saying to voters among first-hand accounts from political reporters, updated members, fundraising data and campaign ads. watch c-span's 2024 campaign trl. friday night at 7:30 eastern, c-span.org and the podcast on c-span now, our free mobile apps or wherever you get the podcast. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> get contact information from members of government in the palm of your hand when you preorder your copy of c-span's 2024 congressional directory with bio and contact information for every house and senate member of the 118th congress, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. the congressional directory cost $32.95 plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. scan the code on your right or

go to c-span.org to preorder your copy for delivery this spring. a group of republican senators called for full senate trial to take place once the articles of impeachment against alejandro mayorkas are received by the senate. they held a news conference that was being recorded that they start a trial would be delayed until next week. this is 50 minutes. >> by thursday. >> good afternoon. thank you for joining us. whether we received the impeachment articles tomorrow

or next week, the democrat leader of the senate plans on halting the process to start the impeachment trial. make no mistake about it, a vote to block the impeachment trial of secretary mayorkas is a vote to keep our borders open. a vote to block the impeachment trial is to tell laken riley's family we don't care in 250,000 americans who lost a loved one to fentanyl poisoning that we don't care. only takes two democrats to deny tabling this process in order to proceed with an impeachment trial but we don't think that is the case. this issue is so toxic to senate democrats, house democrats and president biden that they don't want to this to be the issue of the day. my hope is the good people of

montana and ohio, wisconsin, michigan, nevada, pennsylvania, hold their senators accountable this november. make one thing clear before i turn it over to my colleagues. tabling these impeachment articles is a nuclear option. in our estimation this is a nuclear option and will necessitate some type of nuclear retaliation much as when harry reid went nuclear in 2013 to get his judges moving forward invoking the nuclear option that came back to bite them in the form of neil gorsuch in 2017. i look forward to my college prosecuting this case on behalf of the american people in sharing why we need to go forward with this impeachment trial of secretary mayorkas.

the first one here -- >> you are up, sorry. >> a charitable interpretation of what senator schumer is planning to do does not exist. it doesn't. he is going to either make a motion to table or to dismiss the work done by the us house of representatives. in our 200 plus year history, we have had 20 one public officials impeached by the united states house of representatives. we in the senate have held trials and all but 40. in three instances we dismissed

the charges because the officials resigned. the other incident, we dismissed the charges because it involved a senator, and we don't believe we have the authority to hold the impeachment of the senator. those are the facts. i fully expect senator schumer to try to muddy the water to try to make it look deep, but this is very simple. we are either going to follow senate custom, senate rules and senate history or we are not. if he chooses and if he may have the votes to do it but if he chooses to dismiss these impeachment articles without so much as a trial as if it was just spam in the democrats's in box, it will be further

evidence that under this administration the senate has been rotting from within, rotting from within. we don't do a budget anymore. the leadership just gets together and writes a bill. sometimes they cut the budget bill, the omnibus in two, in too many bills. and this is one more step. what are we here for. impeaching public official, after months and months. after months of investigation, and one of the most solemn acts the house can do. senator schumer is just going to dismiss that.

not even hold a trial because he thinks he has the votes and it is politically expedient, isn't that special? and every one of you know that if republicans were doing the same thing, you would be catatonic and foaming at the mouth. that is what chuck is doing and it is wrong. and we are going to do everything we can to stop it. originally, senator schumer planned to do this on a thursday when everyone is trying to get back to their districts. isn't that special. wonder why he picked a thursday. we asked and i understand the speaker, we asked him to delay sending over the articles to give us a full week, we will

see if senator schumer honors the extra time. this is unconscionable. this ranks right up there with getting rid of the filibuster. we either have the united states senate as set up by our founders or we are not and that's what is going on here. >> we all know chuck schumer is playing politics with this. he has members that are likely going to lose their seats and he doesn't want them to taking vote on this and he knows that the border and lack of border security is the number one issue with the american people. i here in tennessee every day. chuck schumer is trying to be too cute by half and devise a way to not have a trial. here's what he had to say in

