Evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing ‘is overwhelming’, say Democrats, as they lay out final impeachment case

As the impeachment probe into Donald Trump’s alleged abuse of power enters its final stages, Democrats have argued that the evidence before the House Judiciary Committee amounts to clear proof of a “brazen” effort to advance his own political interests over those of the United States.

During lengthy and frequently contentious testimony on Monday, Democrats and Republicans both called upon their leading counsels to make their best case for and against the president’s impeachment.

While Democrats hoped to relay to the American people their argument that the president had misused his position of considerable power to force Ukraine to meddle in a US election – an argument they have bolstered with strong witness testimony – Republicans sought to defend the president by casting the inquiry as a chaotic process revealing little but a political bias against Mr Trump.

“The evidence is overwhelming,” said Barry Berke, the lawyer for Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, before repeating the phrase.

Mr Berke argued that the facts assembled by the House Intelligence Committee in recent weeks remained “uncontradicted” and that they “cannot be disputed”. While making those points, Mr Berke played video clips of witnesses who were brought before the impeachment hearings last month.

Democrats also called upon Democratic lawyer Daniel Goldman, who had led questioning of witnesses during the Intelligence Committee hearings. Mr Goldman said that the president not only attempted to distort the 2020 election with his actions in the past, but that he has continued to do so in spite of the impeachment hearings. As evidence, Mr Goldman noted that Mr Trump had tweeted over the weekend that his personal lawyer would submit a report to the Justice Department regarding Democrats’ behaviour.

“President Trump’s persistent and continuing effort to coerce a foreign country to help him cheat to win an election is a clear and present danger to our free and fair elections and to our national security,” Mr Goldman said.

Republicans repeatedly interrupted the hearings with calls for parliamentary inquiries, forcing repeated conflict between themselves and Judiciary chairman Jerry Nadler. In doing so, the strategy hinged less on refuting the facts before the House – facts that suggest Mr Trump oversaw an effort to abuse his power as president and compel a politically motivated investigation in Ukraine against Joe Biden – and more about driving a narrative that Democrats were engaged in a politically motivated smear campaign against Mr Trump.

Mr Trump, for his part, responded to the hearing mostly on Twitter, where he called Democrats a “disgrace”, implored his supporters to “Read the Transcripts!”, and agreed with conservative talk show host Buck Sexton, who called Democrats “total psychos”.

“This unfair process reflects the degree to which Democrats are obsessed with impeaching President Trump by any means necessary,” said Stephen Castor, the counsel hired by Republicans, emphasising an argument that noted some Democrats had introduced impeachment as an option shortly after Mr Trump became president in 2017.

Mr Castor also argued that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, who Mr Trump memorably asked to do him a favour during a 25 July phone call that resulted in a whistleblower complaint from an individual listening to the call, has previously said that he was not aware that millions in American military aid had been suspended to his country at the time of the call.

Mr Zelensky has also insisted that he did not feel pressured, in spite of testimony indicating that he was poised to announce an investigation into the Bidens on CNN before the military aid was released.

Mr Castor also argued that Mr Trump was only attempting to weed out corruption during the 25 July call – which Democrats say is not true considering the president did not mention the word “corruption” during the call, and that witnesses have claimed Mr Trump only cared about the investigation being announced, not carried out.

“If President Trump was truly orchestrating a pressure campaign to force Ukraine to investigate former vice president Biden, one would think that Ukraine would have felt some pressure,” Mr Castor said.

Democrats largely brushed aside the tactics of their Republican colleagues, with Steve Cohen of Tennessee among those casting the effort as one of desperation.

“I do think it’s desperation – they can’t argue the facts so all they can do is try to question the process and disturb the proceedings. It’s childish – we should have a timeout period for Matt Gaetz,” Mr Cohen told The Independent, referring to the pro-Trump congressman who is perhaps best known for his performative responses to attacks on the president.

(Mr Gaetz was among those to interrupt the hearings, with criticism of Democrats for holding press conferences. He previously led an attention-grabbing march into closed-door impeachment hearings, which some claimed put sensitive elements of the proceedings at risk).

Mr Cohen suggested Republicans may have known ahead of time about the conspiracy theorist protester – an Infowars host – who was thrown out early in the hearings: “I think the guy who got thrown out of here, they probably knew … I don’t think that was an individual acting on his own. I think they probably had knowledge of it.”

Congressman Ted Deutch, of Florida, also attacked the performative nature of the Republican defence: “Look at what they have posted behind them – there is a milk carton posted on a sign behind them. When the facts aren’t with you, when the constitution isn’t with you, then you’ve got to report to distractions. It doesn’t work, it’s never worked, and it’s not going to work in this setting when we have the thoughtful and comprehensive way that all the evidence is being laid out.”

Republican Mark Meadows, meanwhile, argued that Democrats were the ones engaged in a partisan exercise that had little to do with facts.

“Obviously this is a partisan effort to try to put forth a narrative, so to weigh in on the facts is missing the whole point,” Mr Meadows said. “This is an orchestrated event trying to get a desired outcome, not a fact-finding mission.”

Much of the fact finding portion of the investigation has concluded, during testimony last month that included public hearings featuring prominent American diplomats and foreign service officials. That testimony included former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, US ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland, and former US special representative for Ukraine negotiations Kurt Volker.

US diplomat William Taylor, former National Security Council official Fiona Hill, state department official George Kent, and former National Security Council official Alexander Vindman were also called in to testify, among others.

Democrats have indicated they may pursue a vote on articles of impeachment before Christmas. Should it be approved, the articles would then be taken up in the Senate, where it remains unlikely that sufficient votes to remove the president would be available.