Joe Walsh Shouts Down Mark Sanford For Not Supporting Impeachment In Off the Rails Clash


NEXT.>>>HELLO, I’M JAKE TAPPER IN WASHINGTON WITH THE STATE OF OUR UNION IS WATCHING THE EVIDENCE PILE UP. WE BEGIN WITH BREAKING NEWS. THE LAWYER FOR THE FIRST WHISTLE-BLOWER NOW TELLS ME HE IS ALSO REPRESENTING A SECOND WHISTLE-BLOWER WHO IS SPOKEN TO THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY INSPECTOR GENERAL. THE NEWS FIRST REPORTED BY ABC IS ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD PLAY INTO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY INTO PRESIDENT TRUMP AND IT IS THE LATEST IN A STREAM OF NEW EVIDENCE THIS WEEK BACKING UP THE ORIGINAL WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP INCLUDING NOTABLY THE PRESIDENT’S OWN PUBLIC CALL FOR NOT ONLY UKRAINE BUT FOR CHINA TO INVESTIGATE HIS POTENTIAL 2020 RIVAL. BUT PERHAPS MOST DAMNING, HOUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE OBTAINED TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN THREE SENIOR U.S. OFFICIALS DISCUSSING WHAT LOOKS LIKE A QUID PRO QUO, AN OFFER OF X IN EXCHANGE FOR Y FOR UKRAINE. INCLUDING THIS EXCHANGE, HEARD FROM WHITE HOUSE, ASSUMING PRESIDENT ZELENSKY CONVINCES TRUMP HE WILL INVESTIGATE, QUOTE, GET TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT HAPPENED IN 2016, WE’LL NAIL DOWN DATE FOR VISIT TO WASHINGTON. OR THIS TEXT FROM A SENIOR U.S. DIPLOMAT IN UKRAINE. QUOTE, AS I SAID ON THE PHONE, I THINK IT IS CRAZY TO WITHHOLD SECURITY ASSISTANCE FOR HELP WITH A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN. AND WE INVITED THE WHITE HOUSE ON TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE SHOW THIS MORNING AND THEY DID NOT OFFER A GUEST AND WE INVITED BOTH OF THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYERS RUDY GIULIANI AND JAY SEKULOW AND THEY DECLINED TO APPEAR. WE INVITED EVERY MEMBER OF SENATE LEADERSHIP AND HOUSE REPUBLICANS AND THEY ALL DECLINED OR DID NOT RESPOND. THE TRUMP WHITE HOUSE NO LONGER HOLDS REGULAR PRESS BRIEFINGS OR ANY PRESS BRIEFINGS AT ALL AND SO ON ONE OF THE MOST CRITICAL NEWS WEEKS OF THE LAST THREE YEARS, HERE ARE JUST THREE OF MANY QUESTIONS THAT WE FEEL NEED TO BE ANSWERED. ONE, WHY DID SENIOR U.S. DIPLOMATS BELIEVE THAT U.S. MILITARY AID WAS BEING WITHHELD AS A TOOL TO PRESSURE UKRAINE TO ANNOUNCE AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BIDENS AND INTO ATTEMPTS TO UNDERMINE THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION? TWO, CAN THIS WHITE HOUSE NAME ANOTHER INSTANCE, JUST ONE, IN WHICH PRESIDENT TRUMP PERSONALLY PUSHED A FOREIGN LEADER TO INVESTIGATE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN WHO WAS NOT ONE OF HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS. THREE, WOULD YOU THINK IT ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE FOR A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT TO USE THE POWER OF HIS OR HER OFFICE TO DEMAND FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS INTO REPUBLICANS AND THEIR FAMILIES. AS ALWAYS, THE INVITATION FOR AN OFFICIAL TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS STANDS. HERE WITH ME NOW TO TALK ABOUT THIS ARE TWO REPUBLICANS SPEAKING OUT AND CHALLENGING PRESIDENT TRUMP FOR THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION. FORMER CONGRESSMAN MARK SANFORD AND FORMER CONGRESSMAN JOE WALSH. CONGRESSMAN SANFORD, LET ME START WITH YOU. THE PRESIDENT CALLED FOR BOTH UKRAINE AND CHINA TO INVESTIGATE BIDEN AND HE DID THAT PUBLICLY AND DIPLOMATS PUSHING THE UKRAINIANS TO ANNOUNCE A PROBE FOR A WHITE HOUSE MEETING AND A U.S. DIPLOMAT EXPRESSED CONCERNS THAT MILITARY AID WAS WITHHELD AWAITING THE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BIDENS YOU HAVE SAID THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS JUSTIFIED AND WOULD YOU VOTE TO SUPPORT SUCH AN INQUIRY IF YOU WERE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES?>>YOU KNOW, I DON’T KNOW. I SUSPECT SO. AGAIN, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS INCREMENTALLY. I THINK TO YOUR POINT THERE OUGHT TO BE A VOTE BEFORE WE GO INTO THE INQUIRY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST THREE IMPEACHMENTS AND IN FACT ONE IN WHICH I TOOK THE VOTE, YOU FORMALIZE THE PROCESS AS OPPOSED TO HAVING AN OPEN-ENDED PROCESS WHICH IS THE ROUTE THAT PELOSI IS TAKING NOW. >>BUT YOU’RE NOT SURE YOU WOULD VOTE FOR IT?>>IN TERMS OF THE INQUIRY?>>THE INQUIRY. >>IN TERMS OF INQUIRY, I WOULD ULTIMATELY, AS I’VE SAID PREVIOUSLY, I DON’T KNOW THAT IMPEACHMENT IS THE BEST WAY TO GO. I THINK PROBABLY CENSURE IS GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE’RE THIS CLOSE TO AN ELECTION BUT TO A LARGER CONVERSATION, WOULD I WANT TO INVESTIGATE THIS, YES. >>CONGRESSMAN, WALSH, WHAT DO YOU SAY. >>I DON’T UNDERSTAND THAT, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THIS PRESIDENT DESERVES TO BE IMPEACHMENTED. NO ONE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE OR HIGH-LEVEL REPUBLICANS ARE ON THE SHOW TODAY BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO DEFEND. THIS PRESIDENT BETRAYED HIS COUNTRY AGAIN THIS WEEK. WOULD I VOTE IF I WERE IN CONGRESS ON THE INQUIRY, THERE IS ENOUGH WE KNOW NOW TO VOTE TO IMPEACHMENT THIS PRESIDENT. HE STOOD ON THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN THIS WEEK, JAKE AND TOLD TWO ADDITIONAL FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION. THAT ALONE IS IMPEACHABLE. THIS IS A STRONG TERM I’M GOING TO USE BUT I’M GOING TO SAY IT ON PURPOSE, DONALD TRUMP IS A TRAITOR. NOW I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT TREASON. PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES, JAKE, HAVE BEEN IRRESPONSIBLE USING THAT WORD “TREASON.” I’M NOT ACCUSING THIS PRESIDENT OF TREASON. OUR FOUNDERS WERE VERY SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT TREASON IS. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT TRAITOR MORE BROADLY DEFINED, THIS PRESIDENT BETRAYED OUR COUNTRY AGAIN THIS WEEK. AND IT IS NOT THE FIRST TIME HE DID IT. EXCUSE ME. I DON’T KNOW THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD INCREMENTALLY. THIS PRESIDENT NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED JUST BASED ON WHAT HE HIMSELF HAS SAID AND REPUBLICANS BETTER GET BEHIND THAT.>>CONGRESSMAN SANFORD. >>RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE. THE NATURE OF THE PROCESS IS NOT TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION AT THE BEGINNING OF IT AND FOR PEOPLE TO STEP OUT AND SAY HE NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED IS TO DIMINISH AND DISCARD WITH THE VERY PROCESS THAT IS LAID OUT BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS. AND SO I DO THINK WE OUGHT TO BE INCREMENTAL. ARE THERE VERY TROUBLING CHARGES OUT THERE IN YES. DO THEY NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED? YES. BUT TO JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS AND SAY HE NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED, WHAT HE’S DONE IS TREASONOUS IS TO SAY WE’RE NOT GOING THROUGH THE VERY PROCESS THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS LAID OUT. >>JAKE, YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS BUT AGAIN, MARK, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AND THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME HE’S DONE IT, IS TELLING FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION. AND HERE IS ANOTHER THING. HE ASKED CHINA THIS WEEK TO INVESTIGATE HIS FELLOW AMERICANS. IF THAT ALONE — AND THAT IS WHAT OUR FOUNDERS FEARED, JAKE — MARK, IF THAT ALONE ISN’T IMPEACHABLE, THEN NOTHING IT. YES, BEGIN THE PROCESS. >>LET’S — BUT LET’S GO WITH — BEGIN WITH THE END IN MIND WHICH IS, AGAIN, ARE THERE TROUBLING CHARGES? YES. COULD YOU MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT YOU ARE MAKING? YES. BUT DO YOU THINK YOU COULD GET 20 REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO GO ALONG WITH THAT ARGUMENT? THE ANSWER IS NO. THAT IS WHY DAVID BROOKS WROTE AN ELOQUENT COLUMN LAST WEEK SAYING THAT THERE WAS CERTAINLY REASON TO MOVE FORWARD, IT DIDN’T MAKE IT POLITICALLY PRUDENT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS NOT A LEGAL INQUIRY IN THE JUDICIARY, IT IS A POLITIC MOVE AND SO THE QUESTION IN THIS POLITIC SEASON IS DO WE WANT TO COMPLETELY WIPE OUT THE DEMOCRATIC DEBATE TAKING PLACE AMONGST THE DEMOCRATS AND SOME DEGREE OF REPUBLICANS THAT WE’RE TRYING TO HAVE, JOE, AS TO WHAT WE BELIEVE AS A COUNTRY AND WHERE WE WANT TO GO AND WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO US. BECAUSE THE GIANT SUCKING SOUND WILL BE THIS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY SUCKING EVERY OTHER PIECE OF DEBATE BOTH IN WASHINGTON AND OUTSIDE OF WASHINGTON OUT THE DOOR AND THE QUESTION IS, FROM AN ELITIST STANDPOINT, SHOULD 100 SENATORS MAKE THE CALL ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS PRESIDENT STAYS IN OFFICE OR SHOULD WE, IN FACT, HAVE THAT QUERY COME NEXT NOVEMBER. I THINK THAT IS LEGITIMATE. AND I THINK THERE IS PRECEDENT HERE. ANDREW JACKS IN 1834 WAS CENSURED AND AGAIN IT SAID WE’RE NOT GOING TO SAY NOTHING. BUT WE DON’T KNOW THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY PULL OFF A CHANGE SO THEREFORE WE’LL LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE. >>LET ME JUT GET CLARITY, CONGRESSMAN SANFORD, DO YOU WORRY AT ALL ABOUT A PRECEDENT WHERE IT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR A PRESIDENT TO USE THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO PRESSURE FOREIGN LEADERS, ESPECIALLY OF COUNTRIES THAT REALLY NEED U.S. HELP LIKE KRAEB UKRAINE, TO PRESSURE THEM TO INVESTIGATE RIVALS BECAUSE IF THAT PRECEDENT IS ACCEPTABLE AND I HEAR PEOPLE IN THE PRESIDENT’S CAMP SAYING THAT IS OKAY, DO YOU WORRY ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE THAT DOESN’T JUST END WITH THE PRESIDENCY, IT GOES ON FOREVER, RIGHT?>>RIGHT. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. LET ME BE 100% CLEAR, I DON’T THINK IT IS RIGHT. END OFTORY. THE QUESTION IS WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT IT? AND THAT IS A MORE COMPLEX QUESTION. WHICH IS DO YOU LOOK AT CENSURE, OR DO YOU LOOK AT IMPEACHMENT? WHAT DOES IMPEACHMENT ENTAIL. THIS IS WHERE IT IS WORTH EVERYBODY READING DAVID BROOKS’ COLUMN OF LAST WEEK BECAUSE HE ARGUES ARTICULATELY THAT WHAT IS DONE HERE IS WRONG BUT THE QUESTION IS WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT IT AND THAT IS WHERE IT DOES BECOME MORE COMPLEX? DO I WANT TO SET THIS PRECEDENT? NO. >>AGAIN AND AGAIN POLITICS BE DAMNED AND BEING POLITICALLY PRUDENT BE DAMNED, JAKE, WE HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO STOOD IN FRONT OF HIS COUNTRY AND SAID I WANT A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INTERFERING IN OUR ELECTION. THAT CAN’T BE ACCEPTED. THAT IS WRONG. THAT IS IMPEACHABLE ON ITS FACE.