Thursday on how to formalize the ground rules for an impeachment inquiry into President Trump. It defined the procedures that lawmakers will follow as they transition from weeks of closed door interviews to potentially public hearings and a possible future vote on articles of impeachment. Lets bring in kims strassel, assistant editorial page editor, James Freeman and colum columni, bill mcgern. What did you make of the vote this week and did it advance the democratic cause for impeachment. Its hard to say if it advanced it this is the first time in modern american political history that youve had an entirely partisan vote to proceed with an impeachment inquiry. If anything, you had two democrats who crude over to the republican crossed over to the republican side to vote with them in opposition. Again, impeachment is a political process. And the goal here is to convince significant majorities of americans that you are proceeding fairly and that you have the goods and this is its not succeeding in that regard on the basis of this vote and polls we see out in the country. Paul yeah, james, 4104 in the nixon impeachment inquiry vote, both parties overwhelmingly for it. 31 democrats voted for the inquiry, not ultimately impeachment but the inquiry against bill clinton. This time, zero. I was surprised. Ill be honest with you. I thought you would get some republicans who are retiring next year, dont face any more competition politically and theyre not fond of President Trump. I thought more would be there. Yeah, i think a setback for the cause of impeachment and i do it makes me wonder whether nancy pelosi really believes in this or whether she is essentially just pleasing the furtherrest left parts of her base, satisfying them to do this, because if you were serious and you actually thought there was a case to be made here, i think what you would first do if you were nancy pelosi is try to get some of those republicans onboard by negotiating, saying okay, no more closed hearings, okay, well allow republicans to call witnesses without our approval. Basically bringing it back to the traditional nixon or clinton process in an effort to make it bipartisan. I dont know if she tried to do they that or found no takers, but this is not a strong message for her side. Paul the other thing i would say, bill, is if you really want this to persuade the public, adam schiff is not your best spokesman. I say that in a purely analytical sense. He was writing he wrote an op ed for us calling for impeachment probably in 2017. Hes seen more than circumstantial evidence on russian collusion that somehow eluded bob mueller and his team of attorneys. Paul what does this mean, shes saying schiff is going to be able to continue, hes going to be able to hold private, secret hearings if he wants. Hes not obliged to turn over any of the transcripts of witnesses hes already interviewed. And in the end, the only thing he really has to make public is a final report whose contents he will decide. Right. Right. And remember, its unusual to have the Intell Committee heading an impeachment. Its not just that theyve chosen him. Theyve gone outside of precedent to do this. Your point about republicans joining this, i think if they had a real inquiry he vote, they might have got a few. A lot of republicans could say im not saying we should impeach but we should look into it. Mrs. Pelosi talks about the truth. The process is how you get to the truth. Paul this what is they say. They say process, shmosess, who cares. Process is a fundamental part of law, of justice, in some cases more important than outcome. Process is how you get to the truth. You dont just take an Opening Statement or some nugget adam schiff has leaked, you want to hear how a witness handles cross examination and so forth. Mrs. Pelosi had two problems. If she could have had an honest impeachment inquiry and probably got a few republican votes if she had done it in a kosher way, but then im not sure they would have gotten enough to hang trump. So she chose the other way, because she wants and impeachment, having committed to that vote, i think shes committed to actually impeaching the president. Paul the biggest rule difference between the nixon and clinton inquiries and this one, in my mind, is the fact that in this one the republicans can ask for a witness but theyre subject to veto by adam schiff or jerry nadler, the head of the judiciary committee. In those other impeachment inquiries, both parties, majority and minority, had equal power to call witnesses. Yeah, another big difference too is that even in the early proceedings in those prior impeachments, the president s counsel was allowed to be present and privy, part of the proceedings. Thats also different. This entire continuing early stage that adam schiff is doing, the white house still is not allowed to take part. And look, this really was a mistake of all of this, because it has allowed i mean, the republican now have a legitimate point that if youre going to cook this up this way from the beginning, then its all of it poisoned and tainted and thats going to have repercussions for the coming vote on impeachment and for how the senate may handle this as well. Paul this is what puzzles me, james. I think kim makes a good point. Made it easier for republicans. So how does this serve the cause of persuading the country to oust donald trump . I dont think it does. I dont think its persuasive at all. Paul then why do it . I think this is a question you would love to get nancy pelosi under oath to answer why is she really doing this. I think if youre an optimistic democrat, you cant think hes going to get convicted in the senate, so were going to taking hitaghim with impeachment and wl run against him next year, talking about how hes been disgraced and impeached. When this goes kno nowhere, he l claim vindication and i think rightly so. What