Mr. Mccarthy close, close . Id like to start this monday was veterans day. I was able to be home. I was able to be grand marshall in our 100th veterans day parade. I want to thank those veterans for the freedom they provided us, the service they have given. It would have been nice this week we would pass appropriation bills for our troops, for their pay raise, for the funding to make sure theyre safe and protected on the job that they have to do, but unfortunately, this week is just about impeachment. The public was able to see what this democrat majority has been working on for the last three years, just impeachment. I want to recognize the republican members and staff of the intelligence committee. I thought they did a great job yesterday. With poise and purpose, they brought forth the truth out to the public after weeks of adam schiff keeping them in the dark. We didnt walk out of yesterdays hearing with any new information than we already walked in. So let me quickly recap what we do know. The call summary is still the most important piece of evidence we have. It shows no pressure or even it shows no pressure or even mention of conditionality between the two leaders. The ukrainians did not know that Security Assistance was under review until over a month after the call. The full assistance was provided and no investigation was opened. We did hear from the witnesses was that they had never spoken to President Trump, they had not met with the chief of staff, their understanding, which is the foundation of the case for the democrats, was based on secondhand information. Remember what yesterday was. The democrats had homefield advantage. They got to change the course of the rules of how to handle a meeting itself. They got to pick the witnesses they wanted. They tabled the opportunity for a whistleblower to come forward and even protect that persons identity while they presented to the committee. With all of that, we found out nothing new. One of the witnesses actually dmitted, what i can do for you here today is tell you what i heard from people. This lacks basic explanation of fact witnesses. Those witnesses did rely on their expertise, though, to underscore how much safer ukraine is today under this administration with President Trump. After russia invaded ukraine, the Previous Administration sent thermal blankets. The Trump Administration sent tankbusting bombs. So ill refer back to what Speaker Pelosi said earlier this year just in march about impeachment. You all recall that. That this is so divisive to our country that it has to be so compelling, so overwhelming, and ipartisan. Otherwise, we should not put our country through it. I think Speaker Pelosi should hold to her own words. Theres nothing compelling. Theres nothing overwhelming. And the only bipartisan vote we had was to end impeachment. But apparently she doesnt stick with her words. I thought what was most ironic was the setting, the ways and Means Committee room. Democrats on that dais tried to spend their entire day to discredit this president s and this administrations foreign olicy and success. Not only were they wrong, they did it while hijacking a committee where we decide on our trade policy. They did it while having ways and means, where the usmca, nited statesmexciocanada trade agreement can only make our top two traders stronger as we have negotiations with china. It only emphasized, again, what is not being done in congress and what should be being done in congress. Impeachment has overtaken every single committee. Were less than a year away from the election, but these democrats do not trust the American Public. They will continue to try to make something up when we have the facts of the phone call. We know there was no pressure to either leader, and the money was released. And ukraine is actually stronger today with a new administration leading america. With that, let me open up to questions. Yes, sir. Reporter james rosen. I wonder if you can explain to the American People why they shouldnt see on the part of House Republicans to hear you assert on the one hand that these witnesses lack credibility because they are only offering second and thirdhand information at the same time you support the white house blocking testimony from those witnesses, like john bolton, and mick mulvaney, who have firsthand information, whether you want firsthand nformation or you dont . Mr. Mccarthy we have firsthand information. We have something i believe the speaker of the house, if she waited 48 hours, would not put the American People through his. We have the transcript. Its not what someone was told fourthhand. We have the two people on the phone call that a whistleblower who was not that started this process. So we know exactly what words were said to one another. And we can walk all the way through that. We have all the information that we need to what adam schiff believed it was something different. Adam schiff read something he wished had transposed inside that transcript that didnt. All of america can read it, and thats why if you take Speaker Pelosis words, has to be overwhelming, it has to be so compelling and has to be bipartisan. She doesnt meet one of her three criteria to move forward. Reporter just to be clear is the setting in which the republicans now find themselves, hich is an impeachment proceeding, you are against hearing from witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of the president . Mr. Mccarthy i am not adversed to hearing from any witness. I am from the standpoint, if we o back to the moment when adam schiff first came forward that he was so concerned that the administration was going to withhold a whistleblower from presenting to congress, that thats what he was fighting for. The only reason why adam schiff is now stopping and moving to table that motion is because we found out that adam schiff and his staff met with the whistleblower. Adam schiff and his staff met with the whistleblower before this whistleblower had an attorney, before the whistleblower went to the inspector general. Hes the only person and staff who knows what the whistleblower as said. But we have all the facts we need inside a transcript of the phone call itself. Yes. Reporter you just asserted that several republicans adam schiff either personally met the whistleblower or knows the whistleblower which he denies. Do you think hes lying . Mr. Mccarthy yes. Reporter you say there should be mr. Mccarthy this is not the first time he has lied to us either. Reporter you say that you and your fellow republicans that the issue should be focused on the president s words on that call. Read the transcript. And yet, you have this growing number of state department officials, career Public Servants who say what they saw was highly irregular, even