What I find, frankly so astonishing is that the lawsuit was filed to begin with, and that so many of my colleagues in the GOP, including Kevin McCarthy, would lend their names to this effort to overturn our presidential election.

it's been essentially a den of thieves environment.

I think the president has probably broader fears than that about his children. There are any number of reported investigations, some state, some federal, in which he may be concerned that they're facing criminal liability.

It would make you the judge in your own case. It would put you above the law.

I have to think they would decide you can't pardon yourself, along the lines of the Office of Legal Counsel opinion from the early 1970s.

Let's say that the Southern District of New York indicted Individual No. 1, who is known to be the president of the United States, in a campaign fraud scheme that the Southern District has already charged Individual 1 coordinated and…

The Constitution, as our justices have written, is not a suicide pact.

the president has probably broader fears than that about his children.

With the initiation of this investigation and now with this, what I think will be an unsuccessful attempt to prolong the investigation through this secret appointment only disclosed now of Durham as a special counsel.

Well, like Bill Barr, from beginning to end, Donald Trump has been an anti-democratic president, came in tearing down our democratic institutions, and, on the way out, is tearing down more, among the most important of our institutions.

there may be issues, even though the pardon would be a federal act, that nonetheless violate state law.

It's a bit, frankly, like the investigation he announced was apparently coming to an end, and that is over election interference.

If the president was involved, he would not be immune from prosecution for it.

That is a very dangerous poison for Donald Trump to put into the well of the American people.

Someone in this conspiracy has to have a close enough relationship to the president or people around the president to make it happen.

We will have to provide a statutory basis for the security briefings of the upcoming president, so we don't have that kind of catastrophe again.

One of the premises behind our Constitution is that no one is adjudge of their own case. We are bound by the rule of law. We are a nation of laws, not individuals.

By giving him a pardon now, imagine the signal that sends to our Russian adversary, that essentially, you know, the president can make Russia's problems go away by dismissing a case against someone who had lied on their behalf.

I would say this. It doesn't literally impact whether the president can pardon himself or whether that will be enforceable in court. In fact, I'm quite confident that's unconstitutional.

It's also, I think, incumbent on us even if we can't prevent this president's abuse of the pardon power, to make sure that the power is not abused in the future.

the voters have decided, that's still not good enough for them.

Joe Biden won. He won handily six million votes more than the other guy.

We do have a role and we're trying to execute that role.

The one true line of the presidency is he does whatever he thinks is in his personal interest and he is personally vindictive.

It's pathetic, but sadly predictable that upholding and protecting our democratic processes would be cause for firing.