Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Romney Speaks Ahead Of Impeachment Vote. Aired 2-2:30p ET
Aired February 05, 2020 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[14:00:00]
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Live pictures from the Senate floor where lawmakers are expected to acquit President Trump on those two Articles of Impeachment: Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. That happens a little later today.
But before that happens, some closely watched senators are revealing how they will vote and among them, Democrat Doug Jones of Alabama who said that he reluctantly concluded there is enough evidence to convict Trump.
And any moment now, Senator Mitt Romney is expected to announce his decision, Utah Republican sided with Democrats on the issue of having witnesses testify during the trial. So as soon as we see him, we'll take him live.
But as all of that unfolds, the Democrats vying to oust Trump through the ballot box are trying to move on in the wake of the Iowa Caucuses debacle.
And just to be clear, we still don't know the winner almost two days later, but with 71 percent of the results in, former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg is maintaining his delegate lead and CNN's senior political writer and analyst Harry Enten is with me and so let's begin with the latest of what you have in Iowa and then pushing forward to New Hampshire how this might affect that?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN POLITICS SENIOR WRITER AND ANALYST: Yes, exactly right, Brooke. So I think this is rather important. You know, we have all these different counts going on in Iowa, a first vote, a final vote, and then the all-important statewide delegate equivalence, because that is how we are going to project the winner eventually.
And we see that Pete Buttigieg is up there, 27 percent to Bernie Sanders's 25 percent. Look, Joe Biden, though, across the board came fourth on all of these different measures, and I think that's just so important that Pete Buttigieg is gaining as you go along.
He gained on realignment. He gained going to statewide delegate equivalents. He gained the system very well in Iowa, and Joe Biden really, really struggled for a front runner.
BALDWIN: Let's talk about Joe Biden.
ENTEN: Yes. BALDWIN: Because I mean, all intents and purposes, he had been doing
well, going into Iowa, spent a lot of time in Iowa when some of these senators have been back in Washington through this whole impeachment process.
I'm just curious what you're hearing because I was reading about, you know, quotes from donors saying this may cool people off moving forward. Obviously not what the Biden team would want to see, what say you?
ENTEN: Yes, I would say I am very worried if I am in the Joe Biden team, and one of the big reasons I'm so worried is because obviously the next contest is New Hampshire.
BALDWIN: Yes.
ENTEN: And what we know, historically speaking, you know, in New Hampshire right now, if you look at my average of polls, Biden's in second place at 18 percent, so he's not too far behind Bernie Sanders.
But that doesn't take into account the potential bounce that you get out of Iowa, or the deflation in the numbers, and I have these odds that I've been working on that essentially --
BALDWIN: Yes, one second, Harry. I think we're going to go to Senator Mitt Romney.
SEN. MITT ROMNEY (R-UT): ... and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both Houses of our Congress these many days.
We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it. We have arrived at different judgments, but I hope we respect each other's good faith.
The allegations made in the Articles of Impeachment, are very serious. As a senator juror, I swore an oath before God to exercise impartial justice.
I am profoundly religious. My faith is at the heart of who I am. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential.
I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the President, the leader of my own party, would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced. I was not wrong.
The House Managers presented evidence supporting their case and the White House Counsel disputed that case. In addition, the President's team presented three defenses.
First, that there could be no impeachment without a statutory crime. Second, the Bidens' conduct justified the President's actions. And third, that the judgment of the President's actions should be left to the voters. Let me first address those three defenses. The historic meaning of the
words high crimes and misdemeanors. the writings of the founders and my own reasoned judgment convinced me that a President can indeed commit acts against the public trust, that are so egregious that while they are not statutory crimes, they would demand removal from office.
To maintain that the lack of a codified and comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a President might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove such a President defies reason.
The President's counsel also notes that Vice President Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian Prosecutor General. If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the Vice President should have recused himself.
While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong.
With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father's name is unsavory. But also not a crime.
Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the President's counsel that a crime had been committed, the President's insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit.
[14:05:24]
ROMNEY: There's no question in my mind that were their names, not Biden, the President would never have done what he did.
The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters.
While that logic is appealing to our Democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution's requirement that the Senate, not the voters try the President.
Hamilton explained that the founders' decision to invest senators with his obligation rather than leave it to the voters was intended to minimize to the extent possible, the partisan sentiments of the public at large.
So the verdict is ours to render under our Constitution that people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfill our duty.
The great question the Constitution task senators to answer is whether the President committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor.
Yes, he did.
The President asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival. The President withheld vital military funds from that government to press it to do so. The President delayed funds for an American ally at war with Russian invaders. The President's purpose was personal and political.
Accordingly, the President is guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust.
What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security and our fundamental values.
Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one's oath of office that I can imagine.
In the last several weeks, I've received numerous calls and texts, many demanded in their words that I stand with the team. I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind.
You see, I support a great deal of what the President has done. I voted with him 80 percent of the time.
But my promise before God to apply impartial justice require that I put my personal feelings and political biases aside.
Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me, for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history's rebuke and the censure of my own conscience.
