U.S. Rep. David Cicilline joins Political Roundtable to discuss House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry against President Trump, whether that will backfire, why Democrats won’t hold a vote on the inquiry, and related questions.
Here’s a rough transcript of this week’s Political Roundtable featuring Cicilline, moderator Ian Donnis, and panelists Scott MacKay and Maureen Moakley.
Donnis: We’re going to focus our discussion this week on the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry since that’s such a big issue. Congressman Cicilline, no one can predict with complete accuracy where this is headed, but it seems likely if the House impeaches President Trump, the Senate would be likely to acquit him. There is an election coming up in a little bit over a year. So why proceed with impeachment?
Cicilline: Well, I think there’s no question that the most recent conduct of the president as it relates to Ukraine — that is the President of the United States using his office in an effort to persuade a foreign leader to interfere in an American presidential election and then an attempt to cover that up is gravely serious. It’s undermining our national security. It is undermining his oath of office and the integrity of our elections. And I think even for a number of my colleagues who have been very resistant to move forward with impeachment they recognize that this is happening in real time. The president of the United States betraying his oath of office undermining the national security of the United States by attempting to get a foreign government to interfere in an American presidential election. And we simply cannot sit by and allow this continue to happen. And so I think that’s why the Democrats are going to move forward expeditiously to gather up the balance of the evidence and then present articles of impeachment to the full House.
Donnis: There’s been some negative fallout from this already for Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren has been rising in the polls. It’s uncertain if Americans would support her as a Democratic candidate. Are you concerned that this impeachment crisis could backfire on Democrats?
Cicilline: I’m not. I mean I think the reality is we have a responsibility to do this work and to do the oversight and proceed with the impeachment inquiry. But the election is going to be won on whether or not Democrats have delivered for the American people and whether or not our Democratic nominee speaks about the important priorities of the American people and I have every confidence that whoever our nominee is that that person will defeat Donald Trump in 2020.
MacKay: Democratic colleagues from purple districts or swing districts – will [the impeachment inquiry] put their re-election in jeopardy?
Cicilline: No, actually what I’ve been most impressed with with all of my colleagues is how seriously people have taken this question. They have treated it really like a question of a vote for war and peace. I mean that’s serious, and so people have been thinking a lot about it. They have been talking to their constituents. They have been reviewing the evidence. They’ve been speaking with each other and I think people are one by one coming to the same consensus. And that is that we have a responsibility — we took an oath of office to defend the Constitution of the United States. We have a responsibly set forth in the Constitution. And I think they feel confident that they’ve developed enough credibility with their own constituents particularly those in those districts that they’ve sort of been resistant to follow the impeachment inquiry path that they have articulated to their constituents that this is a different moment that they have a responsibility. And the reports we’re getting back from from colleagues around the country are that their constituents by and large understand that they have a responsibly to do this.
Moakley: Well, given your answer — why not take a formal vote about procedures why not take the first vote as far as an inquiry is concerned and lay out some procedures to address some of the concerns that the Trump administration is making? It makes a stronger case, it seems to me, and it lends more heft to what you’re doing because you have to bring people along.
Cicilline: Well, I mean the reality is the the reason that they did a formal impeachment inquiry vote …. with Richard Nixon was because at that time the House Judiciary Committee did not have subpoena power. So they had to do that and they did it well into the impeachment inquiry. Subpoena power that didn’t exist on the rules at the time. The rules have changed since then – the Judiciary Committee already has the authority to issue subpoenas for any witnesses we need we have jurisdiction over impeachment by our rules. So it would be sort of silly just like we don’t have a vote on the floor to authorize the Education Committee to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. There’s really no reason to do it. There is a requirement that we have a vote when we do articles of impeachment, and that’s what we’ll do. This is a delaying tactic by the president. He’s asking, can he have witnesses. This is equivalent to a grand jury proceeding. He will get an opportunity to confront his accusers and present evidence in the trial – that’s in the Senate. So this letter is really just a distraction, an effort to try to attack the process so he can avoid answering. The very important question is: why was the president of the United States on a telephone call trying to persuade the leader of a foreign country to gin up evidence against a political opponent and holding up military aid that was essential to that country’s survival? That’s the real question.
Donnis: That leads to my next question for you, Congressman Cicilline. If President Trump is as bad as you Democrats say and his behavior so egregious, why have Democrats been unable to win more support [from] Republicans and the Republican base in the country who seem firmly aligned behind President Trump?
Cicilline: That’s a really important question to ask the Republicans. I think it’s a really important question to be asking anyone who’s standing up and defending the conduct of this president. I’m sad to say that I think some of those judgments are being made because people are thinking about the president’s popularity in Republican primaries and thinking about their own political future. I think that’s very disappointing. But I think that whether you’re Republican or a Democrat or an independent, it is un-American to invite a foreign government to interfere in our presidential elections. The American people get to decide who is going to be their president not anybody else. And it’s unpatriotic it’s un-American and everyone should be speaking out and condemning the president’s activities.
Moakley: I want to follow up on that. I mean given what you just said, are you reaching out to some members of the GOP? Given what’s gone on in Syria it seems that’s a bigger thing. It’s not what we’re talking about, but that has to persuade thoughtful members of the Senate of the Republican Party to say, ‘wait a minute,’ and try… Like Mitt Romney for example, and begin a process where you can win over these people ….The ball is going to be to some extent in the Republicans’ court. You’re going to have to get them to come along.
Cicilline: We are both individually and as members of the Judiciary Committee constantly speaking to our Republican colleagues who see the same evidence we see. We have not seen a lot of evidence that anyone on the House side from the Republican Party has been willing to stand up and engage in the kind of oversight that their constitutionally required to do. We see a little bit more of it in the Senate. But yes I my hope is that as this process proceeds, it will become bipartisan and Republicans will join us in this responsibility. I will say candidly it’s been very disappointing because we have not seen a lot of that. But I think as evidence comes forward and as witnesses produce corroborating evidence of the president’s really shocking behavior with respect to this Ukraine phone call and the related activities. I think we’ll start to see more Republicans — I hope so — because this is a time you need to put your country ahead of the party whatever your party is.
MacKay: Do you think it’s good for the House to have the perception out there that some of these young leaders, AOC for instance, and some people on the left look upon those folks as from basically very liberal districts and that their views really don’t reflect the average middle American in some of the Midwestern or Southern states? Is that a problem that you’re perceived as being too far left in the House?
Cicilline: I don’t think so. Look we have the largest and most diverse caucus in the house we’ve had in the history of Congress which is great. We have we ran on an agenda that we developed called ‘for the people’ that focuses on driving down health care costs, particularly the costs of prescription drugs, protecting coverage for pre-existing conditions, raising family incomes with a real emphasis on rebuilding the crumbling infrastructure of America, and taking on corruption and self-dealing and getting Washington to work for the people of this country again. On those core issues and all the work we’re doing in Washington, there is broad consensus in our caucus. So yeah there are some differences and that’s great. That’s what’s great about having a very large and diverse caucus. But there’s real consensus about the urgency of the priorities the American people and frankly virtually every vote that comes to the floor has support from the entire caucus and even some Republicans. In fact, we’ve passed over 260 pieces of legislation virtually all of them with the exception of one were bipartisan. That means we had some Republicans aboard. The only one we couldn’t which is a sort of sad commentary was the first bill we did, H.R. 1, the biggest anti-corruption bill since Watergate. We couldn’t find a single Republican to support that bill.
