>> Ana Casparian was on Cuomo last night and she took issue with some of the way another
guest on the show was presenting the impeachment inquiry, some of the right wing talking points
that he was spreading.
Here's how she responded to that.
>> If I were the democrats, I would want this to be held open and very fair, very transparent
because they've got a lot of convincing to do.
>> I am so tired of Democrats constantly caving to the type of framing-
>> That Republicans demand.
Finally for the first time you have Democrats standing their ground.
They have absolutely no obligation to hold that vote.
I believe that the way that they're conducting this investigation is not only legal.
It's the correct way to do it, and the reason why they're not holding open hearings is,
number one in 2015.
John Boehner, pushed for and successfully accomplished a law that indicated that they
could do these closed hearings.
>> True.
>> And more importantly, we don't need a circus right now.
What we need is to get down to the facts and figure out exactly what's going on.
>> Yeah.
>> My two favorite parts were Cuomo going, true.
>> It's the opposite Trump, what does Trump do, fake, lies?
>> What was the one, wrong.
>> That's what it was.
>> Wrong.
>> No, Ana, you're the puppet.
>> Okay, so, my second favorite part was when she popped that guy's knee out.
>> Bam!
>> God damn, yeah man!
>> And when she's like, waiter, receipts please.
>> Well, and also one of the points that he makes.
This is a general thing whenever you watch interviews like this when he is like, if I
were the Democrats I would.
Just discount everything that comes after that because the last thing he wants to do
is give the Democrats advice.
Meghan McCain always tries to play that, I think what they should do is this, they should
jump through these hoops that I will lay out, I will never support them even if they did
that.
But it would be convenient for me as a right winger if they were to do what I say.
>> My favorite's when they give us electoral strategy.
I think you should pick the weakest Democrat.
>> The one that no one really likes and is pulling a 2%.
>> Yeah.
>> That's why Trump is tweeting- >> At Joe Biden, I hope to see you in the
general sir my God!
Well now we know who we probably shouldn't elect.
>> And also the reason that he goes into, here is what I would do if I were the Democrats.
Because he doesn't wanna talk too much about what's being done right now because although
he's there to imply that there's something nefarious about it.
He knows as she knows that these were rules that were set up under John Boehner.
The process is going forth in pretty much the same way it was back in the 90s.
They're doing some initial fact finding interviews, of which we have, let's be honest, we have
a lot of information about what's going on in those rooms.
Regardless, the Republicans have even more because they have dozens of their members
who are serving on those committees and they're there for all of those interviews.
They want you to forget that, but it's true.
So you can't actually take issue with the process on specific substantive grounds.
You can only talk vaguely in circles around the process and really fast on that.
One of the things that I loved about this is we know that the Matt gates, the brovasion
of the rooms was a big stunt.
That's all it was.
But AOC pointed out one particular way that it was really a pathetic stunt.
Ryan J Riley had reported that Fox News reports that some republican members quote asked to
be arrested during that.
And so she said there have been many aspects of the GOP's little flash mob that have relied
on mountains of entitlement and privilege.
But then asking for the police to be arrested is just, well, let's just say my community
would find it hard to understand why anyone would ask to be arrested.
But we know why they want to, so that then he could come out and say, I was thrown in
the slammer for just trying to find out what's going on.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, wonderfully said.
So I decided that next time I'm debating a republican on TV I'm gonna flip it on them.
>> If I were the democrats, I would just surrender, they usually say it along lines of John.
John would say, I'm gonna flip it on.
If I were the republicans, I would support a criminal president but I guess you went
in a different direction, so I find that to be a little bit more egregious than some obscure
process thing that you're complaining about that isn't even true, as Ana pointed out.
>> Just ask them if they're scared.
>> Mm-hm.
>> Just that, are you scared, but say it like that.
>> If I were a republican I'd be scared.
>> Okay, we gotta get you on Cuomo now, but there is more of Ana's appearance, here she
is.
>> Guess what, Jeff okay, our colleague on the show previous on Anderson show said, most
of this stuff is hearsay based on top of hearsay, okay.
>> You know it, you're a lawyer.
>> This is not a trial.
It's not a legal process.
>> Chris, you're a lawyer, would you take hearsay upon hearsay?
>> Come one, listen.
>> When you have members of Trump's administration testifying against him.
You have a US Ambassador, Bill Taylor, under Trump's administration, testifying that there
was quid pro quo.
>> It's hearsay based on hearsay.
>> You have Donald Trump's Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney.
>> It's not hearsay based on hearsay.
>> They are specifically saying, quid pro quo all the time.
I mean, you have members of his own administration saying it and then you have Donald Trump constantly
intimidating individuals from coming forward.
>> Hold on a second, Dave don't make it about me being good or bad.
Chris you know that you would not bring a case based on hearsay.
You not proceed forward with a case based on hearsay.
>> Hold on, how is it hearsay if Bill Taylor?
>> Are text messages hearsay?
>> Are text messages between Bill Taylor and Gordon Sondland hearsay?
>> Ana's 100% right there and I found most of what Cuomo said there to be incredibly
frustrating.
