6:29 p.m. The Senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 13, 2021.
6:23 p.m. ML Schumer announced there were no further questions. ML Schumer and RL McConnell spoke about USCP officer Eugene Goodman and asked unanimous consent to call up and pass S. 35 Awarding Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman the Congressional Gold Medal. The bill was passed by unanimous consent.
6:20 p.m. Mr. Castor, representing former President Trump responded. House Manager Raskin responded.
6:18 p.m. Senator Cornyn asked both sides: The House managers have argued that if the Senate cannot convict former officers, then the Constitution creates a January exception. Pursuant to which a President is free to act with impunity because he is not subject to impeachment, conviction, and removal, and/or disqualification. But isn’t a President subject to criminal prosecution after he leaves office for acts committed in office, even if those acts are committed in January?
6:12 p.m. House Manager Castro responded.
6:11 p.m. Senator Bennett asked: SINCE THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, THE GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE, THE VICE PRESIDENT, AND OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIALS, WITHSTOOD ENORMOUS PRESSURE TO UPHOLD THE LAWFUL ELECTION OF PRESIDENT BIDEN AND THE RULE OF LAW. WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THESE OFFICIALS HAD BOWED TO THE FORCE PRESIDENT TRUMP EXERTED OR THE MOB THAT ATTACKED THE CAPITOL?
6:10 p.m. Senator Leahy noted for all Counsel that all parties in the Chamber must refrain from using language that is not conducive to civil discourse.
6:06 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
6:04 p.m. Senator Rubio asked both sides: Voting to convict the former President would create a new precedent that a former official can be convicted and disqualified by the Senate. Therefore, is it not true that under this new precedent, a future house, facing partisan pressure to lock her up, could impeach a former Secretary of State and a future Senate be forced to put her on trial and potentially disqualify from any future office?
6:01 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
6:01 p.m. Senator Van Hollen asked the House Mangers: WOULD YOU PLEASE RESPOND TO THE ANSWER THAT WAS JUST GIVEN BY THE FORMER PRESIDENT’S COUNSEL.
5:56 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
5:55 p.m. Senator Marshall asked: THE HOUSE MANAGERS SINGLE ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT IS CENTERED ON THE ACCUSATION THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SINGULARLY INCITED A CROWD INTO A RIOT. DIDN’T THE HOUSE MANAGERS CONTRADICT THEIR OWN CHARGE BY OUTLINING THE PREMEDITATED NATURE AND PLANNING OF THIS EVENT AND BY ALSO SHOWING THE CROWD WAS GATHERED AT THE CAPITOL EVEN BEFORE THE SPEECH STARTED AND BARRIERS WERE PUSHED OVER SOME 20 MINUTES BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF TRUMP’s SPEECH?
5:51 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
5:50 p.m. Senator Blumenthal asked: FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS ATTORNEYS HAVE CITED THE BRANDENBERG V. OHIO CASE SAYING THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS TRUMP. DID IT HOLD PUBLIC OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE THROUGH THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS FOR THE INCITEMENT OF VIOLENCE?
5:43 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
5:43 p.m. Senator Sullivan asked: THE HOUSE MANAGER SAID YESTERDAY THAT DUE PROCESS IS DISCRETIONARY, MEANING THE HOUSE IS NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AND INDEED DID NOT PROVIDE IN THIS SNAP IMPEACHMENT ANY CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS TO A DEFENDANT IN THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR OUR CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER OF THIS NEW HOUSE PRECEDENT COMBINED WITH THE SENATE’S POWER TO DISQUALIFY FROM PUBLIC OFFICE A PRIVATE CITIZEN IN AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL?
5:40 p.m. House Manager Plaskett responded.
5:39 p.m. Senator Manchin asked: WOULD THE PRESIDENT BE MADE AWARE OF THE F.B.I. AND INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION OF A POSSIBLE ATTACK, AND WOULD THE PRESIDENT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT PREPARING TO PROTECT THE CAPITOL AND ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OF GOVERNMENT WITH NATIONAL GUARD AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AS HE DID WHEN HE APPEARED IN FRONT OF THE ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH?
5:36 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
5:35 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
5:34 p.m. Senator Cassidy asked: SENATOR TUBERVILLE REPORTS THAT HE SPOKE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP AT 2:15 P.M. HE TOLD THE PRESIDENT THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT HAD JUST EVACUATED. I PRESUMED IT WAS UNDERSTOOD AT THIS TIME THAT RIOTERS HAD ENTERED THE CAPITOL AND THREATENED THE SAFETY OF SENATORS AND THE VICE PRESIDENT. EVEN AFTER HEARING — EVEN AFTER HEARING OF THIS, AT 2:24 P.M. THAT MIKE PENCE LACKED COURAGE. HE DID NOT CALL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT BACKUP UNTIL THEN. THE TWEET AND LACK OF RESPONSE SUGGESTS PRESIDENT TRUMP DID NOT CARE THAT VICE PRESIDENT PENCE WAS ENDANGERED OR THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT WAS OVERWHELMED. DOES THIS SHOW THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS TOLERANT OF THE INTIMIDATION OF VICE PRESIDENT PENCE?
