You heard me say, there is stiff competition for that designation of worst. So here we are to protect american lives and values, were passing today a war powers resolution to limit the president s military actions, the Administration Must deescalate and must prevent further violence. America and the world cannot afford war. Some of you heard me say that in december, a bipartisan delegation, 75th anniversary of the battle of the bulge that was just so remarkable to meet our vips, our veterans who served at the battle of the bulge. Some of them also at normandy. Imagine the courage of teenagers, most of them at the time. But the compelling message from the veterans who the veteran who spoke for them along with the king of belgium and the archduke of luxembourg and the president of germany, the veteran who spoke, he spoke about the band of brothers, spoke about allies working together, multilateralism, spoke about the challenges they faced and those winters reminding me really of Washington Crossing the delaware because it was in december and it was snowing and they were not as prepared for snow and camouflage from snow as they needed to be. But just seeing their patriotism, their courage, those young people, this veteran coming to speak for them, 90 some years old, at the end of his remarks, he said i just want one message and i dont know if it is appropriate to say, but i will, pray for peace. Pray for peace. Thats what we all do. Protecting the American People is our first responsibility. Protect and defend. An oath we take. Not only of our constitution, but of the American People. Pray for peace. Thats what we must do. And so what happened in the view of many of us is not promoting peace, but an escalation. Not that we have any confidence or the good intentions of iran, and we certainly do not respect and as for my intelligence background know just how bad soleimani was, it is not because we expect good things from them, but we expect great things from us. Now, in terms of impeachment, you keep asking me the same question, i keep giving you the same answer, as i said right from the start, we need to see that the arena in which were sending our managers, is that too much to ask . In october, we put forth hr660, has resolution which talked about the terms under which we would proceed further to further proceed with the investigation. So the people knew what the battlefield would look like. We expect to see that here. I hear different things. I hear that they might want to you probably heard, one way or another, some of them suggested they might want to dismiss dismiss equal coverup, dismiss equal admission that your fate of the fact, the truth, the witnesses and the documentation. We would have hoped, like as with the clinton process that there would have been a bipartisan resolution determining how to proceed. Contrary to what the majority leader said, he says this is like the clinton no, it is not at all. I sent our members yesterday six points in which it is six of the points in which it is different. But nonetheless, at some point we would hope that we would see from them but the terms of engagement will be. We are ready. We are proud of our defense of the constitution of the United States. We are concerned that the senators will not be able to live up to the oath that they must take to have an impartial trial. So much for that. At the same time as this is all going on, it is important to note that there is so many other things of concern to the American People. One is the assault on the Affordable Care act that the administration is engaged in, in the courts, in the congress, and we are fighting them, in the courts, in the congress and in the country. Right now theyre in the court, instead of defending the law of the land as is the responsibility of the justice department, this administration is fighting the law of the land. That means benefit for preexisting conditions, no lifetime limits or annual limits, child staying on your policy until 26, being a woman, no longer being a preexisting condition, the list goes on and on that they want to tear down. So with all of the other, shall we say distractions going on, which are a collateral benefit to the administration, because it is a distraction as they are masterful at of what is going on, in addition to that and related to health is the statement from the administration that theyre no longer going to enforce nepa, National Environmental protection act. This means more polluters will be right there next to the water supply of our children. Thats a Public Health issue. In theyre denial of climate, they are going to not use the climate issue as anything to do with environmental decisionmaking. Public should know this. Denial, denial about the Climate Crisis in the midst of fires in australia, and we have them in our own country. And then ill close by just talking about how proud we are of the work that our members have done for the people, we have moved to lower healthcare costs by lowering the cost of prescription drugs, hr3, wildly popular in the country, hopefully, pass the house before we left. So were proud to pass the mexicou. S. U. S. mexico canada trade agreement sitting over in the senate. It is sitting over there with 400 bills we sent over, 275 of them bipartisan legislation. One of them, we observed yesterday, the ninth anniversary of the assault on Gabby Giffords life, a bullet, of the highest priority because if they would pass this bill it would save lives, the bill to have sensible background check legislation. So, again, were proud of our legislative agenda to lower healthcare costs, to keep the American People safe, build bigger paychecks by Building Infrastructure and this week, this coming week in the next period of time our chairman led by peter defazio, chairman defazio, the infrastructure and