I'm aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters, I will be vehemently denounced.
I'm sure to hear abuse from the President and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe that I would consent to these consequences, other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before God demanded of me?
I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton, not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he might say could raise reasonable doubt, and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.
Like each member of this deliberative body, I love our country. I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence.
I'm convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character.
As it is with each senator, my vote is an active conviction. We've come to different conclusions, fellow senators, but I trust we've all followed the dictates of our conscience.
I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the President from office. The results of this Senate court will in fact be appealed to a higher court, the judgment of the American people. Voters will make the final decision, just as the President's lawyers have implored.
My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate. But irrespective of these things, with my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability, believing that my country expected it of me.
I will only be one name among many, no more no less to future generations of Americans who will look at the record of this trial, they will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the President did was wrong -- grievously wrong.
[14:10:24]
ROMNEY: We are all footnotes at best in the annals of history, but in the most powerful nation on Earth, the nation conceived in liberty and justice that distinction is enough for any citizen.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
BALDWIN: Wow. That was extraordinary. That was a moment we haven't seen very often from a member of the U.S. government. That was pure honesty and emotion from Mitt Romney there talking about how he would be in the minority voting to convict on both of these charges, presumably with regard to the President.
And john Avalon and I have been sitting here, our senior political analyst, and I mean, the words he used, he said it was the most difficult decision I have ever faced. He talked about his faith being at the heart of who I am. Talked about the phone calls clearly he received from Republicans, stand with the team.
But he put politics aside.
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: That was a true profile encouraged speech we just heard. That was the sound of a man who had wrestled with his conscience, who tried to think bigger than partisan politics, and ultimately kept faith with his oath, his promise to God, as he said, to do impartial justice.
And what a contrast between what we've just heard from Mitt Romney doing the difficult thing, doing what he felt was the right thing, even though the unpopular thing among his base and among his political party, and you saw the logic.
You saw the logic rooted in his understanding of the Constitution, the founding fathers. His dismantling of the arguments offered up by the President's defense, saying this was a grievous abuse of public trust.
The only reason the President singled out the Biden's was political purposes.
BALDWIN: Yes.
AVLON: This was a brave, courageous speech. He will catch hell from the right as he predicted, but that will be looked on well in the eyes of history.
BALDWIN: I want to ask you about that, but I just want to underline your point. That was one of the lines I wrote down. He said, no question, had their names not been Biden, that the President of the United States never would have done what he did.
What's Mitt Romney's future? How will the Republicans respond?
AVLIN: As he said, he has been getting phone calls pressuring him. He expects to be denounced by the President, by his supporters and by many colleagues.
But he said he is trying to keep faith with his faith with a higher power and with the eyes of history, which will ultimately judge his character in this crucial moment.
You see already that many of his Republican allies even those who may agree with him privately have been afraid to speak out publicly. Clearly, they'll say something like, well, it was improper, but not impeachable. They will not vote to remove the President.
But he said he had an impartial oath, and as many Republican senators are going to be saying, let's investigate the Bidens. Let's carry forward the President's political agenda in the name of retribution.
Mitt Romney said very clearly with conscience and courage of his convictions, I will not be part of that because I do not believe it is honest. I do not believe it is right. I do not believe it is true.
And those words, one man with courage can make a majority. It's not going to happen in the Senate today. But in the pure passion and moral clarity from which he spoke, Mitt Romney will gain a lot more supporters he didn't know over there, as well as the detractors he fully expects beginning with the audience of one in the Oval Office.
BALDWIN: I want to stay on this because it is so significant and as we parse through some of these lines, another line that struck me, he said he was worried not voting, his conscience would, "expose my character to history's rebuke."
AVLON: That is the standard that senators are supposed to use. The founding fathers were very clear about why the Senate was supposed to hear impeachment trials because they would have the independence and the integrity to be beyond partisan political considerations. We haven't seen a lot of that.
It's a position that is supposed to take the eyes of history as well as the oath to God seriously. We frankly haven't seen a lot of that. We've seen a lot of tortured explanations for why it may not have been a perfect call, but they weren't going to even vote for witnesses.
Remember, Romney was one of two Republicans to even vote for witnesses. And he said, look, he hoped that John Bolton would be able to answer some of those questions, but he didn't.
BALDWIN: How about just juxtaposing this with someone like Senator Susan Collins, who said he learned his lesson?
I mean, by the way, we know that this President still believes he did nothing wrong. AVLON: After Susan Collins offered up that sort of triumph of hope
over experience statement, the President made it very clear that he did not learn a lesson. He believes he did nothing wrong. He will remain defiant.
And therefore, this decision by the Senate is likely to empower his worst instincts, not tamper them down.
Susan Collins also today said that she would not even vote for censure, which is being offered up by Joe Manchin and others as a way for senators who believe that the binary choice between removal and acquittal is too much.
Here's an opportunity to say what the President did was wrong, to say clearly that what the President did is not right to avoid creating a precedent for future Presidents.
