out of the senate chamber . >> the majority leader. >> i suggest the absence of a quorum . >> the clerk willcall the role . [roll call]

>> for the third time in history a president has been tried and acquitted by the u.s. senate in an impeachment trial,president donald john trump found not guilty on both articles of impeachment, abuse of power and obstruction of congress, both failing to get the required 67 votes , two thirds of the senate. those present and voting one article one there was one republican, mitt romney who voted guilty on that count . here in the next few minutes, we expect to hear from the majority leader mitch mcconnell and also from senator schumer. as you can see, the senate is still in session. they are in a quorum call. we also expect possible comments from president trump

sometimethis afternoon . we will make every effort to bring those to you live and have them available on the c-span networks as they come down. live coverage of theu.s. senate here on c-span2 .

some of you are probably wondering what's left to be said after listening to this for the last two or three weeks. as you know i'm occasionally rather parsimonious at times with comments and i thought it best to wait until this is behind us before having a more open discussion with all of you about what we've just witnessed. now, let me start by saying i don't think any of you doubt

that this was the most partisan of exercises. we all fully remembered and it's been said numerous times, the speaker said roughly a year ago you shouldn't go forward with an impeachment if it was not bipartisan. i've watched it very carefully over the years, our leadership positionoverlapped and even before then , we were working together on appropriation bills back in the early days. i'm pretty sure she didn't want to do this . but the fact that she was pulled into this direction against what appeared to be her political instincts a year ago underscores that this was a purely political exercise. now, having been dragged into something she instinctively felt was a mistake, and the

second impulse was let's get this over with asquickly as possible . get it out of here, get it over in the otherbody and let them deal with it . so that's why you had an abbreviated, truncated rush job over in the house. but even during that abbreviated period, it was pretty clear that they are amassed a significant body of evidence from witnesses which you heard them argue about over here frequently. had they provided with us in the house record testimony from 13 witnesses, deposition from 17 witnesses, then of course we had added on top of that 180 questions that we would witness 193 witnesses, video clips and 28,000 pages

of evidence. so i asked my staff to count up the number of times we heard from the house managers during their presentations, how many times it was already proven. there were 60 times, 60 in which house managers said during their presentation to us that the case was either proven or proof, 60 times. there were 33 more times when one or more of the house managers said the evidence was overwhelming. so where did the nonsense about witnesses come from ? i have a pretty good idea. after this early political exercise (house, it came over to the senate and there was a lot of pull data taken, how

are we going to sell this to senators? how are we going to sell it to the american people even though we already have all of this testimony and all of these witnesses, what polls well ? why course, if you ask the average citizen whether they think there ought to be witnesses in the trial , you're going to get an answer that you want. so the speaker i gather decided to sit on the impeachment papers after arguing that this was a matter of great urgency and the president needed to be removed from office as soonas possible . sit on them for a month to laughably think that somehow gave me leverage to concede their principal political argument which was this is all about witnesses over here on our side . well, that brought one of those rare smiles to my face which you witnessed and which i was perplexed by the strategy that was being

deployed. i finally when it became obvious to everyone it was an absurd position, democratic senators sent the papers over and some of our own members were saying it before they get slapped back into line that the papers came over and we know full well this was all going to be about witnesses . i said to my colleagues in december in anticipation of the impeachment that their strategy would be to get it out of the house quickly and to leave it in the senateand leslie . endlessly. so that we would have that wrapped around our axle indefinitely. and my suspicion was that wasn't so much about president trump but rather about taking the senate and my counterpart senator schumer pretty much admitted it to all of you that said this waswhat it was all about . it was about taking the senate and about trying to

bog us down in this and trying to get my guys to have a lot of tough votes. so i'm proud of my colleagues for seeing through that, for knowing that even though you ask a typical voter should there be witnesses in the trial there would say sure, there ought to be witnesses but it was really about not the president, we all knew it was not going to be removed from office but about trying to take the senate and so i'm proud of my members for resisting the temptation to go down that path, for also preventing what the second strategy was, it was pretty clear that democrats if they couldn't win this one and to embarrass the chief justice and try to drag him into this maelstrom and the way that could have been done was with a 50-50 vote whether he would have been accused had he chosen not to rule which of course i can't imagine he

