I wanted to confirm a Point Of Order is the rules of decorum. I dont believe the gentleman from florida meant to violate them and i give him the benefit of the doubt. More than once he referred to a new york lawyer. If he could explain what he meant i withdraw my Point Of Order. Thats not a recognizable Point Of Order. Mr. Chairman, Point Of Order regarding the schedule. There is no Point Of Order regarding the schedule. In this case, there is. Will you answer my question . The gentleman will suspend. There is no recognizable Point Of Order regarding the future schedule. Will you recognize that . No. Mrs. Mcbath is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to follow up on one part of President Trumps conduct. I asked our constitutional scholars about last week. The Investigative Committees found evidence President Trump
intimidated, threatened and tampered with prospective and actual witnesses in the Impeachment Inquiry, correct . Yes. It is a federal crime to intimidate or seek to i
Election donald trump clearly lost, and what s curious to me and you i mean, you ve taken stands, you ve done more than just about anybody but nobody saw a different version of donald trump. so a whole lot of people kept the horrors of trump s presidency secret for a lot longer than you did. you came out, you told your story, you wrote an op-ed. you wrote in the book, but it has now these tapes are landing at a moment i mean the other ones resulted in a standing ovation for kevin mccarthy at the republican house caucus meeting. there s no view of public service that resembles anything you just said on our air inside the republican party and i guess my question is now what? it s the question of our time. you just asked the question of our time that will determine whether america reaches its 300th birthday or whether it does not. one-half of the country or close to half sees the trump family
Feasible. unless something changes in the senate trial which is possible. somehow they can compel john bolton to testify there. it s a republican controlled body as opposed to the house. i wasn t at the house caucus meeting. i don t know exactly why adam schiff was applauded. there is support for him in the way he conducted the hearing. correct. not necessarily for impeaching the president. i m not so sure that s the case. hair where you re coming from. everything is looked at through a partisan lens. i don t buy the talking point that says this entire exercise was about a pre-determined outcome. that s been said over and over again. i do think that the it s not an impeachment in search of fact pattern. i think the fact pattern presented itself through the ukrainian call and there was a call to duty. i understand the idea and the notion you must be somber when you exercise the authority but you have a constitutional obligation to investigation the matter and they are doing th