donald john trump, president of the united states, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the constitution and laws, so help you god. steve: senator ben cardin, thank you for being with us. joining us for questioning here in our studio in washington, jason, deputy editor of roll call, and zach cohen. senator, recently you told maryland media regarding impeachment, it is not how the parties do, but how the senate does. can you elaborate senator

cardin: -- can you elaborate? senator cardin: this is the senate, its reputation has so much at stake. the senate has exclusive jurisdiction over the trial. although we will listen to house managers and the president's lawyers, it is up to the senate to conduct this trial, not the republicans of the democrats to make points, but the senate as an institution to carry out a fair trial. this is our challenge. i have said many times, we have to make sure this is a fair trial. but we need to hear from witnesses who have direct information. we need to see the documents. we need to make independent judgments as to what the evidence produces, as well as whether this is an impeachable offense. we took an oath to be impartial. this is about the senate. it is not about democrats or republicans. your republican colleagues in the senate say they will not be litigate the case brought up by house democrats. senator cardin: senator

mcconnell said that. i don't believe the republican party said that. senator mcconnell has been difficult on this. he is working with white house counsel. i don't think that is the way it should have proceeded. quite frankly, and prior impeachments the senate has been able to get source information, witnesses to testify, documents reduced, that were not necessarily available in the house of representatives. it is our responsibility to get the information we need. so we are not trying to relitigate, we are trying to get to the facts. , in september you said president trump "was attempting to obstruct justice, refusing to abide by constitutional and corruption losses and flouting the most basic ethics and conflict of interest laws and regulations." due to the author about impartiality, how do you square those? have you come to a conclusion about this trial? senator cardin: i think you are worth your -- you are referring

to the clause. i raised the issue when president trump took the oath of office, when he indicated he would not divest himself of his conflict properties, which i said was a mistake. i introduced a resolution in the u.s. senate to express that. on day one he violated the constitution under the emoluments clause, by continuing to own his properties and having direct conflicts with the office of the presidency. that is not what is involved in the articles of impeachment. the senate cannot produce articles of impeachment, only the house. deal with thecles president's dealings with the president of ukraine to curry the 2020 elections, and his alleged obstruction of the congressional investigation. those are the two issues we have to judge. i took an oath to be impartial. i will listen to both the managers and the resident's lawyers, and hopefully the witnesses and documents that are relevant. this is from

september and you were talking about the house impeachment inquiry. i want to clarify. senator cardin: about which conflict? i'm not sure there is a conflict here from the point of view of his personal wealth. the conflict was his campaign. and it is not really a conflict. the president is not allowed to use the power of his office to curry favor from leaders of other countries to get involved in partisan politics and u.s. elections. that is wrong. about the trial itself, we pomp and some of the circumstance, managers coming in, senators being sworn in, and we have seen restrictions come in, we can get to that later about public and press access, but from a senator's perspective, and you describe what you are expecting outside these hours that you maybe in

trial mode, from 1:00 in the afternoon until 6:00 in the evening, what else is going on in the senate? this trumps all, does it not? this is it. this is the business of the day and the night. senator cardin: it is up to the senate as to what business it will conduct prior to the impeachment trial. we have permanent roles that deal with impeachment and it indicates the impeachment trial is our top priority and that we should be in session six days a week on the impeachment trial until conclusion. and it takes precedent over any other work of the united states senate. we could change that with 51 votes from senators. we have already gotten some unanimous consent to conduct other business during the impeachment trial. so this coming week we will have an opportunity for the introduction of bills and deal with some committee hearings. that has been determined.

