republicans who care about our country and our constitution to present the evidence to examine the evidence to give the public opportunity to kick the tires to scrutinize the credibility of the witnesses and then come to a conclusion about what's going to happen i think it's premature to say that. there won't be he won't be removed listen 2 months ago everybody was saying the house would never move to impeach but look where we are now. what do you make of embezzlers someone changing his testimony. well it's probably smart thing for him to do that because there were several witnesses who contradicted him. you know i guess that's part of what happens sometimes a memory can be refresh or sometimes witnesses slanting testimony to to protect somebody but i think the most important thing now is that he's acknowledged there was basically a quid pro quo here he's still trying to protect the president by saying he didn't know who ordered the quid pro quo but he was delivering the put pro quo message to ukraine many of his supporters assume all t. even of all was a quid pro quo that's not a crime. well 1st of all it could be a crime if you just look at the at the transcript of the june to july 25th telephone call where trump is asking for a quote unquote favor. that call in and of itself was so damaging that the general counsel for the cia forwarded that to the justice department as a criminal referral they didn't see this as a big nothing burger they saw this as a potential crime and we're not talking about anti trump people we're talking about trump's own appointees so i don't think you can just blow this off as as trump and his minions are doing is it's a big nothing nothing happened it was serious enough to warrant a referral to the justice department is a potential crime that's something that tells you that right on the face of it it was serious and it is serious now we know more than the phone call we know that the funds were cut off we know meeting was denied. and we know this was done basically to get. ukraine to do such a trump's dirty work in connection with the 2020 campaign president can't do that abuse of power total abuse of power that was that was if you go back to nixon and watergate that was the centerpiece of the impeachment activity against richard nixon he used the presidency to cover up something the break in which it had been exposed could have affected the election in 2972 well trump is trying to affect the election in 2020 in his using his powers we have a direct correlation we can't brush that off and say it's just nothing the whistle blower i mean it was you know to tax the anonymity of the listener being. but after all this time do you think personally that the whistleblower be the he or she should come forward. well i you know i don't think so because i think the laws are in place to encourage people to come forward without fearing retaliation and now the whistleblower is irrelevant we have the facts of the transcript of the call we have the testimony of u.s. diplomats who are involved and transmitting the quid pro quo the whistleblower or brings nothing to a bill anymore he just started this matter but the question is now what are the facts and had and how do we present them i mean the president wants a whistleblower to come forward why is the president stopping everybody who has information about this or trying to stop them from coming forward he's involved in a cover up big time the federal trial of long term trump advisor g.o.p. up with a rod just don't isn't the way things are than are a lot in that. we might though it's pretty narrowly focused about whether roger stone lied to congress i guess it's possible that really what roger stone was lying about had to do with his own conversations with trump which so far have been concealed we don't exactly know what he was saying to trump we do know that he that he roger stone was in touch either directly or indirectly with songe and was in touch directly or indirectly with the russians . and he was communicating with trump about information he got from both sources so we don't know all the details roger stone is basically stonewall but i don't know that we'll get a lot more information about trump maybe a bit but not a lot of former speaker of the house and trying to send to newt gingrich said that nancy pelosi as we said decision to move forward with the voted through into sieges would lead to an impeachment inquiry was an enormous defeat in a terrible thing because of its partisan manner so i would use spawn to speak again . well i definitely wasn't a defeat in the house approved the procedure to go forward i think it's a very sad commentary that no republican joined in that i go back again to watergate what happened there was. more than 400 members of the house supported the inquiry most of the members of the house judiciary committee did not vote for him to articles of impeachment although they voted to allow the proceeding to go forward i think the idea that the republicans are going to stand as a as a vehicle of obstructionism. it's just wrong and it's very sad if there's nothing to hide here let the facts come out to the american people let mulvaney testify let pompei o testify the repub. this is so interested in transparency and in the facts and in the truth why don't they call in the president to let all these people come forward and tell the facts then the american people can make up their minds about what happened numbers the congress can make up their minds about what happened to base of all the information they're not interested in all the information this is an effort to obstruct and prevent the truth from coming out and to keep the american people in the dark that's very sad but the congress and the democrats are going to go forward as fairly and as professionally as they can and that's what's happening now using next week well i think the american people are going to learn a lot there's a lot of this stuff it's been behind closed doors and a lot of people have been saying oh it's a big nothing or oh these people are never trumped birds or all of these people are bad american people get to see for themselves and they can make up their own minds that's why the public hearings are being held so why are the republicans getting so upset they're so agitated about what's past nudes and not even relevant public is going to get to see the witnesses that's the critical thing is clear pro hole in your opinion. it could be good be a bribe it could be you know i'm going to bribe an elected official in the elected officials are going to promise me to do something for me in return