Transcripts For MSNBCW MSNBC Live With Ali Velshi 20200115 :

Transcripts For MSNBCW MSNBC Live With Ali Velshi 20200115

Only the vote to declare war would be something more serious than this. We take it very seriously. Its not personal, its not political, its not partisan. Its patriotic. So, again, i thank our distinguished managers for their courage, their dedication, for being willing to spend the time to do the job, to honor the oath that we take. As she spoke, on the other side of congress, Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell accused democrats of watering down the impeachment process. If the senate blesses this unprecedented and dangerous house process by agreeing that an incomplete case and a subjective basis are enough to impeach a president , we will almost guarantee the impeachment of every future president of either party when the house doesnt like that person. And President Trump is back on twitter. He reacted to the announcement by tweeting that this was, quote, just another con job by the do nothing democrats. All of this work was supposed to be done by the house, not the senate. Pelosi and mcconnell will soon be in the same place as they attend a ceremony in which the congressional gold medal will be presented to former new Orleans Saints player, steve gleason. Fl gleason became a leading advocate for people struggling with lou gehrigs disease after he was diagnosed with the degenerative condition. And well begin our Coverage Today ton capitol hill with cnbcs Garrett Haake. Garrett, this is a big deal. At about 5 00 today, well be looking at these house impeachment managers doing something they call engrossment or the engrossment is before they walk it over, when it goes is into a wooden box and they take it over to the senate. I think the sergeant at arms is involved. This is going to be a visual, but symbolically and technically important matter. Reporter thats right, ali. And i can tell you even as we speak, those distinguished impeachment managers, as nancy pelosi called them, are having their first meeting together as a group, starting to outline their strategy and tactics for the tasks that will be before them. Really starting tomorrow. What she talks about tonight, this engrossment ceremony is a formality, but its an important one. Its the last act that really the house, other than the managers, will touch. The speaker will sign off on these impeachment documents, the managers walk them across through the rotunda over to the senate side, where theyre received. Tomorrow, the managers will be back on the senate side to read those impeachment articles and then the swearing in process will begin. Tomorrow is really the last day that i think we could see any other nonimpeachmentrelated work go on in the u. S. Senate. And then they snap into impeachment mode. And theres a lot of formality to this. It will feel, i think, bigger than what happened in the house, because you will have the the gravity of this with the chief justice presiding, he, too, will be sworn in tomorrow. This will just look and feel a great deal different than what we saw in the house, where even during the impeachment hearings that were going on, there was still an enormous amount of other work being done in both chambers. Garrett, there is not only going to be this continuing debate that weve had over the rules themselves, but the rules surrounding the trial. Whats the issue there . Probably the single Biggest Issue is, of course, the question of witnesses. This is something that democrats were trying to pressure republicans to include in their rules upfront, to guarantee that there would be an opportunity to call for witnesses, call for documents, as we heard adam schiff say today. He argued that it was more important to get ahold of more documents from the administration than even to get witnesses. Witnesses, he said, can lie. Documents will not. None of that is likely to be enshrined in the organizing resolution, the rule package that gets voted on for the senate trial, on the front end. What youre going to see is a trial that starts with opening arguments from both sides, includes questions for both the managers and for the White House Defense team, from the senators. And then perhaps a week, a week and a half into the process, you would see votes on things like calling for additional witnesses, calling for additional documents. There is an enormous amount of debate, not just between democrats and republicans on this, but even among republicans. Some who have said they definitely want to hear from witnesses like john bolton. Thats mitt romney, susan collins. Others who have said they are more witness agnostic. Theyre open to having the case made to them somewhere along the way. And there are those who are shutting it down completely, saying this whole thing, as the president says, is a sham, and ought to be ended as soon as possible. Expect that debate to continue, ali. Garrett, thank you very much. Msnbcs Garrett Haake on capitol hill. Well be following this closely for the course of the afternoon. Senior Trump Administration officials held a background call on impeachment this afternoon. Nbcs Kelly Odonnell joins me now with more on the reaction coming from the white house on that. After that call, kelly, what insight do we have . Reporter well, a combination of that call and talking with some other officials here, some of the headlines would be that those who will represent the president are confident that it would take less than two weeks at trial. Now, think about that timing for a moment. If it begins next week and goes two weeks, a couple of big things would happen after a