so we can do other business. we have a privilege to by kainer kane -- senator dealing with the authorization of the use of military force in iran. i hope we can take that up because of the urgency. so we can do other business, but the impeachment trial will be our primary focus. we will not be in session from early morning until late at night. i don't think that is going to be the case. we will have some time in the morning, prep time, we need time to go over the information presented, so i think we will get some time to deal with that. and we have other issues we will almost for certain require our attention. >> one thing that is going to be different is that the restrictions that were instituted by the senate, particularly in regard to the press, will be in effect throughout the trial. are you concerned that simply getting information about your

priorities, say you want to discuss the war powers resolution, which got sort of bumped into the trial schedule, does it make it that much more difficult to talk to the press, because we are being prevented from following you, even if you want to talk to us, up escalators and so forth? thinkr cardin: and i those restrictions were overdone. i don't think we needed all those restrictions. there are ways for us to connect. we have been able to do that already. the most popular place is the basement of the capital, where the elevators are. that is pretty much open to the press and the members. we have to go through that area, so we will have the opportunity to talk to the press. i would caution all my colleagues that, yes, we can comment, we can talk about what is going on. this is not a traditional trial from the point of view jurors would not want to talk to the press, but i hope we would recognize our responsibilities under armour oath to be

impartial, and recognize we need to give house managers and the president's lawyers an opportunity to present their case, and hopefully to hear from key witnesses and review key documents. the we can comment to press. no, i don't think the restrictions put in place were necessary. i would have liked to see a more open area, because i think we the press andndle you know how to ask those questions. >> just before the trial began, there was a vote to pass the usmca, the united the press and you know how to ask those questions. states-mexico-canada trade agreement. -- senator cardin: if you look at the final vote, it was overwhelming, about 90% of the newte voted in favor of the united states-mexico-canada agreement. the president is going to sign

it. it is time to move on with this. it is a major improvement over the old nafta. for the people of maryland, it is important. it opens our poultry industry too much more business in canada and mexico. it is good for small businesses, good government, labor and environment. steve: you were in the house ring the bill clinton impeachment, and in 1998, democrats saying this was a political witch hunt and now the republicans say the same thing about democrats. as someone who has been through this process now twice, do you think this town has become politically toxic? have you seen a significant change in the comity, c-o-m-i-t-y, between the parties? senator cardin: we do business every day of the week, me and my colleagues. we are getting legislation done. it's a major consequence in

this congress dealing with chesapeake bay, major bills done dealing with foreign policy issues, and bipartisan working together, democrats and republicans peered but i would be first to acknowledge that under this administration, we have seen a political division like i have never seen in the united states senate or in the congress. dealing with fundamental constitutional responsibilities such as impeachment, you have to put your party on the side and recognize you are talking about the constitution of the united states. what we do here will have a future out impact on our country. so i would hope we all back up a little and recognize we are bearing down on a solemn constitutional responsibility. go to jason dickey dick roll call -- jason of cq roll call. the impeachment trial is

a big deal, but it is also crowding the calendar for four of your colleagues running for president, elizabeth warren, amy klobuchar, bernie sanders and michael bennet. we don't know how long the trial will last, but is there a danger some of your colleagues are going to get antsy if this thing starts to drag into the iowathird, when caucuses are, and then the following weekend in nevada and new hampshire and south carolina. at what point do people start thinking, we need to get this over so we can run for president? senator cardin: there will always be external events that may be inconvenient to our senate responsibilities. and i understand the residential election is a major event, but a trial for impeachment is a major responsibility for the president of the united states, for the united states senate, and that must take priority.

i think we are just going to put that aside. there are advantage that those four colleagues of mine have being a united states senator, but they signed up to be a senator, this is their responsibility. they need to pay attention and they welcome it to their responsibilities as u.s. senators. so i recognize it may have an impact on the presidential nomination process, it will have an impact, but that is the requirements of the job we signed up to do. senator, you have yet to endorse anybody in the primary. are you open to doing so before the maryland april primary? senator cardin: at this point i'm remaining neutral for a couple of reasons. democraticthe senior elected official in maryland. we don't have a governor who is a democrat. and i am trying to keep as much unity as possible among maryland democrats going into this election cycle secondly, we have