crazy. Are they all wrong . Mr. Mccarthy you know, yesterday, congressman John Radcliffe left a question to these two witnesses who never met the president , were not on the phone call, has not talked to the chief of staff, and asked them, what do you see impeachable . Is there one impeachable item in there . They could not answer one. Remember what were discussing here. Were talking about removing a duly elected president. You take that so lightly, we have the transcript. You know, Alexander Hamilton warned of us this day may come. That a person may have the majority with inside of congress to use impeachment for their own personal political gains. We watched how many times they tried this in the last three years and failed. And we see adam schiff leading the charge. Reporter you say not impeachable. Is it appropriate . Mr. Mccarthy are we having a hearing about inappropriate or impeachment inquiry . It goes to the core of the fabric of democracy. Do you take it that lightly that you just have the u. S. Congress vote about an impeachment inquiry and then change the rules of the house where you dont have due process, you move t out of the Judiciary Committee to the Intel Committee and make it an impeachment committee, you have secret meetings inside the basement of the capitol, you have not released all the transcripts, you audition who you want to bring forward and we just watched the two witnesses that they wanted to pick, you deny the minority to bring witnesses forward, you deny the president , who youre moving to impeach, to have an attorney in the room, to crossexamine. The same authority those that were impeached had before. Nothing there is impeachable. We should not be putting our country through this. Were less than a year away from an election. The worst part of all of this, we just had veterans day. Next week government funding stops. And were not funding the troops. Were not giving them the pay raise that we believe we should. Were in a negotiation with china, which is our number three trader, but our number one and number two traders are mexico nd canada. We would only be stronger as a nation in our negotiations with china if we were passing the united statesmexciocanada agreement, but none of that is taking place. Were not spending this week taking talking about the funding that needs to go forward. No. No ones mentioned a word of that, because everything has been taken over about impeachment. The same thing this majority has done for the last three years. And i leave you the question. Name me one thing this majority problem they have solved . Name me one thing those witnesses said yesterday was impeachable . So why are we putting the country through this, and why arent we working on the things that the American Public expects us to do . Reporter you republicans, the president have been critical of some of the testimony yesterday, this is secondhand, thirdhand. Next week youll hear from Gordon Sondland who President Trump put in this position, supported the inauguration und. Would his testimony change your calculation whether or not this is an impeachable offense, if he corroborates what these other witnesses said . Yesterday, we heard there was a conversation overheard by sondland and the president where the president asked about investigations. Mr. Mccarthy ok. You have a phone call where the president asked about an investigation. An investigation thats already Going Forward that i think most of america wants to know what transpired. An investigation that the attorney general is working on. None of that is impeachable. So the answer is no. Reporter walking out of the hearing yesterday, many republicans thought [inaudible] said nothing is impeachable. Learned nothing new. That said, is it the republicans position, regardless what is right or wrong here, that there is no vulnerability to republicans in swing districts of overdefending the president or standing behind him as we move into an election . Are you confident this is not going to affect them in any adverse way standing behind the president as we move toward the 2020 election . Mr. Mccarthy i think what republicans are doing is standing up for the constitution. I think of the same thing of the two democrats who voted against the impeachment inquiry. Standing up for the onstitution. This is the same thing that Alexander Hamilton warned us about, that we would use it for political gain. What the republicans are standing for are the ideas what they ran on. First thing i think a majority should do is pass a budget, which the democrats have not done. We should make sure they fund the government, which we have not done. Were working to now have another continuing esolution. So our troops are not being provided the resources they need or the pay raise that they have earned. Prescription drugs continue to rise. We have, again, a trade agreement that would only make merica and our economy stronger, especially when dealing with mexico. The only person i saw yesterday doing the job that they were elected to do was the president of the united states. Meeting with another foreign leader. Trying to end isis and others. Being a part of nato. What did we watch inside ways and means . The same thing weve seen for the last three years. Whats so disappointing about all of this, i watched what nancy pelosi said prior to the election. She said they would be different. That they would govern different. But lo and behold, what did we find . We found when they decided who to be chairman of the Judiciary Committee, they didnt pick an individual that said they would fight for the privacy of individuals on the internet. They picked a campaign where nadler said he would be the very best for impeachment. We watched new freshmen being sworn in. What did they say on the night after they were being sworn n . Id they celebrate a victory . No, they said theyd impeach the president. They used different words than i used. They spent three years trying to investigate this president. They have spent their entire majority trying to impeach this president. From every single walk. Adam schiff has continued to lie to the American Public when he very first went on the camera and said he had proof beyond circumstantial evidence. He lied to the American Public again when he stood at a position of a chair of the Intel Committee and misread what was in a transcript. On purpose. He was so compelling that the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, believed him on national television. He lied, again, when he told the American Public he did not know who this whistleblower was. And how hard he wanted to fight to bring the whistleblower forward. He had an opportunity that the whistleblower could come forward, just as we have been able to do in the past with the