>>I WANT YOU TO RESPOND AND PLAY SOME SOUND BEEN. >>NO, BUT — WAIT, WAIT. WHAT YOU DON’T WANT TO DO, WHAT YOU DON’T WANT TO DO IS GIVE TRUMP THE REASON TO BE ABLE TO SAY I WAS ABSOLVED OF GUILT. THAT WILL SET MORE PRECEDENT GOING FORWARD THAN DOING SOMETHING LIKE A CENSURE BECAUSE IF YOU DON’T COME UP WITH THE 20 REPUBLICAN SENATORS ON THE SENATE SIDE, GUESS WHAT? HE’S NOT IMPEACHED. AND THEREFORE YOU DO SET PRECEDENT GOING FORWARD ON, AGAIN, WHAT HE DID AND I GUESS IT MUST BE OKAY. HE GOT CLEARED BY THE SENATE. HE WASN’T IMPEACHED. I THINK IT IS WORSE POLITICALLY — >>THAT IS WASHINGTON, D.C. GOBBLEDY –. AND EITHER THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS UP NOW AND SAYS WE OPPOSE THIS AND WE OPPOSE COLLUSION AND WE OPPOSE FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS INTERFERING IN OUR ELECTION, EITHER WE STAND UP WITH ONE UNIFYING VOICE WITH THAT RIGHT NOW, MARK, AND WE DON’T GET INVOLVED IN THE GOBBLEDY — OF CENSURE OR HOW ABOUT WE REPUBLICANS DO WHAT IS RIGHT, SIR?>>I COMPLETELY AGREE. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WE HAVE PROCESS IN THIS DEMOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT WE OWN FOR A REASON. >>BEGIN THE PROCESS. >>WHICH IS TO SAY YOU COULD CALL IT GOBBLEDY — SO BEGIN THE PROCESS. >>IS THAT EM PEACHABLE, MARK? IS THAT IMPEACHABLE IN IF A PRESIDENT TELLS A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTIONS, USES THE POWER OF HIS OFFICE TO BENEFIT HIM POLITICALLY, IS THAT IMPEACHABLE OR NOT?>>ABSOLUTELY. IN OTHER WORDS, IS IT WRONG? YES. BUT THE QUESTION IS — >>BUT IS IT IMPEACHABLE?>>– IS IT IMPEACHABLE, IS A POLITICAL CALL BASED ON THE CONTEXT OF THE — >>MAKE YOUR CALL NOW. DO YOU THINK IT IS IMPEACHABLE? I DO. DO YOU THINK THAT — >>WHAT YOU AND I THINK IS IRRELEVANT TO THE LARGER PROCESS THAT IS IN PLAY AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT. AND I’M SIMPLY SAYING LET’S LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE COSTS, THE COSTS IN THIS CASE, IF WE PROCEED, ARE NO FOCUS BY CNN, FOX, AND EVERYBODY ELSE ON WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE TALKING ABOUT. WE ARE GOING TO SUPER SEED THIS NATIONAL ELECTION BEFORE US WITH AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AND WE HAVE TO SAY, AS WE WEIGH THESE THINGS — >>WHAT THE FOCUS IS IS THE PRESIDENT.>>WE ONLY HAVE A MINUTE LEFT. THIS IS A GREAT DEBATE TO SIT HERE AND WATCH. CONGRESSMAN WALSH SAID HE’S NOT VOTING FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP NO MATTER WHAT. PERIOD. END OF STORY. CONGRESSMAN SANFORD YOU SAID IN AUGUST YOU WOULD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP OVER FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN IN 2020. DO YOU STILL FEEL THAT WAY TODAY? IF THOSE END UP BEING THE CHOICES?>>I DON’T KNOW. AGAIN WHAT I’VE SAID IS I’M AN ISSUE GUY. AND SO FOR INSTANCE ELIZABETH WARREN, I JUST READ IN THIS MORNING PAPER, IS PROPOSING TO TACK ON ANOTHER $2,300 OF ADDITIONAL SPENDING FOR SOCIAL MEDIA EVEN THOUGH THE SYSTEM IS ALREADY BANKRUPT. I’M GOING TO BASE MY DECISION BASED ON WHO IS CLOSEST TO ME WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO DEBT AND DEFICIT AND GOVERNMENT SPENDING WHERE I THINK WE’VE GONE OFF THE TRACKS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. >>CONGRESSMAN WALSH, ONE FINAL WORD. >>JAKE, I’M RUNNING AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP BECAUSE HE’S UNFIT AND A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THIS COUNTRY. THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL I WOULD VOTE FOR HIM IN NOVEMBER. THE ELECTION IS ABOUT TRUMP, PERIOD.>>THANKS TO BOTH OF YOU FOR THIS SPIRITED DEBATE. WE APPRECIATE IT. THANKS FOR BEING HERE AND WE’LL HAVE YOU BOTH ON AGAIN. COMING UP, DEMOCRATS HAVE FOUND THE SMOKING GUN AND ARE THEY READY TO CONVICT THE PRESIDENT NOW. SENATOR AMY KLOBUCHAR WILL JOIN ME AND>>>WELCOME BACK TO “STATE OF THE UNION,” I’M JAKE TAPPER. FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN IS TAKING ON PRESIDENT CALLING HIM WHOLLY UNFIT TO LEAD IN A WASHINGTON POST OP-ED BIDEN WRITES TRUMP IS FRANTICALLY PUSHING FLAT OUT LIES AND DEBUNKED CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND SMEARS AGAINST MY FAMILY NO DOUBT HOPING TO UNDERMINE MY CANDICY FOR MY PRESIDENCY AND IT WON’T WORK BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNOW ME AND THEY KNOW HIM. THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL HAS SEEN NO EVIDENCE OF ANY WRONGDOING BY HUNTER BIDEN, THE VICE PRESIDENT’S SON. JOINING ME NOW 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND A MEMBER OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SENATOR AMY KLOBUCHAR. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. >>THANKS, JAKE. >>YOUR FELLOW DEMOCRATIC SENATOR AND 2020 OPPONENT ELIZABETH WARREN SAID ON FRIDAY THAT SHE HAD SEEN ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONVICT PRESIDENT TRUMP AT AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL IN THE SENATE. >>YOU’VE SEEN ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONVICT YOURSELF?