would have but it's pretty clear that would have drag the supreme court right into the middle of the maelstrom as well so we've reached the conclusion, i think this is a thoroughly political exercise from the beginning to the end . and the final irony of it all is the speaker was right in the beginning. because here we are today in a position tojudge the political impact of this . was it all started about politics and did it end about politics. the president has his highest approval rating since he's been in office. i can tell you as a poll watcher whose looking at polls in senate races, every one of our people, every one of them is in better shape today than they were before the impeachment trial started so i'm not sitting here predicting what will be the biggest issue in november but i cantell you this , i can tell you that right now, this is a political loserfor them

. they initiated it, they thought this was a great idea and at least for the short term , it has been a colossal political mistake. >> several of your members have been critical of the president's conduct and one of them of course today said he would vote to convict the president, mitt romney did. why is it okay for the president to ask a foreign country to investigate a political rival ? >> i've been responding to you for years and you know that what i'm here to talk about today is the political impact of this . we completed it, we've listened to their arguments, we voted and it's in the rearview mirror and i think what's appropriate now is the way since it all began for

political reasons, to weigh the political impact of it and i think it's pretty clear what i've already said is where we are right now. >> is there room in the republican party for somebody who votes for the president's conviction? >> i was surprised and disappointed but i still think that we had great teamwork on this and i think we're in a good position going into our senate races and the presidential race with regardto this issue. there may be plenty of other issues between now and november but i think we are in good shape right now . >> son of pelosi's representatives are talking about next steps,subpoenaing john bolton. is there a price to pay if they don't move on after impeachment ? >> you know, i've watched these impeachments, these investigations over the years by both sides. i really think the american

people are more likely to focus at this point and for the rest of the year on what kind of shape as the country in? how are you feeling about things? are you better offas president reagan put it, are you better off now than you were four years ago ? i think the investigations will go on, that's what congress does. we've done it when we were in the majority and there was a democratic president . iwouldn't expect that to stop . i think in the end it's not likely to have much of an impact on any of theraces. the presidential or the senate races . >> donald trump junior said he's calling for mitt romney to be expelled from the republican party. is there any chance mitt romney is expelled as a result of his votes ? >> i was surprised and disappointed but we have much work to do for the american people . and i think senator romney hasbeen largely supportive of

most everything we've tried to accomplish . >> what is this reluctance to engage on the president's conduct, is it acceptable for the president to ask for investigation on the bidens? >> i'm sure you are paying close attention but that's what we've been talking about for the last three weeks. >> obviously you and chuck schumer have a lot of disagreement about how the trial should go so how would you characterize your relationship with the minority leader coming out of this? >> i think the relationship is fine but adopting the clinton rules didn't serve his purpose. so let's go back to what he was trying to achieve, he was very forthright about it. we had a discussion before we began in the trial. he wanted to guarantee at least some number of witnesses before we started.

i felt that our best interest and the best interests of the country was served by listening to the arguments and going through the questioning period before we got to the question of witnesses because we might or might not conclude at that point that we needed any witnesses because we had a mountain of evidence headed our way as they referred to repeatedly which was the best argument against additional witnesses. how many times that they have to say the case was conclusive ? what was proven or approved or overwhelming? when you listen to those kinds of apartments being made by the managers, you scratch your head and say really? do we need to hear more? that was the difference. we weren't angry about it, he was trying to achieve an outcome that he thoughthelped

him win the senate . i felt that the clinton president made more sense not only for the country but for us. david . >> can you talk more about why it was so important not to hear witnesses to make sure the president was acquitted. [inaudible] and how fear of the republican base may have make help that happen. >> obviously i had hoped that the results in the senate would be similar or exactly the same as a result of the house and i think the message there is no do partisan impeachments . which you remember is what the speaker said and she was initially correct about it when she said sometimes it's not. we don't want this to become routine. we looked at a number of things the founders said when they put impeachment in the