2019 prior to the impeachment of donald trump. he said, i am going to quote him, we would do well to remember our constitutional duty to act as judges and jurors in a potential trial. he fully realizes that this is our constitutional duty. it is ascribed to us to take up these articles, to hold a trial. but he is so power-hungry, the only thing he can focus on is the november elections and what he is willing to do is toss the constitution aside so that he can protect some of his members. it is imperative that we take the information from the house. it is imperative that we hold a

trial of secretary mayorkas, who has neglected his duty. think about it. we have a homeland security secretary that does not believe in securing the homeland. >> a moment ago senator kennedy referred to this as a can to the nuclear option. the most violent act undertaken against the institution of the senate and its time-honored traditions since november 2013 nuking the point the nuclear option, executive calendar filibuster. in a sense this is even more serious. we deal more frequently on a day-to-day basis with the filibuster but on the other

hand this effort to nuke our traditions is even more serious here because unlike the filibuster which is rooted in tradition, article 1 gives the house power to impeach and the senate the power and the duty to conduct trials of impeached officials. there have been 21 sets of articles of impeachment, passed by the house of representatives in the history of our republic. i believe it is 17 of those 21 cases where the senate conducted a trial and those proceedings culminated in a verdict of guilty or not guilty. the remaining four cases the

senate didn't conduct a trial and didn't reach a verdict of guilty or not guilty but only because between the time the house adopted the articles and it reached or not reached the senate, the person holding the office either died or left office and obviating the need for a trial. there is no plausible justification for invoking any of those historical antecedents here as secretary mayorkas is very much alive and very much the secretary of homeland security. but they are nuking here is not just a senate precedent or senate rule, but a provision of the constitution and a time-honored duty in the senate to do this. they are nuking a provision of the constitution. separate and apart from how you feel about secretary mayorkas in his performance of his duties, anyone who fancied him

or herself someone concerned about the senate as an institution should for that reason alone be willing to stand up to this form of legislative tyranny and say we've got an obligation to do this. on the merits of the thing i would ask a series of questions, regardless where you stand on secretary mayorkas need to be answered. for example. if you think secretary mayorkas has not willfully, defiantly refused to enforce our laws, let's hold a trial. if you disagree that he allowed 430,000 unaccompanied minor children in recent months into the united states, let's hold a trial. if you think he hasn't dangerously loosened restrictions and efforts to vet people entering the country from china including a lot of military aged men crossing the border, let's hold a trial.

if you believe that we haven't seen a dramatic increase, and unlawfully let's hold a trial. up trial can either acquit or convict. given we have a sworn duty consistent with the constitution as we are required to take under the constitution to conduct this trial, we got 2.5 centuries of precedent backing up the constitutional duty. wide apart from this now? wide apart from this now even if, especially if you think he is innocent of impeachable offenses of which he has been accused. .. been accused. what this innocentbut this innon that has nothing to hide, it's not this. i'm very grateful to the speaker

johnson for his willingness to we don't want d this to come ovr on the eve of the moment when members might be operating under ethe influence of jet fuel intoxication. that was precisely the plant and it's much better for us to do this at the beginning of a legislative week rather than toward the end of one and i thank him for doing that. >> we're witnessing a profound threat to our nation at the southern border. joe biden, kamala harris and his entire administration is to liberate willfully facilitated the criminal invasion of this country. it is the humanitarian crisis. as a public safety crisis. it is an national security crisis. when all you have america's last hits of it before the senate judiciary committee i asked him how many migrants died last year crossing into this country? he said ion don't know. of course he didn't get the number is 853 but administration

doesn't care about the buybacks that for open borders are producing. when joe biden stood before congress and gave the state of union address, he had planned in his remarks not just a word about laken riley, the beautiful 22 your woman, the nursing student in georgia murdered by an illegal alien. joe biden and alejandro mayorkas released into this country. when biden gave his state of ofe union address they didn't mention the name jeremy cáceres, the two year old little boy murdered just miles away fromeo your end prince george's county again by an illegal alien that joe biden and alejandro mayorkas released into this country. he also didn't mention the haitian illegal immigrant that joe biden and alejandro mayorkas flew from haiti to america, released, who then violently

