Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Impeachment Trial Underway For Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas; House Republicans Sound Off On Speaker's Aid Plan; Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-FL) Discusses About His Take On Elimination Of First Article In The Senate. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired April 17, 2024 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:49]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: So the point of order fails, let's get straight to the floor of the Senate with the Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, let's listen.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): ... not debate but to listen both to the case against the accused and to his defense.

At this point in any trial in the country, the prosecution presents the evidence of the case, counsel for the defense does the same, and the jury remains silent as it listens. This is what our rules require of us as well. But the Senate has not had the opportunity to perform this duty. The Senate will not hear the House Managers present the details of their case against Secretary Mayorkas - that he willingly neglected the duties of his office and that he lied to Congress about the extent of that failure. Likewise, we will not hear the secretary's representatives present the vigorous defense to which he is entitled.

Our colleagues know that we are obligated to take these proceedings seriously. This is what our oath prescribes; it's what the history and precedent require, and I would urge each of our colleagues to consider that this is what the Framers actually envisioned. The power of impeachment is one of the most delicate balances our constitutional system strikes with a portion of the American people's sovereign electoral authority. It purchases a safeguard against malpractice, and it gives the Senate the power and the duty to decide. This process must not be abused; it must not be short-circuited. History will not judge this moment well. Therefore, I move to table the point of order and ask for the yeas and nays.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): Is there a sufficient second?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is.

MURRAY: There is a sufficient second, the clerk will call the roll.

CLERK: Ms. Baldwin?

SEN. TAMMY BALDWIN (D-WI): No.

CLERK: Mr. Barrasso?

SEN. JOHN BARRASSO (R-WY): Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Bennet? Mrs. Blackburn?

SEN. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R-TN): Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Bluementhal?

SANCHEZ: Another point of order, another vote on said point of order, this one coming from the Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Let's go to CNN's Manu Raju who's live on Capitol Hill for us. Point of order palooza, Manu.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. And to - for those who don't speak Senate basically what this means is that they're trying to kill the effort by Chuck Schumer to essentially end these impeachment trial all together, try to end - try to - Chuck Schumer as you'll recall earlier this, well, what is it, a couple hours ago now at this point, made a move to effectively end - throw out that first article of impeachment against Alejandro Mayorkas.

What Mitch McConnell just did here is essentially try to block Chuck Schumer's effort to kill that first article of impeachment against Alejandro Mayorkas. So Republicans would need a majority vote to essentially prevent Chuck Schumer's effort from moving ahead. They're not going to get a majority vote. They're expected to fail on this, like they did on the previous two points of order. Previous two efforts, one to try to actually have a debate in a closed session, Ted Cruz pushed for that. But another one to delay the proceedings altogether until the end of the month, John Kennedy of Louisiana tried to do that. That also failed along straight party lines.

I expect this one also to fail along straight party lines. It was interesting to see Mitch McConnell align himself with the conservatives in his own conference on this. This very much not been Mitch McConnell's, but for the front of and center of his agenda. He has allowed this to take place in the House. He's really not said a whole lot about the Mayorkas impeachment trial. He did say that he did support moving forward with a full-blown impeachment trial, but that was only when he was asked at a press conference a few weeks ago.

So this is very much not something that he has been on the front lines fighting for. That has been left to the likes of Mike Lee of Utah, Ted Cruz of Texas.

[15:05:01]

Though that wing of the Senate Republican conference has been pushing for this, not Mitch McConnell. But he made it clear there, he is aligned with them on this point of trying to move ahead with this impeachment trial as he criticized Democrats as he said "short- circuiting" this process here.

But despite McConnell's words and despite his call for a full-blown trial, he's not going to get it. This will fail. And then the question will be, will anyone else try to make their own points. But is McConnell the end of it, that's going to be the big question here once this vote wraps up.

And another miracle I must just say as a Senate watcher, a key observer of this place, they're voting pretty quickly. And they're doing that because they're sitting in the chair or their desks and they're voting. Typically, senators take an hour or longer for each vote. They mill about. They go in the hallways. They don't sit in their desks.