one objective when it comes to the president of the united states, and that is to elect a democrat in november. that is our objective, to get a democrat elected. i would enthusiastically support nowof the individuals trying to receive the nomination for the democrats peered so at is forint my enthusiasm our candidates, not to any one specific candidate. >> you have been through a few primaries, and 2008 between hillary clinton and barack obama it went through june of last year, same in 2016. how long do you think the democratic primary will go? senator cardin: it is difficult to predict. first of all, we have many viable candidates in a way that different primaries and caucuses -- and the way different primaries and caucuses distribute delegates, it is unlikely one candidate will have an overwhelming lead on the

delegate count early in the primary season. and then you have the uncertainty of democrats -- uncertainty of candidates that may not be on the early ballots, such as mayor bloomberg. nt may be able to be competitive in some later primaries -- and he may be able to be competitive in some of the later primaries that may be rich in delegates. so it is too early to predict how this nomination process will be concluded. we also have a different structure regarding superdelegates. that could also have an impact on the nominating process. that is a long answer to tell you that i have no idea when this will be determined. historically, nominees went all the way up to the convention and sometimes into the convention without knowing who the nominee is going to be. it is possible this might be one of those years that it will be much later when we know who the democratic nominee will be. >> regarding witnesses in the trial, let's just make an

assumption that you are able to get some witnesses, subpoena somebody like john bolton, say, or mick mulvaney. that would seem to indicate the republicans might get some of .heir preferred witnesses it would be a little odd that biden ord subpoena joe hunter biden, but it is not unheard of. is there a risk that it becomes a circus? senator cardin: i wouldn't think any member of the senate, certainly not because of party affiliation, that you want to have a witness that is not relevant to the allegations in the articles of impeachment to testify before the united state senate. so i think you have to look at relevancy. when you talk about, for

example, mr. bolton, he has direct knowledge of the conversations that took place. we have already heard from third parties who placed him at meetings in which the president was talking about the demands for the ukrainian president as it relates to an investigation of mr. biden and a white house visit. it would be important to hear from him. i'm not exactly sure of the relevancy of the other witnesses you mentioned, but i would want to hear from the president's lawyers as to why they would like to have that person testify , and then we will make that decision. but the witnesses should be relevant. we should have the documents first, so we can properly prepare for the depositions on the testimony. >> speaking of the president's lawyers, we got a look at some of the outside counsel the president is bringing in for his team, names familiar from the

impeachment saga in 1998-1999, ken starr, the independent counsel who led the investigation, alan dershowitz, who is all over cable news and is a presidential vendor, and robert ray. defender, andl robert ray. i wonder if it is already starting to nip into that area of theater. ken starr prosecuted the last president to was impeached is be part of this, was there chatter among fellow senators about the selection? senator cardin: the president has the right to choose his lawyers, and i am certain some issues you are talking about were in the president's thought pattern when he selected his team. not so much, it is what the president's lawyers want to do or the manager want to do, this is up to the united

states senate. we have sole jurisdiction over the trial, and i hope we will stay focused on trying to get to the evidence to support the facts and the legal conclusions as to whether this is an impeachable offense or not. getpe that is where we focused. and i hope that the president's lawyers will recognize that. ken starr was very much in favor of having a broad number of witnesses in the investigation he pursued, particularly those who had wrecked knowledge of the factual allegations -- who had direct knowledge of the factual allegations. so it will be interesting to see whether he is at the trial table even, because of his prior positions. when you talk to republican senators about impeachment, do you get a sense they are committed to bringing witnesses, or open to the idea?

