republicans are saying there is not sufficient evidence to accuse the president of these actions and this impeachment is a sham. it is not built on first-hand evidence and they have tried to dismiss the process as not worth pursuing. i was talking to sources over the weekend who are working on the committees with regards to impeachment, and they re working on drafting articles of impeachment as we speak. when will that process conclude and the committee introduce articles of impeachment? we expect to see articles this week. they will probably be voted first in the judiciary committee as soon as wednesday and go to the house floor next week. they want to wrap this up before christmas and right now they are on that timeline. vonnie: what are we looking at in terms of articles of impeachment? at least twoa: articles, the first will be abuse of power, that the president abused his power and trying to elicit help from a foreign power. the other will be obstruction of congress and
let s get started! the final countdown of the election day in three of the most recent presidents are all held it out on the campaign trail. in the sand by state digging into key races just days ago. we ll go one-on-one with congresswoman debbie dingell but americans worry about political violence. plus! how are the latest lose about donald trump s potential 2024 run affect the midterms? well this country compared to election deniers on i ll pose that question to my panel of political experts. and later, elon musk lays off thousands of twitter employees. including the ones fighting disinformation. with election day just 72 hours away, is a social media company where detail without truth from lies? the all that and more coming right up! all right, good morning to you. i am sam stein. i m in for katie fang. thanks for starting your saturday with us. with more than 37 million votes already cast. candidates are getting ready for a big campaign events on this final weekend. be
phillips. labour had ordered its mps to back the party s own amendments which called for a longer humanitarian pause. labour wanted those mps to abstain on the snp proposal. so the language is really important. the labour proposal had simply been a humanitarian pause, the idea a pause in fighting, a longer pause to allow aid in and people out, should they need medical help. the snp proposal was calling for an outright ceasefire. we know internationally there is growing condemnation, growing criticism of the rising death toll in israel s wore in the middle east. so that is at the centre of these discussions and the votes. we know tonight the un security council in new york is voting on a similar proposal around the wording of whether it is a ceasefire or a humanitarian pause. the un proposal is for a humanitarian pause. let s get the latest on what is happening at westminster, iain watson is an central lobby. you are running through some of the logistics and details of how thi
that s not what it was about. okay. you guys want to pick up the point about the bay of pigs? you want to start? go for it. all i ll say is, nixon was i read the question a couple different ways. nisksson was often interested to ask his people, could we release some prior records from presidents kennedy and johnson that he thought would look embarrassing to him. and he wanted the bay of pigs records themselves out. it was not a high moment for kennedy foreign policy. so i think nixon does talk, does scheme at times to release records out about democrats, and predecessors that he thought would make them look worse and him look better. let me add one thing about the kennedy assassination. i had the privilege of getting to interview gerald ford. he became president 40 years ago. and president ford, i ll always remember, he called me over, i did my interview and he said, come here. i went over, and he said, you see this stack? he had a huge stack of papers. i said
garman. hague said, bob, the president wants you to argue this case in the supreme court on the tapes. i said i can t. i said, well, because jawarski is a member of the department of justice, and i have been on his i have necessarily been on his side. if i switch sides and oppose him, my next argument is going to be before the character and fitness committee dealing with the state bar as to why i shouldn t be disbarred. i can t start arguing the case on both sides. so st. claire then said that this is where i kind of lost some respect for st. claire. he said, hey, walk the way, muttering something about technicalities. st. claire leaned over and said, i think you re right. i said tell him so. he said maybe i will some day. that struck me as not the most stand-up position i had heard in a while. just so we re clear, you felt that it was right to fire cox because the president had the authority to do so? the authority to do so and i thought he had good reason to do so.