raped a 15-year-old girl in boston, massachusetts, who was severely disabled. what we are witnessing is evil. it is wrong. that is why the house of representatives impeached alejandro mayorkas, because he is aided and abetted the criminal invasion of this unitea states. and yet, chuck schumer of the democrats don't want to talkde about it. even worse, , chuck schumer and the democrats want to defy their constitutional responsibility. 21 times in our nation's history, the house of representatives ascent articles of impeachment over to the senate, 21 times. alejandro mayorkas is only the second cabinet member ever to be impeached. the last time i a cabinet was impeached was 1876, 148 years ago. what mayorkas has done is

extraordinary and its consequences are profound. under the constitution the responsibility of the senate are simple and straightforward. they are to try this impeachment. chuck schumer doesn't want to do that. instead, he wants to move to table the entire thing, and are three reasons chuck schumer wants to move the table the articles of impeachment. sreason number one, he does not want to allow the house managers to present the evidence of alejandro mayorkas and this administration's willful decision to aid and abet this criminal invasion of this country. the second reason schumer wants to table two articles of impeachment is he doesn't want a trial. he does not want the american people to see the facts. when each of us lay out the facts so what's going on, not

democrat argues not the never side, they don't defend it safe no, no, no, it's great. don't worry about the people who are dying. don't worry about the children being raped. don't worry about the mexican drug cartels taking billions of dollars. the democrats have no response. the response is they count on the meeting up to reported. that's their entire strategy. and the third reason schumer wants to table these articles of impeachment is he does not want senate democrats particularly those on the ballot in november to vote guilty or not guilty because it is indisputable alejandro mayorkas is guilty, eddie's nudges guilty of aiding and abetting the invasion that is happen for l the last three d half years and every dead body that has resulted, but he is guilty tomorrow and the next day and the next day he intends to continue facilitating and accelerating this criminal invasion. of the 21 times the house has voted out articles of impeachment and sent them to the

sin, in four of them, the senate either lacked jurisdiction because the individual was a senator and nonexecutive branch officer, a judicial officer, or the person impeached was out of office. and the case was mooted. in every single case where the individual a peach was still in office, , in all 17 the senate conducted a trial and adjudicated and came to a decision guilty or not guilty. in 2013, harry reid nuked the filibuster. that date in or missed damage to the institution of the united states senate. and 2024 chuck schumer and tens to nuke the impeachment clause of the trendy constitution. and make no mistake, if this president is that it will not be the last time it is used --

precedent. if and when donald trump wins in november, if god for bid democrats have the house, they will impeach him again and probably again and again and again. and what chuck schumer is deciding is the senate no longer has to try impeachment, but instead can hide behind procedural games. anyone who cares about the security of this country should oppose what schumer is doing and vote to convict alejandro mayorkas. and anyone who cares about the united states senate and about the united states constitution should demand that a trial be conducted. the american people deserve a trial and i would encourage egg in any media ask yourself, why is chuck schumer so terrified to have a trial on what's happening on our southern border? and the answer is he cannot defend it. he desperately wants to keep it

hidden in secret from the american people. >> first of all, thank you, senator marshall, for sponsoring this press conference. thanks all of youou for f coming here. i want to think the legal rights of a conference with that of laying out the case of why we must hold a trial. i'm going toi' make the practicl case. the reason chuck schumer wants to table it is this chart. i was with president trump last week trial than with him. of course we talked about the border and ushered in this chart that i've been developing since i was chairman of homeland security probably in 2014 and beyond, just updating in monthly. the disaster that was deferred action for childhood arrivals which sparked this massive under a biden invasion of her country. president trump liked theun chat and he adapted it. he modified it for his own use. it's got more publicity as a result. i'm shocked, but one of the commentators, one of the political commentators retweeted the chart and said this will itself decide the election. that's why senator schumer does