corus a crime it could it depends on the circumstances what happened here was you know it was that the united states government the president himself using the powers of his office tried to force ukraine a fragile democracy to do something by using the powers of the presidency withholding military aid withholding the opportunity of a meeting to force ukraine to do something that would help trump and his election not for the benefit of the american people but to help trump in the 2020 election that's completely impermissible whether you call it quid pro quo or quote quit doesn't matter what you call it as shakespeare said a rose by any name smells just as sweet well stink by any name also stinks. did they write it poorly when they wrote high crimes and misdemeanors and you know it was a traffic ticket why are you not letting anyone off the care you getting to the framers of the constitution i think well no i don't take a hike. i don't think a high crime in this demeanor involves a traffic ticket and gerald ford once said that you know high crimes and misdemeanors anything the house of representatives wants to say have a say and spike think there are no it's not right because it's never actually voted for impeachment well i shouldn't say that that if you go back to the framers of the constitution i think they had something relatively clear in mind when they high crimes and misdemeanors and a term stands out by itself it's 3 grounds for impeachment treason which is defined in the constitution bribery we all know what that's about and other high crimes and misdemeanors so other means that high crimes and misdemeanors is of the same seriousness as treason and bribery but actually if you really this goes back to ancient british parliamentary practice if you go back to that practice and you read the history of legal history which is boring as you know what what it tells you is that high crimes and misdemeanors really and i agree just abuse of power and how it's been defined over our our course of american history is that agree just abuse of power that threatens our democracy or that threatens the liberties of america i think you should thank you congresswoman see pointing out to me that taking on the founding songs. and they came into congress and thanks for your time today thank you always love having you on a level playing here right after the break. aeroflot russian and like us. you know world a big part of the lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the back and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. aeroflot russian and lights. in my iphone i have a 1000 times the capability of the of the computers we had on board the spacecraft at that time i mean it's ridiculous that in my back pocket i have much much more capability then we had in the hood in the entire apollo program. well go back to politicking the house moves closer to a possible impeachment of the president who's in the stronger position at this stage of the inquiry house number. it's all presumed trump let's begin there with the political panel they are joe pa let's seen you had a drink 100 pounds temps it went right by our news he joins us here in studio and in mountain view california zach friend who worked for barack obama and john kerry's presidential campaigns as a spokesman and strategist we were is all is going do you think jack lew going to have an impeach president yeah i think we will have an m.p. to present but i don't think you're going to convicted president seems like much like the country i think congress has already kind of made up their mind in these regards it may be really how to sort of make a political and practical decision i think the democrats have made the political calculation that even some of these risky districts that actually works out ok for him but from a practical side i think ultimately at the end of the day i don't see the senate moving forward with any sort of conviction joe what do you think. i agree i think that the house will likely impeach the president on strict party lines we had 2 democrats vote against the impeachment inquiry and the rest of the democrats vote for the inquiry and i think they'll stick that i think they'll impeach the president it's not going to be what they'll impeach him for because i don't think anything he's being accused of doing violates the constitutional requirement treason bribery high crimes and misdemeanors but he spoke to a fun country to help in the presidential campaign to get information on the opponent well that's how this journey ends does one of the again you take it if you read what you say you know what i find interesting is that for years when we were looking at the russia investigation democrats including adam schiff who's now chairing the intelligence committee where the is taking place they said that it had been not only possible but commendable for the obama administration and the f.b.i. and the intelligence services to look into then candidate trump because they had to know if someone who could be president of the united states was corrupt or compromised in some way by a foreign government suddenly that's now gone from being a national interest to an impeachable offense and i don't think that there's any question that democrats have been trying to find something with which to impeach this president do you think there was a. quid pro quo. oh yeah i mean i think it's it's one question i mean i got as they told me i respectfully disagree i mean if i mean the republicans would have jumped all over this when they were in the my door majority of this what about the obama administration to him the exact same thing i mean i think realistically though the house has an oversight function i mean they they have a constitutional responsibility to do exactly what they're doing i mean in some respects we may become a nerd to the idea that some of these crimes are basically committed in point of view every single day is sort of a governance by tweet that i think a large portion of the country almost doesn't even care about what the standard might be but if we. think about it from a historical perspective this is a pretty significant thing that the president did to make these requests to investigate you know his political woman the one candidate it seems like he really doesn't want to run against but i really do think it was a quid pro quo and by the way i mean with the president out there selling t. shirts saying read the transcript which isn't even the transcript just sort of an overview of what went down and that's exactly what we're reading and it doesn't look particularly good but with that said