Senator Charles Mathias. Jr., chairman of the impeachment trial committee, referred Jud ·e Claiborne’s motion to the full Senate, it.

36 KB – 195 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICEWASHINGTON : 1 39Œ528 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ” ! 116THCONGRESS 2d Session DOCUMENT 2020 116Œ95 IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT DONALD JOHN TRUMP THE EVIDENTIARY RECORD PURSUANT TO H. RES. 798 VOLUME XI, PART 5 Historic Materials Printed at the direction of Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House of Representatives, pursuant to H. Res. 798, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2020) JANUARY23, 2020.ŠOrdered to be printed VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:12 Jan 24, 2020Jkt 039528PO 00000Frm 00003Fmt 5012Sfmt 5012E:\HR\OC\HD095P27.XXXHD095P27 E:\Seals\Congress.#13lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS

PAGE – 2 ============
(II) COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chairman ZOE LOFGREN, California SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas STEVE COHEN, Tennessee HENRY C. ‚‚HANK™™ JOHNSON, JR., Georgia THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida KAREN BASS, California CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island ERIC SWALWELL, California TED LIEU, California JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida J. LUIS CORREA, California MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas JOE NEGUSE, Colorado LUCY MCBATH, Georgia GREG STANTON, Arizona MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas DOUG COLLINS, Georgia, Ranking Member F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., Wisconsin STEVE CHABOT, Ohio LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas JIM JORDAN, Ohio KEN BUCK, Colorado JOHN RATCLIFFE, Texas MARTHA ROBY, Alabama MATT GAETZ, Florida MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana ANDY BIGGS, Arizona TOM MCCLINTOCK, California DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania BEN CLINE, Virginia KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida PERRYAPELBAUM, Majority Staff Director & Chief Counsel BRENDANBELAIR, Minority Staff Director VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:12 Jan 24, 2020Jkt 039528PO 00000Frm 00004Fmt 5904Sfmt 5904E:\HR\OC\HD095P27.XXXHD095P27 lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS

PAGE – 3 ============
(III) MAJORITYSTAFF AMYRUTKIN, Chief of Staff PERRYAPELBAUM, Staff Director and Chief Counsel JOHNDOTY, Senior Advisor AARONHILLER, Deputy Chief Counsel and Chief Oversight Counsel BARRYBERKE, Special Counsel NORMANEISEN, Special Counsel ARYAHARIHARAN, Deputy Chief Oversight Counsel MADELINESTRASSER, Chief Clerk PRIYANKAMARA, Professional Staff WILLIAMS. EMMONS, Professional Staff ANTHONYL. VALDEZ, Staff Assistant MINORITYSTAFF BRENDANBELAIR, Staff Director, Counsel BOBBYPARMITER, Deputy Staff Director, Chief Counsel ASHLEYCALLEN, Chief Oversight Counsel STEPHENCASTOR, Counsel DANNYJOHNSON, Oversight Counsel JAKEGREENBERG, Oversight Counsel PAULTAYLOR, Chief Counsel, Constitution Subcommittee DANIELFLORES, Counsel RYANBREITENBACH, Counsel JONFERRO, Parliamentarian, Counsel ERICABARKER, Deputy Parliamentarian ELLAYATES, Member Services Director ANDREAWOODARD, Professional Staff Member VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:12 Jan 24, 2020Jkt 039528PO 00000Frm 00005Fmt 7633Sfmt 5904E:\HR\OC\HD095P27.XXXHD095P27 lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS

PAGE – 4 ============

PAGE – 5 ============
COMMITTEE 0~ THE ,JCDICIAHY HENHY ,J HYDE, F ,JAMES :’:ENSENBH.EN’NER, JH. W1s(‘(m,in BIL!. MrCOLLl ‘.\1, Florida GEOHGE W GEKAS, Prnnsvlvonii, HOWARD COBLE, North C~rolrna LAMAH SMITH, Texas ELTON GALLEGLY, Califomia CHARLES T CANADY, Florida BOB JNGLIS, South Corolina BOB GOOIJLATTE, Virginia STEPHE’.’-1 E Bt:YF:R, Indiana ED BRYANT, Tt>n!ll’SS(‘(‘ STE\’E CHABOT, Ohio BOB BARR, Grorgia WILLIAM L. ,JENKINS, T,·nnP~s,,,, ASA HlJTClflNSON, Arknnsas EDWARD A PEASE. Indiana Cllft!STOPHER B. CANNON, t.Trnh ,JAMES E. ROGA:-.’, Cahforma LINDSEY 0. GRAHA.\1. South (\irolinn !\1ARY BONO, California (II) l!lmo1s, Chn1rma11 ,JOHN COS’YEHS, ,Jt(, Midugan BAH.1′.EY FRA!’iK, MHssadrnsd t., CIIARLES E SCHn’vlER :-;ew York HOWARD L. BERMAN, Cahforma RICK BOUCHER Virgima ,JERROLD ;-.;ADLER NPw York HOBERT C SCOTT, \1rg:nia !\1EL\’IN L WATT. Nortli C’an,!ma ZOE LOFGREN. Californin SHEILA ,JACKSON LEE, ‘fp;,rns MAXJNE WATEHS, California MARTIN T MEEHAN. Massnd1us Łtt., WILLIAM D DELA!!l:!’\T, !\fossadrnsetts ROBERT \\’EXLER Florida STEVEN R ROTHMAN. NPW ,JtŁN·V THOMAS BARRETT, \\’ts,on,;rn .

PAGE – 6 ============
MA.JOmTY STAFF T!ioMAS E Mrni:s;f:Y, SR., Clw:f of Staff-OtŁnera/ Counsel JoN W. Dt’llAS, Deputy Cknt?ra/ Cowm:1-Staff Director l>!ANA L. Scl!Anrr, Deputy Stair Director-Chief Counsel 0A1′!EL M. FHr:f:MAI,’, Parlianwntarian-Co1msel PAt’L ,J. McNt’LTY, DinŁctor of Comm11nications-Chu:f Counsel Jos1Ł:l’H H. Grni,;o:–., Chwf Counsel RlcK FrLK!NS, Counsel SHARH: M. FREE~IAS, Coun.,el Pr:TER J. Li:VI.NSON, Co1msd JoH:s F. MAVTZ, IV, Counsel Wll.LIAM E. Moscm:LI.A, Co1mscl STEPHEN P1:s;KOS, Counsel GEoma: M. F1s11,11.:-,., Clue( Cuunsl’i MIH fl GLŁ\7.JEH, Chief Counsel JoH:–. !!. LADD, Cl11ef C<>11ns,·I MY\ION!l V. S~llf:TA’.;KA, Clue( Counsel Lr\l ‘H.A A.,:–. BAXTER. Coun.sei DA:S:IEL ,J. Bl1,ns,./ \’1:sn: GARLUCK, Cu1m.,../ ,J,\~ffs W. l·L\Hl’Ut, Cu1111s,·l Sn,A:s ,h:NSr::s;-C’o.\’KLIN,! Dr:,nv, K LAMA.N, C(}tmsrl BLl\l:S-E S. :\1ERIUTT, Counsel N1co1,r: R NAso:s, Cuwis,·I Gu::-,;;-; R. SCH:ll!TT, Cuunsel JI\! Y. WJLllN, Co1ws,-/ DAvm P. Snl!f’!’EW,, Clue{ lricc.,t1;ia/1l’e Cnunsel St’SA:S-Bo:;ART, lnh’sti;!a/11Łe Counsel ,Jom,; C. KocoRAS, Cotmsel Bi-:nu: S. L1rn1A.\:S-, ln1·est11;ator C’HA!U.t:S F M,\RiSo. C”11nsd ,)nT!:HY ,) J’..\Vl.F”IW, hll’<'.,t11;(i/i:·e Cnun.,,·i T'Ho\!As M Sc HI fŁl'EHS, In 1 cst1,1.:at11',· ( 'c,u11,,Ł/ AU\Fft Pr:n:H ,J. WAl’KS, f111·c.,t11,;atur DIAN.~ L. \\’Or.NH Ki, fntTSltgat,,r .MINORITY ST,\FF ,Jt’LJAS El’STEIN. Jfrnor1t_1Ł PE!rnY l l. An:LHAl ‘\!, .\fwontv General Counsel · DAVlD G. LAC!!\IA.’\’, Counw·l C’tXflllA A. R. MAHTIN, Cums,Ł/ STEP!!A.’\’rE J. PETEf,S, Co1msl’i SA\IARA T. RYlJr:H, Co1msd BRIAN P. WOOLFOLK, Counsel Cl11cf Counsel ::’,ta(( Director AHHE D. LUWELL, .\1111or1ty Chu'( !111Ł,·stli?atll’c C.iunsel SA\ll’ACK P. GA!H,, l1w,:sti1?atin· Cowisd Sn;PH!·::s: F. H,:101, ln1·est1,:ati1Łe Counsel DrnoRAH L. RIIOllE, lrll’CS(l/o{Gtlt’C C{l/lfl.Sl’i K~:\’I.’\’ M. S!:lll’SO\’, lm·csti,:at11 c Cuunsci LIS W. W1,:!IL, fl!tŁest11port writtPn rn rn’i·.1 by the impeachment inquiry staff of the Houst’ Committl’e on thl’ ,Judici-ary .. . .. .. :.!S (V)