not want to hold this trial. i've made one additional modification by the way what i liked by the c chart what i'll y to describe or is the cause and effect. starting with daca, the reinterpretation of the flores decision, the fact president trump was faced with his own border crisis but he fixed it. you'll notice his peak, a little under 5 million people a day on average being counted at the southern border. 12 what you reduce it down to about 500 a day. now, that was before twaddle 42. i added added to the chart now is expulsions under title 42. so even though started decreasing about 2020 during election, democratic presidential candidate were vowing they would in deportation, they provide free health care. that was an incentive. that's a problem. the by administration democrats are incentivizing invasion of

this country. so more people started coming. but because of covid, president trump invoked title 42. he started -- you could see the incredibly small numbers of people under the trump administration thatf president trump allowed in this country. we had pretty well secured our border. setting up the next step of passing a functioning legal immigration system. i was withfu senator lee with te trump a station on it. we would a fix these problems but important american made the wrong choice. they elected president biden and democrats controlled the houses of congress here in this as an important point to understand. democrats, p president biden wat an open border. they caused this problem. we didn't need a law passed to the president biden have the authority to close the border. president trump using existing

law close the border. president biden used that exact same authority, opened it up. so you can see the explosion from the end of the, the end of the trump administration where virtually we had the border closed and then the explosion and the widening gap is president biden allowed title 42 to expire. but even without that, even using title 42 they welcomed, they incentivized families, unaccompanied children, and subjected them to the depredations. they're open border policy facilitates the multibillion dollar business model come some of the most evil people on the planet, the human traffickers, the sex traffickers, the drug traffickers poisoning our cities. that's what biden and the democrats, and this is important to know, too. it's not just president biden. this is democrat policies. that's what must be defeated.

but senator schumer wants to nip this impeachment trial in the blood because heth doesn't want the house managers to make the case -- bide -- exports i can would happen, how to actions, how their policies are causing this invasion. they do want to be held accountable. that's why a trial is imperative in the united states senate and why i so appreciate what speaker johnson apparently just is going toat he delay delivery of these things so that senator schumer doesn't have thursday at 1:00 to just snuff this thing epic so again, thank you, senator marshall. thank you all. >> politically speaking, if there were a mount rushmore of worst cabinet members in history of our country, secretary mayorkas would be a mount rushmore can you be one of the faces. legally speaking, he supported the loss ofea the united states and that's what this is all about. before you get to that we have to have trial.

the t constitution calls for it. history of this country, this, what chuck schumer is about to do has never happened. an account that says things are unprecedented all the time, this actually is unprecedented. the idea that you would dismiss or table something that is part of our duties, part of, when we raise our right and, when we take this office, something we're supposed to do. chuck schumer is willing to throw all of that away because he's afraid of a couple of news cycles. we hear a lot about threats to democracy. there is, ladies and gentlemen, there's only one party in this country tryingg to throw a political rival off the ballot, throw him in jail for the rest of his life, and the filibuster, destroy the senate and and impeachment forever. that is what they're doomed plan is.

and so i would just ask even my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, this is our job. this is our job, regardless of how you're going to vote. because 200 years from now people will look back at him a senators who don't know the names, sitting in seats in the chimp can look back to what happened in th next seven days. and it will set a course for the rest of american history because there's no goingis back. once you break the seal here, there will be no impeachment trials ever again. and chuck schumerer likes to say history is watching. and i would remind him, history is indeed watching, chuck schumer. do the right thing, hold the trial, let the chips fall where they may. >> i want to make one point and we were opened up for questions. several have pointed out senator schumer is reaching another nuclear weapon here. -- unleashing -- could you imagine with retaliation by the

