Chief Justice John Roberts refused on Thursday to read aloud a question from Sen. Rand Paul that identified an alleged whistleblower who first raised concerns with investigators that President Donald Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rivals.

“The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted,” Roberts said after appearing to read the question to himself.

The chamber was silent during this moment, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell whispering to an aide, standing up and appearing like he would speak. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) then asked her question unrelated to the whistleblower and McConnell sat down.

But Paul was not done.

The Kentucky senator then gave a contentious news conference in the Senate’s TV gallery in which he read his question, which named a person referred to in conservative media as the possible whistleblower and an acquaintance who works for the House Intelligence Committee. Paul asserted those two men “may have worked together to plot impeaching the president before there were formal impeachment proceedings.”

“I don’t know who the whistleblower is. Adam Schiff doesn’t know who the whistleblower is. My question is not about the whistleblower. My question is about two people who are friends who worked together … who have been overheard talking about impeaching the president years in advance of a process that then was created to get the impeachment process going,” Paul told reporters.

McConnell proactively scolded Paul as the Senate came into session on Thursday afternoon.

“We’ve been respectful of the chief justice’s unique position in reading our questions. And I want to be able to continue to assure him that that level of consideration for him will continue,” McConnell said.

Paul said that “did sound like code didn't it, or something? I don’t know what it meant. I’ve had no discussion with Sen. McConnell.”

Paul had signaled his intention to ask the question on Wednesday, raising alarms that he intended to out the anonymous complainant. Defenders of the president say the whistleblower should not be protected because he may have harbored a political bias against Trump, but Democrats have argued that the whistleblower’s account has largely proven accurate, confirmed by subsequent witnesses — and that naming him publicly could endanger his life.

Paul, a longtime antagonist of Republican leaders, arose from his seat as the first GOP senator to offer a question at the start of Thursday’s session of the impeachment trial. He said the question was specifically directed to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the lead House manager, and to the president’s lawyers.

He said he considered requesting a roll call vote to overrule Roberts’ “incorrect finding” but decided Friday's debate over witnesses and other possible motions will have enough roll calls that it would have slowed down proceedings too much. He was also unlikely to win that vote.

“It’s very important whether or not a group of Democratic activists, part of the Obama-Biden administration were working together for years looking for an opportunity to impeach the president,” Paul explained. He blamed Roberts and the Senate for “selective belief in protecting the whistleblower statute … nobody says they know who the person is. But anybody you say might be all of a sudden is protected from being part of the debate.”

Roberts communicated to senators on Tuesday that he would not read questions that outed the alleged whistleblower, prompting Paul to complain afterward.

Schiff first revealed the existence of the whistleblower complaint publicly in mid-September, when he subpoenaed the document from the director of national intelligence and accused him — under the influence of the White House — of preventing it from reaching Congress.

Schiff and other Democrats indicated that the intelligence community’s inspector general had deemed the complaint “urgent” and credible, triggering a requirement to notify Congress — but instead, DNI Joseph Maguire sought input from the Justice Department, which rejected the IG’s determination.

Paul said he was still considering whether to try and ask another question later Thursday.

Melanie Zanona contributed to this report.

A majority of registered voters say Chief Justice John Roberts should rule in favor of motions to allow new witnesses at President Trump’s impeachment trial, according to a new poll from a liberal advocacy group.More than twice as many respondents...

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said on Thursday he has “no problem” with a White House lawyer’s argument that American politicians can accept damaging information on their opponents from a foreign country — a proposal that shocked Democrats.

White House Deputy Counsel Patrick Philbin told senators during Wednesday’s session of President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial that it was a “mistake” to believe that any information about a political opponent that originates from a foreign country amounts to improper interference in a U.S. election.

“I have no problem with what Philbin said,” Burr told reporters.

Philbin, responding to a question about whether Trump believes foreign interference in an American election is “illegal,” told senators that as long as the information is credible, it is relevant to American voters.

“I think that the idea that any information that happens to come from overseas is necessarily campaign interference is a mistake,” he said. “Information that is credible that potentially shows wrongdoing by someone who happens to be running for office, if it’s credible information, is relevant information for the voters to know about.”

The argument outraged Democrats — including Burr’s counterpart on the Intelligence Committee, Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.), who said “my head exploded” when he heard the remark. Burr and Warner have worked closely on the issue of election interference in the aftermath of Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 election — perhaps the only bipartisan duo in Congress still working closely together on the issue.

“God help us,” Warner told POLITICO, referring to Republicans who were defending Philbin’s argument.

“I think [Philbin’s arguments] dramatically weaken America’s expectation that we’re going to have a free and fair elections. I think it directly contradicts the work of” the intelligence community, Warner added.

House Democrats seeking Trump’s removal from office repeatedly warned that an acquittal would embolden Trump to seek derogatory information on his political opponents from foreign powers.

The House impeachment managers noted Trump’s ABC News interview last year in which he indicated his openness to accepting such help — and they also cited reports that Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company where former Vice President Joe Biden’s son previously served as a board member, had been hacked by Russian intelligence agents.

The White House’s posture also follows years of investigations by the House and Senate intelligence committees seeking to understand the extent and impact of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Lawmakers of both parties, while sharply divided over Trump’s involvement in the 2016 effort by Russia, have long agreed that the Kremlin’s campaign was wrong and dangerous — and that all foreign interference should be prevented.

Burr wasn’t the only Senate Republican who appeared to approve of Philbin’s argument.

“I think all he was addressing is whether there was a crime. And what I understood him to say is there is not — it is not a crime, per se,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told POLITICO.

Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) also defended Philbin’s view.

“The president is the presidency — he is that branch of government. Everybody reports to him, including the attorney general. Are you saying that the American people shouldn’t know about or we shouldn’t pursue criminal wrongdoing just because it’s overseas?” Johnson told reporters.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has been foiled again.To ask questions in the Senate's impeachment trial of President Trump, senators have to write them down and submit them to Chief Justice John Roberts for him to read. That proved a problem for Paul on Wednesday when he asked a question naming an alleged whistleblower who sparked Trump's impeachment; Roberts refused to read it. So after insisting Thursday morning he'd get his questioned answered, Paul sent it in again, and received a repeat response.> Senator @RandPaul sends question to the desk during Impeachment Trial.> > Chief Justice Roberts: "The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted." pic.twitter.com/CCeB33HnRP> > -- CSPAN (@cspan) January 30, 2020Immediately after being denied, Paul exited the Senate chamber and tweeted an explanation of what he apparently wanted to ask.> My question today is about whether or not individuals who were holdovers from the Obama National Security Council and Democrat partisans conspired with Schiff staffers to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings.> > -- Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020He then complained that he received no rationale for why his question was rejected this time around, and then read that question, which named the alleged whistleblower, to the press.More stories from theweek.com Mitch McConnell's rare blunder John Bolton just vindicated Nancy Pelosi 7 witheringly funny cartoons about the GOP's John Bolton problem

John Roberts read the senators' questions as if they implicated some third person in a distant place. But they were about him, the chief justice of the United States, and how much control he might wield over witnesses in the Senate trial of President Donald Trump.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read a question submitted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) during Thursday's question-and-answer session in President Trump's impeachment trial.Paul and Roberts have been battling over the question, which...

The Kentucky Republican was shut down during Thursday's Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.