Transportation Committee will be putting forth our most Current Initiative on climate on the i say climate because you cant do infrastructure without having a recognition of resilience and green technologies. So thats where we are there. Now, today, we again send sad condolences to the person who lost his or her life in puerto rico. Other whose homes were damaged. We call upon the white house to stop its unlawful withholding of funds from puerto rico. We also there are needs that need to be met. There has been a disaster designated, but the ongoing withholding of funds appropriated by congress to puerto rico is illegal and we call upon the administration to cease and desist that illegal activity. So what else do we have here . Maybe well take some questions from all of you. Nancy . You say you need to know what the arena looks like. Yes. How long are you prepared to hold on to the articles of impeachment if you dont get the answers youre looking for . It is interesting, just to listen to what they say, because they may the other day, probably heard the leader say im glad to show what it is when im ready, but we dont know when hes going to be glad to be ready to show it to us. So there is something that they will have. And then he says, well, well pass it once we get the the article articles. In the past few weeks since we have had this, shall we say, impasse because they wont reveal the terms of engagement, many things have been accomplished that are collateral benefit to the discussion. And they relate to on december 20th, new emails showed 91 minutes after trumps phone call with the ukrainian president a top omb aide asked dod to hold off on sending military aid to the ukraine. Directly related to that call. On december 29th, report public revelations about mulvaneys role in the delay of the aid, the effort of lawyers at dod, doj and white house to justify the delay and the alarm the delay caused within the administration because not everyone was in agreement. Last thursday, nearly unredacted pentagon emails exposed serious concerns by Administration Officials about the legality of the president s hold on the aid. Legality of the president s hold on the aid to ukraine. And just this week, bolton announced he would comply with the subpoena, compelling his testimony, his lawyers stated he has new relevance information. These and other our investigation and our articles necessitate a fair trial with documents and witnesses. They dont want documents, the documentation, they dont want witnesses, they may want a dismissal, which is proof that they cannot cannot clear the president of the wrongdoing that he has put forth. Are the articles indefinite . Im not withholding them indefinitely. Ill send them over when im ready. That may be soon. If you dont send them over, im going to pass a u. S. mexico canada trade agreement, okay. We want to see what theyre willing to do, and the manner in which they will do it. But we will not let them say, this is just like clinton, fair is fair. It is not. Documents, documentation, witnesses, facts, truth, thats what theyre afraid of. Speaker pelosi, you call the the democrats call him a clear and present danger to democracy. Shouldnt House Democrats in the impeachment called the president i thought you meant Mitch Mcconnell, okay. Shouldnt you move more expeditiously given the fact that you raised this serious concern of the president poses to u. S. Democracy . I think we should move smartly and strategically. Yes. On iran concurrent resolution, yes. Some criticism from both sides that this should be binding. I know there is some questions about why not make this like an aumf . This is with real teeth. If you are familiar with the war powers act and ill get you the text, the war powers text enables two approaches to go forward, one is a concurrence resolution and it gives the procedure for that, which we will be following today, and it gives a path for concurrent for a hcon resolution. Were taking this path because it does not require a statement by the a signature of the president of the United States. This is a statement of the congress of the United States and i will not have that statement be diminished by whether the president will veto it or not. Your members raised serious concerns about the timing of the strike against soleimani, the administrations justification, do you think the administration misled the American People about i think that it is very unfortunate that right now, because i was briefed in the gang of eight and i was briefed in the what do they call it, demeaning, worst classified briefing that the republican senators ever heard yesterday. So at this point in terms of what is in the Public Domain difficult to address some of what they contended. However, i will say this, because i was informed by phone calls, as i mentioned to you earlier, i think i did anyway, that when i was briefed by the secretary of defense, and chairman of the joint chiefs over the weekend, taking responsibility for the killing that it was disdainful, and in terms of not consulting with congress, dismissive, we held it closely. Really . So if you want us to all join together, let us have a strategy that we Work Together on. I do not believe in terms of what is in the Public Domain that they have made the country safer by what they did. And that is what our responsibility is. Well have more discussion of this on the floor today at some length. But it is real again, as i go back to the battle of the bulge, pray for peace, we must avoid war. And the cavalier attitude of this administration it is stunning. And the president said, well, i inform you by reading my tweets, no, thats not the relationship that our founders had in mind in the constitution of the United States had they gave power to the president to the white house to do one thing in