court could you imagine a day and a time where a republican president, a democrat-controlled house, they impeach the republican president. they send it to a republican-controlled senate, and that senate said we're going to table it. i just think that americans and the national media would lose their minds over it. what we are letting chuck schumer get by with it for whatever reason. let's to questions. >> just to confirm russian speaker johnson has agreed -- two hours ago they were sending them this week. so he's delayed them. how do you get a trial? how do you try to draw schumer -- [inaudible] >> remember, come up to the microphone so they can record abettors. >> articles of impeachment triggers a whole different set of rules. the scent as exactly three

states up like i'm a ledge e telecom executive calendar, and impeachment court calendar. [inaudible] convened, the region articles can we get sworn in and then we go about a process to negotiate the precise procedural bounds of this particular impeachment proceeding. and in those we make arguments, unlimited motions, subject to being ruled dilettante by the president officer patty murray in this instance because the president is not on trial. and so making arguments and points of order. the unfortunate event that they decide to proceed with this disastrous approach to nuke impeachment, aliso nuke impeachment and all cases where the party in control of the majority of the senate finds itself in opposition to the impeachment. remember, it has not been very long since we've conducted well,

we conducted to a impeachment trials involving the 45th 45th present of the united states. the first of which came over to us at a time when we republicans were in control of the united states senate. think about it this way. over time we seen the senate gradually whittling away to its own authority and its own obligations on the legislative calendar, we seen the senate and the house, sadly, transferring disproportionate share of our lawmaking power over to unelected accountable democrats and in executive branch of government. on the executive calendar side we've seen ourselves whittle down the number and a percentage, the portion of federal appointees, presidential appointees, subject to senate confirmation. we will now have a trifecta, a trifecta if we undertake this task where we hope will yet again narrowed down her constitutional duties.

that's shameful. but getting back to question, this will be all about -- less inclined operate under jet fuel intoxication on a monday and it would on a thursday. >> go ahead. >> short answer is no going to follow points of but senator schumer can block of those. >> how long? >> we will have, have lots of points of order because this is, this is blatantly unconstitutional. but senator murray, the pro tem, will be in the chair and she doesn't have to recognize us. that's entirely possible that senator schumer will tell her only to recognize him, and we will not even have a chance to make a point of order. so much for democracy. >> we may be not providing that consent. >> and listen also. y'all can influence this. why is chuck schumer trying

desperately to defy the constitution and not have a trial court because he doesn't want the american people to hear the facts about what this administration has done and how many americans have died as a result. and he believes with the motion to table he believes the press would be compliant. hominy how many of your goe a story tomorrow this has chuck schumer and the democrats defied 200 years of history, and for the first first time refua trial on impeachment or i suspect there are notch going to be many stories. why is schumer wanting to do this?ie because the press he believes let him get away with it, and every democrat, how many of you have asked jon tester in montana, why are you refusing to comply with yourmp constitutionl duty for how many of you have asked sherry brown or jacky rosen or tammy baldwin but they are all on the ballot. that's a chuck schumer is trying to protect from having to his

evidence and fulfill a constitutional responsibility. he believes the press will not report on whathe he's doing. >> the vulnerable democrats up for election and then come back and forth, but there's even some republicans that are a question of what they vote in a motion to table. talking to reporters today, store romney said he wasn't sure with you we do. what's the reaction to that? how to project identified gop conference? when you have someone on that side saying they don't know? >> look, i think that every senator is going to vote their conscience. of, senator romney has gone up for reelection. maybe there's a reason he's not going upper election. we just i that super majority of republicans i know back home are demanding some sort of accountability, and a measure what townhall he's going to and listen to but not the same town halls i'm going to. >> i have two questions. i want to follow senator rubio would you just think about the

demolition direction. the founders purposely made conquers the creation of congress article one. are you suggesting that congress is no longer the ? [inaudible] >> yes. it was surprising to no one, it was secret to no one at the time that the most dangerous branch of the federal government was then, is now, has always been, was always intended to be the article oneen branch, the legislative branch. congress where weth work. always. why? because with one branch that makes the law. we have one branch that enforces the law, or supposed to, the same laws passed by the logistic branch. a third branch that interprets the law. those are subservient to the dominant role of making the law. we set the policy. we decide what should be. executive branch enforces that, and then in their rearview

