jordan, who also participated in the House intelligence committee hearings, complained that Democrats were overseeing a “pre-determined impeachment.”

Like the previous two Republican members, Jordan did not pose a single question to today’s witnesses during his five-minute round of questioning, instead choosing to simply criticize the inquiry writ large.

Republican congressman Louie Gohmert used his five minutes of questioning to criticize the process of the impeachment inquiry and demand that other witnesses linked to Joe Biden be made to testify, which has 0% chance of approval by the panel’s Democratic majority.

Republican congressman Steve Chabot just completed his five-minute round of questioning -- which he used to deliver a diatribe against chairman Jerry Nadler without posing a single question to today’s witnesses.

Chabot accused Nadler of reversing himself from his comments about impeachment during Bill Clinton’s presidency and argued the inquiry was preventing the panel from addressing other matters.

Those talking points echo comments from Trump, who has accused the “do nothing Democrats” of neglecting their constituents’ needs.

Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan has just delivered another line that is sure to be replayed many times after today’s impeachment hearing.

Responding to questions from Democratic congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, Karlan was arguing that the Constitution makes a point to distinguish between the powers of the president and the powers of a monarch.

Karlan specifically cited the president’s inability to distribute titles of nobility. “So while the president can name his son Barron, he cannot make him a baron,” Karlan joked.

The first Republican questioner after the recess was Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, who was an impeachment manager during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

Sensenbrenner used the first four minutes of his questioning to criticize the impeachment inquiry before posing a single question to Jonathan Turley, the only witness called by Republican members of the panel. Then his time was up.

House judiciary committee reconvenes impeachment hearing

Chairman Jerry Nadler has once again gaveled in the first public impeachment hearing conducted by his panel, the House judiciary committee.

The panel will continue with five-minute rounds of questions from the members of the committee, which could take another three hours or so. For reference, this hearing began almost five hours ago.

Democrats on the House judiciary committee have been told to stay in Washington this weekend so the panel can complete work related to the impeachment inquiry.

It’s unclear what work chairman Jerry Nadler hopes for the members to complete, but it could include mock hearings regarding the Huse intelligence committee’s newly released report on the impeachment inquiry.

The Senate has released its calendar for 2020, but the chamber has left the month of January blank in case the House passes articles of impeachment and a trial needs to be held on whether to remove Trump from office.

If the House passes articles of impeachment later this month, as it is widely expected to do, the Senate would likely take up the charges in January. Unless two-thirds of senators rule against the president, which is highly improbable, Trump will be acquitted and remain in office.

Updated

Neal Katyal, a former acting solicitor general under Barack Obama, accused Republicans on the House judiciary committee of misrepresenting his words by only quoting a portion of his comments about Hunter Biden in his book “Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump.”

In the book, Katyal makes a point to emphasize that while Biden’s conduct was not right, it also wasn’t illegal -- as the business dealings of Trump’s family while he is in office are not illegal.

The House judiciary committee is not likely to reconvene for another 30 minutes, which could mean the impeachment hearing will not conclude for another four hours or so.

Impeachment hearing briefly recesses for House votes

Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren opened her questioning of today’s witnesses by noting that she has been present for all three modern impeachments -- as a staffer during Richard Nixon’s impeachment and as a lawmaker during Bill Clinton’s.

After Lofgren had concluded her questioning, chairman Jerry Nadler recessed the hearing for members to go vote on the House floor. Dozens of committee members still need to have the chance to question the witnesses, so we will be here for a while.

The House judiciary committee’s impeachment hearing has moved on to five-minute rounds of questioning from each member, which could run more than three hours long if everyone uses up their full time.

House intelligence Democrat announces retirement

Representative Denny Heck, a Democratic member of the House intelligence committee, has announced he will retire from Congress after serving four terms in the chamber.

Heck cited his decades of public service, considering his years in the Washington state legislature, and his discouragement with the Russia investigation as reasons for his departure.

“It is incredible work but it takes its toll. Being away so much from Paula, my best friend and wife of nearly 44 years, can be lonely even when I am in a crowded room,” Heck said. “At our age, however many ‘good years’ we have left together is not a growing number.

“In the spirit of complete openness, part of me is also discouraged. The countless hours I have spent in the investigation of Russian election interference and the impeachment inquiry have rendered my soul weary. I will never understand how some of my colleagues, in many ways good people, could ignore or deny the President’s unrelenting attack on a free press, his vicious character assassination of anyone who disagreed with him, and his demonstrably very distant relationship with the truth.”