terms of our National Security, and to the congress to declare war and to allocate resources and the rest. So this is this is your question is an important one, we, again, we will have two hours of debate. An hour on the rule, two hours on the bill to put forth some of the factual basis of the concern that we have. And let me just say this, because you hear the administration say, well, we were justified because the office of Legal Counsel said the office of Legal Counsel is a tool of the president of the United States. Thats who that is. So whatever the president wants to do, to be declared legal, his office of Legal Counsel declares it. It is a misleading to the public as to what war powers act, article ii that gives the president certain powers, article i that gives the congress certain powers, it is a very big issue now because it is nothing less that preventing war as we honor our first responsibility to protect the American People. Yesterday came to the senate, several people came out and said the briefers told them that putting out information, debating the war pourz awers ac would empower iran. Theyre debating war powers around iran. What do you say to the Trump Administration if theyre telling you thats empowering iran . I dont spend a whole lot of time telling them anything because i dont know that their basis of judgment is to receive information. I will say this, if they think that any statement they make is there to curtail public debate on a subject, as serious as this, it just explains to you the seriousness of the situation that we are in. We will debate on the floor of the house. Now, we are not going on the floor talking about what we learned in the and they said at the beginning, they said, even if you read it in the newspaper, if you hear it here, you cant talk about it. They proceed to tell us many things we have read in the local metropolitan journals that are seen on tv. But thats thats foolish. Thats completely foolish. And the as i say, we have no illusions about iran, no illusions about soleimani, a terrible person, did bad things. But it is not about how bad they are. It is about how good we are. Protecting the people in a way that prevents war and does not have us producing again and again generations of veterans who are suffering because of let me just close by saying this, when we were there and many of these veterans, 70th anniversary of normandy, when i met them there, i said, my uncle was in world war ii, close to the battle of the bulge, they said, we went there next, these were so brave teenagers mostly, 18, 19, some 17 years old. And when we talked to them this time because deeper relationships over time, they said, you know, i never wanted to kill anybody. I didnt want to kill the germans. I was incapacitating them, shoot them in the leg or something, one of them told me i killed somebody and i found out later he was a doctor and i always carried that with me. I said, well, you were you were instructed to shoot him because a superior said you take him, ill take him, you know. And they said, i still never forget that. So we all would die for our country, we take pride in saying that. But to kill for our country is a pretty traumatic thing. So when we want to engage in these whatever we want to call this that the president engaged in, have to be really careful about how we endanger our men and women in uniform, who courageously, patriotically put themselves out there to protect and defend. Any other questions . Yes. Because the air strike targeting soleimani happened in iraq, is it time for the house to consider a broader aumf . I know thats the legal justification of the administration has put forward with this air strike. Is it time for congress to get rid of the 20012002 for sure. We did get rid of the aumf of 2002 and it was in an appropriations bill and it passed in a bipartisan way. And in the dark of night the then speaker ryan just took it out. It was highly unusual. Highly unusual. They just went and took it out. Thats ridiculous, but thats what he did. So congress has already passed, rejecting after it passed both houses, he took it out for what was signed. So we will have that resolution coming up soon under leadership of congresswoman barbara lee, whose wedding we observed today, and then the question is what do we do about aumf . It is harder than you would think because an aumf, so who is president , democrat or republican, how much power, confidence do you have in that person, regardless of party to execute an aumf, and the decisions that have to be made about aumf, it is important to note, are what is the timing of it, this one is too long, it didnt have a date. Should have a date. Not one that couldnt be renewed, but nonetheless it should have a date. The timing, the geography, what are we talking about, this was to go into iraq, used then to pursue al qaeda, different places, and here we are. And, third, what is the scope, are we talking about boots on the ground, talking about air cover what are we talking about in terms of scope, timing, geography and scope. When you have that debate, it is, well, i want the president to have as much power or i want the president not to have as much power. So it is hard. It is harder than you would think. But we have to do it. And when we do it, we have to have it with enough time that is realistic militarily, but also not endless. So to your point, the argument would be made that putting the shoe on the other foot if the United States had a high level, maybe the second most important person in the country, assassinated, wherever United States might consider that assault on our country. Right . And the iranians might, as well, even though this took place at the iraqi airport. And so it is foggy. There are those who think it was in iraq, so it counts. But it was an assault on iran, so