mirror the courts look at things and think this is what it means. this is what, this is what was enacted. this is what the law actually says. so we are by far the most dangerous branch and that's why the founding fathers entrusted only to the branch of government most accountable to the people at the most regular intervals. voters have the chance to fire every representative and has come all 435 every two years. voters have a chance to fire a third of us every two years. there is a reason for this, and that makes it, that much more dangerous when we impart, we relinquish, we shun, we run from our own obligations just for the sake of ease, for the sake of avoidance of criticism. that's the road to tyranny, folks, whether you're a democrat, or republican, conservative or liberal, , that ought to scare you to death. >> use of next week your

telephone week to do the call but doesn't that conflict with the debate on the extension? >> look, i do know it's going to take an entire week to go to the initial round of arguing. i would love to make it not easy for them to do it. i don't know it will stretch into entire week. what i'm saying is if we don't start it until the end of the week, that leaves us know adequate opportunity to debate it. you don't want members try to town so quickly that their influence on the jet fuel. let me jump in because there are two ways this can and should proceed constitutionally inconsistent with precedent. one is next week if we receive the articles of impeachment on monday night, the senate under the rule immediately moves into a court of impeachment. and typically the beginning of that is negotiating the resolution that lays out how the impeachment will proceed. there are two ways to do it. one, the trial can be on the floor of the senate. that's what happened with both

of impeachment of donald trump is impeachment was on four of the senate or the other with intuit is the senate can appoint a committee to try the impeachment. so not the entire senate, not on the senate floor. that is what it is typically been done for impeachment be the level of president. so senator lee filed and organizing resolution to the full senate to convene and conduct a trial the way we did twice for president trump. the and ior both believe that would be the best way to do it, but it's not the only way to do it. the other way to do it would be next week when w the articles of impeachment are received to appoint an impeachment committee that within conduct the trial in the committee, and that would enable if there are other the legislative matters that need to proceed, they could proceed, they would proceed on parallel tracks. so any democrat who tells you know know know we've other things to turn to, we cut fisa, we got this, without that, either one of those arguments ms. maloney. because under the existing rules the senate could appoint an

impeachment committee to conduct a trial that would be public antiphon of the american people and the senate could simultaneously proceed and consider legislation while the child was ongoing. >> you said this place and functions by unanimous consent. is it? [inaudible question] >> of course we would need the majority of the republican conference to basically agree with that strategy, , but we believe this is important not that that ought to be on the table. if senator schumer so disrespects then traditions and precedence of theth senate, if he's willing to do this nuclear option on the impeachment power, i think we should certainly challenge him and let him realize that it may not be easy going from here on in. >> let me justt add, this is not like some amendment on a bill, right? this is the united states

constitution. in 240 plus years of precedent. so my personal view is the consequences ought to be commiserate with the action, and this is, , again, short of endig the filibuster, fist of the more you could do in the transcendent to diminish this institution from his constitution responsibly. impeachment is likely we're supposed toth do your so my personal view is there ought to be a real cost for chuck schumer. schumer. so we will see. >> just to make sure, you guys have spoke to anyone who is voting differently on cabling or not tabling based on if this is happening on thursday for a monday, right? >> what. >> with by pushing this to mind as opposed to doing this on thursday, you have spoken to anyone within republican or democratic caucuses since i'm going to vote did not table because this is happening. you don't have the vote. >> what kind of question is at? how do know we don't have the votes. >> i'm not saying that you get i'm asking what the benefit of the delay is. >> the benefit of the delay is,

dove, that we have a chance to talk about the issue. i mean, if you guys want to go back and write an article about whether your linkedin page is holding youet back, you can do that, or you can write about this issue. and short of getting rid of the filibuster, this goes to the heart of the united states senate. i happen to think and rethink my colleagues agree with me that maybe talking about it for a few days might, before return, take the constitution and turn it upside down, , just might be a wise thing to do. i can't tell you that we, that every republican is going to vote for this. i can't tell you that. you know as well as i do we had some free range chickens and they wander off and sometimes we can't catch them. and they, and they have the right to be free range chickens.