5:29 p.m. House Manager Castro responded.
5:28 p.m. Senator Murray asked the House Managers AT 6:01 P.M. EASTERN TIME ON JANUARY 6, PRESIDENT TRUMP TWEETED, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN WHEN A SACRED LANDSLIDE ELECTION VICTORY IS SO UNCEREMONIOUSLY AND VICIOUSLY STRIPPED AWAY FROM GREAT PATRIOTS WHO HAVE BEEN BADLY AND UNFAIRLY TREATED FOR SO LONG. ADDING, FOR RIOTERS TO GO HOME WITH LOVE AND IN PEACE. WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THIS TWEET TO PRESIDENT’S TRUMP GUILT?
5:21 p.m. House Manager Raskin and and Mr Van Der Veen responded.
5:20 p.m. Senator Cruz asked both sides OUT OF THE THEIR 16 HOURS, THE HOUSE MANAGERS DEVOTED ALL OF 15 MINUTES TO ARTICULATING A NEWLY CREATED LEGAL STANDARD FOR INCITEMENT. ONE WAS VIOLENCE FORESEEABLE? TWO, DID HE ENCOURAGE VIOLENCE? THREE, DID HE DO SO WILLFULLY? IS THIS NEW STANDARD DERIVED FROM THE CRIMINAL CODE OR ANY SUPREME COURT CASE?
5:16 p.m. House Managers Castro and Raskin responded.
5:15 p.m. Senator Merkley asked House Managers IF A PRESIDENT SPINS A BIG LIE TO ANGER AMERICANS AND STOKES THE FURRY BY REPEATING THE LIE AT EVENT AFTER EVENT AND INVITES VIOLENT GROUPS TO D.C. ON THE DAY AND HOUR NECESSARY TO INTERRUPT THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE COUNT AND DOES NOTHING TO STOP THOSE GROUPS FROM ADVANCING ON THE CAPITOL AND FAILS TO SUMMON THE NATIONAL GUARD TO PROTECT THE CAPITOL AND THEN EXPRESSES PLEASURE AND DELIGHT THAT THE CAPITOL WAS UNDER ATTACK, IS THE PRESIDENT INNOCENT OF INCITING AN INSURRECTION BECAUSE IN A SPEECH HE SAYS “BE PEACEFUL”.
5:12 p.m. Mr Van Der Veen and House Manager Plaskett responded.
5:10 p.m. Senator Johnson asked both sides THE HOUSE MANAGERS ASSERT THAT THE JANUARY 6 ATTACK WAS PREDICTABLE AND IT WAS FORESEEABLE. IF SO, WHY DID IT APPEAR THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT AT THE CAPITOL WERE CAUGHT OFFGUARD AND UNABLE TO PREVENT THE BREACH? WHY DID THE HOUSE SERGEANT AT ARMS REPORTEDLY TURN DOWN A REQUEST TO ACTIVATE THE NATIONAL GUARD STATING THAT HE WAS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE OPTICS?
5:03 p.m. House Manager Plaskett and Mr Van Der Veen responded.
5:00 p.m. Senator Sanders asked both sides THE HOUSE PROSECUTORS HAVE STATED OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS PERPETRATING A BIG LIE WHEN HE REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN FROM HIM AND THAT HE ACTUALLY WON THE ELECTION BY A LANDSLIDE. ARE THE PROSECUTORS RIGHT WHEN THEY CLAIM THAT TRUMP WAS TELLING A BIG LIE OR IN YOUR JUDGMENT, DID TRUMP ACTUALLY WIN THE ELECTION?
4:59 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:58 p.m. Senator Cramer asked a question: GIVEN THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE HOUSE MANAGER THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS TOLERATED ANTI-SEMITIC RHETORIC, HAS THERE BEEN A MORE PRO-ISRAEL PRESIDENT THAN PRESIDENT TRUMP?
4:55 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
4:54 p.m. Senator Warren asked a question: THE DEFENSE’S PRESENTATION HIGHLIGHTED THE FACT THAT DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RAISED OBJECTIONS TO COUNTING OF ELECTORAL VOTES IN PAST JOINT SESSIONS OF CONGRESS. TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WERE ANY OF THOSE DEMOCRATIC OBJECTIONS RAISED AFTER INSURRECTIONISTS STORMED THE CAPITOL IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE COUNTING OF ELECTORAL VOTES, AND AFTER THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYER ASKED SENATORS TO MAKE THESE OBJECTIONS SPECIFICALLY TO DELAY THE CERTIFICATION?