senator cardin: quite frankly, we don't have many discussions about impeachment, for many , primarily that this is a matter where every senator will have to make his or her own decision. and i think they recognize that there is a senate responsibility here and that yes, we certainly want to hear what the managers want, what the president's lawyers want, but ultimately it is our decision, not theirs, as to the information we need, the evidence we need, in order to make our decisions. get am hopeful we will consensus among the senators as to the documents and witnesses that are needed. it is clear to me the house was prevented from hearing from key witnesses by the president's unprecedented attitude about cooperating out all with the constitutional spots abilities of the house in regards to articles of impeachment. so we have a responsibility as

the senate to say, look, for us to have a fair trial, we need to hear from the witnesses that have the direct knowledge of these factual allegations, and we need to see those documents. i am hopeful we will have, kratz and republicans coming together to say we need to get that. you were critical of the drone attack that killed that iranian general. and we have learned 11 american soldiers were injured. initially, the president said no americans were injured. your reaction? again, thedin: president to me exceeded his constitutional authority, his legal authority, when he ordered the killing of the general. we don't cry at all for mr. soleimani's death. he was a horrible person responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people. we have three years of this

administration going from a path of diplomacy to resolve our problems with iran, in unity with our allies and with support of russia and china to isolate iran, and now the united states has been isolated, the path for diplomacy seems much more challenging, and just about every expert tells us it is in our national security interests to find a diplomatic answer to iran in the middle east, and not to engage in another lengthy conflict. i think the way the president has handled iran, not just with the killing of general soleima ni, the way he has handled iran during his three years in office has been against our national security interests. iran, things seem to have cooled down a little bit. european allies are trying to figure out some way to continue whatever talks could

to the to get them back table, perhaps to replace the iran nuclear deal and get something better. is that feasible, from your perspective? is it too hot to go there, or is this an opportunity? i have haddin: regular contact with our european friends in regards to the iranian situation. i talk frequently with my counterparts in the u.k. and and i have france, urged them to keep the toward diplomacy with iran to keep going forward. europe has indicated they intend to adhere to the nuclear agreement, the arms limitation agreement with iran, where they were not allowed to produce a

nuclear weapon. and they were in compliance before the united states pulled out of the agreement. we recognize it is going to be a challenge, with the united states pulling out and imposing additional sanctions, but we are hopeful that we can preserve diplomacy, and europe is helping us in that regard. the best answer to resolve the iranian issue is through diplomacy. we do not want to start a war. a war will be very lengthy and costly, and where does it lead? we can't occupy, nor do we want to occupy iran. so it is a circumstance where we need to find avenues to pursue diplomacy. and europe gives us that path where perhaps we can. can: do think diplomacy yield a new agreement with iran, now that the president pulled out of the iran nuclear deal, that i believe you opposed. >> british foreign minister boris johnson said the president

should lead those negotiations. senator cardin: you are right, i opposed it, but once we were in it, my view was very much that i as long as iran was -- that as long as iran wasn't compliance, it would be a mistake for america to be isolated and jeopardize diplomacy, and that is what happened. i recognize that. i also hope we have a different leader in america after the next election a year from now. i recognize that is a long time and we have to deal with the reality. why believe we can find a diplomatic way to deal with iran's nuclear weapons and deal with other nefarious actions? we have to pursue it. it is more difficult today than it was three years ago. three years ago we had a path in regards to the nuclear issues and iran, and we could build on that to deal with their other activities, including the support of terrorism in their ballistic missile tests. today the indicted states is in a much more difficult position. we do not have direct

negotiations with iran. we have to work through surrogates and third parties but we have to build on that because that is in our national security interests. you have faith in secretary of state mike pompeo to deal with these issues? senator cardin: secretary pompeo and i have different views as to how to conduct foreign policy. no question about that. when he was in the house, he was opposed to even negotiating with iran. he was in favor of using military action back then. so he and i have different views . the diplomacy route needs to be put in high gear, we have to accelerate that, we have to have a surge in diplomacy, and i have not seen that from secretary pompeo. >> are there any active talks about getting back on the war powers resolution that senator kaine sponsored, which you mentioned earlier? is that something you are going

to have to wait until opening arguments in the trial, or are there escutcheon's about getting back on that as soon as possible , given how volatile the situation could be? senator cardin: the resolution is privileged. believes he has 51 senators who will support the resolution. the resolution is very simple. it says has 51 senators who will support the , basically, the president does not have authorization to use force against iran. he certainly has the right to defend america against an imminent threat, but he does not have the authority. and if he wants to use military force, he needs to seek authorization from congress that is pretty much what the resolution says. it will be on the floor of the may benate, and it privileged during the impeachment trial. it is not clear. we will wait for the parliamentarian to give us a ruling. that we are hopeful, because