The Republican counsel has concluded his questioning of the legal experts today, but he spent his time only posing questions to lone GOP witness Jonathan Turley -- pursuing a similar strategy as the Democratic counsel.

Chairman Jerry Nadler noted this would have been the time when the White House had an opportunity to question the qitnesses, but the president declined the invitation.

The panel has now moved on to five minutes of questioning from each member, beginning with Nadler.

Turley warns of leaving 'half the country behind' on impeachment

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, the only witness called by Republicans, criticized Democrats for not winning over more members of the opposite party about impeachment.

“If you rush this impeachment, you’re going to leave half the country behind,” Turley warned. “This is not an impulse buy item.”

Paul Taylor, a longtime Republican staffer on the House judiciary committee, is now posing questions to the legal experts testifying today. (Well, so far he has only posed questions to the one witness Republicans called -- deploying the same strategy that Democrats pursued.)

White House counsel Pat Cipollone is on Capitol Hill today, although he is not participating in the House judiciary committee’s impeachment hearing. The president was given the option to have a lawyer represent him at today’s hearing, but the White House declined to do so.

A Capitol Hill reporter said Cipollone was meeting with senators “as part of an ongoing effort to keep Senate Republicans informed about White House thinking.”

A New York Times reporter noted that Jonathan Turley’s argument about the impeachment inquiry moving at a record pace is actually up for debate.

Legal expert accuses lawmakers of abusing their power

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who was called to testify by the Republicans on the House judiciary committee, argued members of Congress were abusing their power by moving quickly on the impeachment inquiry.

“Fast is not good for impeachment. Fast and narrow impeachments have failed,” Turley said, citing the example of former President Andrew Johnson, who was impeached in 1868 before being narrowly acquitted by the Senate.

“If you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it’s an abuse of power,” Turley told the lawmakers. “It’s your abuse of power.”

Legal expert called by Republican dissents with other witnesses

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, the only witness at today’s impeachment hearing who was called by Republicans on the House judiciary committee, argued Trump’s actions toward Ukraine do not represent a “clear case of bribery.”

Those comments clash with testimony from Stanford professor Pamela Karlan, who told the panel that Trump would be guilty of bribery if investigators concluded the president requested an investigation into Joe Biden to advance his political interests.

Congressman Doug Collins also opened his questioning by joking that George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, the only witness called to testify by the Republican minority of the House judiciary committee, was “well rested” after only being asked one question by the Democratic counsel.

Representative Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House judiciary committee, opened his questioning by noting the freezing conditions of today’s hearing room.

Chairman Jerry Nadler has gaveled back in the House judiciary committee’s impeachment hearing, and the Republican ranking member and Republican counsel will now be allowed to pose questions to the four legal experts testifying today.

Afternoon summary

Here’s where the day stands so far:

  • The House judiciary committee is in the midst of holding its first public impeachment hearing, where three legal experts have testified that Trump’s actions toward Ukraine constitute impeachable behavior. (A fourth expert has testified the president’s behavior does not meet the constitutional standard for impeachment.)
  • House Democrats held a closed-door meeting this morning, where members signaled their willingness to move forward with the impeachment inquiry despite the White House’s refusal to cooperate.
  • Trump left the Nato summit in London without holding his scheduled final press conference after a video surfaced of world leaders seeming to mock the US president for his lengthy comments to reporters.

The blog will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

Democrats ready to move forward with impeachment inquiry

House Democrats held a closed-door meeting this morning to discuss the intelligence committee’s report on the impeachment inquiry, which was released yesterday, and next steps in the investigation.

The Washington Post reports:

According to multiple Democratic lawmakers who attended a closed-door Capitol meeting, [speaker Nancy] Pelosi announced no firm decision or timeline in moving toward Trump’s impeachment. But, a day after [Adam] Schiff delivered a 300-page report detailing charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress against Trump, she made clear what lay ahead in the House.
‘Are you ready?’ Pelosi (D-Calif.) asked her colleagues, after describing the grave constitutional circumstances posed by Trump’s alleged wrongdoing surrounding his dealings with Ukraine and his subsequent decision to stonewall the House investigation into it. The caucus, according to multiple members, erupted with shouts of approval. ‘We’re moving forward,’ said one member, summarizing the thrust of Pelosi’s remarks and speaking on condition of anonymity to candidly describe a private meeting. ‘We’ve got a job to do whether people want to testify or not.’

