districts. your job is up for grabs, basically. crime scenes to be a vulnerability from one of these democrats in these districts and in all likelihood, so too is the border. we seem to be the only network that consistently gives this issue the time and attention it deserves. i saw a number today where thousands of russians crushed our border. at the ukrainian border. our border. in the month of december. why don t democrats within the administration emma within congress, why don t you demand better from the administration when it comes to security on the southern border? we speak all the time as members of congress on the importance of having secure borders of strong borders. you can protect dreamers and live up to her values. there s no reason you can t do both. it s the same thing with law enforcement.
murphy from his challenger jack ciattarelli. that s not a lot. if you look at the votes that are left we ll look to see where those could break. this is squeaky tight. alexis, thank you. welcome to fox. so between new jersey and virginia, republicans are celebrating. you saw mike pompeo. while democrats are feeling pressure. npr has summed it up this way. tuesday night s elections, it s a bad omen for democrat s hopes. mike braun in indiana. first of all, why don t democrats see something like this happening? what are they looking at? what s the rubric of what they see versus what the republicans see which is helping your side win? i describe democrats the political opportunists and they do seize the moment and they always get ahead of their skis.
just in the future huge sums. it s going to raise our taxes. i don t know what they are doing. i think she promised that they were going to vote on this at the very beginning of the week on monday. telling her caucus that they were going to vote on this. brian: she promised. it didn t happen. here we are, it s thursday. it s last day we are in session here. we are about to be done and still not here. brian: keep on thinking remember, harold ford says and is he democrat. why don t democrats take the win? they have the votes to get the 1.2 whether you want to vote for it or not, republicans. came out of the senate. the house would get it. 25 republicans evidently have bought into it already. but they won t do it without the 3.5. here s what nancy pelosi said about the 3.5 trillion. i thought 3.5 trillion was real money but i found out differently. listen. it s not about a dollar amount. the dollar amount, as the president has said, is zero. this bill will be paid for. brian: what?
advantage of, they are flooding our cities with, in particular, fentanyl, which is really easy to get across the border. even the smallest amount of fentanyl can cause a deadly overdose, and a lot of the drugs we are seeing, especially in the pacific northwest but really across the country, are laced with fentanyl. so people are taking meth or heroin not realizing there is fentanyl in it, they overdo it and end up dying. that s a big reason behind the surge in overdose deaths. bill: he asked the question, why don t democrats change their ways? why not? they don t change their ways because, in this case, when we talk about the drug legalization pushed, they are ideologues and they truly believe the criminal justice system, especially dealing with drug crimes, is infected with white supremacy. and it s a system of oppression that has to be dismantled. at the same time you can go ahead and talk about that all you want, you are killing these people every day you allow the legalization
so, where the process has a foregone conclusion, is there a better resolution? mark thesen, conservative columnist for the washington post recently suggested that democrats pursue an alternative, censure. in his piece, why don t democrats drop impeachment and just censure trump, he argues that unlike the mueller probe, this time, trump actually did something wrong, but that a minority of americans see it as worthy of impeachment. if democrats persist and to prove articles of impeachment, it will be a purely symbolic act, a way to publicly censure the president for his actions with regard to ukraine. so, why not drop impeachment and censure him instead? thiessen sees precedent. in 1834, the senate voted to censure president andrew jackson for stonewalling a congressional investigation into why he shut down the second bank of the united states. trump would be only the second president in history so reprimanded and it would put