But, look the Bill Taylor stuff is great and it's not hearsay at all.
It's literally he said, it's not hearsay.
But more importantly than that, Donald Trump put out the transcript of the call.
>> And everything you need to know to be extremely concerning about whether crimes were committed,
was in there, it wasn't hearsay, it was, he printed it out and presented it to us.
>> Yeah.
I just like how Ana is doing a bit of a better job than Chris is at the moment.
>> Well she's the one debating to be fair to Chris.
>> Chris is doing a great job not saying thank you for having TYT people on, love it.
>> Love it!
>> Do more of that.
>> But also the other dude, I don't know who he is, but he's like, Chris you're better
than this, when Ana's talking.
As if to say, you're better than having Ana Kasparian on, and almost a little sexist.
This woman, tell you what you're doing.
>> No, no, no.
>> I didn't like that at all.
>> Francesca, I totally agree with you.
I got the same vibe.
I won't even deign to talk to this woman.
>> Yeah.
>> Right?
And what is Chris, you're better than this mean?
It means you should shut her up.
>> Right?
>> Yeah.
>> Why are you allowing her to say things that are demonstrably true?
>> Right?
So that hearsay talking point is from months ago.
When they, the whistle blower, it's just hearsay.
Now, some of the things that the whistleblower had was direct evidence and some some of it
was hearsay.
But to John's point, we're not talking about that anymore because we already have a rough
transcript, and even that shows that he did do it.
And then we have the text that Ana mentioned, none of this is hearsay.
Then we have Taylor come in as a witness and say it was quid quo pro, that is not hearsay.
>> Add everything Rudy Giuliani has said on Fox News.
>> That's not hearsay, none of it is hearsay.
He's gone to an old talking point, and he's basically saying, how dare this liberal woman
disagree with my old talking point and prove me wrong?
>> He didn't get the update.
>> See, republican talking points are like IoS updates, or software updates.
You can't keep ignoring the update, because then you don't get the new talking points.
>> And I've been frustrated by a lot of stuff as we've proceeded with this.
But one thing is, we're still hearing from Trump primarily but from others, attacks against
the whistleblower.
They really wanna know who it is.
What's the source and everything?
But, from my point of view, and I acknowledge we got the text messages, we got Taylor's
thing, all that contextual stuff.
The whistleblower raised the concern that I heard crazy stuff on a phone call, you need
to look into this.
So we got the phone call.
What do we care, what the whistle lower told us to look into it?
So we're looking into it, we got it.
It would be great for him to come and say, yeah, I was really concerned about the phone
call and you can literally look at it.
It was really bad, but I don't get why we're still focusing so much on the whistleblower,
we have primary source material that indicates a criminal quid pro quo.
>> I think that when you have a guest and I mean I get and I like that there are sort
of left and right debates on programs like Cuomos.
I think that's important.
But when someone goes on to television and PBS is actually a good example, we always
talk about, cable news, but PBS and NPR are super guilty of doing these things too, which
is both sizing something.
They'll have people on, who continually lie.
They're lying about the facts.
So then, as the media, what do you do?
I mean, it's the Kelly Anne Conway syndrome.
It's like do we continually invite this perpetual liar back on or not, and I feel like at some
point we have to just let him go.
>> Yeah.
>> Just not put him on television anymore if you're gonna continue to lie.
>> Yeah, look, and so we get criticism, they say why don't we have more conservative voices
on, look, you find me honest conservatives and I do have them on.
John Ziegler, don't agree with him at all, and we've had wonderful, hilarious shouting
matches, right?
But he's an honest conservative.
And he genuinely believes those things that he says, whether you agree or disagree.
And I can name you a couple of others.
In fact, Hilton from Fox News, honest conservative, I've heard him on and sometimes we actually
wind up agreeing when we're having an honest conversation.
But 90% of the people that go on cable news to defend Trump or just even republican talking
points are purposely dishonest
>> Right.
>> So we don't have them on and then mainstream media goes, why don't you even it out by having
some liers on too.
>> So obviously I agree, like today on the damage where I had an activist start a nonprofit
around autism I did not feel any sort of need to add on someone who feels like we should
be funding autism research less, I don't know what that would've added.
>> But obviously, I don't think that the network is requiring that sort of balance because
they think that it gets you to the truth.
They do it because it's an investment over a long period of time that has resulted in
the right wing respecting CNN.
No, it hasn't.
It hasn't worked at all.
So why are you doing it?
>> It's a complete waste of time.
They don't care about you.
They hate you.
They think that you're fake news.
>> Yeah, yeah.
>> Yeah, I understand they have political pressure.
They have economic pressure.
They have media pressure and a culture of group think in my opinion.
But again, look, I get that we have a self interest here, we kidded around about it earlier.
Well, you have to give Cuomo and CNN a lot of credit because it's a very rare show that
bothers to have an actual progressive on.
>> That's true.
>> Against these guys.
Normally it's one of those guys and blah, blah, blah and a meek democrat going, sorry,
right?
>> Yeah.
>> So this is much more preferable to that, which
is 98% of cable news.
>> That's true.
>> Love you, Chris.
>> Yeah.
>> Love you, Chris.