Pelosi then turned the room over to Schiff (D-Calif.), who received a standing ovation before saying a word, the members said.

Giuliani reportedly meets with former Ukrainian prosecutors amid impeachment scrutiny

From the department of “you really can’t make this up”: the New York Times is reporting that Rudy Giuliani traveled to Europe this week to meet with former Ukrainian prosecutors who have pushed baseless corruption allegations against Joe Biden.

The Times reports:

Mr. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, met in Budapest on Tuesday with a former Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, who has become a key figure in the impeachment inquiry. He then traveled to Kyiv on Wednesday seeking to meet with other former Ukrainian prosecutors whose claims have been embraced by Republicans, including Viktor Shokin and Kostiantyn H. Kulyk, according to people familiar with the effort.

The former prosecutors, who have faced allegations of corruption, all played some role in promoting claims about former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a former United States ambassador to Ukraine and Ukrainians who disseminated damaging information about Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, in 2016.

House judiciary committee chairman Jerry Nadler has just called for a 10-minute recess in the panel’s impeachment hearing, which will almost certainly become more like a 20-minute break.

When the committee regroups, the Republican ranking member and Republican counsel will be given the chance to pose questions to the four legal experts testifying today.

Democrats signal they are considering three articles of impeachment

During the House judiciary committee’s impeachment hearing, the panel’s Democrats displayed a sign appearing to indicate they are considering three articles of impeachment against Trump: abuse of power and bribery, obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice.

Democratic counsel Norm Eisen asked the legal experts testifying at today’s impeachment hearing whether the effort to pressure Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden was an impeachable act, even though the countryultimately did not launch the probe.

“The attempt itself is the impeachable act,” said Harvard law professor Noah Feldman, who noted that Richard Nixon’s efforts to cover up the Watergate break-in were ultimately unsuccessful. But the attempts themselves clearly constituted impeachable behavior, Feldman said.

Pamela Karlan and Michael Gerhardt echoed that opinion with hypothetical situations emphasizing the soliciation itself is the issue.

University of North Carolina law professor Michael Gerhardt warned that lawmakers could set a dangerous precedent if they didn’t impeach Trump for his actions toward Ukraine.

“If what we’re talking about is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable,” Gerhardt said.

Stanford professor Pamela Karlan emphasized she had spent her Thanksgiving break reading the transcripts from the impeachment hearings, implicitly criticizing Republican congressman Doug Collins for implying today’s witnesses had not had time to consider all the evidence.

Updated

Legal expert says Trump's actions toward Ukraine constitute bribery

Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan said Trump’s actions toward Ukraine meet the constitutional definition of bribery, adding credibility to Democrats’ usage of the term to describe the allegations against the president.

Karlan said that, if lawmakers conclude Trump requested an investigation into Joe Biden and his son for political gain, “then yes, you have bribery here,” the law professor said.

Harvard law professor Noah Feldman warned that the US would turn into a monarchy if its presidents cannot be impeached for using the office for personal or political gain.

Democratic counsel Norm Eisen pressed Jonathan Turley, the only legal expert called to testify by Republican members of the House judiciary committee, about his Wall Street Journal op-ed on the impeachment inquiry.

Eisen noted that Turley, who has argued that Trump’s actions in the Ukraine controversy do not meet the constitutional standard for impeachment, wrote in the op-ed, “There is much that is worthy of investigation in the Ukraine scandal, and it is true that impeachment doesn’t require a crime.”

Turley confirmed he had written that but he attempted to elaborate on the argument before being cut off by Eisen, who said he was only seeking a “yes” or “no” answer on whether Turley had in fact written that.

Democratic counsel Norm Eisen has now been recognized for 45 minutes of questioning, and he has started by focusing on Trump’s alleged abuses of power and whether those actions constitute impeachable offenses.

All three of the witnesses called by Democrats -- Noah Feldman from Harvard, Pamela Karlan from Stanford and Michael Gerhardt from the University of North Carolina -- agreed those actions met the constitutional standard for impeachable offenses.

Legal expert criticizes Trump's refual to cooperate with impeachment inquiry

Chairman Jerry Nadler asked University of North Carolina law professor Michael Gerhardt what concerns should be raised by Trump’s refusal to cooperate with congressional subpoenas in the impeachment inquiry.

“When the president does that, the separation of powers means nothing.” Gerhardt said.

