Kevin Roberts: “I send a question to the House counsel for a question. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you. Senator Roberts asks: Would you…”

“I send a question to the House counsel for a question. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you. Senator Roberts asks: Would you please respond to the arguments or assertions the House managers made in response to the previous questions? This is directed to the counsel for the President. Mr. Counsel SEKULOW. Mr. Chief Justice, Members of the Senate. I want to respond to a couple. First, with regard to the question or the issues that have been raised as it relates to witnesses, it is important to note that in the Clinton impeachment proceeding, the witnesses who actually gave deposition testimony were witnesses who had either been interviewed by deposition in the House proceedings, grand jury proceedings, and then, more specifically, was Sid Blumenthal, Vernon Jordan, and Monica Lewinsky. New witnesses were not being called. That is because the House, in their process, moved forward with a full investigation. That did not happen here. There was another statement that was raised by Mr. Chairman Schiff, Manager Schiff, regarding the Chief Justice could make the determination on executive privilege. And again, with no disrespect to the Chief Justice, the idea that the Presiding Officer of this proceeding could determine a waiver or an applicability of executive privilege would be quite a step. There is no historical precedent. There is no historic precedent that would justify it. But there is something else.…”