michael barbaro

From The New York Times, I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

[music]

michael barbaro

Today: The impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump begins this afternoon in the Senate. Nick Fandos on how it will work. It’s Thursday, January 16. Nick Fandos, describe the past 48 hours inside the Capitol. How does it start?

nick fandos

So it starts on Tuesday morning when Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who, for close to a month now, has been withholding the articles of impeachment against President Trump from the Senate, goes down into the basement of the Capitol for a private meeting with all House Democrats. And the Speaker walks in and says, “Guys, finally, the day is here. I’m ready to move forward. Our break has accomplished what we wanted it to. Additional evidence has come out over the course of this four weeks. We’re going to vote tomorrow, on Wednesday, to name the team that will prosecute the case against President Trump and finally move this over to the Senate.” And so that was the state of affairs for most of Tuesday afternoon. But then, kind of out of the middle of nowhere —

archived recording — We’ve got very big breaking news tonight. On the eve of the House vote to send President Donald Trump’s articles of impeachment over to the Senate, the House Intelligence Committee — that committee just released an incredibly incriminating cache of documents from Rudy Giuliani’s indicted associate Lev Parnas.

nick fandos

House Democrats released a new tranche of evidence that they had just gotten in recent days from Lev Parnas, who was obviously intimately involved in President Trump’s attempts to pressure Ukraine to help dig up dirt on his political opponents.

michael barbaro

So basically new evidence in an impeachment case after the impeachment has been completed.

nick fandos

That’s right. Here was what seems to be meaningful new evidence from a key player in this drama pouring forward.

michael barbaro

And what exactly is in these documents from Parnas?

nick fandos

So there were three things that stood out immediately to us as interesting. One was a letter from Rudy Giuliani, the President’s personal lawyer, to the new president of Ukraine asking for a meeting.

archived recording Giuliani writing quote, “I have a specific request. In my capacity as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent, I request a meeting with you this upcoming Monday or — ”

nick fandos

For the first time in that letter, we saw Giuliani putting down on paper that his client, Donald Trump, knew what he was up to and had sanctioned it. And that ties the President even more closely to everything that Giuliani was doing in Ukraine. The second piece that stood out were text messages between Parnas and a former Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Joe Biden and wanted the American ambassador to Ukraine — remember Marie Yovanovitch — out of the way. And what these messages seem to show is a kind of bargaining that’s going on that the prosecutor will help Giuliani, Parnas and their team dig up the dirt they want, if they help get this American ambassador out of the way. Now, this would suggest that there is a closer tie between the removal of Yovanovitch from her post, which President Trump eventually brings about last spring, and the campaign to dig up dirt on his political opponents. Now, the third thing are notes on stationery by Parnas from the Ritz Carlton in Vienna that mention trying to get the new president of Ukraine to publicly announce an investigation into Joe Biden and his son. And this is what Democrats say the President was after the whole time, and the notes suggest that Parnas, the guy working with the President’s personal lawyer, was trying to get that done for him.

michael barbaro

And Nick, what do these three revelations really tell us about the larger picture of the impeachment?

nick fandos

Each of these has its own significance for the larger investigation. The letter from Giuliani shows very clearly that he was keeping President Trump in the loop and working for the President. The text messages show that they were working to try and get damaging information on Joe Biden. And the notes suggest further that they wanted to do that by getting Ukraine to publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens that would smear them, so to speak. And so though these don’t significantly change the shape of the case as we’ve understood it, they make it a lot harder to argue that it didn’t happen. And in that sense, they go a long way in strengthening the Democrats’ case.

michael barbaro

And, what do you make of the timing of the releases? Literally, the night before the House is going to vote to send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate.

nick fandos

Whether by design or by accident, this was terrifically helpful for the House and for the team of prosecutors that are about to go over and try and make their case in the Senate.

michael barbaro

How so?

nick fandos

Well, Speaker Pelosi withheld the articles of impeachment for a month to try and gain leverage to push the Senate to call new witnesses and evidence in their trial. And so the timing of this couldn’t have been better to make the argument that, hey, there’s compelling new evidence out there to be had, and it won’t be that hard to get, Senators. If you don’t want to hear from new witnesses, if you don’t want to call new documents, Democrats would say, then you’re helping President Trump and his cover up. Because the argument is that senators, taking a constitutional oath to render impartial judgment, owe it to the Constitution and to the country to try and get as much material as they can to make this weighty decision. And on top of that, because this evidence has now all been submitted into the record before the articles are sent over to the Senate, they can automatically be incorporated into the trial.

michael barbaro

O.K. so what happens next?

