public hearings, transcripts available, some kind of due process for the president. his lawyers will get to cross examine. the most important thing about this is that this formalizes the process and that gives democrats a slightly stronger hand when they go to court to try and compel or enforce the subpoenas they issued. once they formalized it, it gives them a little bit stronger hand. bret: congressman collins earlier said this does not change their complaints about this process. it doesn t they believe a fair take because of the guidelines that are set up at the minutia of the resolution. i think congressman collins speaks for a lot of his colleagues when he says that. this is it going to change anything about the approach of the republicans have had. they reject this process as something that is unacceptable from the get-go. i don t think that they re going
that this call took place. and either he felt emboldened by that, by getting off scot-free, or having the mueller probe lifted off of his back, and then in releasing the transcript, it was almost giving pelosi and adam schiff the weapons to use against him. that s exactly right. the argument you ve heards ove and over from the republicans, you heard it ytoday, is that t democrats have been moving towards impeachment since the day president trump took office. that s contradicted by the very fact that nancy pelosi was very clearly not going to impeach the president. as was adam schiff. as was adam schiff, until he took this step to extort a foreign government into a openi an investigation into one of his political opponents. we heard a lot today from the republicans about the process, as we ve heard over and over again. that is going to be a more and more difficult argument for them to make as this goes forward, as phil rucker said, we re now about to turn to the point of this inve
members of the judiciary committee. and so, you know, whenever you re calling witnesses, you don t know what s going to happen. i think they actually laid out a process that allows to at least control the environment so it doesn t become a circus. can they control their own sort of grandstanding, charlie question of we ll seen members of escongress, on chairman nadler s own o committee, reall diminish their political effectiveness p by the way they perform, not following up on questions, just as the republicans dides during the benghazi inquiry. and look at what republicans are doing, i think it s striking that not a single republican decided to break with donald trump,to not a single republica is concerned about the verdict of history. think about what their strategy be.going to of they ll be trying to delegitimize and discredit this entire process. this is peak congressional power. under the constitution this is one of the most important things that congress cane do. the congress
kupperman and bolton are saying, we have two competing directives here which could be of equal weight, federal judge, you decide.l and donna edwards, john bolton is an unlikely hero for democrats, a hard line conservative, a hawk against the iran agreement. but he,, t according to other witnesses,g taylor, fiona hill and others, was arguing against the shadow diplomacy of rudy giuliani and the pressure on ukraine as being improper. i mean, here s the thing. we have witnesses all around john bolton who validate his role. bringing john h bolton i think important, and will be a signal to other republicans, republicans in the house, and that s important to the process. it also helps to, you know, get rid of this argument that somehow this is a witch hunt. this is a guy who is deeply embedded in conservative
republican he sre not a never trumper. he really is not. so that will be important to see. in an evidentiary process, you would always want to interview and depose the witness first and then bring him forward in public testimony, so it s not one or the other. i think this might be both. what s the political fallout, charlie, if you re a voter in wisconsin which according to poll is one of the battleground states where only 44% support the process. do people have anor open mind a or they locked in? i think most people are locked in, but you don t have to move a huge number in a state like wisconsin. if even 3 or 4% of the reluctant trump voters decide this conduct is unacceptable or if they become just exhausted at the prospect of another four years of this president, that will be enough fort, donald trump to lo wisconsin. is the best argument for republicans, a rick, that let t voters decide, why go through this, why tear up the country with impeachment in an election