there is a need to conduct business during the next several weeks. we don't know how long the impeachment trial is going to go , and we will get consent between mitch mcconnell and chuck schumer for an opportunity to take up this resolution, i hope within the next week or two. steve: a crowded field to replace your friend, former congressman elijah cummings. will you make an endorsement in that race? senator cardin: no, i will not. i don't believe in the seventh congressional district. i have a lot of friends that are running. elijah cummings, we can't replace him. we will have a congressman in the seventh congressional district, but we lost our real champion on social justice. i'm pleased to see we have a lot of really good people running. the primary is taking place soon. we should have some indication of woo hoo the next congressperson will be.

cardin,enator ben democrat from maryland, member of the foreign relations committee, think he for being with us on "newsmakers." we continue the conversation. the impeachment trial is getting underway tuesday. what will you be looking for? zach: i will be curious to see what the managers present. we have had new facts and new evidence come to light since the articles were passed in december. it was a government accountability office report that said there was a violation of the impoundment control act, a law that says the president has to spend money congress appropriates. the report came out just last week. i will be curious to see if managers incorporate that into their arguments. after the managers finish the process, it will turn to the white house defense. steve: jason, you brought up john roberts. his role in all this? it is fascinating. the way william rehnquist

conducted clinton impeachment trial, he was quoted as saying, i set out to do nothing and i accomplished it, or something along those lines. but the chief justice does have leeway in terms of what questions, how to frame questions brought to him from senators. there is a potential for an ugly rulesif the chief justice some white and the majority leader like that and rings up a motion to overrule. that could be ugly. but i kind of doubt they are going to go there. see, onbe important to tuesday i will be looking at exactly how it is organized. this sounds very wonky, but the organizing resolution they will vote on will tell us how they are going to go into the day, whether they will go on saturdays. i will believe it when i see it that they will be in six days a

week. bring up they can anything they want, if they have the votes. andhey stay with the tone solemnity with which the chief justice open the trial, we could see a very, a situation where people may say the senate is acquitting itself as well, as senator cardin said. is not the chief justice interested in being embarrassed. he wants to make sure he conducts it in a way where history, not just people in the room, will judge him well. you said it earlier, this is probably going to be one of the first aligns and history written about this chief justice. but a it is a trial, political process, and at the

center, witnesses. what will senator mcconnell do? a vote of be up to senators. the organizing resolution is something house speaker nancy pelosi was negotiating on when she was withholding the articles. they were hoping to have a vote on witnesses. instead, senate minority leader chuck schumer said recently they witnessesto force anyway. but the resolution punts the decision on witnesses until later in the trial, as was done in 1999 with bill clinton. it has yet to be determined whether this will go beyond opening arguments from both sides and senators' written questions. not to hit the political calendar, but mitch mcconnell is also running for reelection in november. he needs to show his state he is behind the president. it is a very republican state, kentucky. his unfavorable's have always been high, but he has always

managed to win handily, even when he doesn't have high favorable ratings like you would want if you are running a campaign. i am guessing he is not going to do anything that would get him crossways with republican voters in kentucky. but the challenge will be, will that play with the public? will the public perceive it as a fair process? that is the type of needle mcconnell has threaded his entire career. zach: it is a tougher needle for susan collins in maine, a very different state than kentucky. call: jason dickey of roll and zach: of national journal, thank you for being with us. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the house will be in order. c-span hasears, provided america unfiltered

coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy events from washington dc and around the country, so you can make up your own mind. created by cable in 1979, c-span is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> our guest's abigail spanberger, democrat from virginia and her first term. you passed legislation earlier this month? the premise of the bill is that we are facing significant challenges with the future of 5g technology, and the u.s. needs a comprehensive strategy. so the bill would require we develop one, we implemen