i'm just telling you all this questions that are being asked, you are falling into senator schumer trap because he's going to try to muddy up this water to make it look deep. there's nothing, get about this. you either believe in the constitution or you don't. >> i will say there wistar consensus in the senate lunch today to delay this delivery of impeachment so we can have this discussion. because we feel thisss is an important discussion to have. so get that was almost unanimous consensus. people ask him anybody to set? nobody did. >> joe manchin and kyrsten sinema buck chuck schumer's on the filibuster just a f couple years ago. so i don't know,w, that might be democrats who actually care about the constitution, too. but if they're allowed y with this tabling or dismissal, -- >> and let's be clear, the question, what difference is a make me it on a thursday afternoon? either one of you covers capitol hill. you are aware on thursday

afternoon senators rushed to the airport to fly to other he wanted to go away quickly. the advantage of starting the week with it is it enables the senate to focus on it. we ought to do our job, and i will say the question a minute ago that was asked, given that the vote to understand what you say when you save when we don't have the votes. you were saying that you know that every single democrat senator does not give a damn about what evidence might be presented when you listen to the evidence, would be open to any evidence come doesn't care about the people being killed, doesn't care about the 100,000 americans who died of drug overdoses last year, doesn't care about little boys and girls l being violently sexually assaulted. they don't come to the board. they do look them in the eyes. i do. everyone of us here has been to the border. we think children can we seen women who have been brutalized by the cartels. and your question assumes no democrat cares. they're all okay with the open border. eithercr way, remember that when

you write the stories about each of the democrats saying i'm very concerned about more security. because they're going to say that in the election ads. they're going to claim they are very concerned about it. well, if they are, we ought to have a trial. the reason schumer doesn't want a trial, he doesn't want the evidence in front ofev him. and you know the democrat senators don't care about the people that are getting hurt by these open borders because b thr only priority is political power. to make one point, is that public sentiment, public opinion does drive and impeachment trial. 1974. i'm a young boy watching watergate hearings, and those hearings with all the american eyes on those, as boring as a series were, they drove and impeachment trial to the point they cause richard nixon to drive, to resign. just like the president had the responsibility of the press has responsibility now i hope to talk about the significance of

the stupid option. yes, go ahead. you are able to usher in the pressure -- elite don't necessarily vote to remove. >> happens all the time. you know that and i know that. >> to mention points of order. could you tell the point of order your thinking of offering? i knew set us up to them in terms of whether they recognize for what are your ideas? >> well, i'm not going to tell you. stay tuned. you should actually watchl the proceedings. but i'll take this, you will be impressed. we will have lots of points of order and we will have lots of motions. but let me say -- we are free range chickens but but i dow if we'll ever get to make the because it senator schumer walks in their and gives, against the high side to the speaker pro tem, and she won't recognize anybody but senator schumer,

they can even get rid of our, our responsibility to raise points of order because this thing is unconstitutional. i mean, you know it's unconstitutional, excluding unconstitutional. >> go ahead. >> what's the bare minimum you need to see from the trial to say that you are satisfied with the process? >> i want a trial. >> a trial. >> conduct a trial, allow the house managers to present their evidence. that's how traffickers. the house calls called tht deficit this as evidence want to. the senate sits and receives the evidence, considers evidence and makes a determination. had a real trumpet the house where the respondent dilley. by all the way rescinded happen. it happened twice inne recent years with the democrats impeached donald trump, and to stick with, with john kennedy's poultry analogies, removal it's good for the goose is good for the gander. when house democrats impeached

