♪.
MARIA: WELCOME BACK.
NOW IT GOES TO THE SENATE.
HISTORIC WEEK IN WASHINGTON
WHERE THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES BROUGHT TWO
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AND
IMPEACHED PRESIDENT TRUMP.
NOW THE ARTICLES GO TO THE
SENATE, BUT HOW SOON MIGHT THAT
HAPPEN?
JOINING ME RIGHT NOW WITH
REACTION IS SENATOR TED CRUZ OF
TEXAS ON FOREIGN RELATIONS,
JUDICIARY COMMITTEES.
ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MARIA.
MARIA: THANKS FOR JOINING US.
NANCY PELOSI SAID OF AT
IMPEACHMENT THAT MAYBE SHE WILL
SIT ON ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT
BEFORE SENDING IT OVER TO YOU
AND YOUR COLLEAGUES IN THE
SENATE.
CAN SHE DO THAT?
>> YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP.
LISTEN, THIS IS A SIGN OF
WEAKNESS.
THIS IS A SIGN SHE UNDERSTANDS
JUST HOW WEAK THESE ARTICLES
ARE.
THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT THEY
ACTUALLY VOTED ON WERE REALLY AN
ADMISSION OF FAIL TURE.
THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE NOT
ALLEGED ANY HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS, MUCH LESS PROVEN
ANY.
NOW PELOSI IS IN A SITUATION SHE
KNOWS WHEN IT GOES TO THE
SENATE, IT WILL BE A FAIR TRIAL,
BOTH SIDES GET OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT THEIR CASE, WE WILL
PROTECT DUE PROCESS, SHE KNOWS
THE RESULT OF TRIAL IS
IMPEACHMENT CLAIMS WILL BE
THROWN OUT PAUSE THEY HAVEN'T
MET THE CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARD.
MARIA: DO YOU WANT TO SEE
WITNESSES IN A SENATE TRIAL?
>> I WOULD.
LET ME TELL YOU HOW I THINK IT
WILL PLAY OUT.
THE TRIAL WILL START IN EARLY
JANUARY.
START WITH THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF
THE UNITED STATES SWEARING IN
ALL 100 SENATORS.
IT WILL SHIFT TO THE HOUSE
MANAGERS PRESENTING THEIR CASE.
THAT WILL PROBABLY TAKE SEVERAL
DAYS.
THEY WILL STAND UP.
WALK THROUGH EVIDENCE, THEY WILL
MAKE ARGUMENTS T WILL SHIFT TO
THE WHITE HOUSE, DEFENSE TEAM
FOR THE PRESIDENT MAKING THEIR
CASE.
THE PRESIDENT WILL HAVE A FAIR
AND FULL OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND
HIMSELF T WILL THEN SHIFT TO
QUESTIONS.
HERE IS WHERE IT'S A LITTLE
WEIRD.
I THINK SOME PEOPLE SEEN WHAT
HAPPENED IN THE HOUSE, THEY'RE
EXPECTING IN SENATE TO SEE BUNCH
OF SENATORS ASKING QUESTIONS.
MARIA: YEAH.
>> THE SENATE IMPEACHMENT RULES
PROHIBIT ANY SENATOR SEEKING IN
OPEN SESSION, IN OTHER WORDS
WHEN TV CAMERAS ARE ON.
YOU WILL NOT SEE ELIZABETH
WARREN AND ME GOING 15 ROUNDS ON
THE SENATE FLOOR.
THAT IS NOT ALLOWED.
WE'RE BOTH SITTING QUIETLY AT
OUR DESK.
WE SUBMIT QUESTIONS.
THE QUESTIONS HAVE TO BE IN
WRITING.
WE WRITE OUT THE QUESTIONS, HAND
THEM DOWN.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE ASKS QUESTIONS
FROM THE SENATORS.
I THINK AT THAT POINT WE'RE
LIKELY TO RECESS, HAVE A
DISCUSSION.
I THINK ONE OF TWO THINGS WILL
HAPPEN.
ONE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT A
MAJORITY OF THE SENATE WILL BE
PREPARED, LET'S MOVE FORWARD,
LET'S VOTE, THEY HAVEN'T MET
THEIR THRESHOLD, THEY HAVEN'T
COME CLOSE, LET'S REJECT THE
CLAIMS.