4:52 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
4:49 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:47 p.m. Senators Hawley and Cramer asked a question: IF THE SENATE’S POWER TO DISQUALIFY IS NOT DERIVATIVE OF THE POWER TO REMOVE A CONVICTED PRESIDENT FROM OFFICE, COULD THE SENATE DISQUALIFY A SITTING PRESIDENT BUT NOT REMOVE HIM OR HER?
4:42 p.m. House Manager Lieu responded.
4:41 p.m. Senator Padilla asked a question HAVING BEEN ON THE FLONT LINES OF — FRONT LINES OF COMBATING THE BIG LIE OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS AS CALIFORNIA’S CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER, IT IS CLEAR THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S PLOT TO UNDERMINE THE 2020 ELECTION WAS BUILT ON LIES AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES. HOW DID THIS PLOT TO UNCONSTITUTIONALLY KEEP PRESIDENT TRUMP IN POWER LEAD TO THE RADICALIZATION OF SO MANY OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S FOLLOWERS AND THE RESULTING ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL?
4:39 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:38 p.m. Senator Lee submitted a question on behalf of Senators Blackburn and Portman. Multiple state Constitutions enacted prior to 1787, namely the constitutions of Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Vermont specifically provided for the impeachment of a former officer. Given the framers of the US Constitution would’ve been aware of these provisions does their decision to omit language specifically authorizing the impeachment of former officials indicate that they did not intend for our Constitution to allow for the impeachment of former officials?
4:33 p.m. House Manager Plaskett responded.
4:31 p.m. Senators Klobuchar, Casey and Brown asked a question: In presenting your case, you relied on past precedence from impeachment trials such as William Belknap’s impeachment. After what you have presented in the course of this trial if we do not convict former president trump, what message will we be sending to future presidents and Congresses?
4:30 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:27 p.m. House Manager Castro responded.
4:26 p.m. Senators Romney and Collins asked a question: When President Trump sent the disparaging tweet at 2:24 p.m. regarding Vice President Pence, was he aware that the Vice President had been removed from the Senate by the Secret Service for his safety?
4:23 p.m. House Manager Plaskett responded.
4:21 p.m. Senators Markey and Duckworth asked a question: Exactly when did the President learn of the breach at the Capitol and what steps did he take to address the violence?
4:19 p.m. Mr. Castor, representing former President Trump responded.
4:18 p.m. Senators Hagerty and Scott (SC) asked a question: Given that more than 200 people have been charged for their conduct at the Capitol on January 6, that our justice system is working to hold the appropriate persons accountable and that President Trump is no longer in office isn’t this simply a political show trial that is designed to discredit President Trump and his policies and shame the 74 million Americans who voted for him?
4:13 p.m. House Manager Plaskett responded.
4:11 p.m. Senator Cortez Masto asked a question: On January 6, the anti-Semitic Proud Boys group that President Trump had told to stand by laid siege to the capitol alongside other rioters. Is there evidence that President Trump knew or should have known that his tolerance of anti-semitic speech, hate speech, combined with his own rhetoric, could incite the kind of violence we saw on January 6?
4:09 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:08 p.m. Senators Murkowski and Collins ask a question: Exactly when did President Trump learn of the breach of the capitol? What specific actions did he take to bring the rioting to an end? And when did he take them?
4:04 p.m. House Manager Raskin responded.
4:03 p.m. Senator Warnock submitted a question for the House Managers.
THE CLERK: IS IT TRUE OR FALSE THAT IN THE MONTHS LEADING UP TO JANUARY 6, DOZENS OF COURTS, INCLUDING STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS IN GEORGIA, REJECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN'S EFFORTS TO OVERTURN HIS LOSS TO JOE BIDEN?
4:03 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump responded.
4:02 p.m. Senator Graham, Cruz, Marshall and Cramer submitted a question for the former President’s Counsel.
THE CLERK: DOES A POLITICIAN RAISING BAIL FOR RIOTERS ENCOURAGE MORE RIOTING?
3:56 p.m. House Manager Castro responded.
3:56 p.m. Senators Schumer and Feinstein directed a question to the House Managers.
THE CLERK: ISN’T IT THE CASE THAT THE VIOLENT ATTACK AND SIEGE ON THE CAPITOL ON JANUARY 6 WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED IF NOT FOR THE CONDUCT OF PRESIDENT TRUMP?
3:54 p.m. The Senate returned from recess and will begin the question and answer part of the trial, as defined under S.Res.47, with up to 4 hours for questions and answers.
3:16 p.m. The formal defense of the 45th President of the United States has concluded. The Senate recessed subject to the call of the chair.
2:34 p.m. Mr. Castor, representing former President Trump spoke.
2:34 p.m. The Senate returned from recess.
1:53 p.m. The Senate recessed subject to the call of the Chair.
1:08 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump spoke.
12:26 p.m. Mr. Schoen, representing former President Trump spoke.
12:06 p.m. Mr. Van Der Veen, representing former President Trump spoke.
12:05 p.m. Former President Trump’s counsel began their presentation.
The Senate will convene at noon and will reconvene the impeachment trial of former President Trump.