occasionally talking and shouting over each other insistence that facts exist or facts don t matter. that s really troubling. we need to be able to reason together. julie made the point you re not contesting underlying facts. but the deflexes and trying to draw attention elsewhere. saying the facts don t exist that s sufficient. the argument should be about, here s the facts. we can agree that they exist. we can disagree whether it rises to level of impeachment. we haven t been having that level of adult conversation really. interesting how you delineate the two sides. jeffrey, to that point, we ve heard a lot of that and i have a feeling tomorrow hearing a lot more. we don t have specifics in terms of the tick tock of tomorrow. what are the details? can you tell us what are the details they will eventually hammer out to set parameters for the impeachment vote tomorrow? ultimately determining who gets to speak on either side and for how long. seems basically a forgone
center for presidential history at sunk methodist university. welcome to all of you. j julie, start with you, what i chatted about with lauren. the big day before the big vote. walk us through what we ve seen in the last couple hours with the rules committee and how partisan things have been so far. i think that clip you play captured is. this is the rules that set out the guidelines for this debate tomorrow, will come to a vote in the morning seen as a proxy vote on impeachment. by the same token, this is something of a approximateliy debate on impeachment articles hearing both republicans and democrats lay out their plan. the facts are no really in dispute. every has seen the rough transcript of the phone call between president trump and president zelensky of ukraine. he was clearly asking for investigations of his political rivals at the time we now know