senate trial is concluded. The state of the union address, where the president has been invited by the House Speaker on february 4th, and also, the first caucus of the 2020 election cycle. And of course, there are Democratic Senators running for president who will be required to participate in the trial and certainly would like to be in places like iowa and new hampshire. So timing is one piece. They have not announced yet who will represent the president in terms of a full specific team. We already know that pat cipollone, the white house counsel, a couple of his deputies, jay sekulow, the president one of his private outside attorneys would be on that team, but they have not yet made a public formal announcement about the kpo composition of the president s defense team. They also talked about trying to seek a dismissal of the case right away. Saying that they believe that not only would the president be acquitted but that the house does not have a sufficient case, and arguing that by trying to add new documents or potential for witnesses that it suggests to the president s lawyers that the house doesnt feel its case is sufficient to try. So they are clearly sending the message they believe the president will come out on top with this. But theyre also being very careful to guard each additional step. For example, if witnesses were at some point permitted in this trial, those involved on the white house end would say they would want to hold open the possibility of the president having witnesses, too. So theyre going to sort of dribble out the details. Notably, Officials Say now that we know the composition of the house managers, that group of seven, that that in and of itself might not affect any final decisions on who would be included in the president s legal team. So theres optimism that the outcome will be what they want. There is an expression that theyre ready to go. But a cautiousness about getting ahead of any particular step before it unfolds. Ali . Kelly, thank you very much. Kelly odonnell at the white house for us. All right, so what do we expect once the trial actually gets underway . Joining us to talk about this is michael conway, who served as council to the House Judiciary Committee during the Richard Nixon impeachment process. And Jeffrey Rosen, who is the president and ceo of the National Constitution center and a law professor at the George Washington university. Jeff, let me start with you. Because there are still people out there who are confused about the role of the chief justice of the Supreme Court. There are many people who are taking some relief in the fact that the chief justice, who has said that the justices are not meant to be partisan, theyre not meant to be obama judges or trump judges are is going to try to maintain a bipartisan or nonpartisan role. What is the chief justices actual breadth of authority over the impeachment trial . Well, we heard at the end of the last segment, chief Justice Rehnquist said i did nothing in particular and did it very well. And thats more or less what the chief does. Hes the presiding officer, but the crucial fact is, he can be overruled at any time by a majority of the senate. So none of his evidentiary rulings can stick, if the majority doesnt favor it. And for that reason, chief Justice Roberts is likely to defer to the majority on all of the contested questions. Whether or not to hold witnesses, whether to get additional documents. Even the remarkable possibility of a motion to dismiss at the beginning of the trial is one that hes likely to say, hey, senate, you decide. Im not going to decide it for you. He might make some symbolic rulings and it is crucially important that he will represent the nonpartisan legitimacy of the judiciary, just by his simple presence, but in terms of a practical influence on the substance of the trial, that doesnt seem very likely. Michael, you heard this what kelly was just saying about the emerging argument for the white house, to say, you had impeachment hearings, thats the evidence. If you dont think you have the evidence, why are you looking for the senate to do that. Parse that for me. Well, sure. Of course theyre saying that. And under Mitch Mcconnells set of rules, which follow he says hes going to follow the clinton procedure, there can be no witnesses and there can be no documents that didnt already exist at the time that the house voted. Until and then theres a motion to dismiss, and if thats denied, they can go forward. But theres new evidence. The American Public is seeing the parnas emails. Theyre seeing information from omb in the pentagon. And we have john bolton tantalizingly saying that hes willing to testify. And so i think its going to be very difficult for Mitch Mcconnell to keep all of the republicans in line and say we want to see no evil, hear no evil. We dont want to hear any witnesses. We dont want any of these new documents. And i think thats going to be the challenge that Mitch Mcconnell has. So, lets talk about this, jeff. How how does your reading of the constitution tell you how this is supposed to go. Is the house, what the house does supposed to be the be all and end all . Because weve heard that they billed the indictment. They billed the case. And then they go and prosecute it, by making names up that those of us who are not lawyers might understand. They go and prosecute it at the senate and the senators are jurors. In the case of an indictment that leads to a trial, in the legal world, there would be witnesses. There would be documentation. There would be evidence at that trial. So the argument that the trial that the case should have already been made in