The Democratic House managers used their final day of arguments on Friday — the fourth full day of President Donald Trump's impeachment trial — to make their case that President Donald Trump obstructed Congress in denying them witness testimony and documents.
Follow us here for all of the latest breaking news and analysis on impeachment from NBC News' political reporters, as well as our teams on Capitol Hill and at the White House.
Highlights from the Senate trial
- Democrats finished hours of arguments in which managers called Trump a "dictator" and a danger to the nation with a plea to the Senate: "Give America a fair trial, she's worth it," lead House manager Rep. Adam Schiff said.
- The White House is set to begin laying out Trump's defense Saturday morning.
- "Get rid of her": A voice appearing to be Trump's is heard on tape demanding Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch's ouster.
- Schiff warned his fellow lawmakers that "the next time, it just may be you" who Trump targets.
- Democratic House manager Rep. Val Demings says the evidence is "pretty painful" for senators.
Download the NBC News mobile app for the latest news on the impeachment inquiry.
Why Democrats keep introducing doomed amendments
Despite multiple amendments for additional witnesses failing along party lines, Democrats have continued to push for additional subpoenas for witnesses and documents, causing the proceedings to go late into the night.
NBC News' Leigh Ann Caldwell explains.
Amendment 5 fails; Schumer introduces another to subpoena two White House officials
Schumer's fifth amendment, to subpoena certain Defense Department documents and records, was killed like all the others, 53-47, along party lines.
Schumer immediately introduced an amendment for the Senate to issue subpoenas for the testimony of two White House officials, Robert Blair and Michael Duffey.
Rep. Sylvia Garcia of Texas, the House manager rising in support of the amendment, argued that Blair and Duffey must appear as witnesses because they "operated the machinery of the executive branch ... and executed Trump's order" to freeze the aid to Ukraine. The pair had defied subpoenas from House impeachment investigators.
"They stood at the center of this tangled web," she said.
Crow argues Pentagon documents will further prove Trump-Ukraine scheme
Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., argued on behalf the impeachment managers in favor of Schumer's amendment to subpoena the Defense Department for certain records related to the freeze on military aid to Ukraine.
He cited the testimony of Laura Cooper, the top Pentagon official overseeing U.S. policy toward Ukraine, as one reason those documents would shed additional light on whether Trump improperly withheld military aid for Ukraine as leverage to compel Ukraine to launch politically advantageous investigations.
In a public hearing in November, Cooper explained how and when she became aware of the hold on the aid and said she had recently learned of the existence of multiple emails that had been sent to her office (but that she hadn't received). The emails pertained to questions she had been asked during her deposition in October about whether she knew if the Ukrainians had known about the hold or had asked any questions about it.
Cooper said her staff later showed her two unclassified emails from the State Department. They were sent two hours apart on the afternoon of July 25. The first, Cooper said, showed that Ukraine's embassy was "asking about the security assistance," and the second suggested that "Hill knows about the [aid freeze] situation." Fiona Hill is Trump's former top Russia adviser.
The Pentagon had previously defied a subpoena from House impeachment investigators for information and documents related to the aid freeze.
Trump's defense team argued that Democrats were jumping the gun by pushing for additional documents and witnesses at this stage, saying McConnell's rules allow for the issue to be decided later, after both sides have presented their arguments.
"We're not here to make it easy for you," Schiff responded.
We're back and debating Schumer's amendment to subpoena Pentagon records
If that short break was used to try to reach a deal to move the proceedings along, it appears it didn't work.
McConnell resumed the trial, and then Schumer immediately introduced his fifth amendment, which seeks to subpoena certain Defense Department documents and records.
They will go into up to two hours of debate on the amendment. Several senators looked tired an hour ago, as Jeffries made the case for why Mulvaney should be called as a witness.
As Jeffries spoke, some senators appeared to be eating snacks. A few chatted quietly. Most watched the screens as the videos were played, although a few looked around the room and up at the galleries.
As the clock approached 9 p.m., a few senators rested their heads against their hands as they sat listening, and Senate pages walked through the room refilling water glasses.
McConnell asks Schumer to speed things along after another amendment gets killed
The fourth Schumer amendment, to call Mulvaney as a witness, was defeated along party lines, 53-47 — just like the previous three.
McConnell, after remarking that he had observed a "certain similarity of all of these amendments," asked Schumer whether he would be willing to stack the votes on the remaining Democratic amendments into one to speed the evening along. Schumer did not agree and told him he would be willing to hold amendment votes Wednesday if senators wanted to go home now.
"The bottom line is very simple," Schumer said. "As has been clear to every senator in the country: We believe witnesses and documents are extremely important and a compelling case has been made for them. We will have votes on all of those. We will also — the leader, without consulting us made changes, a number of significant changes that significantly deviated from the 1999 Clinton resolution. We want to change those. So there will be a good number of votes."
