Call it their good cop-bad cop schtick.

Hakeem Jeffries Hakeem Sekou JeffriesPelosi: House will stay in session until agreement is reached on coronavirus relief Races heat up for House leadership posts Postmaster general earned millions from company with ties to Postal Service: report MORE and Jerrold Nadler Jerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerSchumer: 'Nothing is off the table' if GOP moves forward with Ginsburg replacement Top Democrats call for DOJ watchdog to probe Barr over possible 2020 election influence House passes bill to protect pregnant workers MORE, two New York City Democrats serving as House prosecutors in the Senate impeachment trial, have very different styles but the same objective: trying to persuade some Republicans to vote to convict President Trump Donald John TrumpUS reimposes UN sanctions on Iran amid increasing tensions Jeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Trump supporters chant 'Fill that seat' at North Carolina rally MORE.

Their contrasting styles have been on full display as lead impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff Adam Bennett SchiffTop Democrats call for DOJ watchdog to probe Barr over possible 2020 election influence Overnight Defense: Top admiral says 'no condition' where US should conduct nuclear test 'at this time' | Intelligence chief says Congress will get some in-person election security briefings Overnight Defense: House to vote on military justice bill spurred by Vanessa Guillén death | Biden courts veterans after Trump's military controversies MORE’s (D-Calif.) Democratic prosecution team made its opening arguments during three long days in the upper chamber this week.



Nadler, a veteran Jewish American lawmaker from the Upper West Side, has been a pit bull for the prosecution, accusing the 53 GOP senators in the chamber of being accomplices in Trump’s “cover-up” — an allegation that infuriated the very Republicans that Nadler’s team is trying to cajole.

ADVERTISEMENT

Jeffries, an African American lawmaker from Brooklyn, launched an impeachment charm offensive, disarming senators by quoting rapper Notorious B.I.G. and cracking a Derek Jeter joke that elicited chuckles on both sides of the aisle.

Neither Democratic approach appears to changing any GOP minds.

“I think they would be better as trial lawyers than in the business of Congress. They struck me as being somewhat polished, but I’m pretty astute in trying to distill if there is anything new, and I did not see it,” Sen. Mike Braun Michael BraunPessimism grows as hopes fade for coronavirus deal McConnell shores up GOP support for coronavirus package Patient Protection Pledge offers price transparency MORE (R-Ind.) told The Hill on Friday.

Asked about Jeffries’s Jeter joke, Braun quipped: “It’s hard for me to laugh in such a somber setting. It was a nice attempt though.”

Nadler and Jeffries are just two of the seven members of the Democratic team. But the pair of powerful New Yorkers generated scores of headlines this week after their presentations to the Senate, where they argued Trump should be removed from office for pressuring Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election and trying to hinder the House’s investigation.

On Day One of opening arguments, Nadler was the last Democrat to speak but he came out swinging. In an impassioned speech, he accused GOP senators of voting for a “cover-up” if they block subpoenas for witnesses and documents; he called it “obviously a treacherous vote.”

ADVERTISEMENT

White House counsel Pat Cipollone demanded an apology from Nadler. Moderate Sen. Susan Collins Susan Margaret CollinsJeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Trump supporters chant 'Fill that seat' at North Carolina rally Momentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day MORE (R-Maine), whom Democrats are trying to sway, was so upset she wrote a note to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts questioning whether Nadler had violated Senate rules with his pointed remarks, Politico reported. Roberts then intervened and admonished both sides — handing Trump allies an opening and putting Democratic colleagues back on their heels.

“It didn’t help his cause. When you are getting admonished by the Supreme Court chief justice for what you say,” Rep. Lee Zeldin Lee ZeldinDCCC reserves new ad buys in competitive districts, adds new members to 'Red to Blue' program Overnight Defense: House panel probes Pompeo's convention speech | UN council rejects US demand to restore Iran sanctions | Court rules against Pentagon policy slowing expedited citizenship The Hill's 12:30 Report: Republicans conduct in-person convention roll call MORE (R-N.Y.), a Long Island lawmaker who serves on Trump’s impeachment team, told The Hill. “That was a pretty rough start.”

Rep. Elise Stefanik Elise Marie StefanikRepublicans cast Trump as best choice for women The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Pence rips Biden as radical risk GOP women offer personal testimonials on Trump MORE, another New York Republican who’s part of Trump’s team, called Nadler’s unforced error “a weak moment for Democrats,” one that caused “fissures” between Nadler and Schiff. Democrats have downplayed any divisions.

