because it is partisan. and i expect that what we are going to find out, if we learn anything, as a result of the vote in the house on thursday, it will be overwhelmingly partisan. which should then counsel in favor, as you suggest, laura, that the sun and take appropriate action in response. remember, the senate is in control of the president s party, and even under existing rules, the president makes an appearance in the senate through counsel, and the first thing i would expect to happen is a properly filed motion to dismiss to end this thing laura: immediately. john, i want to get into that. we will get back to vindman, which i think jordan was getting at, the possible legal jeopardy that vindman might be facing under that statute, i think that is what he was getting to. but john, that s important, is it not? so let s say the articles of impeachment, for what? we don t know any underlying
i mean, these are the kind of things we ought to be looking at. and nobody seems to be doing it. laura: i mean, it s a shock, frankly. that the senate, with a healthy majority, is not putting the pressure on this bureaucracy who seems to be trying to run their own little fiefdom over at the white house intel agencies. as john mentioned, our catherine herridge says the big question is who colonel vindman shared his concerns with. vindman writes i provided readouts of relevant meetings and communications to a very small group, properly cleared national security counterpart with a relevant need to know get what you heard congressman jordan say today is that when he asked vindman who he shared the information with, adam schiff, e of questioning. laura: oh, why did they want that question answered? well, the possible violation that jordan was trying to get to
media outlets. last night, the media was going gaga about vindman. number two. witness appearance is hyped as a bombshell. we began with the bombshell breaking news story. a bombshell opening statement. bombshell testimony on capitol hill. this is a very, very important moment. laura: and free media forecast doom for trump. this headline from nbc is typical, extremely disturbing, top democrats alarmed over vindman s testimony on a trump-ukraine call. but remember, despite the relentless press build up, the public is still left in the dark, and even republicans inside the interview room today for trying to question vindman were shut down. it seems interesting to me that chairman schiff is so sensitive. i witnessed today is under subpoena! he is supposed to answer questions from the members of the united states congress! not just members from the
criminality, there wasn t any in the transcript, but maybe general abuse of power, you know, stuff. so that arrives, and then mitch mcconnell, at that point, can do what? can he immediately move a motion to dismiss to the chief justice? they certainly can. look, during the clinton impeachment, there was an effort to try and have witnesses brought forward, and that was shut down. the senate has full control over how to conduct the impeachment inquiry. if this was a rank partisan thing, there is no evidence here, you know, we re going to have a vote right now to decide whether we are going to convict on the articles of impeachment, and the boat is going to be 53 53-48, because it will be partisan there, as well, in all likelihood, the american people understand that this has been a partisan hit job. you know, one of the things i found most interesting about what was leaked about vindman s testimony is the parallel it has with investor taylor s testimony from last week. vindman is compl
is an answer on 18 u.s. code 798, leaking classified information. so robert, should vindman, and those actions, be looked at here under that statute? there s also another statute of talking with a foreign government, which we will get to. but what about that particular statute? i don t know why that inquiry got cut off. i suspect the reason is that adam schiff seems to be concerned about protecting the identity of the whistle-blower, which may explain why he wasn t going to allow what amounts to cross-examination of colonel vindman about who he shared information with, but understand also, all of this is, of course, behind closed doors. so i don t understand really what the concern is, if there is legitimate cross-examination by republicans. and the fact that got shot down, only serves to essentially reemphasize, yet again, that this resolution that apparentlyg to vote on on thursday is flawed