to prosecute the case is the kind of rebellious to eat, i thought if i had been there about the kind of thing i would be doing especially when you went down to that room when adam schiff was conducting the interviews. has not always been your attitude to some of the stuff? we don t like it but we ve got to go along with it. you seem to challenge the process more than anybody else. a big mistake we make is that we apply the rules to ourselves when our colleagues don t do the same thing. we settle for winning the battle of ideas when we lose the war for the soul of our country. in this case we have to remind ourselves that you had a group of elites who were trying to delegitimize that over 62 million americans made this decision. in defense of democracy, i was
that s one option. it is a possibility and it does send a powerful message to future houses that if you re going to do this you d better actually do the process and you better honor your obligations under the constitution because if you don t the senate will bring it to you and will place upon you the fact that you couldn t even bring one good enough to go into it in detail in the senate may very well say we ve spent enough time on this, let s move on and get back to doing the people s work. that is a possibility. the other side is based on whether or not the president, the defense wants to bring out. if he wants to have the say in terms of all of these witnesses and so forth, that s a possibility but i m not sure the senate at this point may even think it s necessary to do that and we might just want to get on with the work that people sent us here to do. last question, quickly, what you think of the argument i may just there and others have made, the fact that
stopping the vote in the house was never really a serious option so just tell us what you are hoping to achieve during the process. i knew from the beginning of nancy pelosi s control as speaker that we would not likely win the vote on impeachment but we have the ability to win the argument. time and again we showed the president s conduct was entirely appropriate and consistent with his long stated goal of ensuring that we put america first and we support the u.s. taxpayer with some good scrutiny of some of these countries that are known to have corruption. after it was demonstrated that that had been cleaned up, the president did the right thing. now the question begins what will happen in the senate, i favor a two-step process. first i believe they should totally acquit the president and dismiss these charges. outside of the impeachment process we could have the
and i want republicans to make the same mistake we did to distract from the work that matters from the american people to their lives and goals and ambitions and hope for a brighter economy and a stronger nation. i think very quickly it could be dispensed with. i understand the presidents frustration with the unfairness of the process and his desire to prove the meaning behind his actions and really to expose a lot of the corruption he was fighting against and while the president would be justified in doing that, that s not why we have trials. we have trials to accommodate judicial and legislative labor and ensure that were using that labor in appropriating and in the right way and i think a lot of the american people hate this and if we keep it up they will hate us. well said. i d love to ask you for your reflection looking back. were there any moments during the house part of this process that you thought this is a bit of a turning point, we really
that s one option. it is a possibility and it does send a powerful message to future houses that if you re going to do this you d better actually do the process and you better honor your obligations under the constitution because if you don t the senate will bring it to you and will place upon you the fact that you couldn t even bring one good enough to go into it in detail in the senate may very well say we ve spent enough time on this, let s move on and get back to doing the people s work. that is a possibility. the other side is based on whether or not the president, the defense wants to bring out. if he wants to have the say in terms of all of these witnesses and so forth, that s a possibility but i m not sure the senate at this point may even think it s necessary to do that and we might just want to get on with the work that people sent us here to do. last question, quickly, what you think of the argument i may just there and others have made, the fact that