But Nadler, the Judiciary Committee chairman who cut his teeth decades ago as a state legislator in Albany, didn’t back down from the fight. The very next day, he came at Trump’s chief defenders again, playing old video clips of Sen. Lindsey Graham Lindsey Olin GrahamMomentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day Video of Lindsey Graham arguing against nominating a Supreme Court justice in an election year goes viral Warning signs flash for Lindsey Graham in South Carolina MORE (R-S.C.) and Trump attorney Alan Dershowitz Alan Morton DershowitzDershowitz suing CNN for 0 million in defamation suit Bannon and Maxwell cases display DOJ press strategy chutzpah Ghislaine Maxwell attorneys ask for delay to unseal court documents due to 'critical new information' MORE that contradicted their argument that only a violation of the criminal code could be considered an impeachable offense.

His Day Two performance won kudos from within his own party. One Democratic source involved with the impeachment team called Nadler’s presentation “clear-eyed, smart and effective.”

“I thought Rep. Nadler did an excellent job showing how the president doesn't need to have committed a criminal offense to be impeached and removed from office — reflecting on what impeachment meant to the Founding Fathers,” added Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer Chuck SchumerVideo of Lindsey Graham arguing against nominating a Supreme Court justice in an election year goes viral Graham signals support for confirming a Supreme Court nominee this year Pelosi orders Capitol flags at half-staff to honor Ginsburg MORE (D-N.Y), who has known Nadler for decades.

On Day Three of Democratic arguments, Nadler was back in attack mode, labeling Trump a “dictator” on the Senate floor.

“This is a determination by President Trump that he wants to be all powerful, he does not have to respect the Congress, he does not have to respect the representatives of the people. Only his will goes. He is a dictator,” Nadler said as he concluded his remarks Friday.

“This must not stand and that is another reason he must be removed from office."

For Nadler, 72, this historical political moment — the impeachment of his longtime adversary, Trump, as he holds the prized Judiciary gavel — probably represents the pinnacle of a remarkable 50-year career in law and politics.

Jeffries, not yet 50, is still climbing. Viewed on Capitol Hill as Speaker Nancy Pelosi Nancy PelosiSunday shows preview: Justice Ginsburg dies, sparking partisan battle over vacancy before election Trump is betting big on the suburbs, but his strategy is failing 'bigly' Trump orders flags at half-staff to honor 'trailblazer' Ginsburg MORE’s possible heir apparent, the unflappable chairman of the House Democratic Caucus is a disciplined messenger and talented orator. His turn in the impeachment spotlight is helping to raise his national profile; Jeffries was prominently featured in a front-page photo in The New York Times on Friday.

“If you don’t know, now you know,” Jeffries said on the Senate floor in his distinct staccato delivery, quoting the famous rap song “Juicy” in a reference that went over the heads of most of the grey-haired senators.

But senators and the American public also got a glimpse this week of Jeffries’s disarming sense of humor. As senators began nodding off, Jeffries, a former corporate lawyer, tried to revive them with a light-hearted story about a fellow New Yorker who asked if he had heard the “latest outrage.”

Was it about Trump? Jeffries asked.

No, the man replied. One anonymous person “voted against Derek Jeter on his Hall of Fame ballot,” depriving the Yankees slugger of a unanimous vote.

Jeffries said he hoped the two parties could agree to subpoena witnesses like John Bolton John BoltonDiplomacy with China is good for America The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by The Air Line Pilots Association - Pence lauds Harris as 'experienced debater'; Trump, Biden diverge over debate prep DOJ launches probe into Bolton book for possible classified information disclosures MORE and Mick Mulvaney Mick MulvaneyMick Mulvaney to start hedge fund Fauci says positive White House task force reports don't always match what he hears on the ground Bottom line MORE, “but perhaps we can all agree to subpoena the Baseball Hall of Fame.”

The punchline drew hearty laughter from Democrats, polite laughter from Republicans.

Zeldin's team has been watching the trial from Vice President Mike Pence Michael (Mike) Richard PenceMomentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day Sunday shows preview: Justice Ginsburg dies, sparking partisan battle over vacancy before election McConnell urges GOP senators to 'keep your powder dry' on Supreme Court vacancy MORE’s ceremonial office just off the Senate floor.

“I happen to be a Mets fan. I even have my Mets colors on,” Zeldin said Friday, pointing to his bright orange tie. “Even as a Mets fan who despises the Yankees, everyone wants to know where that one vote came from.”