PAGE – 9 ============
H>REWOIW l Jtll rk,twt.l tn make,!\ ai/;1bk d ,t,:f! rc·r,1r1 Uf’dJllfliC th,· I q”‘.j ln;p,·.,, “”'””‘ I ,1,;:;1~’. >t;if! rep,,rt rq!,udrng the ltŁf1’li!Utl<>nal gr,,und, i,,r p1,S1,k1:11;,1 irnpc.h.111:1v1,1 l h,, 1,·p,,1! L, ricen,·J h> the ,tart nt rht: C,1nun1rtt’t’ t,,r th,: Lh<' ,,/ t:·,· (, ,,nirnHt,·~ Ł.Ł:, 11,,Ł .i.1,li, ,,tr'-It,~ unJn,tuPJ that th,· 11n" and c,,ndu>iom ,,,m.un,·,l 111 111,· 1q1,,n .,re-¼l,1!! , ,c-, Ł .,,,,! Jp nPt 11,·,,:,~anh retkct t!w,e ,,( th<.' t ·umrn11te, ,,r ,tnl ,,t 11, m,·mkr, PAGE - 10 ============ 2 INTRODUCTION The United State& Constitution provides that ''[t]he President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of. son, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." 1 In 1974, the House of Representatives directed the Judiciary Committee to investigate whether sufficient grounds existed for the House to impeach President Richard Nixon. The impeachment quiry staff prepared a memorandum on the constitutional grounds for presidential impeachment. The staff memorandum, entitled Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment. reported on "the history, purpose and meaning of the constitutional phrase, 'Treason, Bribery. or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."' z Then ,Judiciary Committe1: Chairman Peter Rodino, Jr., stated in a foreword that "the views and conclusions contained in the report a,':' staff views and do not necessarilv reflect those of tlw committee or any of its members." 3 In any event. over the ensuing years the memorandum has become one of the leading and most cited sources as to the grounds for impeachment. In 1998, the Committee has again bN'n directed to investigate wlwther sufficient grounds exist for the Bouse to impeach a dent. On September 11. the House of RPpresEŁntati\'es passed I-I.Res. 525, which provided that the Committee review the nication received on Septernber 9 from Independent Counsel neth Starr in which he transmitted his determination that tial and credible information r1:ceived by his office might constitute grounds for an impeachment of President Clinton, and dt>termine whether sufficient grounds did in fact exist to recommend to the House that an impeachment inquiry be commenced. ·1 After ing the evidence submitted, the Committee \’Oted to recommend that an impeachment inquiry be commenced and reported a tion to the House authorizing an inquiry. On October 8, the House passed H.Res. 581, which directed the Committee to conduct such an inquiry to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House to exercise its constitutional power t, impeach President Clinton. The Chairman of the Committee has asked the impeachment quiry staff to update the 1974 report for the benefit of the tee’s members. The present memorandum was written for that pose and is designed to be read in conjunction with the 197 4 repJrt 1which is attached as an appendixl. 1 US. Const. art. II, s4. “The House of Represc>ntntives shall have the sole Power of peachment.” Id. at art. ], s2, cl. 5. “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all In,pead1-ments.” Id. at art. I, § :,, cl. 6. “,Judgment in Case’s of lmpeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honr r, Trust or Profit under the l:nited St.ates.” Id. at art. I, §3, cl. 7. 2 Staff of House Comm. on tlie Judiciary, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess., Constitutional Gr mnds for Presidential Impeachment 3 {Comm. Print 1974J(hereinufter cited as “1974 Staff Report”), 3 Id. at iii. 4The Ethics in Government. Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-521, 92 Stat. 1824 (codifie,, as ed at 28 U.S.C. §§591–99 (1994 & Supp. 1996\\ provides that an independent coumel “shall vise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible information whir.h such pendent counsel receives, in currying out the independent counsel’s responsibiliti ~s under this chapter, that may constitute grounds for an impeachment.” 28 U.S.C. §595fc\ (19’J4l. See ral from Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity with the Requir,:ments of ti.tie 28, United States Code, Section 595(c), H.R. Doc. No. 105-310, 105th Cong., 2d S, ss. { 1998).