donald trump the first time, republicans had the majority. we could've done this. we didn't. because we actually took our constitutional responsibility seriously, and the senate conducted the trial. the question is, is or even one senate democrat, one, who takes the sims constitutional responsibility seriously now? and if the answer is no, i can promise you the next time we see and impeachment, if the senate is in the same party as the president, you're not going to see see a trial. you areee saying the democrats erased impeachment clause from the constitution, and that is a serious, serious threat to the rule of law. >> let's go clear to the back. >> so you go straight to the trial or have committee assess the evidence? >> i propose we go straight into a trial with my organizing

resolution. senator cruze has a a differet one that would propose that we haven't handled by a select committee. i think most of us, maybe all of us would probably prefer the former but we'll take it the one if either one would satisfy our constitutional duty. >> last question. mark. [inaudible question] the counts coming over from the house sites several specific instancesl where secretary mayorkas instructed dhs employees not to. is that a policy disagreement? >> no, that's called a violation of the law. >> look, look, and understand why he's not going to resign. mayorkas is not impeached for being incompetent. he's not impeached for being negligent. this invasion is not anng accident. it's not that they're bad at

their job. sadly, it's that alejandro mayorkas is very good at the job he's trying to do. and the job he is trying to do is maximize the number of illegal immigrants in america. this is absolutely deliberate, and this is flouting the law. look, i've said several times joe joe biden ostensibly i thought was impossible. he make me miss barack obama. listen, barack obama, the thoughts of things i disagreed with, there are lot of things they disagreed with aboutgs bark obama, but when it came to immigration, obama by and large follow the law pick any particular obama deported millions of people. member for the left mad at obama. i called him the deported in chief. we've never seen a president of the united states do what joe biden is doing which is utterly flouting the law. that'll is mayorkas not trying to securer, the border, he's trying to accelerate illegal immigration. he wants the 10.4 million illegal immigrants to become 29,

30,000,000 to 40,000,000 because he viewsws them all a suture democrat votes. so votes. so this is different from saying he's never good at his job. thisis is openly defined the la, and this is aiding and abetting mexican criminal cartels, cumin and drug traffickers that have become deca- billionaires because of these open border policies. >> one phyla, because i want to disagree with senator cruze. it was president obama that sparked this invasion with the deferred action for childhood arrivals memorandum. that was involved with act across all of this. by the way i do have that new chart for all of you if you wanted. i got some copies. >> by the way, ron has a tattoo of the chart, to pick a truly impressive. >> stop. thanks, everybody. >> right here if you want it. here are the color codes to match her outfit.

[inaudible conversations] >> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front-row seat tout issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, you're an overview of government. tay on the c-span house is back for general speeches at denny a etern. at noon membe csider the rules for debate on four bls including legislation to reauthorize a me changes the foreign intelligence surveillance act section 702 waaness surveillance

authority set to eire april 19. on c-span2 the senate returns at denny and eastern toese consideration of a u.s. district judge nomination in utah. seto will take up disapproval resolutnelating to the federal highway administration and general issued b t national labor relations boa tt sets a new standard for determining joint employer stu in collective bargaining. so in c-span3 heland security secretary alejandro mayorkas is on capitol hill to testify on the president 2025 buetequest for his department and take questions on imgrion policy and the u.s. soutrnorder. he is appearing before both chambers of congress starting with a house appropriations subcmiee opinion, followed by a senate appropriations bcmittee at 2:30 p.m. eastern. you can also watch our live coverage on the c-spaow video app or online at c-spaor >> tonight preside biden and first lady biden host a

state dinner honoring japanes prime minister fumio kishida at 11 p.m. eastern o cnn we will feature highlights from the evening including the prime minister's white arrival and toast given at the dinner. you canls watch online at c-span.org or on the free c-span now the app. ♪ ♪ >> c-span has been delivering unfiltered congressional coverage for 45 years. here's a highlight from the key moment. >> and although the city was a patient's capital for only a short time, from those early days the eyes of the world continued to be on new york. one year ago this great center of history, enterprise and creativity suffered the greatest cruelties that showed itself to be a place of valor and generosity and grace. here were so many innocent lives were suddenly