But because of the impeachment process and the trial and the seriousness of it, they sit down at their desks. They cast a vote. They go in alphabetical order. And hey, lo and behold, it happens pretty quickly.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I will say, Manu, I also have noticed that. And it is - it pains me, because how many things have we all missed covering the Hill where it was like an hour of vote for one thing. So I'm glad they're all sitting there. It can move quickly if they wanted to.

SANCHEZ: Gloria?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: They're stuck. They're stuck. They have nothing else to do, right? They're stuck. They're in that room and they've got to vote, which is why the vote happens pretty quickly. And everyone knows what the result ...

DEAN: Yes.

BORGER: ... is going to be. I think the interesting thing about McConnell, as Manu was saying, is that he kind of approaches this from an institutional point of view, which is that we don't know how he really feels about the Mayorkas impeachment issue, but he believes that there should be a debate and that that is the rule.

And that is what Mitt Romney also said, like he believes there should be some kind of debate. Now, Schumer would say, I gave you an opportunity at the beginning. I outlined debate time for you, and you decided to blow that. You decided, no, no, we're not going to do that, so you missed your chance. But I think McConnell's point is institutional more than anything else.

SANCHEZ: Notable, given that the outcome is going to be the same regardless.

BORGER: Right.

SANCHEZ: Mayorkas is not going to get convicted, so much of this is just for show, as noted. We're going to keep an eye on what's happening on the floor of the Senate. Manu, Gloria, please stand by.

This is obviously just one flashpoint that's shaking up Congress right now. Another is the battle over Speaker Mike Johnson's future. He just unveiled a sweeping foreign aid package that might make his standing among Republican hardliners even more precarious. DEAN: All right. So let's take you over to the other chamber, CNN's Lauren Fox is there. Lauren, tell us about this foreign aid package and how Speaker Johnson's GOP critics are reacting to this plan. This is all kind of unfolding in real time, too.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: Yes, exactly, Jessica, a busy day on Capitol Hill. We just got that bill text not too long ago, and it is essentially looking a lot like the Senate bill, but only in three different parts. There is a component of this that it provides aid to Ukraine, a component that includes aid to Israel, and a component that includes aid to the Indo-Pacific region.

But altogether, that funding adds up to about $95 billion. There is one small change and that about $10 billion of this funding is actually a repayable loan to Ukraine. There is a catch, though. The president, in a couple of years, can forgive that loan entirely, but that was put in there because the loan idea was something that former President Donald Trump had suggested that he would be supportive of.

Meanwhile, a lot of hard-liners very disappointed in Speaker Johnson, many of them not going quite as far as Marjorie Taylor Greene and threatening his job, but several of them not ruling it out. Here they are.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): Now, I'm well past the point of giving grace here. So we're going to go have some conversations.

RAJU: Is it time for him to get out of office?

ROY: I need a little bit more time today, but it's not good.

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): We met for hours last night and proposed different paths for the Speaker that would have avoided the abject surrender represented by his strategic choice here. There's no other way to describe it. It's surrender. It's disappointing. I won't support it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOX: And on the mechanics of this, Johnson has told his members that they will be voting on these underlying bills on Saturday evening. But before that, they have some procedural hurdles that they are going to have to overcome. We have yet to hear from Democrats as to whether or not they would be willing to join Republicans to try to move forward with this debate on the floor. They have to get what is known as the rule out of the committee.

And so far, you have three Republicans on that committee saying that they will block that action. So it will be all eyes on Democrats as to whether or not they are willing to help Johnson to get this bill across the finish line.

[15:10:04]

Something that they have been saying for months is essential to getting that aid to Israel and Ukraine. Jessica?

DEAN: Yes. It's going to be fascinating. Lauren Fox for us on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.

And House Speaker Mike Johnson will join Jake Tapper as he pushes ahead on that aid bill from - for Ukraine, despite pressure from GOP hardliners. That is next hour on THE LEAD.