it shouldnt count. I dont think there is anybody who thinks that aumf would apply in iran. To your other point on it though, it is it needs to be addressed, rewritten, because we have to have an authorization, use of military force, specific to the danger that we are addressing. One last question. You had mentioned the clinton impeachment trial agreement, the need for witnesses and documents. What other details specifically are you waiting to hear from senator mcconnell, and why not fully turn over these negotiations now to senator schumer . Well, they are in the senates hands. This is the senate they have tried to have a bipartisan approach to how they would conduct the investigation, what are we calling it the trial connect the trial. But feebly, feebly the majority leader has said this is just like clinton, except it isnt. It is exactly not like clinton in that he wont do a bipartisan agreement on how to proceed. So thats very important. But it is not incidental to say, but for the documentation and the witnesses. Now what now, separate from all of that, under the house senate rules of 1986, what is allowed for the presentation from the house is one person to speak. One person to speak. So are those the terms . Is that what we should be ready for . Or is there Something Else that they have in mind . It is one person to speak for the house. And one person to speak for the white house. Did you know that . 1986. So is that the rule under which theyre all we want to know is what are the rules . Doesnt mean we have to agree to the rules or we have to like the rules, we just want to know what they are. So getting back to sports because thats all we live, right, football, football, college, high school, professional, do we send in our team or do we have to send in special team as well as the team . Because we have to know what is the what that trial is about. Can you turn the whole negotiations over to senator schumer . They had the negotiations. The senator has said he has doesnt have to have witnesses and the rest. So thats you know, we may send them over. We have our im not responsible to Mitch Mcconnell or anybody else except my members and the people that have worked so hard on this. Members and staff, patriotically honoring the oath of office, the constitution of the United States. I will give them their our best shot to find the truth for our bosses, the American People. Thank you, all, very much. Are you going to the niners game . It would be my intention to go. I went to one game in San Francisco. We watched altogether the second game in seattle. I have, unfortunately, responsibilities to save our country from peril, so this weekend, so on my democrat ic ht of political leader this weekend, so my family will enjoy our season tickets at the 49er game and then next week well, get one game at a time, and well see about the next week. We had the Baltimore San Francisco super bowl and that was hard because i had been rooting for both teams all along, right, and again going to the 49er games and watching the baltimore games on tv right there at the stadium, so what happens, they both win, nobody was in a more difficult situation than ive been as a mother of the coaches, brothers coaching the teams, and then you saw what happened at that game. But the dalesandros from baltimore came all dressed in purple and the pelosis from San Francisco all came in red and we had a lovely family reunion. This time i hope that we get a similar result that we have both teams in the i already, because of my, shall we say responsibilities to wint house for the democrats and the Electoral College for the American People, i was scheduled to be in florida that weekend. So im all set. Im all set. One way or another. Do you think harry and meghan will move to california . Who knows . Were talking about tom brady, who knows, who knows what happens with all this but isnt it interesting . Wonderful because it is so unifying, you know. Whatever your politics, whatever forget it, it is about the team. And we all like to say and we all believe that were all team usa. So however it turns out. Thank you, all, very much. Thank you. All right, House Speaker nancy pelosi, family feuds aside, taking questions for First Time Since very clearly a lot has happened. Dana bash is here with me. Lets start with impeachment. That was one of the big questions, really key question when she was going to face reporters was is she finally going to hand over articles of impeachment . Not budging. What did you think of what she said . Couple of things, one is she said im glad to send it over when im ready. Ill do it when im ready. She also said it wont be it will be soon. Shes going to do it soon. But the most telling part of her discussion about the fact she was prepared for the questions about when to send the impeachment articles is that she pulled out a piece of paper and she had a list of things that she called, quote, collateral benefit, the collateral benefit that she insists has happened by holding the articles of she thought were the successes right, going and talking about the fact we have now the we have seen an emails suggesting that, you know, that the money was being held up and a couple of other things and then ending with, of course, john bolton telling the senate hes willing to testify. So the fact that she was prepared for that is a very big indicator that she is hearing, seeing and feeling the pressure that we have been reporting on since yesterday, led by phil mattingly, hearing things as well from not just senate democrats, but members of her own caucus saying, okay, we made our point, and enough already, byebye impeachment, lets move on to other things. And, yes, telling, but still not what is it telling us . Shes not there yet. Shes not budging. I feel like i heard her say that before they