octopus with augmented weapons. you have to use every single tool you have if you want to take this president on because he will use every single tool that he has, and democrats can t get caught in a vise of hoping there will be a referee somewhere calling fouls and say, no, no, donald trump, you are out of line here. they have to be the ones to do it. i think that will benefit them politically and history will look back, even if they lose, even if the senate doesn t do it, doesn t convict him, history will look back and say the democrats got elected, stood up against donald trump and they did. amanda, congressman francis rooney, a republican from florida who is retiring, he has shown one of the few republicans in the house to show an open mind about this, even though he voted against the impeachment inquiry. he has not made up his mind about impeachment, he says. in an interview with cnn minutes ago he said that democrats have been rushing to judgment. he said it might be enough to
and take it is wrong. if the senate doesn t convict him, so be it. the senate members will have to live with the history and the mark that it will put on them. okay. so they re arguing, though, at the white house that he has that mcgahn has constitutional immunity. the legal opinion from the justice department says, in part, that congress may not constitutionally compel the president s senior advisers to testify about their official duties. what do you say to that, representative? well, first of all, you can t believe anything out of the justice department anymore. barr is a hired gun. he s not an attorney general. and he lied to the congress. and he s done whatever trump wanted him to do, talking about collusion when a lawyer would talk about conspiracy. and he talked about it over and over. he s tried to step on the mueller report and trash it and destroy it, hurt the public s opinion about it so it didn t have the effect it should have had. if you read the mueller report,
citation, which has been disdained by the trump administration, and they ve basically thumbed their nose to us when we do it. i ve inquired about the opportunity of doing inherent contempt, which is stronger, but counsel thinks that that takes too much time, it would go on forever and be challenged because it s a rather novel and little used process. i say you throw the book at them and i also think you need to start impeachment inquiries, at a minimum an inquiry that would have a lot of support in the judiciary commitment members, if not outright impeachment. this man has violated so many sections of our constitution. he s run rough shod over the constitution and he s disdainful of the american public and the rule of law and he s engaged in a serious cover-up, a cover-up not known since richard nixon. for the house to sit there and take it, it s wrong. if the senate doesn t convict him, so be it. the senate members will have to live with the history and the mark that it will put on th
included offense in the homicide charge is the prosecution would first love to get him for intentional homicide, but a lesser charge included in that, if the judge doesn t convict him of that, would be what s called culpable homicide, which is negligently using a firearm and killing someone, firing blindly into a door, not knowing who s behind the door. and that could be 15 years. intentional homicide is mandatory life with minimum served of 25 years before parole. so they are also gun charges, independent gun charges against him, mishandling guns, so all of this is relevant, but doesn t prove, as you said, intentional homicide. that will be other evidence in the case. and let me play a little bit of some of the testimony today, the defense attorney asking one of the witnesses, why his testimony was so similar to what we heard from his wife in the first two days of this trial. let s play that exchange.