Republican and then what happens . Yeah, and then at that point, any member can simply say they move to offer an amendment. And when they offer an amendment, they have to actually provide the next of that language to the clerk. The amendment could be read aloud before all of the members of The Committee. And then each of the members can simply say they want a chance to talk and to speak about that particular amendment. And as you said, there are 41 members of this committee. 40 are expected to attend one is not, ted lieu because of health issues. Hes not expected to be here this week. But each of those members could speak. That could take time for each individual amendment. When that amendment is voted down which we expect because republicans are expects to offer amendments, democrats are happy with these articles and dont plan to do that. Thats why this is unpredictable how this contentious day will play out, wolf. 40 members now. Ted lieu had some medical issues. We wish him a speedy
elections with foreign interference. that takes power away from the american people. this president has chosen to put his purge interests ahead of the national interest. it is overwhelming evidence of the scheme led by the president, led by his personal lawyer rudy giuliani to corrupt the american elections. no president has ever, ever, ever obstructed congress in the manner that we ve seen from president trump. the president abused his power, and is a continuing threat, not only to democracy, but to our national security. republicans meantime attacked the substance of witness testimony, and republican congressman john rat cliff was brushed back by democrat val demmings after he suggested the whistle-blower distorted the contends of the july 25th phone call of the president with ukraine. the democrats have built this
pattern of misbehavior on the part of the president. joining me now is msnbc legal analyst danny cevallos, and danny, you heard the house speaker there say she is not a lawyer, and you lucky for us, are, and one of the things that house democrats have said is that they wanted to bring, in this impeachment inquiry, the strongest case with the simplest evidence. do you think they ve done that here? it s an interesting strategy. because sometimes prosecutors, in criminal cases, throw a bunch of charges against the wall and the biggest charges they can think of and meet in the middle and maybe end up with a lesser-included charge. that s not the strategy the democrats have chosen here. andrew johnson s impeachment here had 11 articles of impeachment, he was acquitted of all of them, and now you see only two, and those charges are abuse of power, and obstruction of congress. abuse of power, and this came up many times, maybe 100 times yesterday, during the debates, that abuse of power i
we have put forth articles of impeachment. i am very proud of the committee, six committees have been working on this for a very long time. this is nothing swift about it. but it is urgent. speaker pelosi also explained why the charge of bribery which she has accused the president of committing was not included in the final articles of impeachment. you yourself accused him of bribery. why did you decide not to make bribery one of articles of impeachment. i myself am not a lawyer. sometimes i act like one. and not as often as i act as a doctor, i practice medicine on the side, without benefit of diploma, too. this was a decision recommended by working together as committee chairs are attorneys. and the articles are what they are. they are very powerful. they re very strong. and they are a continuation of a
not using official channels like the department of justice to request investigations. taylor texts ambassador volker. the person who asked for an official request was yermak. volker responds, yes. but don t cite him. taylor, i won t. you re right. this is not good. we need to stay clear. august 22nd, ambassador sondland emailed secretary of state mike pompeo and others to make clear that to break the logjam, releasing the military aid, president zelensky would have to, quote, move forward on the issues of importance to trump, again meaning the investigations. and the list goes on and on. so this claim that this is the thinnest of evidence is simply not true. there is overwhelming evidence of the scheme led by the president, led by his personal lawyer rudy giuliani to corrupt the american elections to continue to withhold military aid until such time as a public announcement was made that would sphere the president s chief political rival. and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back.