>>YES. >>SO YOU WOULD VOTE RIGHT NOW TO — >>I THINK THE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR. WHEN DONALD TRUMP RELEASED THE TRANSCRIPT IN WHICH HE SOLICITED A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE IN THE 2020 ELECTIONS, HE BROKE THE LAW.>>SENATOR, WOULD YOU VOTE TO CONVICT PRESIDENT TRUMP RIGHT NOW?>>JAKE, I HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR, I THINK THIS IS IMPEACHABLE, THAT THE CASE SHOULD BE HEARD BY THE HOUSE AND IT SHOULD COME OVER TO THE SENATE. NOW I DON’T KNOW WHAT COUNTS THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE OR HOW THEY DO THIS BUT MY FOCUS IS ON THE FACT THAT YOU’VE GOT A PRESIDENT THAT IS ACTING LIKE A GLOBAL GANGSTER. HE IS BASICALLY GOING TO ONE LEADER AFTER ANOTHER TRYING TO GET DIRT ON HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT. I CONSIDER THAT AS VIOLATION OF OUR LAWS. I CONSIDER IT A VIOLATION OF THE ELECTION LAWS. YOU HAVE THE SMOKING GUN DOCUMENT BUT NOW YOU’RE GETTING REPORTS OF ANOTHER WHISTLE-BLOWER THAT IS GOING TO BACK-UP WHAT THE FIRST WHISTLE-BLOWER SAID. SO I AM REALLY, REALLY FOCUSED ON GETTING THE EVIDENCE OUT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND CALLING ON OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES TO TAKE THIS ON IN A SERIOUS MATTER, TO PUT THE COUNTRY IN FRONT OF THEIR OWN PARTISANSHIP AS WE GET THIS VERY SERIOUS CASE THAT I BELIEVE WILL COME OVER FROM THE HOUSE.>>THAT IS RIGHT. AND JUST TO REITERATE FOR THOSE JUST TUNING IN, THE WHISTLE-BLOWER ATTORNEY MARK ZAID HAS CONFIRMED HE’S NOW REPRESENTING A SECOND WHISTLE-BLOWER, SOMEBODY WHO HAS SPOKEN TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND HAVE FIRSTHAND ACCOUNTS TO BLACK UP THE WHISTLE-BLOWER. BUT YOU ARE SAYING THIS SHOULD GO FORWARD AND IMPEACHABLE BUT NOT READY TO CONVICT RIGHT NOW. I UNDERSTAND YOUR A BELIEVER IN THE PROCESS. DO YOU THINK IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE FOR SENATORS WHO WILL BE JURORS TO SAY RIGHT NOW THEY WOULD VOTE TO CONVICT? IS THAT IRRESPONSIBLE?>>THINK PEOPLE WILL SAY DIFFERENT THINGS. AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR I LIKE TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE EDS BECAUSE YOU MIGHT CONVICT ON A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS AND NOT ANOTHER ONE. BUT THAT IS NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS WE HAVE SOME REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES THAT ARE BASICALLY TREATING THIS AS A JOKE WITH VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS. AND THEY ARE THE ONES THAT IS GOING TO MATTER BECAUSE WE NEED SOMETHING LIKE 20 REPUBLICAN VOTES TO GET UP TO 67. YOU LOOK AT THE FACT THAT WE’VE HAD A FEW GLIMMERS OF PEOPLE TRYING TO LOOK AT THIS DIFFERENTLY. SENATOR GRASSLEY DEFENDING THE WHISTLE-BLOWER AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP ATTACKED THE WHISTLE-BLOWER AS A SPY BASICALLY AND IMPLYING THAT HE SHOULD BE EXECUTED AND YOU HAD SENATOR ROMNEY THIS LAST WEEKEND COMING OUT TO SAY WHAT WAS VERY, VERY WRONG ABOUT MAKING THESE KINDS OF THREATS WHEN YOU’RE IN THE MIDDLE OF TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CHINA USING THE LEVERAGE THAT SHOULD BE USED TO HELP OUR FARMERS AND OUR WORKERS AND INSTEAD TRYING TO USE IT TO GET DIRT ON OPPONENT OR THE FLEDGLING DEMOCRACY OF UKRAINE SO I’M WAITING FOR THE OLD KIDS STORY, THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES AND YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT CLOAKING HIMSELF IN THE PAGEANTRY OF THIS OFFICE WHILE LITERALLY VIOLATING THE LAW ON A DAILY BASIS. WE NEED MORE REPUBLICANS TO POINT OUT THIS EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. AND PRETTY SOON ONE BY ONE BY ONE I THINK THE TRUTH WILL COME OUT.>>THE WHITE HOUSE IS ASSERTED THAT IT DOES NOT NEED TO COMPLY WITH CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS FOR DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAS NOT HELD A FORMAL VOTE TO OPEN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. REGARDLESS OF THAT LEGAL POSITION, YOU ARGUE THERE IS A PROCESS TO FOLLOW HERE. WHY SHOULDN’T THE PROCESS INCLUDE A VOTE ON THE HOUSE FLOOR TO OPEN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. >>I DON’T THINK THAT IS NECESSARY. BECAUSE WE KNOW ABOUT THE HOUSE RULES THAT THE SPEAKER CAN DO THAT HERSELF. TO ME, AGAIN, THESE ARE A BUNCH OF THE NUANCES OF THIS BUT WHAT REALLY MATTERS TO ME IS THAT PEOPLE COME FORWARD AND TESTIFY. YOU ALREADY HAVE THOSE TEXTS WHICH ARE VERY DAMNING WITH HIGH-LEVEL DIPLOMATS TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE FACT ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE PUSHING FOR THIS INVESTIGATION WHILE FOREIGN AID SECURE IS ON THE ONLINE. I HAVE BEEN TO UKRAINE AND THERE WITH SENATOR McCAIN AND SAERNT GRAHAM AND SAW FOR MYSELF HOW MUCH THEY NEED OUR COUNTRY BY THEIR SIDE AS THEY DEAL WITH FOREIGN ENTITY AS IN RUSSIA THAT SHOT PLANES DOWN OVER THEIR COUNTRY THAT IS ANNEXED WITH CRIMEA IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY AND THEY NEED US AND PRESIDENT TRUMP KNOWS THAT. SO I THINK WHAT REALLY MATTERS IS, OKAY, WE’VE GOT THESE COURAGEOUS WHISTLE-BLOWERS COMING FORWARD AND NOW WE HAVE TO SEE COURAGE FROM SOME PEOPLE THAT USED TO WORK IN THE WHITE HOUSE THAT WERE DIRECTLY IN THE ROOM WITH HIM THAT HEARD WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT THESE