Our live coverage of the impeachment inquiry has ended. Learn more about the latest developments below.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke tonight about the impeachment resolution ahead of an expected vote on the House floor Thursday, saying, "Mr. Clyburn, our Whip, has given me a very good report about our vote tomorrow.He's the Whip, the vote counter, thank you Mr. Clyburn."
Pelosi was being honored at the LBJ Liberty & Justice for All Award ceremony at the Mellon Auditorium in DC.
Earlier today: The House Rules Committee advanced the resolution tonight to establish procedures for Democrats' impeachment inquiry into President Trump ahead of Thursday’s expected vote on the House floor.
The resolution, unveiled earlier this week, establishes procedures for public impeachment hearings, the release of deposition transcripts and outlines the Judiciary Committee's role in considering potential articles of impeachment.
It will be the first vote the full House has taken on the impeachment inquiry since Democratic leaders launched the probe related to an intelligence community whistleblower complaint that raised concerns in Congress about President Trump's conversations with Ukraine.
The House Rules Committee advanced a resolution to establish procedures for Democrats’ impeachment inquiry into President Trump tonight ahead of an expected House floor vote on Thursday.
The resolution, unveiled earlier this week, establishes procedures for public impeachment hearings, the release of deposition transcripts, and outlines the House Judiciary Committee’s role in considering potential articles of impeachment.
It will be the first vote the full House has taken related to the impeachment inquiry since Democratic leaders launched the probe after an intelligence community whistleblower complaint raised concerns in Congress about Trump’s conversations with Ukraine's president.
Key Republican senators told CNN the Senate should conduct a fulsome trial of President Trump — assuming the House soon sends over articles of impeachment, as is expected — and not try to jam through a motion that would allow them to dismiss the case quickly on a partisan vote.
A motion of dismissal was attempted in the 1999 impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton when his Democratic allies in the Senate, led by the powerful institutionalist Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, tried and failed to get that case dismissed. Even though Byrd rounded up some support from Republicans who controlled the chamber, his effort fell short and the trial went on for about three more weeks before Clinton was acquitted.
In the Trump matter, some of the GOP senators who argued against dismissing the case are close allies of the President, who might otherwise be inclined to assist him politically by helping the spectacle go away. Others have been critical of him at times but are unhappy that the House has conducted its investigation in private, with routine leaks of information damaging to the President, and without due process for him.
They argued a comprehensive and public examination of the charges would be best for the President, who wants to clear his name and stay in office, best for American people, who deserve to learn what happened, and best for the Senate as an institution, to demonstrate that even in these harshly partisan times, a careful examination of the charges can be conducted.
“Unlike the process up to this point, I think it is important the Senate process be viewed as fair and serious and give serious consideration to whatever the House is going to bring us,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, a member of the Republican leadership, who added that he is “very doubtful that there will be some immediate attempt to try to dismiss the charges.”
Sen. David Perdue, a Republican from Georgia who is close to Trump, said there’s been so much “inuendo and stuff done behind closed-doors” during the House impeachment inquiry that he “personally would welcome an open and fulsome debate.”
“What I want to hear is both sides of the argument. The trial is in the Senate not in the House,” Perdue said in an interview. “But I don’t see this taking weeks and weeks and weeks. This is a very isolated accusation so I would hope we could get a look at it and get it done and give this president due process.”
The attorneys for the anonymous whistleblower who ignited the impeachment investigation said members of the media have a role "in protecting those who lawfully expose suspected government wrongdoing," according to a statement.
Attorneys Andrew Bakaj and Mark Zaid would neither confirm nor deny the identity of the intelligence community whistleblower in their statement.
"Our client is legally entitled to anonymity. Disclosure of the name of any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower places that individual and their family in great physical danger. Any physical harm the individual and/or their family suffers as a result of disclosure means that the individuals and publications reporting such names will be personally liable for that harm. Such behavior is at the pinnacle of irresponsibility and is intentionally reckless," the statement said.
The identity of the whistleblower has been a point of contention after Democrats accused Republicans of trying to goad Lt. Col Alexander Vindman into revealing the identity of the whistleblower with their questions yesterday during his testimony in the ongoing impeachment probe.
More about the whistleblower: President Trump has repeatedly derided the anonymous whistleblower whose complaint alleges the President abused his official powers in a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky "to solicit interference" in the 2020 election.
Trump, who has denied any wrongdoing, said last month that whoever had provided the whistleblower with information about his call with Zelensky is "close to a spy," adding that in the old days spies were dealt with differently. The comments prompted lawyers for the whistleblower to send a letter to acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire outlining "serious" safety concerns for their client as Trump continues to take aim at the whistleblower.
The House Intelligence Committee had issued a subpoena to compel Christopher Anderson, a State Department official who worked for Ukraine diplomat Kurt Volker, to testify today.
Anderson complied with the subpoena and appeared today before lawmakers, an official working on the impeachment inquiry told CNN.
“In light of an attempt by the White House and State Department to direct Christopher Anderson not to appear for his scheduled deposition, and efforts to also limit any testimony that does occur, the House Intelligence Committee issued a subpoena to compel his testimony this afternoon. As is required of him, Mr. Anderson complied with the subpoena and answered questions from both Democratic and Republican Members and staff," the official said.
Former national security adviser John Bolton will not appear at his deposition without a subpoena, his lawyer Charles Cooper tells CNN.
It is not clear if Bolton would show up even if he was subpoenaed. He shares an attorney with a former aide who has gone to court to seek a decision on whether he needs to testify given the White House insistence that the President’s immunity be protected.
Earlier this afternoon: Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said he hopes Bolton will testify before his committee and wouldn’t say whether he would issue a subpoena
According to a source familiar, Bolton was invited to appear next week on Nov. 7.
The Department of Justice said it tried and failed to reach an agreement where former White House counsel Don McGahn could testify to the House.
The Justice Department notes that it approached the House to try to reach an agreement where McGahn could testify. The White House has blocked this testimony by asserting immunity over its officials.
"The parties held more than five discussions to explore whether they could reach a mutually acceptable accommodation for an interview with Mr. McGahn," the Justice Department wrote today.
The House had originally approached the White House counsel's office to make a deal, they wrote. The DOJ took issue with the characterization that President Trump's administration has been stonewalling.
Still, "the parties’ negotiations have now reached a stage at which it is clear that fundamental disagreements remain between the parties and that, under the present circumstances, it appears unlikely the parties will reach a mutually acceptable accommodation," the DOJ lawyers wrote.
A hearing is scheduled Thursday afternoon on whether McGahn must testify.
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham has raised concerns over the testimony Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman gave yesterday in the impeachment inquiry.
Vindman was the first witness to offer testimony in the inquiry who listened to the July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Vindman told lawmakers that he tried to make changes to the White House's rough transcript of the July phone call, including that Trump mentioned tapes of former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Grisham challenged Vindman today, saying the President "released a full and accurate transcript of his call with President Zelensky so the American people could see he acted completely appropriately and did nothing wrong."
"The media is reporting that Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman claims he proposed filling in words that were missing in areas where ellipses were shown in the transcript – this is false," Grisham said in a statement. "Because Chairman Schiff has kept his sham hearings secret and has excluded the President’s counsel from the room, we cannot confirm whether or not Lt. Col. Vindman himself made any such false claim. What we can confirm is that he never suggested filling in any words at any points where ellipses appear in the transcript."