I THINK THAT IS OUT COME THAT
COULD HAPPEN.
SECONDLY THERE COULD WELL BE
PROCEDURAL FIGHT, DO WE NEED
MORE EVIDENCE, NEED MORE
WITNESSES IN WHICH CASE THAT
QUESTION IS DECIDED BY 51
SENATORS.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE CAN RULE IN
THE FIRST INSTANCE BUT THE CHIEF
JUSTICE CAN BE OVERRULED BY 51
SENATORS.
I THINK JOHN ROBERTS IS VERY
LIKELY TO FOLLOW THE REHNQUIST
PRESIDENT, DEFER PROCEDURAL
QUESTIONS TO THE SENATE.
WHICH MEANS IF 51 REPUBLICANS
AGREE, WE CAN RESOLVE ANY LEGAL
ISSUE.
TO ME THAT MEANS, IF THE
PRESIDENT WANTS TO CALL HUNTER
BIDEN, IF THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO
CALL THE WHISTLEBLOWER, DUE
PROCESS MANDATES WE ALLOW THE
PRESIDENT TO PRESENT HIS CASE.
WE SHOULD DO SO.
THAT IS THE QUESTION FOR THE
PRESIDENT AND LEGAL TEAM.
MARIA: BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW
TODAY, DO YOU EXPECT ANY
REPUBLICANS TO IMPEACH IN THE
SENATE?
>> I DON'T.
IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE.
THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT COULD
VOTE THAT WAY.
BUT I THINK ANYONE VOTING ON THE
FACTS, ANYONE VOTING ON THE LAW,
THIS IS A VERY EASY VOTE.
WHAT THEY HAVE ALLEGED IS NOT A
HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR.
YOU KNOW AS, THERE ARE TWO
ARTICLES.
THE FIRST ARTICLE IS AMORPHOUS
ABUSE OF POWER.
MARIA: YEAH.
>> WHICH BY THE WAY IS
MALADMINISTRATION.
LITERALLY TERM REJECTED IN THE
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
THAT IS WHAT THEY'RE ALLEGING.
MARIA: RIGHT.
>> THAT PLAINLY DOESN'T MEET THE
CONSTITUTIONAL THRESHOLD.
THE SECOND ARTICLE THOUGH, IS
ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE WEAKER.
SO THE SECOND ARTICLE IS
OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, PEOPLE ARE
USED TO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
MARIA: I NEVER HEARD OF
OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS.
I'VE HEARD OF OBSTRUCTION OF
POWER OR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
>> OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IS A
CLAIM, A FELONY, SERIOUS FELONY.
MARIA: THEY NAMED IT OBSTRUCTION
OF CONGRESS.
>> THEY COULDN'T PROVE
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED ON
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
RICHARD NIXON WAS GOING TO BE
IMPEACHED ON OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
THE BASIS OF OBSTRUCTION OF
CONGRESS CLAIM, THAT THE
PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE AIDES
ASSERTED PRIVILEGES.
FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THEY WANTED
JOHN BOLTON TO TESTIFY, JOHN
BOLTON, NATIONAL SECURITY
ADVISOR FOR THE PRESIDENT, HIS
LAWYER WENT TO FEDERAL DISTRICT
COURT.
SAYS THE HOUSE ASKED ME TO
TESTIFY.
WHITE HOUSE IS ASSERTING
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.
YOUR HONOR, WHAT DO I DO.
JUDGE I HAVE TWO CONFLICTING
DEMANDS.
I WILL DO WHAT YOU TELL ME TO,
YOUR HONOR.
YOU KNOW WHAT THE HOUSE
DEMOCRATS DID, NEVER MIND?
THEY BACKED AWAY.
THEY DIDN'T SUBPOENA BOLTON.
DIDN'T LITIGATE.
THE NIXON CASE WAS LITIGATED TO
THE USE SUPREME COURT.
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HANDED
WHITE HOUSE TO HAND OVER
WHITE HOUSE TAPES.
TWO DAYS LATER RICHARD NIXON
RESIGNED THAT IS HOW YOU FIGHT
THE MATTERS.
HOUSE DEMOCRATS DIDN'T DO THAT
INSTEAD THEIR ASSERTION IS,
SIMPLY CLAIMING A PRIVILEGE IS
AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE.
IF THAT WERE TRUE, ALL 45
PRESIDENTS GOING BACK TO