Mr. Mccarthy hello. Now, this is going to be our last Weekly Press Conference for the year. And for the decade. So before we begin, if i dont get to see you, i want to wish you all a very, very Merry Christmas and a prosperous new year. Being our last press conference, i guess were going to start just where we started with our first one about a year ago. Talking about impeachment. You watch what had transformed last night on this floor. Its something weve said all the time. The weakest, the thinnest, the fastest impeachment in u. S. History. Schumer even admitted, trying to ask for more witnesses, that what happened on this floor over here was wrong. Now we have the own speaker of the house who is so embarrassed that she admits the failure of this impeachment that she will not even send it to the senate. So embarrassed that i watched in her press conference, she wouldnt even take your questions. That is not a good legacy to have. Shes admitting defeat by not sending it. By refusing to send the impeachment over, she knows this outcome is not good. She knows the facts are nod knot there are not there. Theres no basis for it. At the end of the day, the American Public needs to move on. So with that, let me open it up for questions. Reporter [indiscernible] pelosi legacy. Do you worry about your legacy, defending a man who suggested last night that john dingell might be in hell . [indiscernible] said she had anger management problems. Is it difficult to demand a defend a man mr. Mccarthy am i worried about my legacy . No. Am i worried about my legacy of standing up for the constitution, that it is not impeachable what the president did . The question before me as a member of congress is that impeachment is that impeachable . Even what i would skr probably the most respected constitutional scholar, someone who is not a republican or democrat, Jonathan Turley even said, the only abuse that was moving forward was the democrats. That there was no bribery, there was no obstruction. And thats the job that i have. Will i be embarrassed by the fact that i just served for a year in congress and the record of this congress is more subpoenas than laws . Im embarrassed that this is the congress that did that. Im embarrassed that this congress promised to be different and they havent. Im embarrassed that this congress designed their entire time, from selecting of their committee chairs, from the freshmen on their first day, to adam schiff, with only one goal of impeaching the president. When they moved to that impeachment, going against everything and every fear that Alexander Hamilton had, that the animosities would be so great that theyd use their own political raw power to do Something Different and they did it and now theyre so embarrassed that they wouldnt send it over to the senate, im mbarrassed about that. Reporter there were a Record Number of republican retirements over this congress and the last. What does that say to you about the health of your party . Mr. Mccarthy the health of our party is very strong. Lets talk about that. Last congress when we had retirements, i was sad about that. I wish we didnt have as many. I wished congressman poe did not retire. Id never met a man named den crenshaw before, this new dan crenshaw before, this new, young navy s. E. A. L. , who is probably the strongest republican on social media talking about policies and ideas. Its healthy. For those when are afraid about republican retirements, i would not be. If you take the average of the retirements based upon where if you look at the president s votes and others, its an r23. The republicans are going to replace mark meadows. I wish he would stay, hes been a great member. But when you look back, the thing about the Republican Party, we dont believe this should be your entire life. I watched steny hoyer, and hes a dear friend of mine, but he said in his speech the other day that hes been here 38 years. I dont think thats what our founders designed or thought of. And with the Republican Party, were healthy. We bring new blood in and whats happening with a lot of retirements, when you look across and in 2010 i happened to be the recruitment chair. Remember in 2010 is when republicans defeated 63 democrat incumbents. If you measure us today of where we are as a party on those who are running for office, we have more than 100 more than we had then. We have more women republicans running for congress than any time in the history of the Republic PartyRepublican Party. From veterans and others. Were stronger than Speaker Pelosi said, she had a step in her or a jump in her a swing in her step. That may be true because her conference is going to be a little lighter and a little smaller. And the republicans is going to be stronger republicans is going to be stronger after today. If you ask me about party and retirements, prospects are going to replace republicans are going to replace. I think the question of Speaker Pelosi when she started this impeachment, she promised her own members that the public would be for it. We found that not to be the case. She promised that theyd be stronger, theyre going to be smaller. Were the stronger conference after it. I just dont find that any of this was healthy in any aspect that you measure it. It definitely is not healthy for our government, but its definitely not healthy for america itself around the world. Yes . Reporter if you could respond to an earlier question about can you defend remarks about john dingell, but my question would be, this week federal prosecutors revealed that million nible] 1 came up during his bail hearing. As you know, some of the money was sent to your committee. You donated it. Can you respond to both the development in the prosecution, what that means for now the and what oligarch that means for the investigation . Mr. Mccarthy i dont know, the investigation will continue to go forward. I thought you were going to refer to, when you said what happened this week, i thought you were going to refer to the judge