the process is trying to do is prevent information, evidence that supports the president from coming out. They do not want hunter biden to be under oath, answering questions. Paul still ahead, as the house moves ahead with its impeachment inquiry, all eyes also on the senate where liberal groups are targeting some vulnerable republicans. Karl rove on the politics of karl rove on the politics of impeachment thud crash grunting whistle play it cool and escape heartburn fast with tums chewy bites cooling sensation. Tum tututum tums im working to treat every car like i treat mine. Adp helps airtech automotive streamline payroll and hr, so welby torres can achieve what hes working for. Paul as the house votes on its impeachment resolution, one Democratic Group has its sights set on the senate. The super pac need to impeach released a new ad pushing foreigfour republican senatorse donald trump. It is targeted Susan Collins, joanie erns, cory gardner and martha mcsally, all of whom face tough reelection fights next year. Take a look. Should a president pressure a foreign leader to intervene in our elections . I could have. I think it would probably, possibly have been okay if i did. He swore an oath to protect our democracy but ask his lawyer. You did ask ukraine to look into joe biden. Of course i did. Now his chief of staff says get over it. Tell senator collins it time to put country over party. Paul Fox News Contributor karl rove served as Senior Advisor to president george w. Bush. I want to get to this ad in a bit. First, how does the partisan nature of the house vote for an inquiry affect the politics of impeachment and the ability the to persuade the country . Well, look, one of the three big considerations that i think voters are going to have when they ultimately judge members of the house and senate for voting on this was do they believe the process was bipartisan in nature. That was the critical nature in the nixon impeachment and because it was missing in in the clinton impeachment it was important there as well. At the end of the day, the more partisan this looks, the worse off it is. I agree with the comments in the previous panel, you could not have picked from the position of being bipartisan, you couldnt have picked a worse person to lead this process than adam schiff who is not going to give the sense to all sides theyre being treated fairly and it will be communicated to the american people. Paul so is this process argument, the idea that the republicans are making that this is an unfair process, that it is not done to give equal rights to the minority and so on, is that enough, though, to defend the president . Ultimately, theyre going to come forward with articles of impeachment that claim a a, b, c. Right. Absolutely its not enough. But its essential not to move off of the process argument too quickly. People inside washington think that weve talked about this for a week or two so therefore its over. The points particularly that kim made that the president s not allowed to be present in the process through his attorney, as was done for Richard Nixon and bill clinton, that the point that was made that minoritys ability to call witnesses and ask questions is limited, its at the the fact that these have been private, these are important to keep driving home. Most person americans have not t absorbed this. We have a dichotomy in the New York Times poll on friday of six critical states of majorities being opposed to impeachment and majority being in favor of continuing the inquiry. So people are up for grabs and theyve got to drive home the procedural arguments. Youve got to start dealing with the merits of the charges. Paul on that point, the president is saying well, it was a perfect phone call, i did nothing wrong. I could have invited anybody to investigate corruption, any Foreign Government or joe biden. If im a republican senator, im not so sure thats the ground i want to stand on. No, i think rich lowry had an excellent piece that suggested that the argument be there was a quid but there was no quo. They raised the issue but there was no withholding of aid to ukraine based on it. The ukrainians are were not aware there was a delay in the decision to ray grantin grantin. The republicans make a mistake if they get into the assistance whether they receive assistance, if its worthy of impeachment. Hillary clinton gets elected president , we find about the role that the dossier played to get President Trump elected. Steele, a british former intelligence agent reaches out to his pals in moscow who are former kgb, fsb and gru agents and says got any dirt on trump. Would we be talking about itch peaching Hillary Clinton right now . Paul we would be. Some House Republicans would be. Maybe not make it that far. Well, certainly House Democrats wouldnt be. Thats the test. And one other example. We have it on tape, we have the president of the United States in 2012 saying to dimitri medev, with regard to Missile Defense and other issues, tell vladimir this my last election, ill have more flexibility after the election. That was a quid. Tell him to lay off and ill have more flexibility after the election. No democrat was talking about impeaching barack obama when he made those comments on tape in 2012. Paul lets talk about the ad that the group is running against these four vulnerable senators. Theyre in tough races and how effective is this ad likely to be and, i mean, is that when are republicans are they going to have to go on the air to fight back on this . First of all, lets remember, the ad is mounterred by a Committee Formed by tom steyer. The 3. 5 million sounds like a big number but spread across that number of states, four states, youre talking about less than 1 million each state. 