left for break. Lets go to manu raju. You asked a key question on the urgency of it. Where is the urgency of it . What was her quote, she said, she wants to move smartly and strategy ablg strategically. What does that mean . Reporter good question. It is unclear. That is part of the concern that democrats have been raising that withholding the articles for too long undercuts the message they have been delivering for quite some time, the president is a clear and present danger to the democracy. That was the mess aag message a the articles of impeachment. What she is saying shes not too concerned about that potentially undercutting that message and she said that to me in that exchange i want to move smartly and efficiently. So that is a clear sign that she doesnt feel too concerned about the pressure she is hearing, the feeling from her members, who do want this to get moving, but i did think it was it was a sign that this is probably coming to an end sometime soon. When she did indicate that she would deliver the message soon, she would sense he was not going to hold on to the articles indefinitely. There was slightly a different message than before, but how she gets to that point is uncertain. She wants to see all of the procedures that will be detailed in the senate, senate trial be conducted. Unclear when Mitch Mcconnell will do just that. And if you would hes saying hes not going to be forced into doing something that the house wants the senate to do, will he put out the issue that resolution that will force her to send the articles over, unclear how that dance is going to play out, but she is indicating this is going to happen soon. I think there is an expectation on capitol hill that we could be in the trial by next week and i still have that expectation in talking to democrats this morning and last night, that is still the plan, but the way pelosi plays it, things very close, not indicating exactly what she is thinking, shell deliver the articles when shes ready, it will be soon, and she doesnt seem to be concerned if it undercuts democrats message here, kate. And the other major topic, iran, what did you make of her answer when asked about the briefing she received and what she thinks of the as we were listening to it, you and i who have covered her, the way manu does now, sort of speak pelosi, if you will, she sidestepped the one of the fundamental questions that members of congress across the board have been asking and wanted to know in these brief g briefings they got yesterday, did we really need to do this, was there an imminent threat, she didnt answer that question. Because as she likes to say intel isnt her wheel house, she came up through the intelligence committee, she not na all of the members of the socalled gang of eight dont take their jobs take it seriously and have a responsibility, she really does. So it doesnt necessarily mean that she feels satisfied with the intelligence, that it does prove that there was an imminent threat, but here is how she said it. She said i dont believe what is in the Public Domain means that they made us safer. So i read that as her way of grasping at what we know publicly, without having to say what she learned privately and in a classified setting to give that answer. And, manu, i hope youre with me, because she is as dana points out, a member of the gang of eight, shes one of the few members of congress who have received the more in depth sensitive intelligence briefing on what they knew that they say the administration said led to the imminent threat they took out soleimani. What did you think of her answer . Yeah, and she has not commented yet after the briefing that she had received. She left that gang of eight briefing not discussing whether or not she still had the same level of concern going in and her comments here were interesting because they didnt go as dana noted as far as a lot of the other democrats did come out and raise some serious concerns. It is uncertain how much more detailed they did get in that gang of eight briefing about the imminent nature of the threat if it existed or not, or if it was as democrats and republicans put it yesterday, in more of a general nature that was provided, general level of intelligence, saying that a strike could occur in a matter of days, saying that this was not approved by the Ayatollah Khamenei in iran, this was whether it be carried out by soleimani is still a question. All of those things perhaps discussed in the gang of eight meeting. But it is clear she is concerned about a military conflict escala escalating, which is why theyre pushing forward on the war powers resolution that will be approved in the house in a matter of hours and the senate will move on that too in a matter of days, kate. Manu, thank you. Dana, thank you so much. Appreciate you guys. Coming up, 24 hours after President Trump declared iran appears to be standing down as he said it, are they . Ill talk to two veteran diplomats about what happens next. Does scrubbing grease feel like a workout . Scrub less with dawn ultra. Its superior greasecleaning formula gets to work faster. Making easy work of tough messes. Dawn is a goto greasecleaner throughout the kitchen, too. Keep a bottle in the laundry room to pretreat greasy stains. And keep dawn in the garage to lift grease off car rims. Its even gentle enough to clean wildlife affected by oil. Dawns grease cleaning power takes care of tough grease wherever it shows up. Scrub less and save more. With dawn. So wim searching for info on options trading, and look, it feels like im just wasting time. Wasted time is wasted opportunity. Exactly. Thats why Td Ameritrade designed a firstofitskind, personalized education center. See, you just oh, this is easy. Yeah, and thats oh, just what i need. Courses on options trading, webcasts, tutorials. Yeah. Their