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Good morning, everyone. This is a very important day for us.

nick fandos

So Wednesday morning, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as expected, convenes a news conference in the Capitol, and she arrives with seven Democratic lawmakers in tow.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Today is the day that we name the managers who go to the floor to pass the resolution to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

nick fandos

The team that she’s about to introduce, who will prosecute the House’s case in the Senate. But first, she takes a quick chance to spike the football.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) There’ve been comments about when are we going to send the articles over?

nick fandos

To basically say, hey, I’ve taken a bunch of heat for this strategy to delay. The Republicans have been beating me up left and right.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Time has been our friend in all of this because as we’ve yielded incriminating evidence, more truth into the public domain.

nick fandos

You saw what happened with Lev Parnas last night, right? That validated what I was talking about. This is why I did what I did. So now you get it, basically.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) And we wouldn’t be in this situation had we not waited.

nick fandos

And from there, Speaker Nancy Pelosi turns to the lawmakers around her and begins to introduce the managers, who basically fall into three groups. The first are those that were locks for the job.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Chair Adam Schiff of California.

fandos

That’s Adam Schiff, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee who oversaw the House’s Ukraine investigation last fall and Jerry Nadler —

archived recording (nancy pelosi) The chair of the House Judiciary Committee is serving his 15th term in Congress.

nick fandos

— Who drafted the articles of impeachment and helped build the constitutional and legal justification for the charges. The second group are respected senior lawmakers who were expected to be on the team but weren’t givens.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Chair Zoe Lofgren, chair of the House Committee on House Administration.

nick fandos

Zoe Lofgren of California. This is her third impeachment in the House on the Judiciary Committee. She was a staffer back during the Nixon impeachment and on the committee during the Clinton impeachment.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Chairman Hakeem Jeffries is the chair of the House Democratic Caucus and is currently serving his fourth fourth term in Congress.

nick fandos

Hakeem Jeffries, he is the chairman of the Democratic Caucus and a rising star within the Democratic Party, also a member of the Judiciary Committee.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Congresswoman Val Demings of Florida.

nick fandos

And then Val Demings, who is a former police chief from Orlando, who is on both Mr. Schiff’s committee and Nadler’s committee and is very familiar with these facts and effective on the bench. But then there were a couple wild cards as well.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Excuse me. Congressman Jason Crow of Colorado is a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

nick fandos

There was Jason Crow who is a freshman Democrat from Colorado. He’s former military, but he hasn’t been involved in the impeachment debate all that much in the House. And Sylvia Garcia —

archived recording (nancy pelosi) Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia is a member of the House Judiciary Committee.

nick fandos

— who is from the Houston area. She is a member of the Judiciary Committee but not a particularly outspoken one.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) I’m very proud and honored that these seven members, distinguished members, have accepted this serious responsibility.

michael barbaro

So what does this particular group tell you about what Pelosi is trying to accomplish? Why did she pick them all, especially the wild cards?

nick fandos

So Pelosi stated one of her goals, and she left one unstated.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) As you can see, the emphasis is on litigators. The emphasis is on comfort level in the courtroom.

nick fandos

The stated goal was to try and put together a team with a lot of courtroom experience. So you have lawyers and prosecutors. In Garcia, you have somebody that was part of the judicial system in Texas. She wanted a team that was going to be ready to argue this case to put together briefs in the Senate. But Pelosi’s other goal here was to try and put together a team that was regionally and ethnically diverse. So you have lawmakers from the coast, from New York and California. You have black lawmakers and Latino lawmakers, and you have folks from the middle of the country. Jason Crow, for instance, is from Colorado. Garcia is from Texas, in addition to being Latino. So she was looking to put together basically a team that looks something like the Democratic caucus and the country as a whole, rather than a set of coastals or legal elites, or like the team of managers the prosecuted Bill Clinton in 1999, 13 white guys.

michael barbaro

13 white guys.

nick fandos

Yes, 13 white men from the House Judiciary Committee brought the case against Bill Clinton over to the House, yeah.

michael barbaro

Hm. You know Nick, I’m curious. Is this a desirable assignment for a House Democrat, or is this a job people run from?

nick fandos

You know, I think it’s a very desirable assignment, and you need no look farther than the fact that many lawmakers put their own names forward, wrote letters to Speaker Pelosi asking to be included on this team. Because these seven Democrats are now basically going to become the face of the House’s case. They will be the ones writing briefs, but more importantly, arguing on the floor of the Senate as to why President Trump’s behavior warrants impeachment. And they’re going to be all over TVs across the country. There’s the potential here for many of these folks for this to be a career-defining moment. Lindsey Graham, who’s now a very well-known member of the Senate and a confidante of the president, his career got its big boost when he was one of those 13 House managers in 1999. So this is a important and historic role. There will be books written about this as well. And to be a member of that team is to have a role in, potentially at least, history.