The hearing has now moved on to questioning by the members of the House judiciary committee, beginning with chairman Jerry Nadler.

The California Democrat began by asking Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan about the danger of a president inviting election interference from a foreign power. Karlan warned that such a request “takes the right away from the American people” to determine the winners of elections.

The four legal experts testifying at today’s public imeachment hearing have concluded their opening statements, and the Republicans on the House judiciary committee have now forced another prcedural vote on subpoenaing the whistleblower whose complaint kicked off the inquiry.

A Democratic member of the panel unsurprisingly responded with a proposal to table (or kill) the motion, which was adopted along party lines.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, the only witness called by the Republican members of the House judiciary committee, began his opening statement by noting he is not a supporter of the president and did not vote for Trump in 2016.

However, the professor expressed fear about this inquiry setting a dangerous precedent for impeachment. “I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger,” Turley said.

Turley also offered a joke about the current divsion in the country. “I get it, you’re mad. The president’s mad ... My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog seems mad,” Turley said. And he noted his dog, a goldendoodle named Luna, is never mad.

But he added, “Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?”

University of North Carolina law professor Michael Gerhardt similarly argued in his opening statement that Trump has participated in several acts that constitute impeachable behavior.

“The record compiled thus far shows that the president has committed several impeachable offenses, including bribery, abuse of power in soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader to benefit his political campaign, obstructing Congress, and obstructing justice,” Gerhardt said.

The law professor closed by warning, “If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeachment process has lost all meaning, and, along with that, our Constitution’s carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil.”

Stanford law professor Pamela S. Karlan closed her opening statement by arguing the presidnet should not be inviting election interference but rather warning any country who threatens to do it.

“A president who cared about the Constitution would say ‘Russia, if you’re listening, butt out of our elections,’” Karlan said, referring to Trump’s famous line requesting that the Kremlin try to find Hillary Clinton’s emails in 2016.

In her opening statement, Stanford law professor Pamela S. Karlan echoed Noah Feldman’s argument that Trump’s communications with Ukraine represented a clear abuse of power.

“When President Trump invited — indeed, demanded — foreign involvement in our upcoming election, he struck at the very heart of what makes this a republic,” Karlan said. “That demand ... constituted an abuse of power.”

Legal expert says she was 'insulted' by Republican congressman's opening statement

Stanford law professor Pamela S. Karlan took a shot at Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House judiciary committee, in her opening statement after the congressman implied the legal experts testifying today may not have reviewed all the evidence gathered in the impeachement inquiry.

Karlan said she was “insulted” by Collins’ suggestion that she has not carefully considered the facts of the investigation.

Trump calls impeachment a 'dirty word'

As the members of the House judiciary committee took yet another procedural vote forced by the Republicans on the panel, Trump weighed in on the hearing from London.

Speaking to reporters following the Nato summit, Trump questioned Democrats’ loyalty to the US. “You almost question whether or not they love our country and that’s a very serious thing: Do they love our country?” the president said, according to the pool report.

Trump added he considered impeachment to be a “dirty word” that “should only be used in special occasions.” “This should never happen to a president again what’s happened here,” Trump said. “It’s an absolute disgrace to our country.”

Harvard law professor Noah Feldman used his opening statement to argue Trump’s actions, as described during last month’s hearings conducted by the House intelligence committee, clearly meet the constitutional standard for impeachment.

“President Trump’s conduct described in the testimony and evidence clearly constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under the Constitution,” Feldman said.

“According to the testimony and to the publicly released memorandum of the July 25, 2019, telephone call between the two presidents, President Trump abused his office by soliciting the president of Ukraine to investigate his political rivals in order to gain personal political advantage, including in the 2020 presidential election. This act on its own qualifies as an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”

Witnesses sworn in as Republican try to interrupt their opening statements

The witneeses for today’s impeachment hearing have been sworn in, and the first legal expert, Noah Feldman from Harvard law school, has started to deliver his opening statement.

But before Feldman could begin speaking, Republicans on the House judiciary committee once again tried to interrupt the hearing with a procedural motion.

Chairman Jerry Nadler replied that the motion would be recognized in between the witnesses’ opening statements, and Feldman continued with his prepared remarks.

Republicans' effort to force Schiff to testify fails

Thirty minutes into the House judiciary committee’s first public impeachment hearing, the panel’s Republican minority forced a vote on a motion to force Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, to testify.