awardwinning content is tailored to fit your investing goals and interests. And it learns with you, so as you become smarter, so do its recommendations. So its like my streaming service. Well exactly. Well except now, youre binge learning. Oh, i like that. Thank you, i just came up with that. Youre funny. Learn fast with the Td Ameritrade education center. Call 8662851912 or visit tdameritrade. Com learn. Get started today, and for a limited time, get up to 800 when you open and fund an account. Thats 8662851912, or tdameritrade. Com learn. In just a few hours, the house will take the first steps to limit President Trumps war powers, voting on a measure that would move to rein in his authority to take military action in iran, military action without approval from congress. After the house, the senate could take up the same. Democrats and even some republicans left the briefings on those strikes enraged. Still, searching for answers. Lets talk to one of them. Joining me now, top democrat on the Senate Foreign relations committee, senator menendez. From what i have seen, you left the iran briefing skeptical and no more won over, if you will. Do you agree with mike lee when he republican mike lee when he came out to say it was the worst briefing he had ever received, he called it insulting and he even called it an unmitigated disaster this morning on npr. Are you going that far . Well, look, you know, to the extent that members went in to get a get answers to critical he questions and didnt get them, i would say yes. I went in with three specific questions, what was the specific intelligence to lead you to believe that there was an imminent threat, two, what was the specific intelligence in terms of to the nature of the threat, what were the targets, and, three what was the specific intelligence that led you to believe eliminating soleimani alone singularly would eliminate the threat . The answer is after pressing them really hard i got no substantive answers to those three critical questions. Some of the reasoning, at least according to the Vice President mike pence, he was asked about that, this morning. Why they couldnt give more if you will. Heres what he said. We have to protect sources and methods and so there is only a certain amount that we can share with every member of congress. But those of us who have seen all of the evidence know that there is a compelling case of an imminent threat. Senator, do you accept that some of the intelligence is too sensitive for you all to see . I dont accept that the Intelligence Community cannot distill the critical intelligence away from the sources and methods in a way that can be conveyed to congress. I dont accept that. Otherwise we have to rely on faith. And we see that faith, for some, years ago, you know, in iraq, where we were told there were weapons of mass destruction, was an ill placed fate. I didnt place my faith in that. I voted against the war in iraq, but it taught me a lesson, you cannot accept the word of any administration, this or any other one, you have to verify for yourself. I believe they can distill the intelligence in a way that can be convincing if they have it, but that doesnt ultimately betray source and methods. Speaker pelosi sidestepped a question on if she received if shes convinced from the more in depth briefing she received. Have you spoken to pelosi, schumer, adam schiff or mark warner, any of democrats on the gang of eight, who received that deeper briefing on iran . Where are they on this . Do they say theyre convinced . Well, i have spoken to one or two of them. And, of course, the theyre not free to give the same in depth briefing that they got as a gang of eight but do you agree they can say i am convinced of an imminent threat . He yeah, and i think that my takeaway from my conversation with them is that theyre not convinced that, number one, that uniquely eliminating soleimani was the solution to any potential threat, and the question of imminency is a question of definition that the administration seems to have a broad definition of. Republican congressman doug collins, Top Republican on house judiciary, he said something last night. I want to ask you about, asked about the democrats response to the killing of soleimani, heres what he said. Let me play it for you. In love with terrorists. They mourn soleimani more than the gold star families who suffered under soleimani. Thats a problem. Do you want to respond to that . Yeah, it is pretty outrageous. No one mourns the death of soleimani. What we are concerned about is the risk to greater american lives including those of our men and women in uniform, in iraq and in the region. Our concern is for them, first and foremost. Our concern is for the National Security of the United States. It is pretty outrageous for anyone to suggest that we are coddling, you know, those who are terrorists. I mean, it was barack obama who took out osama bin laden. And many of us have supported the administrations resources in the war against terror. So, you know, this is where we turn from patriotism to partisanship. And i believe that these moments on questions of war and peace and National Security are moments of patriotism, not partisanship. Senator, on impeachment, there is a growing number of democrats saying it is time for pelosi to send the articles of impeachment over, including senator manchin, senator murphy and just this morning, the chair of house arpd servimed servicesd he thought it was time to hand it over, but he says he misspoke when he said that repeatedly. You have given pelosi space here up until now. What do you say to democrats who say it is time . Well, listen, each member has to make his own judgment. I trust Speaker Pelosi to send over the articles of impeachment at the appropriate time. I dont think there is going to be a lot