PATRICK PHILBIN: The implications here, in our constitutional structure for trying to run things in such an upside down way would be very grave for this body as an institution because as the Senator’s question points out, it largely prevents this chamber from getting other business done as long as there is a trial pending. And the idea that the House can do an incomplete job in trying to find out what witnesses there are, having them come testify, trying to find out the facts, just rush something through and bring it here as an impeachment and then start trying to call all the witnesses means that this body will end up taking over that investigatory task. And all of the regular business of this body will be slowed down, hindered, or prevented while that goes on. And it’s not a question of just one witness, it’s not a question of—a lot of people talk right now about John Bolton—but the President would have the opportunity to call his witnesses, just as a matter of fundamental fairness. And there would be a long list of witnesses. If the body were to go in that direction that would mean this would drag on for months and prevent this chamber from getting its business done. There’s a proper way to do things and an upside-down way of doing things. And to have the House not go through a process that is thorough and complete, and to just rush things through in a partisan and political manner and then dump it onto this chamber to clean everything up is a very dangerous precedent to be set. As I said the other day, whatever is accepted in this case becomes the new normal. If this chamber put its [sic] on this precedent, then that’s the seal of approval for all-time in the future.
CONGRESSWOMAN ELISE STEFANIK