[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 26 (Thursday, February 11, 2021)]
[Senate]
[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.

                          ____________________