The only person who would have firsthand knowledge of the quid pro quo, bribery, extortion, or whatever buzzword the Democrats want to trot out next is President Zelensky, who has categorically denied any such agreement or pressure.

We had a bunch of law professors, three of which who cannot stand the President, who cannot stand his voters, and cannot stand the fact that he is still in office, telling us why he should be impeached.

You just keep throwing around these bad facts that you don't like, and it is interesting to me also that the catalog--and you finally got to it.

this one-sided sham.

The one witness that we really wanted to call... we weren't allowed to, and that is the whistleblower.

The Democrats have no case when it comes to obstruction. This obstruction charge is completely baseless and bogus.

We need an independent President who does not have to suffer to anything a congressional majority might throw at him.

If you are going to do that, you should have a record of fact that no reasonable person can deny.

I never thought we would cross outside of the ocean to try and basically impugn the integrity of a world leader like we have been for the last two hearings.

Come in and prove your own innocence. First of all, that is antithetical to the Anglo-American judicial process.

Impeaching a President that has published these types of things is just patently absurd.

After 22 months of investigations and millions in tax dollars spent on Democratic lawyers investigating the President, they found nothing, no collusion.