A Democratic member of the panel responded by proposing to table (or kill) the motion, which was approved by the committee along party lines.

Collins calls impeachment inquiry a 'simple railroad job'

Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House judiciary committee, closed his opening statement by condemning the impeachment inquiry as a “simple railroad job” against the president.

The Georgia Republican claimed the impeachment inquiry began with “tears in Brooklyn,” referring to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss to Trump.

Collins closed out by mildly mocking the witnesses at today’s hearing. “We’ve got law professors here,” Collins said. “What a start to a party.”

Doug Collins, the ranking member of the House judiciary committee, used his opening statement to reiterate some of the most consistent talking points from the president’s allies.

Collins claimed Democrats were only pursuing the impeachment inquiry because they were fearful of Trump’s reelection prospects and had been hellbent on getting the president out of office since he was inaugurated.

“If you want to know what is really driving this: it’s called the clock and the calendar,” Collins said. “They want to do it before the end of the year.”

The Georgia Republican also joked that today’s hearing, featuring testimony from legal experts on the constitutional standard for impeachment, would show Americans “why most people don’t go to law school.”

Chairman Jerry Nadler closed his opening statement by pushing back against some Republicans’ argument that Democrats should postpone the impeachment investigation, given that the 2020 election is less than a year away.

“We cannot wait for the election to address the present crisis,” Nadler said at the start of his panel’s first public impeachment hearing. “The integrity of that election is one of the very things at stake.”

Chairman Jerry Nadler pointed to the report from special counsel Robert Mueller, which outlines Trump’s obstruction of his investigation, to argue there is “precedent for recommending impeachment here.”

“Ladies and gentlemen, the storm in which we find ourselves today was set in motion by President Trump,” Nadler said in his opening statement. “I do not wish this moment on the country. But we have each taken an oath to protect the Constitution, and the facts before us are clear.”

Chairman Jerry Nadler used his opening statement to outline the accusations against Trump and criticize the president for not cooperating with the impeachment inquiry.

Nadler noted the two other modern presidents who have faced impeachment -- Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton -- turned over considerable evidence to congressional investigators. “President Trump, by contrast, has refused to produce a single document and directed every witness not to testify,” Nadler said.

Chairman Jerry Nadler could not even begin his opening statement before he was interrupted twice by Republican members of the House judiciary committee raising procedural questions. Viewers of the hearing can expect a lot of those motions from the minority today.

House judiciary committee's first impeachment hearing begins

Jerry Nadler, the chairman of the House judiciary committee, has gaveled in his panel’s first public hearing in the impeachment inquiry -- which will feature testimony from legal experts on the constitutional standard for impeaching a president.

The first public impeachment hearing conducted by the House judiciary committee is set to get underway in just a few minutes, but House Democrats are simultaneously meeting to discuss next steps in the inquiry.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi enforced unusually strict rules for members entering the meeting, not even allowing staffers to attend.

Trump’s abrupt decision to cancel his press conference at the end of the Nato summit prompted surprise and frustration from the reporters gathered in London to pose questions to the president.

Meanwhile, over on Capitol Hill, Republicans on the House judiciary committee are following the example of their intelligence committee counterparts by displaying signs disparaging the impeachment inquiry.

Trump cancels press conference after being apparently mocked for comments to reporters

Trump has just announced that he will depart the Nato summit in London today without holding his press conference, which was scheduled to take place at 10:30 a.m. ET.

While taking questions from reporters this morning, Trump had suggested he may cancel the scheduled press conference, but more details were not immediately available from the White House.

Now the president has confrmed he will not be holding the press conference after talking to reporters for more than two hours yesterday. But the abrupt decision may have less to do with his lengthy comments yesterday and more so to do with his fellow foreign leaders appearing to mock him yesterday for his rambling press conferences.

Updated

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson denied that he, French President Emmanuel Macron and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau were mocking Trump yesterday when they were caught on a hot mic joking about someone’s late appearance at an event due to a long press conference.

Follow the Guardian’s UK politics live blog for more updates from Jonhson’s press conference at the Nato summit.

Today’s impeachment hearing conducted by the House judiciary committee will feature testimony from four law professors -- Noah Feldman from Harvard University, Michael Gerhardt from the University of North Carolina, Pamela S. Karlan from Stanford University and Jonathan Turley from George Washington University.

The opening statements from the four witnesses were released this morning, and they feature some drastically varying interpretations of the president’s actions, as described during last month’s hearings conducted by the House intelligence committee.