PAGE – 11 ============
a This memorandum takes int-o account the four impeachment quiries and three convictions that have taken place since the 1974 report was written. The 197 4 report ,;tated that the “American perience with impeachment [is among thel best available sources for developing an understandin~ of the functwn of impeachment and the circumstances in which it may become appropriate in tion to the presidency.” 5 The present memorandum relies on this insight and will utilize the impeachmc,nt proceedings of tlw last quarter century to provide guidance to the members of this mittee in the diflicult duties they must perform As with the 1974 report, this memorandum·s views and sions are those of the staff and do not rwcessarih-reflect those of the Committee or any of its members, · IMPEACHME;’;’T “STA .. “-JDARDS” The goal of this memorandum is not to define which nffenst;s in the abstract render a federal official imiwachablt’.’. The 1974 report recognized why such an etToti would be ill-conceived Delicate issues of basic constitu\ional law are it1\'(1lved. Those isrnes cannot be deiined in d(‘tail in advance of full vestigation of the facts. The Supreme Court of tht’ l.”nited States does not reach out_ in the abstract, to rule or; th(Ł stitutionality of statutes or of conduct. Ca,-,e:-must he hmuµht and adjudicated on particular focts in knns of th(‘ tion. Similarly. the House does not engage in abstract. advisnry or hypothetical debates about the precise nature of cnnduct that calls for the exercise of its constitutional powers: rather, it must await full development of the facts and understanding of the events to which those facts relate . . [This memorandum] is intended to he a review of the precedents and available interpretive materials. seeking eral principles to guide the Committee. This memorandum offers no fixed standards for determining whether grounds for impeachment exist. The framers did not write a fixed standard. Instead they adopted from English tory a standard sufficiently general and flexible to meet future circumstances and events, the nature and character of which they could not foresee. 6 A commentator, Michael Gerhardt, writes in his recent book The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis, 7 that both Alexander Hamilton and Supreme Court tice Joseph Story, the document’s greatest nineteenth century terpreter, share this view. He finds that: “[t]he implicit underŁ standing shared by Hamilton and Justice Story was that quent generations would have to define on a case-by-case basis the political crimes comprising impeachable offenses to replace the eral common law of crimes that never developed.” 8 He quotes Hamilton as stating that “the impeachment court could not be ‘tied down’ by strict rules ‘either in the delineation of the offense by the o 1974 Staff Report, supra note 2, at 4. 8 Id. at 2. 7 Michael J. Gerhardt, The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and HiMnrical Analysis (1996). 8 Id. at 106 (emphasis added),

36 KB – 195 Pages