Let's go back to the Senate and our Chief Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju to fill us in on the impeachment trial of Alejandro Mayorkas. Manu, what's happening now?

RAJU: Okay. The Senate right now is voting to kill that first article of impeachment. This is what Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, tried to do a short time ago. But it was delayed because of Republican objections as Republicans tried to push for a debate to happen behind closed doors. They wanted to have - delay the proceedings altogether. They wanted to block Chuck Schumer from moving ahead. That all failed.

The Democrats killed those Republican efforts to try to essentially end their push to end the trial altogether. Now, they're voting on what Chuck Schumer put forward. That is essentially to say this first article of impeachment that was put forward by the House should be essentially dismissed. The procedural vote is basically that - it says, "Is the constitutional point of order well taken?"

That is the question before the Senate. So they vote yes. They essentially are voting to kill this article of impeachment. So that's what we expect to see. And we do expect this to happen along party lines as all the other votes have happened so far. That'll be a surprise if anybody breaks ranks at this point, we will see.

Now that they're voting on the merits, maybe there will be a member who disagrees with what the House put forward and the Republican side may decide to defect. Maybe there will be a Democrat who is in a swing state and wants to show alliance with the Republicans on this. We'll see. Those are some of the questions that we have to ask here. There's no question about the outcome, though.

This will succeed. This effort to kill this article of impeachment will succeed by the Democrats. And then they'll try to move on to the second article of impeachment, to try to stop and essentially throw away that second article of impeachment. And then we will see how the Republicans respond.

If they do the same thing they did before, try to procedural vote after procedural vote to try to delay it, delay it, delay it, until we get to the ultimate outcome. But at the moment, this is what's happening on the floor of the Senate right now and we will get the vote in a matter of minutes here, guys.

SANCHEZ: Michael Gerhardt is still with us.

And, Michael, to Manu's point, if Democrats eliminate this first article of impeachment, how likely is it that then Republicans try to delay a vote to potentially eliminate the second article of impeachment?

MICHAEL GERHARDT, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think we can expect that they will do what they can, something very similar in response to this first attempt to kill an article of impeachment. But one thing I think we should keep in mind, and we're kind of seeing this live, and that is - and it's particularly true for the Republicans - if you take the sword, you die by the sword.

Sen. McConnell said not too long ago, well, there's an obligation to hold a trial. Keep in mind, back in 2016, when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, Democrats pleaded with McConnell to have a hearing and to allow for a vote, and McConnell didn't allow for anything. Well, that's coming back now, in a sense, to haunt him.

There's no obligation that the majority has to do anything more than it's doing. And it's not obliged to conduct a full trial like Republicans want. Instead, they can consider the possibility of debate. Sen. Schumer held open that possibility at the beginning today. But once Republicans shut that down, they now have to live by the rules, and the rules allow points of order to kill it as quickly as possible, and that's what the vote is on right now.

DEAN: Okay. And they are voting right now on this, we know that Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska just voted present. Let's go back to Manu for more on what exactly that means in terms of how this vote is playing out, Manu.

RAJU: Yes, this is actually one of the people that we were looking at. I mentioned before this vote, let's see how Lisa Murkowski votes on this, because she has been one of those who has been sharply critical of what the Republicans in the House did. She didn't think there was any real basis to move ahead here. She said we need to focus on other issues.

In fact, just a few weeks ago when I interviewed her about how she views the Republican Party under Donald Trump, she didn't know if she had a place within this Republican Party. The question of whether she should be an independent and the like, someone who voted to convict Donald Trump in that second impeachment trial, not happy with this impeachment of Alejandro Mayorkas.

And voting present here, the first member of the Senate to break ranks. That present means you're not a yes, you're not a no, you're somewhere in the middle. It's usually someone to reserve their objection in some way. Here she is reserving her - making clear that she has an objection over the efforts to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas in this first article of impeachment.

