Page:Impeachment of Donald J. Trump, President of the United States — Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives.pdf/27

 perjury. Finally, on December 8 and 9, 1998, President Clinton's legal counsel called multiple panels of outside legal experts and elicited testimony primarily on whether the President's alleged conduct rose to the level of impeachable offenses.

Between December 10 to 12, 1998, the Committee debated and voted to adopt four articles of impeachment. The following week, the articles were debated on the floor of the House over the course of two days. On December 19, 1998, the House voted to approve two of the articles and voted against two others. Shortly after that vote, Ranking Member Conyers wrote to Chairman Hyde expressing concerns that Majority staff had conducted witness interviews without informing the Minority and provided summaries of those interviews to certain members while withholding them from the Minority. Chairman Conyers also raised concerns that members of the Majority had encouraged Members whose votes were still undecided to review certain evidence that had been withheld from the President and the public in an effort to sway those Members' decision-making.

C.The Procedural Protections Afforded to President Trump Met or Exceeded Those Afforded in Past Presidential Impeachment Inquiries

The House's impeachment inquiry provided President Trump procedural protections that were consistent with or in some instances exceeded those afforded to Presidents Nixon and Clinton. The House's inquiry was conducted with maximal transparency: transcripts of all interviews and depositions were made public, and HPSCI and the Judiciary Committee held seven days of public hearings. All documentary evidence relied on in HPSCI's report has been made available to President Trump, and much of it has been made public. Furthermore, during proceedings before the Judiciary Committee, President Trump was offered numerous opportunities to have his counsel participate, including by cross-examining witnesses and presenting evidence. The President's decision to reject these opportunities to participate affirms that his principal objective was to obstruct the House's inquiry rather than assist in its full consideration of all relevant evidence.

1The House's Inquiry Was Conducted with Maximal Transparency

The House's impeachment inquiry against President Trump was unique in its lack of reliance on the work of another investigative body. Instead, the Investigating Committees performed their own extensive investigative work—and they did so with abundant transparency. Twelve key witnesses 21