constitution and they really were concerned about it becoming a kind of routine effort based on policy differences. or personality differences. sound familiar? the main thing that drove andrew johnson to impeachment is they just didn't like him. sound familiar? that's the kind of thing that seems to me the founders did not want to happen. that we get in a routine of doing this all the time because we had a policy difference or a personality difference . >> .. can you talk a little bit about the senate agenda going forward

and if there's animosity between the speaker and the president at last night state of the union speech. you think this congress can really accomplish anything legislatively with this white house? >> my biggest problem is with this house of representatives. as you all know we are pretty different in approach is to america's problems between the house and the senate. i think we have a chance to do some more business. i certainly hope so. we are looking at infrastructure. we are looking at land and water conservation. barry even in the midst of the election some things that i think we can do together and even though several of you have completely bought into the notion that we are somehow totally dysfunctional, i would point you back to the end of last year. there were a number of dramatic bipartisan accomplishments in the overall spending bills at the end of the year.

admittedly they did move across the floor independently but in that will work huge numbers of priorities for both sides and those only get negotiated on a bipartisan basis so i don't buy the notion that the congress is dysfunctional. we have some big differences. i mean look at what the house passed and we do have some big differences but we will get some more work done for the mac and people. on things that we can agree on and if they don't settle all of this in november and decide they want to lead the country going forward. >> back in the back. >> the resolution to extend the deadline for the ninth amendment. to ratify a constitutional amendment. is that something you might be putting on the floor? >> to ratify what? >> the equal rights amendment. >> oh i haven't thought about that.

i'm personally not a supporter that i hadn't thought about it. [inaudible] will the republican party go after the bite is after the impeachment? >> look i don't tell the committee chairman what to look at. one of you suggested earlier the house is probably in investigatory business. i can only suggest that the senate could choose to do that as well but we don't have a dictatorship over in the senate and i don't trust the committee chairman as to what to take a look at. >> so you have avoided answering the question several times including twice today. >> would you like to make it a third time?

>> a difficult vote in the political environments perfectly reasonable to ask if it's appropriate. >> yeah i think that's what we have just dealt with for three weeks. three weeks we have listened. we have voted. we have passed a number of internal meetings to discuss all of this that you ended up knowing a good deal about in writing about. it's time to move on. this decision has been made and as far as i'm concerned it's in the rearview mirror and the consequences of it in terms of the future are up to the voters of the country to decide who they want to lead the government for the next four and in our case six years. i'm going to take one more. >> when you make of the house voted bipartisan against impeachment and the senate was

the opposite. >> yeah i think there are pretty clear party lines both ways. i think that's what you can take out of it. pretty much party line in both chambers. thanks a lot everybody. [background sounds] majority leader mitch mcconnell and his first substantive comments to reporters in 21 days. the length of the trump impeachment trial which is wrapped up with an acquittal of president trump article i the vote 48-52, article ii the obstruction of congress charged 47-53. it would have taken 67 votes two-thirds of the senate to convict president trump. he becomes the third president to be tried and acquitted in the

a page for trial by the u.s. senate by descendents of southern quorum call now. we are waiting to hear from the democratic leader. chuck schumer. we will take you to the news conference what happens. obviously if the senator comes to the floor to speak that takes precedence and people go to the senate floor has he been doing here on c-span2 since 1986. also when to stand we are getting at least a written statement from the president and perhaps even on camera. we'll keep you posted about that

>> mr. president. >> majority leader. i consent that the quorum call p. dispense with. i move to proceed to executive session for the consideration of calendar 562. >> the question is on the motion.

>> those opposed aye. those opposed nay. the ayes have it. the clerk will report the nomination. the nomination of the judiciary andrew lynn pressure of alabama to the united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit. i sent the cloture motion to the

desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture motion. the cloture motion we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate to hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination to the united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit signed by 17 senators as follows. >> the names will be way for a move to proceed to legislative session. >> the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no no. the ayes appear to have it, that goes. you have a. the motion is agreed to by move to proceed to executive session to consideration of calendar 653. >> all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes have it that motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. >> the nomination to judiciary joshua kendrick of alaska to united states district judge for