more time involved. Think about do you think youre going to have a trial started by next week . That will depend upon a lot of things, number one, sending over the articles of impeachment and passing a resolution that the majority leader wants to pass, that will be amendable. Whether or not we start a trial next week or start the process next week, it is possible. It would depend when the articles are sent over. Look, the result of having waited has now shown us a whole series of emails that have come to light through foia requests, the comments of ambassador bolton that hes ready to testify before the senate, not before the house. This continues the drum of what most americans believe, that a fair trial involves witnesses and documents, no american who has ever served on a jury been involved in any action similar or otherwise under knows that every american i should say knows that there is a fair trial, a trial involves witnesses and documents. Senator, thank you for coming in. Thank you. Well be right back. Greatest presentation they ever had. Mike and rand paul disagree because they want information that honestly i think is very hard to get. It is okay if the military wants to give it, but they diabednt t to give it and it had to do with sources and information we had that really should remain at a very high level. Could we individually maybe give one or two of them some information . Possibly if we can do that. I get along great with mike lee, ive never seen him like that, other people called and said it was the best presentation they ever have seen. Let me tell you what was the best. Forget about presentation, the result. We killed a man who killed many, Many Americans and many, many people, thousands and thousands of people. And when i go over to walter reed and i meet these young incredible folks, mostly just seems mostly men, but also women, where their legs are gone, their arms are gone and in some cases both the legs and the arms are gone and the face and the body is badly damaged, and frankly five years ago they couldnt have lived and today they can live because of the wonders of medicine and the wonders of walter reed and the people over there, the job they do, the medical doctors, but i will say this, we caught a total monster and we took him out and that should have happened a long time ago. We did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy. We also did it for other reasons that were very obvious, somebody died, one of our military people died, people badly wounded, just a week before, and we did it. And we and that shot was pinpoint accurate and that was the end of a monster. Really, that was the second attack. We didnt start it, they started by killing and wounding badly other people. That you call retribution. If you look at what happened with ukraine, that was a hoax. This is a hoax, too. Iran went in and they hit us with missiles. Shouldnt have done that. Fortunately for them, nobody was hurt, nobody was killed, nothing happened. They landed. Very little damage, even, to the base. They landed. But we had a chance to take out a monster, we took him out and it should have been done a long time ago. Do you Want Congress to take further military action against iran . Would you seek their advice . I dont have to. Sometimes you have to move very, very quickly, john. In certain cases, i wouldnt mind doing it. You know what bothers me . When i see a nancy pelosi trying to defend this monster from iran who killed so many people. So many people are Walking Around now without legs and without arms because he was the big roadside bomb guy. He was the one that sent them to afghanistan, sent them to iraq. That was his favorite thing. He thought it was wonderful. He doesnt think its so wonderful anymore. When nancy pelosi of the democrats wanted to defend him, i think thats a bad thing for the country. I think its a losing argument, too. Outside the jc poa and with total sanctions, whats left . The j drrcjcpoa is close to expiring. It expires in a very short period of time. One of the problems was there was 1. 8 billion in cash, all that money was used for terror. If you look at iran, it wasnt so bad until they got all that money. They used that money for terror. Thats when it became really bad. Take a look, it really got bad when they had 1. 8 billion in cash. The agreement i always call it the Iran Nuclear Deal that didnt work. The iran deal, it was just something that is no good for our country. It expires in a short time. That means they would be on their path to Nuclear Weapons. And for me its about Nuclear Weapons more than anything else. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. They understand that. We have told them very strongly, iran now is not wealthy like it was when president obama handed them 150 billion. Theyre a much different country. Well see whether or not they want to negotiate. Maybe they want to wait until after the election and negotiate with a weak democrat, somebody like a biden or a pocahontas or buttigieg or one of these characters. Maybe they want to wait. But i think theyre probably well off doing it now because if you look at the polls and if you look at whats going on, were doing very well. Theyre losing a tremendous amount. Theyre getting hurt very badly by the sanctions. It call came in very quickly, but as to whether or not they want it, its up to them. Not up to me. Its totally up to them. They can straighten out their country. Iran right now is a mess. They can straighten out the economics of their country very, very quickly. Lets see whether or not they negotiate. When should we expect to see sanctions on iran following the attacks . Immediately. Its already been done. Weve increased them. They were very severe, but now its increased substantially. I just approved it a little while ago with treasury. Who