archived recording (nancy pelosi) — But I don’t think we could be better served than by the patriotism and dedication of the managers that I am naming here this morning. Thank you all very much.

michael barbaro

O.K., so once these measures are announced, what happens after this news conference?

nick fandos

Pretty quickly Pelosi and her team of seven walk upstairs to the floor of the House chamber where —

archived recording (jerrold nadler) Madame Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 767, I now send to the desk a resolution anointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment trial of Donald John Trump, president of the United States.

nick fandos

The House votes along the same party lines that it did a month ago when it approved the articles to formally appoint the managers and bring the case to trial.

archived recording On this vote, the yeas are 228. The nays are 193. The resolution is adopted, and without objection —

nick fandos

And that is really the last vote that the House officially needs to take on this matter. It’s now up to the managers to bring their case forward, and a Senate trial is imminent.

michael barbaro

Nick, at this point as we’re talking it is 3:40 p.m. on Wednesday after that vote to approve the House managers and transmit the articles of impeachment. So what is the next step?

nick fandos

So Speaker Pelosi and the managers will reconvene now at 5 o’clock and begin, basically, the carefully choreographed exchange of the articles between the House and the Senate. First the speaker will sign the articles in what is called, as only Congress could put it, an engrossment ceremony. From there, the managers will line up with the sergeant-at-arms of the house and the clerk of the house and they will process out of the House through the old House chamber, through the rotunda of the Capitol, over to the Senate to meet the Secretary of the Senate and hand over a communication —

archived recording The Senate will receive a message from the House of Representatives.

nick fandos

— saying they are essentially ready to come to trial —

archived recording A message from the House of Representatives.

nick fandos

— and hand over a nicely printed copy of their articles of impeachment for the Senate.

archived recording Mr. President, I have been directed by the House of Representatives to inform the Senate the House has passed H. Res. 79 —

nick fandos

And so then the next step is basically to start a trial, only the third such proceeding in American history where a president of the United States will be potentially convicted or acquitted of high crimes and misdemeanors.

[music]

michael barbaro

We’ll be right back. So Nick, now that the impeachment moves from the House to the Senate, what does that process look like over in the Senate? Walk us through it.

nick fandos

So on Thursday the trial will begin, and it starts with quite a bit more ceremony. The House impeachment managers will once again walk over from the House to the Senate carrying their articles of impeachment, and this time they’ll enter the Senate chamber and meet the sergeant-at-arms, who will give a stern warning to the senators. They’ll cry out, “Hear ye, Hear ye!” Now you know we’re firmly in the territory of old American traditions, right?

michael barbaro

Indeed.

nick fandos

He will warn senators that from here on out, as long as the Senate is sitting in trial, they cannot speak, quote, “on pain of imprisonment if they do.”

michael barbaro

Wow.

nick fandos

This is serious business. Senators are all expected to be in their desk, and then the managers will process up into the center of the Senate and they’ll read aloud their articles of impeachment.

michael barbaro

I just want to understand this. So throughout the trial, House members will be going into the Senate and doing the talking, and the senators will, under pain of imprisonment, remain absolutely mum, which is kind of an interesting situation for the senators.

nick fandos

It is. It’s a very uncomfortable situation for senators who like to do their own talking. Not only can they not speak, they won’t be able to bring electronics into the chamber for hours at a time.

michael barbaro

Wow.

nick fandos

They will have to remain seated at their desks. When they are allowed to ask questions, they have to do so in writing. And if senators want to debate, say, a motion before a vote, what they actually do is kick out reporters and the cameras and they close the doors of the Senate and have that debate in private. So this is not a proceeding like any that, that I think any of us, including me, covering Congress are familiar with. It’s really about the House managers and the President’s defense lawyers arguing it out in front of the Senate, which serves as both kind of a judge and a jury.

michael barbaro

Just a very silent version of that.

nick fandos

A very silent one.

michael barbaro

O.K., so the House managers have the floor Thursday morning.

nick fandos

That’s right. And so they are introduced formally to the Senate, and the Senate summons next John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, to come over to the Senate. He takes an oath himself and then administers an oath to senators that, for the duration of the trial, they swear to administer impartial justice. At that point, the Senate sends a summons to President Trump, telling him formally that he is on trial in the Senate and asking for his answer. The House managers will get probably up to 24 hours to make their case spread over three or four days. The President’s defense team will get a chance to do the same thing for the same amount of time. And remember, we’ve yet to hear from those defense lawyers since they declined to take part in the House proceedings. And then after both sides have made their case, senators will have a chance to ask questions.