there'll be public hearings i think that's good because people can now see and judge themselves the credibility the witnesses none of this will be done behind closed doors moving forward and we'll see if nothing else is going to take up all the oxygen even in the 2020 race in the coming weeks and months to the impeachment inquiry and i think that will at least get a better sense of the information that's out there and i want to ask what lot of the president break. well i mean i think that the president was seeking foreign interference remember the constitution to me under article one section 5 it's not like it's a very complex thing it's really in the houses purview to make a determination of what a high crime and misdemeanor is and i think that it's safe to say that's ultimately a political decision there is no legal metric as you know just like when republicans were clamoring for there to be some sort of impeachment inquiry vote there's nothing in the constitution that requires that i mean end up being held and now they're complaining about what grounds it's being based on so the constitution is pretty vague it just provides the oversight function on the house that provides the jury side on the senate and we'll see where it actually goes back and said something i think it's very interesting which i would actually agree with. he used the word oversight and no matter what you think of what the president did when he spoke to ukrainian government i think that looking at those discussions is the proper function of congressional oversight it's not impeachment you have a long way to go before you get to a question of whether the president should be impeached or not and so interesting to me that prior to this we were told that the congress would follow the conclusions of the motor investigation and so forth more democrats wanted to impeach after their phone no rush of collusion than did before and it's been clear that democrats have tried to use these investigations in these processes to try to build up some sort of political support for impeachment i don't think it's there but i think also that what they're discussing is simply a political vendetta they want to feel better about the fact they lost in 2016 and they want to set the stage for winning in 2020 and you know the the appropriate response to this is if you don't like what the president did in ukraine and some people think it was commendable i do i think you have to look into the corruption that has existed in the past to joe biden is not granted immunity from investigation and prosecution simply by the fact that he's running for president i think you have to look into it especially when you doing with ukraine so what are your views on that that's a that's a function for oversight that's not an impeachable offense and we have yet to hear about anything the president actually did to break the law. zach is it do. whatever congress thinks is him teach you lose impeach you. well if you look at the constitution i think that actually there's a lot of latitude given to the house and if you think about the framers which still brings up one of their main concerns dealt with foreign intervention remember why we fought the revolution why didn't we try if the constitution anyway was to establish a new government that was broken from these foreign interests and foreign interference and we had an entire revolution far for that reason so i think that there actually is something to be considered when a foreign government is asked functionally to interfere in our election in regards to the mower report member obstruction of justice is also i think under most people's belief an impeachable offense at least just as bill clinton how that panned out for him and i'll say republicans seem to have an interest in not and muller his conclusion on that as everybody well knows was it was ultimately that under justice rules they didn't feel they could pursue it so i think that there is something here and i think there's a lot a lot of through the house that's not correct the special counsel forwarded his discussion of possible obstruction of justice to the chair in general who decided none of this was prosecutable but not because of the memorandum saying a president can be prosecuted while in office and miller actually clarified that wasn't the reason they didn't do it they just felt that there wasn't enough there to make the case and that some of the back and forth between the president and his opponents was simply just politics and had nothing to do with obstruction but i want to just make one make one of the point there. i agree with you that foreign intervention foreign interference in our election is a serious thing why shouldn't president trump get to the heart of ukrainian interference in the 26000 election when we know from mainstream media sources politico for example that the democratic party was actively seeking information on trump from the ukrainian government the previous government that is before this one and trump wanted to get to the bottom of it and i think that's the gist of it don't you joe do you honestly do you honestly believe that the president's motives were nothing but altruistic and this i mean that's basically the argument they're making that he was not they had no self bullet. the interest on this and he was just randomly not holding up aid to a foreign government by the way which people end up dying as a result of him holding up aid because he had no political interest and not me that's a give me a break that well past the basic smell test so if you if you think the president is responsible for people dying in ukraine because aid that was withheld for however many days or weeks before ultimately being given i would ask your opinion of the president you worked for who didn't give any military aid to ukraine but the question you ask is really sort of a straw man you say are you saying that the president had no personal or political interest well he may have had a personal political interest but we don't impeach presidents for doing things that are in their political interest if they're also good for the country as a whole and i think finding out about ukrainian intervention in 2016 is something we all his own and all have an interest in embezzler taylor has in his testimony embarrassed you or the president no no no because everybody who has practiced law understands that a witness who has no direct knowledge of something is usually not admitted to testify before the court taylor has firsthand not firsthand information 2nd or 3rd he has information from other people what we call hearsay evidence he