PRESIDENT
PRESIDENT TRUMP'S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
INQUIRY.
INQUIRY. >> NOW, TWO DECORATED STATE
DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS TESTIFIED
HOW ALARMED THEY WERE WHEN THE
WHITE HOUSE STOPPED AID TO
UKRAINE AND, GET THIS,
REPUBLICANS, THEY FOUGHT BACK.
THEY ARGUED THAT THE PRESIDENT
WAS SIMPLY TRYING TO
INVESTIGATE CORRUPTION.
INVESTIGATE CORRUPTION. >> SO THE QUESTION IS, WHERE DO
INVESTIGATE CORRUPTION. >> SO THE QUESTION IS, WHERE DO@
WE GO FROM HERE?
OUR POLITICAL REPORTER MIKE
VALERIO IS WITH US.
WAS THIS A BLOCKBUSTER DAY FOR
DEMOCRATS AS THEY HAD HOPED?
>> I DON'T THINK SO.
THAT WAS HARD FOR THEM TO DO.
I THINK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
BLOCKBUSTER MOMENTS WHEN THERE
ARE OFFICIALS AT THE TOP OF THE
WHITE HOUSE FOOD CHAIN LIKE
MICK MULVANEY OR MIKE POMPEO
THE SECRETARY OF STATE TESTIFY
ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENED
HERE.
HERE.
HERE. BUT
HERE. BUT REALLY THE DEMOCRATS' GOAL
FOR TODAY WAS TO SET A BASE
LINE OF WHAT IS NORMAL.
WHAT IS IN OUR NATIONAL
INTEREST TO SECURE THE REGION
HERE.
HERE.
HERE. AND
HERE. AND 4@4@WE HEARD FROM ACTING
AMBASSADOR OF UKRAINE BILL
TAYLOR TODAY WHO TOLD US WHAT
WAS NORMAL TO PROTECT UKRAINE
AT ALL COST.
WE ARE GOING TO PLAY YOU SOUND
IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF SECONDS
WHEN HE LEARNED THAT THE WHITE
HOUSE STOPPED AID TO UKRAINE
AND HIS 4@ALARM AT THAT.
JUST TAKE A LISTEN TO WHAT 4@
EXACTLY HE SAID HERE.
>> I AND OTHERS 4@SAT IN 4@
ASTONISHMENT, UKRAINIANS WERE
FIGHTING RUSSIANS AND COUNTED
ON 4@NOT ONLY THE TRAINING AND
WEAPONS, BUT ALSO THE ASSURANCE
OF U.S. SUPPORT.
ALL THAT THE STAFF PERSON SAID
WAS THAT THE DIRECTIVE HAD COME
FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE CHIEF
OF STAFF, TO OMB.
IN AN INSTANT I REALIZED THAT
ONE OF THE KEY PILLARS OF OUR
STRONG SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE WAS
THREATENED.
THREATENED. >> OKAY.
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY. SO THAT IS THE NATIONAL
INTEREST, THAT'S NORMAL.
AND DEMOCRATS ARE REALLY TRYING
TO SET UP THIS IMPEACHMENT
QUESTION IN TERMS OF WAS THE
PRESIDENT ACTING IN THE
NATIONAL INTEREST OR WAS HE
ACTING IN HIS 4@OWN PERSONAL
INTEREST.
INTEREST.
INTEREST. SO WE HAVE BILL TAYLOR, AN
ACCLAIMED DECORATED AM4@BASSADO
SAYING THAT IS THE NATIONAL
INTEREST, PROTECT UKRAINE AT
ALL COST 4@AND 4@THAT WAS
SACRIFICED WHEN THE PRESIDENT, @
FROM HIS POINT OF VIEW, ENTERED
INTO THE EQUATION.
>> ON THIS SHOW THE WHOLE PO4@I
IS TO GET VIEWERS' QUESTIONS
INTO THE SHOW AND GET ANSWERS
SO I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT
BECAUSE EARLIER TODAY WE HAD A
QUESTION FROM JUDY ON FACEBOOK
AND SHE WANTS 4@TO KNOW ABOUT 4
QUESTION FROM JUDY ON FACEBOOK AND SHE WANTS 4@TO KNOW ABOUT 4@
VALIDITY OF SECONDHAND
INFORMATION.