THINGS. THOSE PEOPLE HAVE TO COME FORWARD. AND THEN OF COURSE WE NEED TO SEE THE SAME LEVEL OF COURAGE THAT WE SEE FROM THE LINE CIA AGENTS THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED. WE NEED TO SEE THAT FROM THE CONGRESS. BECAUSE TO ME THIS IS JUST LIKE WATERGATE. YOU HAD A PRESIDENT THAT WAS PARANOID AND AN ELECTION WAS COMING UP AND HE WANTED TO GET DIRT ON HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND HE SENT OUT A GROUP TO BREAK INTO A FILE CABINET IN THE DNC HEADQUARTERS. INSTEAD THIS GUY, HE’S DECIDED TO USE HIS CLOUT WITH WORLD LEADERS AND TRY TO DO IT ON A GLOBAL BASIS AND THEN WHEN THEY GET CAUGHT, WHAT DO THEY DO IN THEY TRY TO HIDE IT ON A SUPER SECRET SERVER AND HAVE THE INFORMATION THERE. THEY DIDN’T HAVE THOSE BACK THEN IN WATERGATE BUT IT IS THE SAME KIND OF THING. THAT IS WHAT WE’RE DEALING WITH HERE AND PEOPLE NEED TO THINK OF IT THAT WAY. >>VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN DEFENDED HIMSELF WHEN ASKED ABOUT HUNTER BIDENS INVOLVED WITH THE UKRAINIAN COMPANY AND WHETHER IT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. TAKE A LISTEN. >>IT IS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THERE IS NO INDICATION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, PERIOD. I’M NOT GOING TO RESPOND TO THAT. LET’S FOCUS ON THE PROBLEM. FOCUS ON THIS MAN WHAT HE’S DOING THAT NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER DONE. NO PRESIDENT. >>AND TO BE CLEAR. THE UKRAINIAN PROSECUTOR GENERAL HAS NO EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING BY HUNTER BIDEN BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU, SENATOR HARRIS AND CONGRESSMAN O’ROURKE HAVE BOTH SUGGESTED THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH A CHILD OF THEIR VICE PRESIDENT SITTING ON THE BOARD OF A FOREIGN COMPANY. WOULD YOU?>>NO, I WOULDN’T. AND I CAN PROMISE YOU RIGHT NOW MY OWN DAUGHTER WHO IS ONLY 24 DOES NOT SIT ON THE BOARD OF A FOREIGN COMPANY. BUT THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE HERE IS WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING. BECAUSE WE HAVE THE UKRAINIAN PROSECUTOR SAYING THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, AS YOU HAVE SAID ON YOUR SHOW, MULTIPLE PEOPLE LOOKING AT THIS. THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT DID SOMETHING WRONG HERE. AND SO WHAT REALLY MATTERS IS THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS REPEATEDLY TRYING TO GET DIRT ON A POLITICAL OPPONENT. THAT IS THE ISSUE HERE. AND WE HAVE SEEN THIS. WE’VE SEEN THIS PRESIDENT. HE DOES NOT KNOW THE LINE FROM THE MOMENT HE STOOD IN FRONT OF THAT WALL OF STARS AT THE DECEASED CIA AGENT AND STOOD THERE ON THE SACRED WALL AND GAVE A PARTISAN SPEECH. HE BELIEVED VPUTIN OVER HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORS. TIME AND TIME AGAIN THIS GUYS GOES WITH THE DICTATORS AND KIM JONG-UN OVER THE INTERESTS OF AMERICA. AND I THINK WE NEED A PRESIDENT THAT IS GOING TO PUT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY, THOSE WORKERS, THE FARMERS IN IOWA, PEOPLE OUT HERE WITH ME RIGHT NOW IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, THE VETERANS, I’M GOING TO BE MEETING WITH THEM IN AN HOUR, TO PUT THEIR INTERESTS IN FRONT OF HIS OWN OR HER OWN POLITICAL AND BUSINESS AND PARTISAN INTERESTS. THIS GUY HASN’T DONE THAT. THAT IS WHY THE HOUSE IS LOOKING INTO THIS BECAUSE IT IS A SECURITY INTEREST FOR OUR COUNTRY, A VIOLATION OF THE LAW. IT IS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND TO NOT DO IT WOULD BE TO SHIRK OUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES. IT WAS JAMES MADISON THAT SAID AT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION THE REASON FOR THE PROVISIONS FOR IMPEACHMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AND WERE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTITUTION WAS BECAUSE THEY FEARED THAT A PRESIDENT COULD BETRAY THE TRUST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO A FOREIGN POWER, THOSE WERE THE WORDS OF ONE OF OUR FOUNDERS. AND THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.>>SENATOR KLOBUCHAR, THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU SHOULD LEARN SOME DANIEL WEBSTER FOR THE NEW HAMPSHIRE CROWD YOU’RE ABOUT TO TALK TO. BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR REFERENCES. >>I’LL BEEF UP ON THE WAY TO THE AMERICAN LEGION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>THANKS SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT SENATOR KLOBUCHAR.>>>COMING UP, AS DEMOCRATS PURSUE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI IS LOOKING TO THE PAST REMINDING THE PRESIDENT OF A RULE FROM HIS CASINO DAYS.>>DONALD, YOU USED TO OWN A CASINO. YOU KNOW THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS.>>>THIS BUSINESS OF CRY CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS GOES TO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON SERVING AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES PUT THEIR OWN INTERESTS, THEIR PERSONAL INTERESTS, AHEAD OF PUBLIC SERVICE. >>THEN CONGRESSMAN MIKE PENCE ON IMPEACHMENT TALKING ABOUT THAT IN 2008 IN THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. I THINK HE’S CHANGED HIS MIND ON THAT SUBJECT NOW. LET’S DISCUSS. LET ME START WITH YOU. BECAUSE YOU SERVED AS A STAFFER ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DURING WATERGATE. I THINK THAT THEN CONGRESSMAN PENCE HAD IT RIGHT AND VICE PRESIDENT PENCE MAYBE NOT SO MUCH. >>ABSOLUTELY. IT IS LIKE THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. I DON’T KNOW WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE. THEY HAVE SO CHANGED THEIR TUNE. THIS IS REALLY SERIOUS. ONE OF THE REASONS I BECAME A CONSERVATIVE. >>I WAS A DEMOCRAT. ONE OF THE REASONS I BECAME A CONSERVATIVE WAS THAT I REALLY BELIEVED THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS DEVOTED TO THE TRUTH, IN A WE BELIEVED IN IDEALS AND WE WERE DEVOTED TO THE CONSTITUTION. AND WHAT I SEE HAPPENING NOW IS PEOPLE WHO ARE ABSOLUTELY ABROGATING THEIR DUTY AND THEY ARE PUTTING POLITICS FIRST AND SCARED OF DONALD TRUMP. >>DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS THAT AS SOMEBODY FROM A RED TATE, IF A BLUE TOWN, THAT DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TOO FAR, TOO FAST?>>NO, I THINK IT WAS HARD FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO THE IMPEACHMENT AND PAST THE RUBICON BUT THE PRESIDENT MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE COUNTRY TO LOOK AWAY AND THROUGH ALL OF THE NOISE ESSENTIALLY I THINK EVERYBODY HAS TO DO THEIR DUTY. IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT MINUTES FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVINCE AND READ MADISON AND LISTEN TO WHAT HAMILTON WROTE IT IS CLEAR THIS IS ONE OF THE EXACT REASONS THEY PUT THE IMPEACHMENT CLAUSE IN THE CONSTITUTION AND A SOBERING AND SERIOUS MOMENT FOR THE COUNTRY THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT KWARLY AND SIMPLY PEOPLE NEED TO DO THEIR DUTY AND LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY. >>AMANDA, THE PRESIDENT AND HIS TEAM IS SAYING HE HAS A RESPONSIBLE TO FERRET OUT CORRUPTION WHEREVER IT MIGHT BE AND WHEN ASKED BY EAMON JAVERS ON FRIDAY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT HE COULD NAME ANOTHER TIME THAT HE CALLED FOR SUCH AN INVESTIGATION BY A FOREIGN LEADER INTO SOMEBODY THAT WASN’T A POLITICAL RIVAL. WELL, LISTEN TO HIS RESPONSE.>>YOU HAVE ASKED FOREIGN LEADERS FOR ANY CORRUPTION INVESTIGATION THAT DON’T INVOLVE YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS OR OTHER CASES WHERE — >>WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK.>>WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK. I THINK THEY’RE STILL LOOKING. BECAUSE I’M PRETTY SURE HE HASN’T.>>WELL, IF HE WANTS SOME INFORMATION ON THIS, THERE IS SOMEONE HE COULD ASK. HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT WHO IS JAIL RIGHT NOW FOR MEDDLING IN UKRAINAN ELECTIONS AND TAKING A LOT OF MONEY FROM PRO-RUSSIAN FORCES IN THE AREA AND NOT REPORTING IT. SO THERE IS CORRUPTION HE MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN. BUT HERE IS THE THING, WE’RE ALL ON FIFTH AVENUE RIGHT NOW. HE DID THE DEED IN BROAD DAYLIGHT. HE CALLED FOR FOREIGN ADVERSARIES TO INTERFERE IN THE ELECTION WITH RUSSIA AND THE TRANSCRIP AND ON THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN. THAT IS SOMETHING YOU CAN’T LOOK AWAY FROM. THERE ARE REPUBLICANS DUCKING, COVERING AND IN THE ALLEYWAYS AND THEY DON’T WANT TO COME OUT IN THE STREET AND YOU HAVE TO LINE UP ON ONE STREET OR THE OTHER BEHIND THIS QUESTION. BEHIND DONALD TRUMP WHO SUPPORTS CHEATING TO WIN ELECTIONS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THIS BOILS DOWN TO OR DO YOU OPPOSE IT AND THESE REPUBLICAN SENATORS SHOULD ENGAGE IN SELF REFLECTION. DO YOU WANT CHINA, UKRAINE, YOU NAME IT COMING AFTER YOU, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR CAMPAIGN? BECAUSE IF YOU DON’T STAND UP TO IT, FAIR GAME. >>AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE SAID IN GREECE JUST YESTERDAY I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS ALL NORMAL. TAKE A LISTEN. >>OF COURSE.>>LOOK, NATIONS DO THIS. NATIONS WORK TOGETHER AND THEY SAY, BOY, GOODNESS GRACIOUS IF YOU COULD HELP ME WITH X WE’LL HEPA CHIEF Y. THIS IS WHAT PARTNERSHIPS DO. IT IS WIN-WIN. IT IS BETTER FOR EACH OF US. I’M OFFENDED WHEN YOUR PRIME MINISTER ASKED ME CAN YOU HELP US WITH X, RIGHT. DOESN’T BOTHER ME A LICK. >>BY THE WAY, THAT IS HIM CONFIRMING A QUID PRO QUO. IF YOU COULD HELP ME WITH X, WE’LL HELP YOU ACHIEVE Y. >>AND WE ALREADY KNOW THERE WAS A QUID PRO QUO. WE ALREADY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TRUMP WAS TRYING TO DO. AND I KEEP THINKING ABOUT THAT PART OF THE MUELLER REPORT WHERE BOB MUELLER KEPT SAYING THAT A LOT OF THE OBSTRUCTION HAPPENED OUT IN THE OPEN. SO OF COURSE TRUMP SAID THE OTHER DAY, CHINA, IMAGINE IF I SAID TO — TO A TEACHER, I CHEATED ON MY TEST BUT I’M TELLING YOU THAT I CHEATED ON MY TEST SO IT IS OKAY, RIGHT? IT IS OUTRAGEOUS. AND THE FACT THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE HIDING IN THE BACKGROUND AS YOU POINT OUT, AMANDA, IT IS SHAMEFUL. AND I HAVE TO SAY, WE’VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT — EVERYBODY ASSUMES TRUMP WILL GET AWAY WITH IT AND IT IS BAD FOR THE DEMOCRATS. I HOPE IT IS BAD FOR THE REPUBLICANS. SHAME ON YOU AND I SAY TO MY DEMOCRATIC FRIENDS WE HAVE TO RAISE THE TEMPERATURE AND MAKE SURE WE TAKE OUT ANYBODY WHO DECIDES THEY THINK IT IS OKAY TO PROTECT THIS PRESIDENT WHEN HE’S WILLING TO COMPLETELY SHRED OUR CONSTITUTION. >>I WANT TO PLAY SOUND FROM A DIFFERENT REPUBLICAN SECRETARY OF STATE. HERE IS FORMER JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN COLIN POWELL TALKING ABOUT THE STATE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WITH MY COLLEAGUE FAREED ZAKARIA. >>REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS GOT TO GET A GRIP ON ITSELF RIGHT NOW. REPUBLICAN LEADERS AND MEMBERS OF THE CONGRESS IN BOTH SENATE AND THE HOUSE ARE HOLDING BACK BECAUSE THEY’RE TERRIFIED OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ANY ONE OF THEM IF THEY SPEAK OUT. BUT WILL THEY LOSE A PRIMARY?