the house, tell me how you make sense of that. Well, the one thing we know from the clinton impeachment is that the senate is not a jury. There was an objection when a senator called the Senate Jurors and the chief justice agreed. He said in this case, the senate is judge and jury. It is a court. It has the sole power of impeachment. So that means, thats all the constitution says, is that the senate can do essentially whatever it likes. It evaluates the evidence as it pleases and it applies whatever standards of proof it thinks are necessary. But there is at least a presumption based on history that it will consider the evidence. That it wont dismiss the case right off without hearing any witnesses at all. And some Supreme Court justices have suggested that if the senate really just flipped a coin to decide what to do, that might not count as a real senate trial and perhaps that might be open to question. But beyond that, the constitution doesnt tell the senate what to do and a majority can essentially do whatever it likes. And as long as it seriously considers the case and the senators are impartial judges of the case, as they have to swear to be, the constitution gives them a lot of discretion to decide how to exercise that power. So, michael, what do you think the role of these managers are going to be . Because were going to see them today. Were going to be hearing a lot about them through the course of this trial. But are they going to go in there as if the jurors, the senators are going to be impartial, according to the very special oath that they take . Its a separate oath from the oath they take to be members of the United States senate, that says theyre going to hear it impartially. Will the managers present this as if these are impartial jurors . Or are they going to be presenting a case that the American People are meant to opine on it . Both, really. And nancy pelosi said something very important today. She wanted litigators to put it in more common terms, trial lawyers to present this case. And they have a huge responsibility and theyre going to have a lot of work to do under the procedures and the past, theyll file a legal brief. And they could have up to this hours of actual time in the senate to not only identify the facts, the witnesses, the things that were developed in the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee, but also to apply the law. And in doing that, theyre going to have to try to overcome the notion that the case should be dismissed without hearing any witnesses. I think one footnote that the American People should understand is, weve had a lot of impeachment trials. Very few of the president , there have been impeachments of judges, impeachments of cabinet members. Every impeachment trial to date has involved witnesses. This would be a complete aberration, if no witnesses were prepared. I think adam schiff and his fellow managers are going to be very capable and able. They were osut both to the Senate Members and also to the American Public. Michael conway, who served as House Judiciary Committee council during the mnixon impeachment and Jeffrey Rosen with the George Washington university, thanks to you both gentlemen. Coming up, House Democrats drop bombshell pieces of evidence to boost their argument that Rudy Giuliani was doing President Trumps bidding in ukraine. Well dig into the documents, notes, and Text Messages to see where it could all lead for the senate trial. And after last nights democratic president ial debate, who looks to stand a real chance at ousting donald trump . Were live in iowa to discuss. Youre watching msnbc. Youre watching msnbc. Force vef doing whats right, not whats easy. So when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. Thats how you do it right. Usaa insurance is made just the way martins family needs it with hasslefree claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. Because doing right by our members, thats whats right. Usaa. What youre made of, were made for. Usaa dont get mad. Get e trade, dawg. Oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his Xfinity Customer Service is. Im mike, im so busy. Good thing xfinity has twohour appointment windows. They have night and weekend appointments too. Hes here. Bill . Karolyn . Nope no, just a couple of rocks. Download the my account app to manage your appointments making todays Xfinity Customer Service simple, easy, awesome. Ill pass. New records in evidence appear to draw a clearer connection between President Trump and the alleged Pressure Campaign on the ukrainian government. On tuesday night, House Democrats released a letter from the president s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, which reveals that he sought a private meeting, this is a letter youre looking at, he sought a private meeting with ukrainian president volodymodym zelensky weeks before the election. Giuliani wrote, in my capacity as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent, i request a meeting with you. In that same trove of evidence is a handwritten note from lev parnas, a giuliani associate, who wrote, quote, get zelensky to announce the biden case will be investigated. Its on a pad that you get from the hotel when you stay there at the ritz carlton in vienna. Joining me to break down what this all means is nbcs Josh Letterman who has done extensive reporting on this story both here in the United States and in ukraine. Josh, theres another character involved in all of this. A guy named hyde. Hes a republican whos running for office in connecticut. Hes running town seat a democrat. And this is the guy who according to these notes

© 2025 Vimarsana