INFORMATION. SHE ASKED US THIS SPECIFICALLY.
SINCE WHEN IS SECONDHAND
HEARSAY ADMISSIBLE?
HEARSAY ADMISSIBLE? SHE SAYS EVERY COURT SHE HAS
BEEN IN SAYS IT'S INADMISSIBLE
AND SHE SAYS, JUST SAYING.
>> SHE ADDS SOME OTHER THINGS
AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT COMMENT.
BUT IT IS A GOOD QUESTION AND
IT'S WHAT WE HE4@ARD OVER AND
OVER AGAIN FROM REPUBLICANS WHO
SAID, NONE OF THIS INFORMATION
IS COMING FROM FIRSTHAND
SOURCES.
SOURCES.
SOURCES. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT ARGUMENT,
THOUGH, IS THAT THIS IS LIKE
THE GRAND JURY PART OF A
PROCEEDING, WHERE HEARSAY IS
ADMISSIBLE, THIS IS GETTING THE
CASE TOGETHER SO HEARSAY IS
PERMITTED AND THAT ALSO PLAYS
INTO THE DEMOCRATS' ARGUE; THEY
ARE SAYING WE 4@4@WOULD LOVE TO
HAVE FIRSTHAND INFORMATION.
WE ONLY HA4@VE THIS SECONDHAND
INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU'RE
PREVENTING ALL OF THESE TOP
OFFICIALS FROM TESTIFYING SO IT
LOOKS LIKE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS
SOMETHING TO HIDE.
>> 4@EVERYTHING BRINGING UP
HEARSAY THEY HAVE TO 4@4@KNOW 4
IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO HAVE TO
GET PAID OFF DOWN THE ROAD, A
REAL WITNESS TO ANSWER A REAL
QUESTION.
QUESTION.
QUESTION. DEVIN NUNES WAS 4@TALKING ABOUT
SECRECY DURING THIS WHOLE THING
AND TALKING ABOUT HOW IT HAS
HAMPERED THE PROCESS.
TODAY WAS THE FIRST ONE WE DID
NOT HAVE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
>> THIS IS THE FIRST DAY OF A
PUBLIC INQUIRY, TO DEVIN NUNES
COMES TO THE LECTERN AND SAYS
THAT THE PROCESS HAS BEEN
HAMPERED BECAUSE OF ALL OF
THESE CLOSED DOOR PROCEEDINGS
GOING ON OVER THE PAST COUPLE
OF WEEKS.
OF WEEKS.
OF WEEKS. THE PROBLEM AGAIN WITH THAT4@
ARGUMENT IS THAT THIS GOES BACK
TO THIS IS THE GRAND JURY PHASE
IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE IT TO
THAT.
THAT.
THAT. WHERE THE PROCESS IS ALLOWED TO
BE IN SECRET.
IT'S ALLOWED TO BE IN SECRET
BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT ALL OF
THESE WITNESSES HEARING OTHER
WITNESS STORIES SO THEY DON'T
WANT WITNESSES TO SORT OF
CHANGE THEIR STORIES WHEN THEY
HEAR SOMEBODY ELSE TALKING.
AND THIS RULE, THIS REGULATION
THAT THE FIRST PART OF THE
PROCESS WHICH WE JUST RAMPED UP
SHOULD BE IN SECRET.
THAT WAS WRITTEN BY JOHN
BOEHNER A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO
AND HE WAS THE TOP REPUBLICAN,
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE.
SO THIS IS REALLY UP TO
REPUBLICANS HOW WE GO FORWARD
OR HOW WE WENT FORWARD WITH THE
CLOSED DOOR PROCEEDINGS.
>> AND 4@NOTHING THAT HAPPENED
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS IS BEING
USED.
USED.
USED. BASICALLY ALL OF TH4@IS IS
HAPPENING AGAIN.
HAPPENING AGAIN. >> IT'S ALL COMING OUT IN
PUBLIC.
PUBLIC.