>>YOU COULD WATCH MORE OF THAT INTERVIEW ON FAREED ZAKARIA COMING UP NEXT. YOU WANTED TO RESPOND. >>HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE NATURE OF SACRIFICE AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE CALLED TO DO THEIR DUTY IRRESPECTIVE OF THE CONSEQUENCES. THIS IS A SERIOUS MOMENT. STATED SIMPLY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WORKED WITH A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO UNDERMINE OUR ELECTIONS AND THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW. AND THE SIMPLE QUESTION FOR THE COUNTRY IS IS THE PRESIDENT ABOVE THE LAW, IF OUR UNION IS GOING TO STAND THE ANSWER HAS TO BE NO. NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW. >>STICK AROUND. WE’LL KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS. BERNIE SANDERS REVEALS HE SUFFERED A HEART ATTACK THIS WEEK WHAT ARE THE>>>THIS IS A GUY THAT IS UNHINGED. HE IS UNHINGED. I WORRY ABOUT WHAT HE’S GOING TO DO. NOT ABOUT ME OR MY FAMILY. I WORRIED ABOUT WHAT HE’LL DO IN THE NEXT YEAR IN THE PRESIDENCY. AS THIS THING CONTINUES TO ROCK ON HIS WATCH. THIS GUY LIKE ALL BULLIES IS A COWARD. HE DOES NOT WANT TO RUN AGAINST ME. THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. >>FORMER VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN CHANGING HIS STRATEGY THIS WEEK WITH A VERY FIERY RESPONSE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP. LET’S DISCUSS. KAREN, LET ME START WITH YOU. DO YOU SEE IMPEACHMENT AS HURTING THE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IN ANY WAY IN THE SENSE THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE THE BIG STORY IN WASHINGTON GOING FORWARD AT LEAST UNTIL IT IS OVER. >>I DON’T. AND I’LL TELL YOU A COUPLE OF REASONS. NUMBER ONE, IF IT WASN’T IMPEACHMENT OR THIS SITUATION, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE THIS IS THE WAY TRUMP PLAYS THIS GAME. HAVING BEEN IN THE MIDDLE OF IT IN 2016, IF IT WASN’T JOE BIDEN IT WOULD BE ELIZABETH WARREN AND SOME OTHER — TRYING TO THROW OUT A SHINY OBJECT THAT WE WOULD BE FIGHTING ABOUT THAT HE WOULD BE TRYING TO CREATE A FALSE EQUIVALENCE AROUND AND I ALSO THINK THESE CANDIDATES HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF TRYING — THERE WAS A PANEL HAVING BEEN IN THE M IN 2016, IF IT WASN’T JOE BIDEN IT WOULD BE ELIZABETH WARREN AND SOME OTHER — TRYING TO THROW OUT A SHINY OBJECT THAT WE WOULD BE FIGHTING ABOUT THAT HE WOULD BE TRYING TO CREATE A FALSE EQUIVALENCE AROUND AND I ALSO THINK THESE CANDIDATES HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF TRYING — THERE WAS A PANEL LAST WEEK ON GUN SAFETY IN LAS VEGAS. I THINK ON THE TRAIL VOTERS ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT OTHER ISSUES THAT THEY CARE ABOUT. AND I THINK THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. I THINK THE CHALLENGE THAT THE BIDEN TEAM HAS HAD AND I PERSONALLY THINK THEY’VE DONE A GOOD JOB. IT IS A HARD PLACE TO BE WHEN YOU ARE FIGHTING AGAINST THE TRUMP MACHINE. TO BOTH PUSH BACK ON THE SUBSTANCE AND TO PUSH BACK ALSO ON YOU HAVE TO HAVE BIDEN OUT THERE IN SOME MOMENTS STANDING UP FOR HIS FAMILY AND SHOWING HOW ANGRY IS HE BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL SAY — WELL WHEN YOU DON’T SHOW YOUR ANGER I THINK VOTERS GET QUESTIONING. >>SO LET’S TALK ABOUT THE SUBSTANCE FOR A SECOND. BECAUSE BIDEN HAS BEEN VERY AGGRESSIVELY PUSHING BACK AND AGAIN FOR THE THIRD TIME THE PROSECUTOR IN UKRAINE HAS SAID THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING BY HUNTER BIDEN BUT THERE IS THE QUESTION OF THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETOR A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BY DAVID IGNATIUS WHO SAID BIDEN DESERVES SOME BLAME TOO. PUTTING ASIDE THE FALSE TRUMP CONSPIRACY THEORIES, BIDEN USED POOR JUDGMENT WHILE HIS SON HUNTER BIDEN WAS WORKING FOR BURISMA DENYING THIS OBVIOUS FACT WEAKENS THE DEMOCRATS CASE AGAINST TRUMP. AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT THIS IS NOT TO UNDERMINE THE FACT THAT WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING IS SOMETHING WE’VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE AND IT IS THE MAIN TOPIC OF THE SHOW. BUT DOES DAVID IGNATIUS HAVE A POINT?