[15:15:04]

We'll see how she does on the second one. This vote's still ongoing. It looks like the roll call is done. We're waiting for the final gavel to come down.

Mitt Romney, we're told, voted against - voted basically against the Democratic effort to throw away this impeachment article. That is one person. Another person we were looking at, it looks like most Democrats voted or at least all Democrats voted with Chuck Schumer on this. We'll get the final vote call, though when it comes down. People can always change their votes before that gavel comes down. We'll see what happens here.

But at the moment, an interesting vote by Sen. Lisa Murkowski voting present, that essentially means she's not happy with the way this proceeding has unfolded, as Chuck Schumer appears to have the votes here to kill this first article of impeachment.

DEAN: Yes, and it is interesting, Manu, as we were watching Mitt Romney, he had said previously he was - he just wanted there to be some debate and then he would likely say, all right, that's enough for me. We've had the debate. We're going to move on. So interesting to see that he's not quite there yet because we have not had any debate on this.

We wait for the final vote tally on this vote. This is actually a vote of consequence after a couple of hours of a lot of other procedures and procedural votes that we have seen floating around.

Tim Naftali, let's go back to you because I had to interrupt you last time. I'm so sorry about that as we were waiting for another vote tally. As you're watching this play out, what are you kind of - what's standing out to you as you kind of take this all in?

TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: I'm thinking about the law of unintended consequences. I'm worried about creating a precedent where a future Senate decides not to listen to substantive impeachment articles from a house that might be led by a different party regarding a president of a different party. I really wonder whether the institutional play here is to do what Schumer is - what Sen. Schumer is doing.

I've been thinking about, in 1999, senators from - on both sides of the aisle understood that the offenses - the articles of impeachment against President Clinton did not reach the level of - for removal and the leaders then, the minority leader, Tom Daschle, the majority leader, Trent Lott, worked together to streamline a process to get this done fast without destroying the sort of the process of impeachment and they did it.

What's really interesting to me is it looks like Sen. Schumer and Mitch McConnell - Sen. McConnell, haven't really reached an agreement. They both seem to understand that this particular impeachment does not reach the level of seriousness for a full fledged deep trial. But they seem to have a different approach as to what to do about it. And I'm surprised that's ...

DEAN: Okay.

NAFTALI: ... that Sen. Schumer, maybe he tried. I don't know. So this main ...

SANCHEZ: Tim, we have to cut you off so we can listen to Senate Majority Leader Schumer on the floor of the Senate right now. Let's listen to the proceedings as his point of order apparently passed.

MURRAY: The Chair has no power or authority to pass on such a point of order. The Chair, therefore, under the precedence of the Senate, submits the question to the Senate: "Is the point of order well taken?"

Senator from Utah is recognized.

SEN. MIKE LEE (R-UT): Madam President, as wrong as the majority leader was, moments ago, in making this particular point of order as to Article I of the impeachment articles. Article I, remember, refers to the willful defiance by Secretary Mayorkas of the law. As wrong as he was in making that as to Article I and he was very wrong for the reasons articulated moments ago by the senator from Texas, he is even more wrong, far more so with respect to Article II, because Article II accuses him of knowingly making false statements.

This is a violation of 18 USC Section 1001, a felony offense. If this is not a high crime and misdemeanor, what is? If this is not impeachable, what is? What precedence we'll be setting? We need to address this and to discuss it we need to - a discussion in closed session.

MURRAY: Senator - the Senate needs to remind we are not (INAUDIBLE) opposition if the senator would like to propose a motion in decent order.

LEE: For that reason, Madam President, I move that the Senate proceed in closed session to allow for deliberation on this very consequential point of order that he's just made that violates hundreds of years of Anglo-American legal precedent and understanding ...

[15:20:01]

MURRAY: The Senator will submit his motion.

LEE: ... on a question required by impeachment rule 24.

MURRAY: Question is ...

LEE: It's a nay.

MURRAY: ... the question is on the motion, is there sufficient second?

LEE: There is.