based upon what happened with the fisa court and the f. B. I. Spying on the campaign. That was a great concern to me as well. Question of john dingell. I knew john dingell, i knew debbie dingell. I served with them both. I think they are very good individuals. I think they served john served his country very well. Very proud. When john passed away, if you watched on the floor and you a rd my speech on the floor, tribute to him, i find him very strong individual, very bright individual, i think he made a great contribution to america. We may differ philosophically and sometimes in principles, but, no, i considered him a friend. Reporter now that the house has voted on articles of impeachment, what will House Republicans role in the senate be . Are you planning on having some of your members prep senate as they prepare for a trial or what will that look like . Mr. Mccarthy well do anything senators need, if they want information, if they need it we have a lot of members who spent a lot of time on this. But thats up to the senate and also up to the president who he wants to represent him. But anything that we can be helpful with, we will. Reporter would you consider [indiscernible] mr. Mccarthy a defeat . Let me first gauge that. I would feel it was a defeat to the constitution. That the rise of impeachment would become so low that you didnt read the constitution to take it. Id consider it a defeat in the idea that we didnt hold the same standard that the speaker asked to us hold in march of this year. At least at that time. That impeachment was so divisive that it would have to be overwhelming, compelling and bipartisan. What i watched last night, the only bipartisan vote was against impeachment. A democrat who is actually running for president voted present. So the question you probably wanted to ask was to the speaker. Unfortunately she would not take any questions when it came to impeachment. I would think if nancy pelosi thought impeachment was so important, that she had to put this before the American Public, that she wrote a timeline that she selected Committee Chairmen based upon in the future, that she spent 2 1 2 years working on this, the press conference the day after impeachment, that she has weekly, i thought she would have welcomed questions about impeachment. Unfortunately she told you they were republican talking points and she would not take your questions. I never thought a speaker would act that way. I guess the only thing i can take from that, shes embarrassed of it. She understands how weak it is. And she understands her own criteria was not met, constitutionally it was not met. She probably failed on all parts. I hope i answered your question. The speaker pro tempore usmca sets a path reporter usmca sets a path that the speaker argued democrats deserve credit for strengthening the product over time, for improving the enforcement mechanisms. Do you think that the final product thats going to pass is stronger than what was what initially came out . And how would you summarize the way that the negotiations have taken place over the last several months . Mr. Mccarthy you started by saying the speaker believes the democrats need some credit for bringing usmca up. The only reason usmca was brought up is because they impeached the president. So if she thinks the president belongs for impeaching the president is why she brought usmca up, ill let her have that credit. But the credit for the bill itself, no. What did she talk about . Less than 1 of the overall bill. I dont think its better. It actually put doubt into some people of whether theyd vote for it. Usmca talks about united states, mexico and canada. Mexico is our number one trader. Canada is number two. A lot of you have been reporting for the last year of our debate with china and trying to come toon agreement with china. China happens to be our number three trader. If you were going to go into a negotiation with china, youd want to be the strongest possible ability, right . So would you think passing usmca a year ago, when the president came to that agreement, would make us a little stronger with our negotiations with china . Yeah. Everybody in the world does. But nancy pelosi had the power as speaker not to bring it up. Why . Because it didnt meet the timeline. She wrote a timeline of when she wanted to impeach the president , in the last week that we are here. But she didnt want that to be the last vote. She had to have one other vote. So she held usmca up. Which only made our negotiations with china, put us in a weaker position. So we got our first phase of agreement with china. We probably could have gotten it all if we were stronger with our first and second traders. So i dont know what credit she wants to take. Because she only harmed us by holding it. If she wants to try to spin it in some manner, youre only negotiating 1 of the bill, i dont know how much credit you can take. America will be stronger because of usmca. President s before have promised they would renegotiate this, after 25 years. But only one president was able to accomplish it. President trump. If you want to take, ok, lets look at the floor and see who should get the credit. Well, i took and i looked at every time the usmca was brought up on the floor. In the last year. You want to know what the percentages are . 91 of the time that usmca was brought up, to bring up to a bill and talked about, was from the republican side of the aisle. 