the state of alaska. i send the cloture motion to the desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture motion. >> we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate to hereby move to bring to close a close as that of the nomination of joshua kendrick of alaska to united states district judge for the district of alaska signed by 17 senators. sad i ask unanimous consent the reading of the names the way. >> the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it revee ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to do. i move to proceed to executive session for the consideration of calendar 565. >> the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. that motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. >> the nomination of the judiciary matthew thomas shell

of missouri to the united states district judge for the eastern district of missouri. >> i sent the cloture motion to the desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture motion. >> cloture motion we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 the standing rules of the senate to hereby move to bring to close debate on the nomination of matthew thomas shell of missouri to united states district judge for the eastern missouri could ask unanimous the reading of the names the way. i move to proceed to legislative session. >> question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it that motion is agreed to. the mood to proceed to executive session for the consideration of calendar 461. >> the question is on the motion all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes to have it tree that motion is agreed to.

>> the nomination of the judiciary john gerald neff of illinois to the united states district judge for the northern district of illinois. i sent the cloture motion to the desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture notion. cloture motion we the undersigned senators in accordance with provisions of rule 22 the standing rules of the senate by move to bring to close the nomination of jonathan neff of illinois for the fifth district of bill nye sent by 17 senators as follows. i ask unanimous consent the reading of the names be waived. the move to proceed to legislative session. >> all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes to have it the motion is agreed to. i move to proceed to executive session for consideration of calendar 535. >> the questions on the motion. all those in favor say yea. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it the ayes have it the motion is

agreed to. >> the judiciary phillip m. holborn of new york to the united states district judge for the southern district of new york. >> i sent the cloture motion to the desk. >> the clerk will report. >> cloture motion we the undersigned senators in accordance with provision rose 22 of the standing rules of the senate to hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of phillip m. halpern of new york to the united states district judge for the southern district of new york sun by 17 senators as follows. >> i ask unanimous consent the reading of the name names you wait radiesse unanimous consent the quorum call for cloture motions be waived. i ask unanimous consent the senate presume legislative session with senators speaking for up to 10 minutes each. sm's consent the senate consider s. res. 493 submitted earlier

today. senate resolution 4932 authorized testimony documents and representation and united states. >> is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection the senate will proceed. >> isu nonsense of the resolution be agreed to in the motion agreed to and to be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. >> without objection. >> mr. president i have five requests for kennedys to meet after today's session of the senate with the approval of the minority and majority leaders. finally mr. president i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today at adjourn until 11:30 a.m. thursday february 6 for a pro forma session only with no business being conducted further when the senate adjourned on thursday february 6 to convene at 3:00 p.m. on monday february 10. further following the prayer and pledge the morning hour be deemed expired the journal of

proceedings be approved to date the time for the two leaders be reserved for business later in the day in morning business be close. further following leader remarks the senate proceed to executive session and present consideration of the dominic blackwell nomination -- brasher. the cloture motion filed in today's session at 5:30 p.m. on monday. >> without objection. if there is no further business to come before the senate i asked the senate be adjourned under the previous order. the senate stands adjourned until 11:30 a.m. tomorrow. >> the senate impeachment trial of president donald trump has concluded about 35 minutes ago on both articles. article i abuse of power article ii obstruction of congress live coverage of the senate tomorrow that for a pro forma session. take it like to hear from the democratic leader chuck schumer. >> is going to work out and i believe it will work out.

that's not what motivated us here. something as serious as this we try to figure out what is the right thing to do. what is the truth and you get to the truth in eagle ford and the chips will fall where they may but almost always in if american history is an indication when you are right the chips fall on your side or go ahead cheryl. [inaudible] >> i learned of the vote just before they call the roll when someone told me he put out a statement. joe manchin wrestled with this and struggled with it and showed far more courage than every republican other than mitt romney and i didn't know where he would come out today told him that he should just wrestle with his conscience. he's a religious man with god and come to the conclusion to do the right thing but i told him we be friends no matter what. no, no you always shout out. i will get to you.