i. R. S. Hearings in the 1990s and the others, this is the 21st century. We could protect the individual more to actually get the information. No, thats not the case. Because hes driven for one purpose. Hes already written the script of where he wants to go on impeachment. Es now just trying to fill in the questions. Reporter republicans have vulnerability from . Mr. Mccarthy look, you want to come here and decide what youre going to do based upon politics or durept to stand up for the constitution . I would hope the republicans, if this were in reverse order, this was a democrat in the white house, that they would stand for the constitution the same way. I would hope at the same time they would never carry themselves in the manner which ive seen these democrats, purely for political reasons, that these democrats have voted three times for impeachment. If you ask the democrats, and you can pick and choose whos the leader of the democrats, but i think there is a young freshman woman that leads most of the democrat, what did she say on tv last night . If we dont impeach this president , and im parafradse, we would not be successful in the next election. The same way al green, a congressman, a democrat on the other side, when he offered the impeachment motion, what did he say . If we dont impeach this president , hes going to win reelection. So the real question were youre asking me, are the democrats doing this for olitical purposes . Are they standing for the constitution . I think two of them are. Reporter how can you call schiff a liar . Mr. Mccarthy he lied to us. Reporter you dont have any proof, or do you . What proof do you have that he lied . Reporter i have the mueller report. Reporter on the whistleblower. Mr. Mccarthy which time do you want to talk about him lying . When he spoke on the transcript that he added different words . Reporter that he knows who the whistleblower is and he has met ith the whistleblower. Mr. Mccarthy his staff met with the whistle blower, he can claim he did not, but he met they met with the whistleblower. Now know you know what the whistleblower did not say . He met with the staff. Reporter he met with adam schiff met with the mr. Mccarthy for the same reason that adam schiff said he had proof beyond circumstantial evidence, and we took america through a nightmare, we spent millions of dollars, we took the very best individuals we had in law enforcement, we went to 13 countries, and you know what, we found out he lied. So then i watched adam schiff as chairman of a committee that is the of a committee that gets to see items that other members do not, get to see the top secrets of things happening, read to the American Public when all eyes were watching on a transcript. And he lied about what was in it then. So when he looks at me and i watched him on television that day say, oh, he wish he knew who the whistleblower was, why didnt he say, well, my staff met with them . Met with him . I think that would have been appropriate at the time, would it not . Why would he question us about not believing him . Shame me once, shame on me shame me once, shame on you. Shame me twice, shame on me. Thats exactly what hes done. Hes lied to the American Public three different times. And you still put him in charge . If the whistleblower staff i mean, if the whistleblower has met with his staff and him, they are fact witnesses. We now put them in charge. And what do they do . They wrote the rules that not only are they prosecutor, which nowhere in our judicial system would allow a whistleblower be a prosecutor, but hes a judge. He was questioned by elise stefanik, was he going to interrupt and direct the witnesses that he got to pick, not the republican witnesses he denied, not to answer the republicans questions, like he did down in the basement when the public could not see . What did we find in less than 20 min he is exactly did that same thing. So now he thinks he is the judge and also the jury. Nowhere in america would we put someone like that in charge. Nowhere would i believe in the republican conference would we allow someone thats continued to lie to the American Public in charge of the Intel Committee. Nowhere we would take it out of the Intel Committee and change their rules, that members of their own committee cannot ask questions until adam schiff gets his 45 minutes and then adam schiff can decide whether he eeds another 45. He was asked at the start, would he decide after the first 45 that the members of the committee could actually have heir five members. Five minutes. No. He didnt say it. Well wait and see. So, yes. I think adam schiff has lied numerous times. I do not think adam schiff is fit to be in this position of running the Intel Committee, and thats only a decision by with you person who could put them in there. Yes, i believe adam schiff has spent his entire time in congress, since the president has been in, trying to impeach him. I think hes already written the script. He auditioned the individuals in the basement, and hes picking and choosing them to come forward. Why dont we take him at his own word. Would he have lied when he came to us in america and said hes so concerned the administration is withholding the whistleblower, that he will fight for this whistleblower to come forward, that they wanted to move legislation on the floor, did he lie to us then . Now he doesnt want to bring the whistleblower forward, would that be a lie . I think thats a question for adam schiff. Thank you all very much. Follow the house impeachment inquiry and the administrations response on cspan. Unfiltered coverage live on tv, our radio app and online. Watch primetime reairs on cspan or stream anytime on demand at cspan. Org. Watch impeachment. A look at President Trump boarding air force one earlier this evening en route to louisiana for a campaign rally. His visit comes two days before voters head to the poll this is weekend to choose the states next governor that race is between democratic incumbent John Bell Edward and republican businessman. Well have live coverage of the rally from bossier city starting at 8 00 eastern. Cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up friday morning, Michigan Democratic congressman dan kildee discussing the latest on the House Democrats impeachment inquishry and author and syndicated columnist ann coulter talks about daca. Impeachment. And campaign 2020. Watch cspans washington journal. Live at 7 00 eastern, friday morning. Join the discussion. Campaign 2020. Watch our live coverage of the president ial candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own mind. Cspans campaign 2020, your unfiltered view of politics. Another candidate is joining the 2020 president ial
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.