will they be against and what sort of sanctions . Youll see. Well put out a minor announcement for a major event. This is a major event, and i had no questions that we can build a highway in a small fraction of time. That we can build all these beautiful bridges but i cant get approval. Ive had no questions on that. Are you shocked, shawe shawn, wu hear that . The plane that went down in iran, what do you think happened to that plane . Well, i have my suspicions. I dont want to say that because other people have their suspicions also. Its a tragic thing when i see that. Its a tragic thing. But somebody could have made a mistake on the other side, could have made a mistake. It was flying in not in our system, it has nothing to do with us. It was flying in a pretty rough neighborhood and somebody could have made a mistake. Some people say it was mechanical. I personally dont think thats even a question, personally. So well see what happens. Do you think someone shot it down by accident . I dont know. Thats up to them. At some point theyll release the black box. Ideally theyll get it to boeing, but if they gave it to france or some other country, that would be okay, too. I think ideally that will be released. I have a feeling that thats just some very terrible something very terrible happened, very devastating. Mr. President , the situation in venezuela has not gone as smoothly as some people, likely even yourself, had hoped. What are you prepared to do i never thought it would go smoothly. Venezuela hasnt gone smoothly since it became a socialist or worse in that country. I didnt expect anything to go smoothly. Well see what happens in venezuela. Theyre doing poorly. When i say this country will never be a socialist nation, that is a great case. It was a wealthy country 20 years ago, 30 years ago. It was a really wealthy country. Now they dont have water, they dont have food. Were supplying a lot of food, were supplying a lot of water. It takes a period of time. Its been ive only been here a relatively short period of time. Well see what happens. Are you prepared to do anything else . Im not going to say that. We have a good strategy, but were taking care of people. Were helping people. Columblum colombia is helping a lot of people. Nations surrounding are helping people. I think they did a good job. The nation around them is very broken. Stay tuned. Do you have any more details on what that plot was . I think its obvious. If you look at the protests, benghazi was a disaster. A long time after it took place, they saw burning embers from days before. I said get out today. Immediately. They were saying, we think we can have them out tomorrow. I said, nope, theyve got to go right now, and they were on their way very quickly and they got there almost they got there quickly. They could have done that with benghazi, too, same thing. Had they done what i did, you wouldnt know the name benghazi. It would not be a very famous name. Now its a very famous name. This was the antibenghazi. We got the apaches there very quickly. They were doing the flares, people didnt know what was happening. If you look at the protesters, they were rough warriors. They werent protesters. They were iranian backed. Some of them were from iraq, but they were iranianbacked, absolutely, and they were looking to do damage. They were breaking the windows, and those are very structurally sound windows, as you know, and had they gotten through, i believe we would have had a hostage situation or we would have had worse, we would have had a lot of people killed. Those people were going to do very serious harm. They were soldiers, they were warriors, and we stopped it. We stopped it. That was a totally organized plot, and you know who organized it. That man right now is not around any longer, okay . He had more than that particular embassy in mind. Do you have a problem with john bolton testifying in the senate trial . I always got along with him. He didnt get along with some of our people, but thats going to be up to the senate. I dont stop it, no, but it would be id have to ask the lawyers because we do have to meet for the future. We have to protect president ial privilege. When we start allowing National Security advisers to just go up and say whatever they want to say, we cant do that. So we have to protect president ial privilege for me but for future president s. Thats very important. I would have no problem other than we have to protect, we have to be able to protect. People cant go up and say whatever my thoughts are, whatever your thoughts are about us, countries, views. You dont want that to be out. So we have to protect president ial privilege. Yeah. Mr. President , you said yesterday you want nato to do more. Could you be a little more practical about what you want them to do . Any indication from them yeah, i spoke to them yesterday. I spoke to the secretary general yesterday, examiand we had a gr conversation. He was very i think he was actually excited by it. And i actually had a name. Nato, right, and then you have me, middle east. Natome. What a beautiful name. Im good at names. Ymca. Usmca, no one could remember it. I said, think of ymca. If you add the two words middle east at the end of it, because thats a big source of problems. Natome. Obviously hes not getting it. Hes not smiling. He used to smile. Before i ran, he was smiling. Now hes not smiling. You know what im talking about. Is there nato personnel in the region . As opposed to us, to be honest with you, because this is an international problem. We can come home or largely come home and use nato. This is an international problem. We caught isis, we did europe a big favor. We got 100 of the caliphate. We have thousands and thousands of isis fighters are killed and thousands and thousands, tens of thousands, are in prison right