fit tomorrow at the hearing, so what kind of irrational, crazy statement is he going make tomorrow? what kind of new policy is he going to propose on the fly? all of this, to me, creates an incredible sense of urgency for why we need to put a halt to this behavior right now. now, whether that leads to impeachment, what articles we introduce and all of that, that remains to be scene. steve. congresswoman, it s steve rattner. you made the point that the stuff around the mueller report really relates to what happened in the last election, whereas, was happening with ukraine relates to what s happening in this election. i don t want to i m not trying to put wards ords in you mouth, but does that mean that you think the mueller stuff should not be brought into this proceeding? no. no, it doesn t at all. i think we have to determine what we what articles there will be introduced, whether or not we introduce articles around obstruction of justice that relates to the mueller report
making between the brett kavanaugh fight, democrats and republicans, and impeachment and the facts in both cases? i think in both cases republicans were reluctant to grapple with the underlying facts. in the kavanaugh confirmation, and i talk about this extensively in my book, there were important witnesses, primarily a man named max steyer, who said he saw brett kavanaugh expose himself to another woman at yale. she doesn t at all, you know, fairness, she has told people that she does not remember that. but the fbi refused to interview max steyer because they were not instructed to do so by the white house. republican senators who were aware of this allegation refused to insist that max steyer be interviewed and, in fact, senator dianne feinstein, the ranking democrat, refused to get
center of the narrative and you can build from there. i think it s important for the democrats. i want to have a this too. i think this links to your conversation with danny as well. the democrats or the representatives in the congress need to understand this debate on the scale that is actually happening. this is an argument about the separation of powers. this is an argument about congress s role, the house, the people s house. and it seems to me that given the way the republicans are playing this game, the democrats need to pull out all of their weapons. nebraska they ne they need to fight as hard as they can. and i think that involves expanding the story, keeping the nut on the graph in the center and using its power. and if that means drag downing mcgahn to the how fast representatives in front of the judiciary committee, then do so. i think you re absolutely right, joe. i actually have a question for ruth. i just want to go back to how we get here to impeachment and is it a p
of robert mueller or if you agree with the findings of inspector general horowitz, then, okay, fine, this is great, see, it proves our point. but if you disagree with them, then you get another bite at the apple and say they re totally wrong and i disagree with them about that. so let s see what happens. but this is just really disappointing behavior on the part of the attorney general. well, ruth, let s talk about your book. supreme ambition and where impeachment feels a lot like kavanaugh 2.0. make the case. well, you know, in both cases republicans are worked up over bad motives rather than dealing with the facts at hand. so with justice kavanaugh during the confirmation hearings republicans were unhappy and s understandably so, that the kristi chris seen it blasey forward are