you were not ready to support articles of impeachment, but you said it s clear the president committed one or more instances of obstruction of justice. now that you ve heard hours of testimony from the public hearings, from the intel committee, has your decision been swayed? well, there is an infinite amount of information that we ve received, and i had no idea that we had collected that the committee the intelligence committee had collected that kind of material. i think if everything is true, and there is no reason to believe it isn t, then that s certainly something that s worthy of impeachment. what i want to see now, and i think it would solve the whole issue if the president has not done anything wrong, as he has claimed and also with the choir behind him called the united states senate, then, hopefully now that we go to the
think you might see some numbers move. do you think that republicans have the strength of the facts, though, on their side, to make such defenses? i don t. but that is my opinion. obviously, you could find someone who would tell you that they do. what i do think is important in this regard, though, is that in the intelligence committee, it seemed to me that devin nunes and jim jordan and others did a horrible job of defending the president. they basically attacked the process and tried to point attention elsewhere. judiciary is different. there are members of judiciary on the republican side who i think might be able to make a case that impeachment is not appropriate in this regard. and i happen to disagree with them, but that s where they ought to go if they want to convince people. can i get you to explain the difference conversely when we talk about 61% of women who now have increasing their support for impeachment? you have 40% of men. that s a pretty wide gap that
jumps. and if we remember that women are more likely voters than men. i think that what you re going to see is that a lot of members will certainly look at that top line, and you know, much of the media will talk about, oh, it seems to be relatively steady, but a lot of folks i think will begin to look into some of the internal numbers, some of these demographics. i heard a lot about that on capitol hill. and i also think that as we move into this process, as impeachment itself is explained, one of the great challenges of where this will move is who is explaining and how well it s done. if the republicans simply say, oh, this is a witch hunt, i don t think they ll do themselves any favor. if they make a strong case on why what s happening isn t impeachable, they might help themselves. by the same token, if democrats put the right people up front, and frankly, make a strong case for why this isn t just about donald trump, this is about the office of the presidency, something that was do
you know, this is not the way the process works. now we re at the point where all of the evidence has been collected, and the president gets to present, you know, their case. and i suspect if they have a good case and the facts were with him, then they would want to do this, but they the truth is, for everybody who s read up on this, you know, the facts aren t in dispute. almost nobody s disputing the facts. yeah. we re down to one thing now, and that is, did what the president do, which was try to trade arms for dirt with the president of ukraine did what he did, is that an impeachable defense? that s the single question out today and that s what i think nadler will spend a lot of time discussing. as you started saying weeks ago, arms for dirt. arms for dirt. that was your coined phrase there. nice and simple. yeah. victoria, say the president decides to call his own witnesses. who do you think would ultimately make the case for impeachment? maybe not intentionally, bu
deal with tomorrow. what s that one all about? reporter: that takes a look at what s coming up on wednesday, which is the first public hearing of the house judiciary committee, which will sort of set the scene for this next phase. the judiciary committee will have jurisdiction over the actual sort of process in the house. what we saw in the intelligence committee was the fac fact-gathering, trying to get together the elements that they will ultimately fashion into articles of impeachment, sort of the case against the president. think of the judiciary committee as the forum where the next phase plays out. and so, by tomorrow, the white house would need to tell the judiciary committee if they intend to send any lawyers, either personal lawyers of the president or white house counsel lawyers, to have the opportunity to question witnesses who will be on the panel next wednesday, and that s more of an academic setting, where there will be experts who will talk about the constitutional gro