1 million, 800 or 900,000 is a lot of money in maine. Its a pretty good sum in iowa. It begins to diminish in size the colorado and arizona. The principal purpose of this was to put together an effective, compelling ad and cause us to talk about it. Less the impact. And theyve succeeded. Were talking about it. Look, i think right now most voters who are up for grabs in those states want to see the process play out and theyre going to make the judgment. This is the second point i was going to make. The judgment about these individual senators is going to come as a result of the evidence that is presented and the individual response of the senators and the better known you are, like Susan Collins in maine, the more likely it is that people are going to make a judgment about you when they see you perform during this drama and what do you say, how do you say it, when do you say it. Do you look like youve been an iimpartial juror or are you a partisan rushing to judgment. Those four people youll notice all of them have stepped back from the process and are not either beating the drum for the president each and every day, theyre taking a measured approach. Paul all right. Thanks, very much. Be fun to follow this going forward. Still ahead, october jobs numbers, a fed rate cut and Third Quarter gdp, our panels take on what to make of this weeks big economic vo the flock blindly falls into formation. Flying south for the winter. They never stray from their predetermined path. But this season, a more thrilling journey is calling. Defy the laws of human nature. At the season of audi sales event. But you dont feel good. With polycythemia vera, pv, symptoms can change so slowly over time you might not notice. But new or changing symptoms can mean your pv is changing. Lets change the way we see pv. You track and discuss blood counts with your doctor. But its just as vital to discuss changing symptoms as well. Take notice and take action. Discuss counts and symptoms with your doctor. Visit takeactionpv. Com paul the u. S. Economy adding a better than expected 128,000 jobs in october. That despite the now settled strike against general motors. The monthly jobs report coming at the tail end of a big week for Economic News with Third Quarter gdp clocking in at a lack husband he tear 1. 9 lackluster 1. 9 and the Federal Reserve announcing a quarter point Interest Rate cut, the third this year. Were back with kim strassel, James Freeman and bill mcgern. You add all of this up, where are we in the economy right now . Are we kind of at that 2 growth rate . Well, i think it makes you think maybe were going to do a little better. This was a really surprisingly good report, not just paul the jobs report. The jobs report. Not just really exceeding expectations on the number created this month but upward revisions on previous months, more people working, more people coming into the labor force, hourly wages ticking up. Really just all kinds of good news in this report and i think it makes you think we can aim a little higher over the next few months here, looking at the economy. Paul yeah. Thats the good news, bill. And im a little surprised by it, particularly with gm. Now the bad news i guess is that we still seem to be in a manufacturing recession. The manufacturing jobs have been pretty bad. Right. Paul Global Growth is not great. And 1. 9 , now weve had two quarters of 2 . Thats what we used to call the obama doldrums and its not what trump donald trump promised, more than 3 . We spent eight years who was it that said 2 is the new normal . Paul larry summers. Trump campaigned against that. Thats the dichotomy thats interesting. The job numbers are stronger than i think anyone thought. That would seem to auger higher growth. Its hard to square the kind of anemic growth with this growth in jobs the way theyre doing. Maybe if we do get the new nafta deal passed and we do get the trade deal with china, maybe we get back to boosting the growth. Because trumps going to campaign on jobs, right. Hes going to say democrats are talking about i produce real jobs. We have record low unemployment for african americans, latinos, women, thats what hes going to campaign on. The pit ay is hes missing somef the growth argument. Under his years the Median Income for an American Family grew by 5,000. Thats because of the high growth. You hope he could make that argument. Paul kim, my argument for the reason for the slowdown has been that it was that its particularly in manufacturing, related to trade. It has created Business Uncertainty that reduced the investment that the business sector is making and the Business Investment is still down, Second Quarter it was really off, the last quarter it was off in a kind big way. So you i guess my view is if you get some trade truce, you get some trade peace here, calm things down, you have a chance to pop back up some. Yeah, absolutely, paul. If you dig into this gdp report, the heros of it as it were, Consumer Spending remains really strong, Consumer Confidence is still pretty strong. And thats in part wages have been going up. You saw an uptick in residential housing, some construction, probably a function of lower shortterm Interest Rates. But its a business sector, the investment has fallen off. People are incredibly nervous. And i think part of it as you said is trade uncertainty. So well see what progress gets made with china. Well see if congress ever manages to get past impeachment and perhaps pass the mexico trade agreement. But i also think, and this is important, paul, its Political Uncertainty as well too. I mean, there is an impeachment proceeding going on. We do have a number of Democratic Candidates up in these president ial primaries that are offering to make vast structural changes to the u. S. Economy. Those are also things that tend to give ceos the jitters and wonder and worry about the future. Paul james, given the good jobs report, do you worry at all that maybe the fed shouldnt have done that third rate cut this week . I didnt r