“If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeachment process has lost all meaning, and, along with that, our Constitution’s carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil,” Gerhardt intends to say. “No one, not even the president, is beyond the reach of our Constitution and our laws.”

But Turley, the only witnesses called by Republicans on the House judiciary committee, argues in his opening statement that a Trump impeachment could set a dangerous precedent.

“I get it. You are mad. The President is mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My Republican friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog is mad . . . and Luna is a golden doodle and they are never mad,” Turley intends to say. “We are all mad and where has it taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?”

Trump calls Trudeau 'two-faced' after hot mic comments

As the House judiciary committee prepares to hold its first public impeachment hearing, Trump continues to insult world leaders at the Nato summit in London.

The US president called Justin Trudeau “two-faced” after the Canadian prime minister was caught on video apparently mocking Trump for his long press conferences. (Trump spoke to reporters for more than two hours yesterday between three different appearances.)

“Well, he’s two-faced,” Trump said when asked about the comments by a reporter. But he quickly added, “And with Trudeau, he’s a nice guy. I find him to be a nice guy, but the truth is, I called him out on the fact that he’s not paying 2%, and I guess he’s not very happy about it.” During his press conference with Trudeau yesterday, Trump urged Canada to contribute more toward Nato defense spending.

In the original video, Trudeau is heard joking to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and French President Emmanuel Macron, “He was late because he takes a 40-minute press conference off the top.” Trudeau doesn’t explicitly say Trump’s name, but it seemed to be a clear reference to the US president, given his multiple press conferences yesterday.

House judiciary committee to hold its first public impeachment hearing

Good morning, live blog readers!

We are about an hour away from the next public hearing in the impeachment inquiry, the first to be held by the House judiciary committee. The hearing will feature testimony from a panel of legal experts on the constitutional standard for impeaching a president.

There is almost 0% chance of any major bombshells coming out of this hearing, unlike last month’s hearings conducted by the House intelligence committee. These witnesses will not be providing new details about the Ukraine controversy, instead offering insight into whether the president’s actions (as described at last month’s hearings) would justify impeachment.

But according to the opening statements released this morning, the witnesses do not intend to hold back. “The president’s serious misconduct, including bribery, soliciting a personal favor from a foreign leader in exchange for his exercise of power, and obstructing justice and Congress are worse than the misconduct of any prior president, including what previous presidents who faced impeachment have done or been accused of doing,” Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, intends to say.

However, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University who was called to testify by House Republicans, will argue the allegations against Trump do not meet the Founders’ standard for impeachment and could set a dangerous precedent for the future.

These clashing viewpoints -- combined with the combative messaging strategy being pursued by the president’s allies -- could add some fireworks to this morning’s technical legal debate.

Elizabeth Warrentalks to reporters during a press gaggle after a campaign event in Iowa.
Elizabeth Warrentalks to reporters during a press gaggle after a campaign event in Iowa. Photograph: Jack Kurtz/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock

Here’s what else the blog is keeping an eye on:

  • Trump is still at the Nato summit in London and is scheduled to hold a news conference at 10:30 a.m. ET.
  • The Atlantic Council think tank will hold a discussion on “US Strategic Interests in Ukraine” with lawmakers at the Capitol.
  • Elizabeth Warren will appear on “The Tonight Show” with Jimmy Fallon.

The blog will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Discover Every Louis Vuitton Monogram Bag Dominating the Fall 2026 Fashion Show's Front Row
See every monogram celebrities carried.
Marie Claire
Marie Claire
A Hazmat Situation Unfolded At Disneyland, And Several Cast Members Were Affected
This wasn't a "2319."
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Does A$AP Rocky Know Ivanna Ortiz? Rihanna's Attempted Shooter Allegedly Had an Affair With Rapper
The alleged motive behind the shooting of Rihanna's home has just been released, and it involves allegations of cheating by A$AP Rocky.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Avengers: Secret Wars Rumor Will Please Longtime Spider-Man Fans (If It’s True)
Big changes may be ahead for the wall-crawler.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Gwen Stefani Addresses Her Christian Pivot After Promoting Controversial Anti-Abortion App
Critics pointed to a prayer asking God to guide women considering abortion, including pregnancies from non-consensual acts.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
One Move Kanye West’s Wife Bianca Censori Is (Allegedly) Considering If They Split
This would be a big decision.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play