michael barbaro

And can they do that out loud this time?

nick fandos

No. That remains in writing. They can put it on pieces of paper, and the chief justice will read them aloud.

michael barbaro

Wow.

nick fandos

But then we’ll get to what may be the most interesting part of this trial which is a debate, which has already begun, over whether or not to call new witnesses and compel new evidence. The prosecution and the defense can both put forward motions to call witnesses, and senators will get an up or down vote, and a simple majority wins. So Democrats want to call a number of administration witnesses, people like John Bolton or Mick Mulvaney. They need the help of four Republicans if they want to make that happen. And if they do, if they’re successful, Republicans are pledging to use their majority to try and call witnesses that may be more favorable to the president, potentially even Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son who’s at the center of these investigations that Trump and Giuliani and Parnas were looking for in Ukraine. So all of the sudden a two- or three-week trial could end up lasting five or six weeks. Eventually when senators have satisfied themselves, they will vote either to convict or acquit. But remember, you need two-thirds of all senators to support conviction to have the president convicted and removed from office.

michael barbaro

I’m thinking back to what Speaker Pelosi said during her news conference, that time has been on the side of Democrats, that the delay in transmitting these articles of impeachment to the Senate and getting this trial under way there, may have shifted the ground when it comes to things like calling witnesses or introducing new evidence and the contours of how this trial will unfold. Do you think that she’s right?

nick fandos

We won’t know for sure for at least a couple of weeks until these votes come up. But walking around the Senate in the last few days, it certainly seems like there is a growing number of Republican senators who are open to this idea of calling witnesses, who seem to recognize after four weeks of feeling intense pressure from the media and, say, from their constituents, that it’s just the kind of smart and obvious thing to do. And another indication, we’ve started to hear more conservative Republicans that are supportive of the president conferring with Mitch McConnell about what witnesses they would call to counter witnesses that Democrats and the moderates wanted. That seems to be a nod, an acknowledgment that the chances are going up that we’re not going to end up with a speedy, narrow trial, but one that may be more unwieldy and involve more witnesses.

michael barbaro

I wonder in the end how much that really matters because, as we have talked about many times on the show, when it comes to the Senate trial, no matter how many witnesses there are, no matter what form this trial takes, there’s an overwhelming predisposition by the majority to come to a certain conclusion in this case.

nick fandos

I will preface my answer by saying that I agree with you. Particularly in an election year, the idea that a Republican-controlled Senate would pull together 67 votes to remove the president of the United States when he’ll be on the ballot in November seems like a total long shot. But I think that we are in for more unexpected twists and turns than we think. You know, it’s one thing for Republicans to be able to watch from afar as the House assembles this case over several months, as they voted on articles of impeachment, to dismiss it as partisan because there weren’t Republican votes. To dismiss it as rushed and having not proved the case, because they haven’t been up close grappling with the facts. But as it gets closer and senators have to swear this awesome oath to administer impartial justice, as they have to sit in their chairs silently without their cell phones listening to the arguments from the House and from the White House, I think we may start to see some lawmakers — maybe the moderates, maybe they’re retiring, maybe they’re up for re-election in a swing state this fall — moving ever so slightly out of their partisan corners that have defied so many fights in the Trump era into the kind of ambiguous middle. And while that may not change the outcome of this particular trial, I think it will go a long way in coloring what it looks like for the American people who, after all, in just 10 months are going to go to the ballot box themselves and be able to render their own decision about whether President Trump is fit to remain in office.

michael barbaro

Nick, thank you very much.

nick fandos

Thank you, Michael.

[music]

michael barbaro

We’ll be right back. Here’s what else you need to know today.

[music]

archived recording (donald trump) We greatly appreciate your joining us at this White House event. This is a very important and remarkable occasion.

michael barbaro

During a ceremony at the White House on Wednesday, President Trump signed a preliminary trade deal with China intended to open Chinese markets to more U.S. goods and protect against the theft of American trade secrets.

archived recording (donald trump) Today we take a momentous step, one that has never been taken before with China, toward a future of fair and reciprocal trade as we signed phase one of the historic trade deal between the United States and China.

michael barbaro

In a victory for the president, the deal leaves in place record tariffs on Chinese goods and forces China to purchase $200 billion worth of American goods within two years.

archived recording (donald trump) Together we are righting the wrongs of the past and delivering a future of economic justice and security for American workers, farmers, and families.

michael barbaro