i try to go to the milder mannered people occasionally. >> will the house of representatives subpoena john bolton? >> i'm not going to comment on what the house of representatives should do. as i said i thought they did a very fine job. i don't have any second-guessing of them and the irony is they did a far finer job than the senate under mitch mcconnell's leadership. [inaudible] this idea we have too many impeachments into few impeachments the standard should not be how many are what's politically writer laura wrong. the standard should be the president commits high crimes and misdemeanors. i think it's conclusive the president did and if the

president doesn't than three months they should impeach him again and that the next president doesn't than they should impeach him or her. autumn line is very simple. this idea that the election should decide if the founding fathers thought election should should have died they would put impeachment in the constitution. they obviously said there are some instances where impeachment should and there were no term limits. it's the most ridiculous argument that elections should preside when the founding fathers put impeachment in the constitution. >> do you think that ukraine. [inaudible] what would be the sign for support? >> we suited the supporting

ukraine. there has been bipartisan support for ukraine. in the past very strong floats for aid to ukraine by what happens is when the president comes up with this crazy conspiracy theory that came out of someone's mind and originally came out of russian intelligence all the republicans say yeah that must be true. when so many people know he's wrong, when so many people know he's not truthful it's very damaging to the republic. we should not be afraid to tell a president he is wrong when you know he is a donald trump is -- you finally got called on. [inaudible] >> i think the greater criticism was the partisan nature of the speech was the fact that it was

untruthful in so many places when the worst thing about this was the president made this a campaign rally, a reality tv show in the it even sounded like a carnival. it was so demeaning for the presidency. that's what i'm aghast at. >> you made reference to senator manchin. [inaudible] >> i said truth will will out and i think those members who voted for the truth who voted for witnesses and documents as the american people were for, will be rewarded for it. nope, not you. >> there has been a number of the president allies who have come out saying there should be a republican -- what do you think that says about the

republican party? >> well it makes my case. you stand up when you think the president is wrong and by the way the vast majority of americans in a good chunk of republicans said the president is wrong. they came to different conclusion but they said he's wrong and they want to throw you out of the party? that's why the percentage in the republican party are less today than when donald trump took office. i didn't call you but i will do you. >> senator gardiner voted against witnesses and conviction. >> you are a all asking these political questions. go ask mitch mcconnell. he is interested in the politics of this and we are just in finding out the right thing to this, the truth okay? [inaudible] >> am not going to tell you what she said that i went to murkowski last night and i told her because she said no one could come to an agreement. i said i went to mcconnell three times before he sent the

letter that asked for witnesses and documents and said let's negotiate a bipartisan agreement that he was not interested in after i sent a letter met with mcconnell and i said let's negotiate. he said not if you have witnesses or documents. he was at unwilling to negotiate and that's what's created these rifts. we were willing to sit down and talk. >> the rifts you are talking about earlier mcconnell said despite the partisan divide that had occurred in an election year he thinks there is still chances to get together. do you agree with that? >> i always want to try but it's laughable. i think irvin mentioned that we have had 27 amendments on the floor six of which by rand paul. leader mcconnell has day after day week after week month after month refused to put things on the floor to debate. it was laughable that he said impeachment is getting in the way of getting things done. the only thing he's getting done is trying to put all these

right-wing judges on the floor that can cast 50 votes. it's laughable that they say they want to get things done but we are always welcome. we want to sit down and bring things to the floor and allow amendments, hallelujah. did you get one yet? go ahead. >> do you have any advice for your caucus about taking the high road? >> we did take the high road. as i said i think we walk with their heads held high. i think the republican caucus is ashamed many of them what they did. >> you mentioned republicans were afraid of the other side. what you think they have to be afraid of next? >> they are always afraid of donald trump. they are always afraid of donald trump. they look back at the last year when the two senators who had the courage to oppose him senator flake a conservative in senator corker a mainstream

republican trait he haunted them out of the party. thank you everybody. this afternoon for the first time in u.s. history of present has been tried and acquitted by the u.s. senate in an impeachment trial. 20 hours after his state of the union address at the capitol president trump found not guilty on a few articles of impeachment abuse of power and obstruction of congress. we just heard from the democratic leader senator chuck schumer and we also heard from mitch mcconnell. we'd like to hear from you. we are putting our phone lines to get your thoughts and here's how we are breaking up the phone lines for republicans to 027-48-8921, democrats 202748891 -- to one and all others (202)748-8922nd