9 from the democrats. So i think history will tell who gets the credit. Im just very proud of our members for never giving up. For continuing to put pressure. But the greatest pressure to finally change the speakers mind was the impeachment. Because she did not want to go home with that being the final vote. She so embarrassed by it, she wont even send the papers over. Shes some barsed by that, she wont even take so embarrassed by that, she wont even take your questions, why did she release the papers . I never thought id see a speaker take that position. But i guess thats where we live today. I never thought wed see a house doing the things that Alexander Hamilton feared the ost. Yes. Reporter [indiscernible] anymore to congressman about him moving over to the Republican Party and how do you feel about welcoming a new member whose record doesnt exactly line up with republicans . Mr. Mccarthy republicans are a very big tent. Were excited to have Jeff Van Drew. We welcome anybody who believes this new Democratic Socialist Party has left them behind. You want to say whats welcoming, why is he leaving the Democratic Party . Theres many times in the past that members from either side of the aisle have left their party to go to the other. But i cant remember a time that somebody left from a Majority Party to join the minority party. That question that you raised to me and the premise of it really should be asked to the democrats. How can you be excited if you started this whole process thanking thinking outcome would be better and your own conference got smaller because of it . It showed the differences. It shows youre not welcoming. And it also shows you cannot have a difference of opinion. When you watched the body language on the floor last night, you watched those 31 democrats who sat in seats that the president carried. Their shoulders were down, their head was down. They were not proud of what they were in. It was almost like the pressure was too great for them. They felt the pressure inside the chamber from their own conference greater than the pressure of the constituents back home of who they said they would listen to. Theyve watched it inside their town halls and others. Many of them promised before they even got here that they would not vote for nancy pelosi for speaker. They broke that promise right away. Because that promise of those 2 1 2 years to the president was too great. Many of them would say that they did not want to impeach the president , thats not way thee why they came here. But the chairman of the committee of impeachment, judiciary, was selected based upon that fact. The congressman they selected to represent the two articles of impeachment inside the rules committee, two days before the president was inaugurated, said he was going to impeach the president. The freshman who now pretty much control freshmen who now pretty much control the floor on the democratic side, who gave them the majority, on the day of being sworn in, a few hours later, shed sade they wanted to impeach the empty said they wanted to impeach the mother. So i guess that much pressure outweighed to these 31s, their own constituents. But the difference is, 11 months from now the constituents will have a voice. For all the frustration i see, this is still the greatest form of government. Because the people have the power. Second question. Reporter [indiscernible] sandwiched in between two pretty bipartisan major votes this week. The spending bill, which had both bipartisan opposition and support, and usmca today, the democrats say that that shows that they what they have said all along, that they can walk and chew gum at the same time. That they can hold the president accountable while also legislating. Do you think that it shows that there can be some bipartisan cooperation, despite all of what has been hanging over congress over the last several months . Mr. Mccarthy there could be a lot of bipartisan support but lets just take your question. We had bipartisan bills on the floor. A spending bill. When was the spending bill due . How many times did you have to do a continuing resolution before the pressure of christmas coming, before the pressure of the troops not getting their pay raise . I dont think thats bipartisan. I think thats a failure in their job. Bipartisan, you become a new majority, you promise that youll be different. They never passed a budget. Bipartisanship, we start at the very beginning. Concerned about prescription drugs. So we had three bills that would lower the price of drugs come out of energy and commerce with every republican and every democrat voting for it. But there was one person that had the power to change the bill. Not in committee. But sheerl by herself. The speaker. She changed the bill before it came to the floor. To make sure it wasnt bipartisan, to mistake sure it could not become law. Usmca you say is going to be bipartisan. It will. Weve waited one year for it to come to the floor. Why . Why would they put them all this week . Its interesting, you even used the word sandwich. Could it be they had a timeline . Could it be that they waited for the impeachment . Could it be that they could not have the votes for usmca unless they promised to impeach the president . Could it be those who sit in the districts that President Trump carried that wanted usmca had to pledge a vote for impeachment to get usmca to come up . I dont know. That would be a question for the speaker. But i guess she doesnt take your questions on certain subjects. Its only the ones that she wants to talk about. Its interesting for elected official to have that answer. Reporter does the decision to not hand over the articles to the senate right away, does that have any precedent or does it raise any constitutional questions . Mr. Mccarthy i dont think she has the constitutionality to keep them. To me its about admitting guilt. But then again, she just makes the rules up as she goes. Remember, we did not use the standards that we used for president nixon or clinton. She changed all that. We did not use the standards that the constitution tells us about impeachment, we changed it for that. We did not use the standards that the speaker laid out to us in march, she changed it after that. Its an embarrassment. And i dont think the American Public will sit back and take it. Thank you for your time. I wish you all a very Merry Christmas. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] at the white house, President Trump welcomed new jersey congressman Jeff Van Drew who is switching his party afell yage affiliation from