MURRAY: There is. Clerk will call the roll.

CLERK: Ms. Baldwin?

BALDWIN: No.

CLERK: Mr. Barrasso?

BARRASSO: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Bennet?

SANCHEZ: A historic moment on the floor of the U.S. Senate. The Senate just voting to pass a point of order introduced by the majority leader. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York to essentially kill Article I. The first of two impeachment articles that House Republicans put forth before the floor of the Senate in an effort to convict the sitting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas. That vote passing 51-48.

DEAN: And you'll notice the numbers change there a little bit because Lisa Murkowski, who is a Republican from Alaska, voted present, you can take that essentially as a sign of discontent with where this effort is but she certainly didn't decide to vote with Democrats there.

But again just to kind of like take the big picture here, there's two articles of impeachment the first one done. They have voted, they have killed it.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

DEAN: Democrats have killed it, so we have arrived at the point of destination where we all thought we would be for Article I. We have now moved on to Article II which Schumer is trying to do essentially the same thing with. But if you'll remember as we've been here for several hours that takes a while and so Mike Lee from Utah we just heard from him and as we are seeing this play out the points of order votes, we will probably see more of these.

Let's go to Manu Raju who we have been relying heavily on this afternoon.

Manu, as you watch this all happen. What can we expect to see next as we now move to the second article of impeachment.

RAJU: Yes. Look, it's following a similar pattern that we saw in the first pattern of the first impeachment article. This is a strategy by Republicans to try to make their case that the Democrats don't want to debate this. They want to stifle this altogether. They want to put it under the rug they're trying to blame Joe Biden, blame the Democrats for the handling of the - what's happening in the situation of the border with Mexico saying that essentially - knowing that this is a central issue in the campaign which is what the arguments are trying to make here on the Senate floor.

The Democrats want nothing to do with this they say that this is an impeachment that is - that lacks any real merit to charging someone with a high crime and misdemeanor over a policy dispute they say is simply unprecedented. It's something that's - and they call it a dangerous precedent and they really don't seem to be too concerned about any political backlash.

As you can see from the votes, there have been expectations this would be vote along party lines. That's exactly what happened in the 51-48 one vote. Yes, Lisa Murkowski registering her objections voting present which is interesting, it shows you where she views her party she's been very outspoken and critical of particularly folks on the far right of her party and the Trump aligned wing of GOP.

But Democrats are making no qualms about voting to dismiss this altogether not worried about the political ramifications because there have been a lot of pressure on Sen. Jon Tester in particular, the Montana Democrat in a swing state, someone who could, who is battling to hang on and millions of dollars will be spent. Immigration will be a key part of that fight but he voted with Chuck Schumer on this issue.

He believes as the other vulnerable Democrats who voted for killing that first article of impeachment, they believe that they could be on a higher ground on immigration because Republicans just a few months ago killed a bipartisan border security deal that they said would actually have fixed some of the problems in the southern border of Mexico. Republicans disagree with that and the way they handle that will be litigated in the campaign, but they believe - Democrats believe they have an issue.

And look, we talk about the politics of this because that is really was driving so much of the strategy here. Republicans want some ammunition to use against Democrats in the heat of this campaign season and Democrats seem to be fine with the votes that they're taking which is to kill this impeachment proceeding. They did in Article I, it's going to happen soon on Article II we'll see how much longer Republicans, though, decide to prolong this by pushing their own points here on the floor of the Senate, yes.

SANCHEZ: Manu, please stand by as we await a tally on that point of order brought by Utah senator, Mike Lee. We want to bring in Florida Republican congressman, Carlos Gimenez, into the conversation. Congressman, thank you so much for waiting patiently.

We had originally scheduled to have you on to discuss Israel, and aid overseas, and the packages, multiple packages now one package that's going to be put forward in the house over the weekend. But obviously we want to get your reaction to what's happening on the floor of the U.S. Senate because you were supportive of the push to impeach the Homeland Security secretary. What's your reaction to hearing that that first article of impeachment has now been eliminated?