heard somebody describe a conversation with somebody else who talked to somebody else that maybe this is what happened when you read when you read what the president said what he called a perfect phone call and you didn't read quid pro quo into this did not you did not know. zag did you read into it. i think the majority of the country read it that way i mean maybe we're in a world where nobody can believe even what's before their eyes as long as the president tells them what they're reading isn't true as they just spell it out for me not in the transcript where it isn't i mean you know i don't know if you have it in front of you but but what did the president say that said to make this a quid pro quo by the way was not even have been at least said oh listen can you do me a favor. and he said do me a favor far earlier. then this question about biden comes much later in the conversation nor did he say unless you do this for me i'm not going to give you a using trump was not interested in the role i think he was i think i should i'm interested as well and i was interested before this phone call you know we did the early investigations one of our editors i should say did the early investigations into joe biden 100 biden in prison holdings that's never been fully investigated by congress anybody else and now we're finding out just came on the wall street journal this week that verismo tried to approach the obama state department and mentioned when he made this overture that hunter biden was on their board so clearly having the vice president's son was something they sought to take advantage of having having him on their board and so we haven't found out what happened there fully certainly it was a conflict of interest for joe biden and i think even some democrats have said that you know well maybe 100 we don't know 100 biden did might have been nothing wrong but to have the sitting vice president who is the point man for president obama in ukraine whose son is now on a major gas companies board in ukraine that's a conflict of interest that probably means biden should have been the one doing it and i don't know what's there but i think when you look back at what happened in 2016 and why ukraine intervened in our election which they tried to do they tried to help the d.n.c. and hillary clinton campaign dig up dirt on trump jack would be the goal is golding as we look at the elections next year. why i think we had a little bit of a take democratic enthusiasm on tuesday night with democrats over performed in a lot of rural areas especially in kentucky and while they didn't win in mississippi they still are performed in a virgin it was a clean sweep do i think that this pretends to a democratic sweep in 2020 no i think that ultimately the whole action is going to be decided in a couple of industrial midwestern states but i do think what's interesting about it is that if the democratic enthusiasm holds you're going to start seeing a lot more state legislators a lot of county commissioners or county supervisor city councils county clerks a lot of positions that actually have a lot of influence in a lot of these areas on voting rights a lot of other. issues so i think what you are seeing is significant enthusiasm in an off year elections it's been sustained and 2018 and now in these most recent elections on tuesday that does bode well for democrats and some of the states again whether that actually means they can flip the white house in 2020 just depends on michigan wisconsin and pennsylvania really and whether or not they have been able to win back some of the voters of flip thank you zack thank you larry joe pollak and zach friend and we thank them for their time today and we thank you for joining me on this edition of politicking remember you can join the conversation on my facebook page you tweet me at kings things and don't forget to use the politicking tag and that's over this edition of politicking. aeroflot russian and lights. in a world of big partisan movies lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the back and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. aeroflot russian and lights. nobody wants to look at the wildfires and say the obvious number one the taxes are being misused and they're not being adequately distributed to where they are needed on the infrastructure side because there's a government failure number 2. climate change regardless of whether you believe it's happening or not the damage that is going to be applied to your pocketbook that you will pay for climate change whether you believe it or not you know it's still the price is still there. of american men and women choose to serve in the country's military and the decision. every song came to a complete. the day that i was right. you told the show to kill me and i see how it destroyed my life any screamed at me and he made me come in the gram my own and he write me this bird think if you take into account that women don't report because of the extreme retaliation and it's probably somewhere near about half a 1000000 women have now been sexually assaulted in the us military rape is a very very traumatizing thing tat happen but i've never seen trauma like i've seen from women who are veterans who have suffered military sexual trauma reporting rape is more likely to get the victim punished to be a friend and almost 10 year career which shows very invested in and i gave a sex offender who was not even going to justice or put on the registry this is simply an issue of our violent male sexual predators for the large part of target whoever is there to prey upon whether that's men or women. i. the headlines this hour mexico holds the 1st funerals for an american family brutally slaughtered by a drug cartel is it revealed they were killed weapons that originated in the u.s. we look at how illegal arms trade is fueling violence also to come president makr on the france lashes out at nato and says it's in terminal decline adding that europe should no longer rely on the u.s. to come to its defense and korea apparently unites a survey of south koreans suggest that they would rather support the north in the event of a war with japan. followed .

Related Keywords

Mexico , Japan , United States , United Kingdom , Kentucky , Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , Togo , South Korea , Russia , France , As Asa , Togo General , Ukraine , America , Ukrainian , South Koreans , British , Russian , Russians , American , Gerald Ford , Joe Pa , Barack Obama , Joe Biden , Shakespeare Saida , Adam Schiff , Jack Lew , Newt Gingrich , Rudy Giuliani , Larry Joe , Hillary Clinton ,