McConnell put the trial into a quorum call, or a break — but moments later, the trial resumed with the reading of Schumer amendment No. 5 into the record.
Mulvaney was 'crucial' in planning the Ukraine scheme, Jeffries says
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., one of the seven House managers and the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, argued in favor of the Democratic amendment that calls for a subpoena of acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.
Mulvaney, who also leads the Office of Management and Budget, played a key role in the president's efforts to freeze nearly $400 million in U.S. security assistance to Ukraine and withhold a White House meeting.
"Based on the extensive evidence that the House did obtain, it is clear that Mulvaney was crucial in planning the scheme, executing its implementation and carrying out the cover-up," said Jeffries.
"Emails and witness testimony show that Mr. Mulvaney was 'in the loop' on the president's decision to explicitly condition a White House meeting on Ukraine's announcement of investigations beneficial to the president's re-election prospects," he added. "He was closely involved in implementing the president's hold on a security assistance, and subsequently admitted that the funds were being withheld to put pressure on Ukraine."
Mulvaney is one of four witnesses that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., would like the Senate to subpoena. The House issued a subpoena compelling Mulvaney's testimony during the impeachment inquiry last year but he defied it at the direction of the White House.
ANALYSIS: Why Trump's defense was looking shaky on Day 1
President Donald Trump's defense failed him at the opening of his Senate impeachment trial Tuesday.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had one job. He just had to collect 51 votes for the trial rules he had written, in close consultation with White House officials, to deliver Trump an acquittal quickly, quietly and with as few surprises as possible.
He couldn't do it.
The other half of Trump's squad, his legal team, chose not to defend his actions with a cogent explanation for them. Rather than rebutting hours of evidence presented by House Democratic impeachment managers, White House lawyers opted to repeat Trump's attacks on the process and the disjointed set of rejoinders he's delivered to Democrats in public.
Read more of the analysis here.
So what does Trump think about the trial today?
SO WHAT DID PRESIDENT TRUMP THINK OF TODAY? He was absolutely engaged in the impeachment proceedings today, getting "minute-by-minute" updates on the process, according to Rep. Mark Meadows, one of the president’s closest allies and an impeachment team member. Legislative Affairs head Eric Ueland backed that up, telling reporters that the president is "very impressed" with what’s been happening on the Hill. But take all that with a grain of salt: the president likes to see impressive TV performances, and we have reason to believe that he may have more mixed feelings than what aides are letting on. And the president is also someone who likes to gauge the reviews so his opinion may end up shaped by the tone from his preferred cable news shows. (An early guide: Sean Hannity, in his opener, is adopting a bored affect and introducing the network’s Congressional correspondent as someone who’s been "suffering through a lot of this tediousness.")
WILL THE PRESIDENT’S DEFENSE TEAM FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS BY 9AM WEDNESDAY? It’s possible, but the chances seem less-than-likely. Ueland didn’t shut the door on it tonight, but Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas sounded more definitive, telling reporters he believes a motion to dismiss is unlikely: it’s "not nearly as good an outcome for the president and for the country as will be a final judgment on the merits." Again, it’s kind of a moot point regardless since Senate Republicans don’t think there are the votes to support such a motion.
IS THE DEFENSE GOING TO PUSH BACK ON THE APPARENT SATURDAY START FOR THEIR OPENING? Seems doubtful. Two sources familiar with the thinking suggest it’s not likely the White House team will put up much of a fight on the expected Saturday start to opening arguments (that’s if House managers take up their allotted three days.) That’s subject to change, as always. But weekend arguments would, in theory, let the president’s defenders get in their first word before the Sunday political talk shows, and then have a weekday audience for the rest of their arguments Monday and, if needed, Tuesday.
Schumer and McConnell a study in contrasts
As Rep. Adam Schiff spoke on the floor, Sen. Chuck Schumer smiled and laughed while talking to the aides seated next to him — a strikingly different demeanor from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s stoic posture across the aisle.
In a brief moment of bipartisanship, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., walked over to the Republican side behind the last row of senators. As he was passing by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., he crouched down and the two chatted and laughed briefly. A packet of gum was being passed around that back row between Sasse, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and others.
While the table on the prosecution side with the managers was full of open binders, notebooks and laptops the Trump defense team's table looked neat. Their binders were not open while Schiff and Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., spoke, and their laptops also remained closed.
During the arguments, Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren took notes on occasion, and Republican Sens. Amy Murkowski and Susan Collins watched Schiff intently for the duration of his remarks. In the final few minutes of Schiff's comments, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, tapped on his watch to indicate the California Democrat was nearing the end of his time. Schiff seemed to look in his direction but did not pause or stop.
When Crow was speaking, the other House managers watched him intently, turning in their chairs to face him. Rep Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., was the one exception; he took notes throughout and referred back to binders and notes.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., read during most of the proceedings, while Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., yawned several times. Cruz slumped back in his chair, scowling, while Schiff and Crow spoke. Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., had a similar posture and didn’t take notes or read.