REP. CARLOS GIMENEZ (R-FL): I think it's a dangerous precedent for the Senate especially in the future. As one of your commentators has said this is setting a new ground.

[15:25:03]

At least, you should listen to the arguments and at the end if you decide that the secretary is not guilty, vote your conscience. I never thought that he was going to be convicted, but I thought at least that he was going to get a trial and that's what - we did our duty here, we sent the articles of impeachment. We feel that the secretary has violated federal law, has lied to congress and those are impeachable offenses. That should be argued like in a courtroom setting which is really the Senate.

And now the fact that they're just throwing out these charges before it even gets to see the light of day, that's a dangerous new precedent that the Senate is setting.

DEAN: And on your side of Capitol Hill, on the House side, we do have this aid package and we're starting to see how this is going to come together. I'm curious where you stand on aid to Taiwan aid to Israel, aid to Ukraine and how you feel about the Speaker and the path that he is choosing to move forward with.

GIMENEZ: Well, the Speaker laid out this plan on Monday when we came in and I was fully supportive of that plan and then some folks decided that they were going to maybe have a motion to vacate, which I completely oppose. I think it's - it would be completely counterproductive.

So I support the Speaker. I think it's a good plan. It allows everybody to really vote their conscience on Ukraine on Taiwan and on Israel along with that, there'll be another package on a border security bill. So I completely support the Speaker and what he's trying to do. I hope we can get this rule passed and put this vote up on Saturday.

Our allies need our help I've been stating it for a long time that I wanted to vote to help Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel separately if that's what you what it took. And I'm glad that he chose this path, so I fully support the Speaker and what he's trying to do.

SANCHEZ: Congressman, I just want to update our viewers on what we're watching on the floor of the Senate. It appeared that a fellow Floridian lawmaker, Sen. Rick Scott, presented another point of order to adjourn the proceedings that is apparently going to be voted on momentarily.

Back to the point you just made, Congressman, about these bills being taken up and a border bill being presented separately. Part of the reason that Speaker Johnson brought up that border bill was because of pressure from members of your conference that have argued that there should be some kind of legislation making the border a priority before even a single dollar, according to Marjorie Taylor Greene, goes to Ukraine or allies of the United States abroad.

Folks like Greene, Bob Good, I'm trying to think of a few others that Manu spoke to previously, have said that they are going to oppose that bill, that they don't believe that it actually addresses the problems at the border. They - several of them have told our reporters that they would support vacating Speaker Johnson over this. Your reaction to where they stand from the view of this border bill potentially passing and even possibly costing the Speaker's job?

GIMENEZ: Well, A, I will not support any kind of motion to vacate and the vast majority of this conference do not support that. Remember, the only way that you're going to be able to vacate the speaker is by having vast Democrats support. You're going to have a small number of Republicans maybe support the motion to vacate but they need all the Democrats in order to make it happen. And so we'll see whether where the Democrats lie with that.

As far as the border is concerned, look I believe that we should know border security packages that actually mandate certain things. But to be frank with you, the only way we're going to get this border under control is with a new president because president Biden has for the last three years on purpose caused this entire calamity which is the southern border through a series of executive actions which we have told them time and time again you need to reverse those actions in order to get this border under control. He has refused and then you see the consequences right now.

So even if we pass a border security bill, the strongest one ever, the - it's up to the President to see if he's actually going to enforce the things that we want him to enforce. So far he's not willing to do that and so I don't have high hopes for any legislation coming out of congress that will help the - to secure the border. It's up to the president to undo the things he did in order to secure this president - to secure the border.

DEAN: But Congressman, does it frustrate you at all that there was bipartisan legislation that was in part negotiated by Sen. James Lankford that was said to be some of the most conservative immigration legislation that your - that the House and the Senate would have seen in a very, very long time that was killed by Republicans really because the president - the former president told them to?

[15:30:06]

GIMENEZ: No, look it doesn't frustrate me at all.