[14:15:19]
AVLON: And Susan Collins, I think to her eternal discredit said she wouldn't even back that. Mitt Romney took a decisive step forward. That was a profile in courage in the classic JFK sense, standing up for what you believe is right, against the pressures of your party.
BALDWIN: John Avlon. Thank you for sitting with me as we watched that together.
And we're going to take a quick break. We're going to continue the special coverage of course, again, ahead of this huge vote in the U.S. Senate this afternoon. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:20:03]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROMNEY: There's no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the President would never have done what he did.
The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters.
While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution's requirement that the Senate, not the voters try the President.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: And that was Senator Mitt Romney just moments ago. Here's what he is doing. He plans to convict the President on abuse of power and acquit him on obstruction of Congress.
So just a reminder that in about 90 minutes, the Senate is expected to acquit President Trump in this impeachment trial.
Let's go straight to Manu Raju who is up on Capitol Hill. And Manu, what an incredible moment from Senator Romney.
MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and he is going to be the only Republican to break ranks here on either chamber. On the House side, the Republicans were united against impeaching the President, on the Senate side, Republicans are united against convicting the President.
But except for one senator, Mitt Romney, breaking ranks on whether to convict the President on abuse of power. He made it clear that he said that this was a decision that he looked to his faith in God to.
He choked up for several seconds on the Senate floor as he discussed his faith in God is it was the hardest decision that he's made in his career.
He said he discussed and looked at all the evidence, and he said he believed the President abused his power and believes he should be removed from office.
Now, he is indicating that he will vote to acquit the President on the second Article of Impeachment that is obstruction of Congress, but he believes what he heard from the House Managers, the President used his office to push a foreign power to investigate a political rival including leveraging military aid that had been approved by Congress, in order to get that investigation announced -- that to him was enough to say that the President should be removed from office.
It was a dramatic break from the rest of his party. He had been looked at as one of four Republicans who could potentially break ranks. The other three, including Senator Lisa Murkowski, Senator Susan Collins and Lamar Alexander, all criticize the President's conduct, but has said that they would vote to acquit the President because that did not rise that level of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Now, as we head into that 4:00 p.m. Eastern vote, Brooke, we'll have to see if any Democrats break ranks.
The only two remaining that we are watching is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. He is saying that he will not make his decision known until he actually votes in that four o'clock hour.
Also Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, a freshman Democratic senator who won in Arizona last year, what will she do -- in 2018 -- what will she do when she goes to the floor? She is refusing to say. Her office is not indicating.
Those are the only two members who could break ranks on the Democratic side, but the Democrats are undoubtedly going to be pleased by this news to say that at least they can probably point to what they'll say is that bipartisan conviction vote on abuse of power as the White House and Senate Republicans were hoping to keep it along party lines, and hoping instead, it will be a bipartisan acquittal vote something that they could use as we get into the run up into the presidential campaign year -- Brooke.
BALDWIN: Again, that vote, four o'clock, Eastern, Manu. Thank you. Senator Romney just did an interview with Fox News. Here's a piece of
that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST: Do you believe that Donald Trump is unfit to serve as President and should be removed from office?
ROMNEY: I do believe that he should be removed from office. That's the vote that I will take in just a short while.
WALLACE: I want to go through that --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: So there you have it. John Avlon is still with me that he believes that President Trump should be removed from office -- from a Republican.
AVLON: That's what it means I'm going to vote to convict rather than to acquit. And notably, he specifies that he has voted to convict on abuse of power.
He is going to acquit on the second charge which is obstruction of Congress, offering a very reasoned argument basically saying that the reason he doesn't believe that to be the case is that Democrats didn't do enough to work through the court system after the initial blocks were put in place by the Trump administration.
But that is a strong statement, and he fully expects the President and his supporters to go to war with him. And you get a sense of why so many of his colleagues that may privately agree with what Mitt Romney just said, have been afraid to say so in public.
They have been afraid to say so because of the attacks that they will come under from the President, from the base, the impact on their careers, even after politics.
Mitt Romney just won a six-year term. He does not have an immediate political consequence to face, but he made it clear that logic and faith and history guided his decisions, and that's what they're supposed to do in a Senate trial.
BALDWIN: What do you think just quickly listening to Manu, too, because what we don't know about is Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, looking ahead on the Democratic side?
AVLON: Look, I think it's preposterous to say with any sort of the straight face that you're going to not going to make up your mind until four o'clock.
All the evidence is out there. The evidence is quite clear. West Virginia is a state in which Donald Trump is tremendously popular, so is Joe Manchin.
[14:25:12]
AVLON: He offered up a censure alternative, which frankly should be something that can pass with a simple majority and should be something that many of these Republicans could support.
Possibly, he will split his vote as Mitt Romney just did. Mitt Romney offering a way to wrestle with these conflicting emotions, convict on abuse of power, acquit on obstruction of Congress.
But we'll see. They're going to be under pressure from both sides. They're going to be listening to their constituencies, but even more so, they should listen to their conscience and the facts.
BALDWIN: Thank you again. By the way, as we've been talking, we just got new Iowa caucus results in, so let's talk about that. Standby.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:30:00]
