strategy discussion to take place. i think it s most important that we do this in the most effective manner possible. i believe the jury is the american people because that drives the forces that perhaps drives the u.s. senate at the same time. it s really hard to overlook the mueller report. it is pretty clear to me that special counsel was hindered in indicting the president for obstruction simply because the department of justice doesn t allow such things in its regulations. i also think that if we don t hold this president accountable for all this, we have to look at what took place the day after the special counsel testified. that was the day the president called president zelensky. when he s not held accountable, i think he goes on to higher crimes and misdemeanors. all that being said, i think we file articles that are most effective, most appropriate no matter how the caucus debates
so they re in this endlessly recursive pattern where they have to do this more and more egregiously, more and more, you know, with greater and greater exaggeration as to trump s qualities. so now you ve got rick perry essentially saying he was sent by god. it s an astounding power donald trump has to break people and to cause them to abandon every principle they ever embraced. michael, and i do want to ask you about this because you ve done some of your most thoughtful and meaningful writing about issues surrounding faith. so what goes through your mind when you hear secretary perry refer to president trump as chosen? well, first of all, it s a confusion of theological categories. i mean this is a case where god is sovereign, but that doesn t mean that everyone deserves their job in government. i mean you have to explain mussolini somehow. this is a case where the proper role of christians in public life is not to pronounce some to
issue which the judge did carve out but didn t really illuminate in great detail, which is executive privilege. that mcgahn could still exert executive privilege, but what could that cover? do we know? and if in the case of don mcgahn, we already know these issues surround whether or not the president was telling him to fire people and obstruct justice. would it cover testimony about that? executive privilege is an area very unlike attorney-client privilege that is not well litigated, so it s not very clear what the parameters are. i think what we will see if don mcgahn shows up to testify is a lot of assertions of executive privilege, and that s really the problem there is the congressional testimony doesn t give a lot of ways to have that issue resolved immediately on the spot, the way you would in a criminal trial with a judge presiding. that s going to be the problem because it s an individual inquiry based on the actual question asked and the likely answer. so it s going to be a
privilege. i guess it would be the white house. what could that cover? do we know? if in fact in the case of don mcgahn, we know about these issues surround whether or not the president was telling him to fire people and obstruct justice, would it cover testimony about that? executive privilege is an area very unlike attorney-client privilege that is not well litigated. it s not very cheer what the parameters are. i think what we will see if don mcgahn shows up to testify is a lot of xergss of executive privilege. and that s the problem. the congressional testimony doesn t give a lot of ways to have that issue resolved immediately on the spot the way you would in a criminal trial. with a judge presiding. so that will be the problem. an individual inquiry based on the actual question asked and the likely answer. it will be a big mess, frankly. we ll have all sorts of assertions. no real way. the house won t get a lot of information out of him.
the mueller report. it is pretty clear to me that special counsel was hindered in indicting the president for obstruction. simply because the department of justice doesn t allow such things in its regulations. i also think that if we don t hold this president accountable for all this, look. we have to look at what took place the day after the special counsel testified. that was the day the president called president zelensky. when he s not held accountable, i think he goes on to higher crimes and misdemeanors. all that being. i think we file articles that are most effective, most appropriate no matter how the caucus debates back and forth on other matters. all right. keep us posted. appreciate you being with us tonight. happy thanksgiving to all. you too. just ahead, president trump s conspiracy theory support a new supporter in the senate.