>>I THINK HE DOES. BUT IT IS A STRANGE POINT IN THE CONTEXT THAT THE PRESIDENT’S CHILDREN ARE BOTH WORKING IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND DOING BUSINESS WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AS WELL. THAT IS A REASONABLE POINT TO BE MADE. HOWEVER, IT SHOULD NEVER TAKE FOCUS AWAY FROM WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID WHICH IS TO WORK WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS TO UNDERMINE OUR ELECTIONS. >>I THINK THAT IS RIGHT. BUT I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE QUESTION WHETHER IMPEACHMENT IS GOING TO HURT THE DEMOCRATS. >>OKAY. >>AND I DO BELIEVE, BECAUSE I WAS IN JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AT THE TIME AND DURING THE NIXON IMPEACHMENT, IT COULD HURT THE DEMOCRATS. DEPENDING ON HOW THEY PLAY IT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK IS REALLY DANGEROUS IS IF YOU HAVE A BUNCH OF DEMOCRATS WHO WANT TO SEE THEIR FACE ON CABLE TELEVISION AND DECIDE TO GIVE SPEECHES AND THIS IS WHAT THEY’VE DONE SO FAR IN THE HEARINGS ALL YEAR RATHER THAN HIRING SOMEBODY AND DURING THE IMPEACHMENT TIME WAS JOHN DOOR THE ATTORNEY WHO ASKED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS, YOU’VE GOT TO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL THERE GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT HAPPENED AND YOU CANNOT HAVE PEOPLE GRANDSTANDING AND CHAIRMAN SCHIFF CAUSED HIMSELF A LOT OF PROBLEMS BY HIS BEHAVIOR DURING THE FIRST HEARING. >>WITH THAT PARODY DIALOGUE THAT WASN’T REAL. >>BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT FACETIME ON TELEVISION, THIS IS ABOUT SOMETHING VERY SERIOUS IN OUR CONSTITUTION. >>I THINK WE NEED TO ZOOM OUT. BECAUSE THERE IS DUELLING STORY LINES AND THE REPUBLICANS WILL TAKE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLOIT VULNERABILITIES IF THE DEMOCRATS MAKE MISTAKES. BUT WITH THIS QUESTION OF JOE BIDEN, HE’LL HAVE TO ABSORB THE ATTACKS FROM TRUMP AND ONE OF THE STARTLES THINGS IS ONE OF THE STORIES HE TOLD CHRIS COOPS FROM DELAWARE, I CAN’T BELIEVE HE’S GOING AFTER MY FAMILY. REALLY? WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN, JOE? OF COURSE PRESIDENT TRUMP IS GOING TO GO AFTER YOUR FAMILY AND THIS ISN’T A NEW STORY THAT HAS BEEN AROUND. THIS IS IN THE CLINTON CACHE BOOK AND FLOAT AGO MONG REPUBLICAN CIRCLES FOR A LONG TIME AND IF YOU ZOOM OUT THERE IS A LOT OF SUSPICION IN THE ELECTORATE THAT PEOPLE ARE UNFAIRLY PROFITING OFF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM. THIS IS THE SAME LIGHT OF ARGUMENT AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON AND THE GLOBAL FOUNDATION WHEN SHE WAS RAKING IN BIG SPEECH MONEY AND PEOPLE DIDN’T KNOW WHAT SHE WAS DOING WITH THE IRAN — SO IT IS THE SAME THING. SO JOE BIDEN SHOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY SEEN THIS COMING. WHY IS IT TAKING HIM SO LONG. HE SAID I’M GOING TO BEAT TRUMP LIKE A DRUM, SO WHERE ARE YOU?>>HE HASN’T DONE ANY SUNDAY INTERVIEWS IS WHAT SHE’S SAYING.>>BUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU JUST PLAYED A CLIP, HE WAS HAPPY SEVERAL TIMES TO GO IN FRONT OF THE PRESS AND TALK TO THE PRESS TRAVELING WITH HIM AND MAKE STATEMENTS. HE PUT OUT ON OP-ED AGAIN TODAY. AND THIS IS THE THING YOU HAVE TO REALIZE HAVING BEEN THROUGH IT, IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE CANDIDATE. IT IS ABOUT HOW THE CAMPAIGN HANDLES IT, RIGHT. BECAUSE IT IS HOW — BECAUSE THE TRUMP MACHINE JUST PUTS IT OUT — >>THEY’VE BEEN SLOW TO RESPOND.>>NO, THEY HAVE NOT.>>YES, THEY ARE THE STORY CAME OUT — >>IT WAS A WHOLE MEMO. >>LAST WORD. >>IT IS EASY TO BE ON THE VICE PRESIDENT BUT HE’S HAD THE KITCHEN SINK THROWN AT HIM BY EVERYBODY THROWN ON BOTH SIDES AND HE’S STILL STANDING AND PUSHING BACK BUT MAYBE HE HASN’T HANDLED EVERYTHING BUT HE’S STILL THERE. >>THANK YOU, PANEL.>>>COMING UP, IMAGINE FIVE OR TEN YEARS IN THE FUTURE, HOW WILL REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS BE JUDGED FOR THE WAY THEY RESPONDED TO PRESIDENT TRUMP TODAY? HISTORY DOES GIVES>>>HE BEGAN HIS SMEAR CAMPAIGN IN 1950 UP UNTIL HIS CENSURE BY THE U.S. SENATE IN 1954. THE STORY OF McCARTHY WAS NOT JUST THE STORY OF INDECENCY, LIES, LAW BREAKING. IT WAS ALSO THE STORY OF JUST HOW MUCH REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS WERE WILLING TO TAKE. AFTER ALL, MANY OF THEM KNEW WHAT McCARTHY WAS DOING WASN’T JUST WRONG, IT WAS CORRUPTING THE NATION, BUT THEY WERE AFRAID OF HIM TURNING HIS SIGHTS ON THEM. THEY FEARED THE WRATH OF HIS POLITICAL POWER. YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GO BACK AND READ ABOUT THAT PERIOD, WHAT REALLY STANDS OUT IS HOW MUCH McCARTHY’S CONTEMPORARIES JUDGED TODAY ABOUT HOW THEY HANDLED HIM. SENATOR SMITH HAD A LONG TRAILBLAZING CAREER HER OBITUARY MENTIONED STANDING UP TO McCARTHY AS HER FINEST MOMENTS IN POLITICS. CONVERSELY STANDS THE EXAMPLE OF OHIO SENATOR BOB TAFT, THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER. HE ONE CALLED McCARTHY RECKLESS AND THE CHARGES BUNK, BUT HE ESSENTIAL CAST HIS LOST WITH THE SMEAR ARTIST. HE HOPED THAT THE POLITICAL CALCULATION WOULD ALL PAY OFF WHEN HE RAN FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN AND BEGAN TRULY WRITING HIS OWN LEGACY. THE PROBLEM IS TAFT DROPPED DEAD IN 1953. WE DON’T GET TO JUDGE OUR OWN LEGACIES. COWARD IS IS– COWARDICE IS PAR OF HIS. YEW YOUR POLITICAL OFFICE TO FORCE FOREIGN NATIONS TO DIG UP DIRT IS ANOTHER ONE. YOU KNOW THIS. I KNOW THIS. I WOULD BEST MOST REPUBLICANS ON CAPITOL HILL KNOW THIS. THEY WOULD DO WELL TO REMEMBER THE LESSONS OF SENATORS SMITH AND TAFT, BECAUSE HISTORY WILL ONE DAY COME LOOKING FOR THEM, TOO. SHE WILL WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY SAID AND DID DURING THIS TIME. SHE WILL LIKELY NOT BE IN A

Maurice Vega

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment