headquarters in new york and our tv and radio viewers worldwide, i am david westin. we are waiting for a news conference with president trump and the italian president who is visiting the white house. we are waiting as people gather in the white house. we'll bring it to you live as soon as it begins. we went to check in on the debate yesterday. we will check in with kevin cirilli in ohio. let's hear what we heard last night. go of for the wealthy and big corporations and for hard-working middle-class families. costs will go down. >> yes or no question that did not get a yes or no answer. >> i want to give a reality check. no one on this stage wants to protect billionaires. >> i'm going to say something that is going to offend some people. i am only -- i'm only one who has gotten anything really big done.

co. following the financial crash of 2008, i had an idea for a consumer agency. >> i went on the floor and got u-boats. i got votes for that bill. i convince people to vote for it. let's get those things straight. >> i am deeply grateful to president obama who fought so that agency sure was passed into law. of sarcasmttle bit coming from senator warren. i really think obama. -- thank obama. what set -- what stood out for you? >> with the frontrunner status, comes political criticism that she had directed her way. i was struck by pete buttigieg who tried to draw a contrast to senator elizabeth warren to say potentially to many of the democrats that he could be the

alternative to joe biden should the biting campaign falter. for joe biden, elizabeth warren, and bernie sanders, they still have the funds to continue forward. buttigieg trying to make this a four way race. senator bernie sanders picking up key endorsements from progressives. alexandria ocasio-cortez out of -- eddie queens new york event this weekend. look for buttigieg to try to make this a four-way race. david: not exactly moving to the center. there are two questions going into this. will senator warren give specifics on how she is going to pay for medicare for all? will vice president biden get out of the hunter biden problem? did we get any answers? >> know, we did not. a host of different candidates from buttigieg to others drawing the contrast with senator elizabeth warren. she refused to answer the question about whether or not

that'll class taxes would increase. on the biting campaign front, i will tell you -- on the biden campaign front, joe biden did not answer directly why his son would not serve on international boards if joe biden was president. that question is going to circulate around the campaign for some time. david: he just did not answer the question. thank you so much for all of the great reporting from ohio. as continue -- as we continue to wait for the press conference, we want to go to the managing editor of the crystal ball. give us your take. you follow the numbers. what is the likely result of this debate? >> it is hard to see how this debate is going to move the numbers. you have a dozen people on stage, which according to some

research we have done at the uva center for politics, was the most candidates ever on stage for a presidential primary debate. it is hard for people to follow along closely and figure out the distinctions when there are so many of them. it is easy to forget that some people are on stage including some of the major candidates. there was a time in the middle of the debate where it was hard to know that even joe biden, one of the co-frontrunners was even there. i do not expect a lot of movement from this debate. what we are seeing is that the media coverage is focusing on pete buttigieg and amy klobuchar to some degree. peteudge probably does -- buttigieg probably does not need that much of a boost. klobuchar is someone who is hanging on to survive. maybe that was her moment last night. i do not think it fundamentally reshuffles the race. david: you go below the top line numbers. on,things you have focused

you are focusing on ohio and michigan and maybe pennsylvania. who are the voters that the democrats need to get the republicans? have focused on the ohio voters who are white and have less than a college education. who on that stage appeals to those voters? >> i do not necessarily know if they did. the kinds of voters we are talking about our -- about are the stereotypical obama to trump voters. a lot of voters like that are white voters who may be do not live in big urban areas. not necessarily poor or lower middle class. there are a lot of people who do not have a four year college degree who are well off financially. they may be socially conservative. if anyt necessarily know of these candidates are a great

fit for those kinds of voters. think joe biden naturally pictures himself that way because he is from scranton, pennsylvania. the better approach for the democrats is to nominate someone who is an economic populist like warren or sanders because at least those candidates will fit the populist moment a little better. i do not think there are any easy answers because these kinds of voters have been trending away from the democrats in 2016 and before 2016. david: you have pointed a something terribly and point -- pointed out something terribly important. this is all in the primaries. additionally, we thought you have to turn to the center in the general. is it possible the selection is different. -- different? --ebody who stays out there last night, it seems like the progressives doubled down.

>> that may be the case. there are a lot of people on the left and right who were proven correct in some ways by donald's victory in 2016 that may be going toward the center is not where you want to be. that flies in the face of traditional political science thinking -- that you are competing for moderate voters. -- if you follow the stuff closely -- you think of moderates as being ideologically centered. some people you would consider moderate but may be extremist on social issues one-way and extremist the other way on other issues. it is hard to pigeonhole the electorate into these ideological boxes that we try to put them in. this is why we talk about electability so much. it is easy to think joe biden is the most electable, but maybe he is not. maybe there are some assets that some of these candidates bring to the table that he does not

have. we are so far away from the start of the caucus and primary season that there is still a lot of time to figure these things out. thed: in november, we have fifth debate coming up. we may have fewer people on the stage. if you are advising one of the front runners what they could do, who would you advise and what would you advise them to do? >> i still do not think that biden has a great answer to the question about his son. what the president has accused him of and his son of is not accurate at all, but there is a biden issue of hunter seeming to benefit from the fact that he is a former senator and former vice president son. one thing i think is interesting is he did not feel much heat on democrats last night on that topic. i was watching to see if the other democrats would criticize joe biden for some of the things

his family has done. felt thate democrats they did not want to mimic the president on that point. i think biden skated on that point. i think that is something he needs to come up with a better answer for. david: cory booker from new jersey actually -- he went the other way and said, we should not be talking about this. he defended the vice president. thank you so much. it is always great to have you with us. he is with sabra toes crystal ball. we turn now to abigail doolittle. what is going on in the market and why? >> we have flat markets in this point. not a lot of reaction to the democratic debate. where we may have a bit of a reaction, retail sales for september dropping down three tense of 1%. that is the first drop in seven months. the reason investor traders be worried about that, consumers are about two thirds of the

economy. your hearing all of these concerns about trade uncertainty that businesses have been putting their capital spending plans on hold. the consumer needs to remain strong. if the consumer falters, it could be a worry going ahead. david: how much of it was a and autos? >> i do not know the answer, but autos are a big part of the picture today. gm, those shares are popping on the tentative deal with uaw. --estors of tesla and but buying stock ahead of earnings later this month. jb hung, one of the big winners on the day, that is a big trucking company. big trucking orders had declined. this company put up a sales feet. investors are optimistic around that. david: coming up, we are waiting for the news conference with president trump and the president of italy, sergio mattarella.

we will bring you that from the white house as soon as that happens. this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio. ♪

david: this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio. we are awaiting a news conference yesterday -- news conference right now. we will bring you that as soon as we have it. we want to go to mark crumpton. he has bloomberg first word news. mark: china is condemning the united states congress over a bill supporting protesters in hong kong. the house has approved a package of measures. hong kong chief executive carrie lam weighed in on the move. rights act isng

unjustified and unwarranted. it will hurt not only the hong kong business, it will heart american interests in hong kong. they have 1400 companies. 85,000 citizens in hong kong. mark: the action follows months of protests over china's actions to strengthen control over hong kong. the house impeachment inquiry is exposing details on president trump actions on ukraine and rudy giuliani. former national security advisor john bolton referred to giuliani as a hand grenade with his efforts toward ukraine. secretary of state mike pompeo is speaking to house impeachment panels behind closed doors today. michael mckinley is a career foreign service officer and was mike pompeo's de facto chief of staff. he is expected to discuss concerns held by career state department officials about the treatment of the former u.s. ambassador ukraine.

the u.k. and european union are struggling to reach a deal. one of boris johnson's key political allies has denied it has dropped its opposition. johnson needs northern ireland credit unionist party to get any deal through parliament. he may be forced to seek an extension of the october 31 deadline to leave. in spain, thousands of people have taken to the streets in large protest marches across catalonia. this comes after nine catalonian separatists were given lengthy prison sentences i spain supreme court. marches were set to converge on barcelona as the region reeled from two straight days of violent clashes between police and protesters. global news, 24 hours a day, on air and on tic-toc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. david: we continue to wait for

the news conference from the white house, which we will bring you as soon as it happens. we want to turn to our stocks of the hour. there are three big distributors of opioids. they are the three best performers in the s&p 500 reports that they may be negotiating an opioid settlement. kailey leinz is here with more. usually not good news and you have to spend $18 billion. ley: when you look at the details, it is over the course of 18 years. $1 billion a year combined. these companies can afford it. if you look at their cash flow, it is about 11%. this is something they can afford. this would settle 2000 cases that are pending against them. they face allegations they fueled the epidemic by illegally flooding states with pills. there are some examples of pharmacies in towns getting millions of pills over the

course of a couple years. they say if it is true, it is attractive. if it does blanket lay cover all of the cases. david: it is no coincidence it is these three distributor's. these three distributors are going to go to trial in federal district court in cleveland. they are on the courthouse steps as it were. kailey: absolutely. are flooding the idyllic -- the idea of a $4 billion settlement. it is kind of a change of tact. usually, they litigate until the end. let us say they do not pay out settlements. they paid out $3 billion and of the past 12 months. 2 billion in 2018. the $4 billion charge is slightly higher. the same story with these distributors. the company can afford it. it has $18 billion in free cash flow. it is not super consequential to them. david: cannot -- can afford it,

but it is not enough. coming out of the purdue bankruptcy, a lot of states and localities are saying it is not enough money. it is not clear the plaintiffs are going to agree. kailey: it is still an open question. the market taking it as if this work to pass. also for j&j, even if they get through the opioids, that is only 2000 of the 100,000 cases they face on their various drugs from the child baby powders, their whispered all. coststs say this could all $20 billion. david: to editorialize a bit, if it does go forward, one thing is the money might actually go to the people who deserve it rather than to the lawyers. nothing against lawyers. on of the concerns in the bankruptcy of purdue, the trustees thing, if we keep litigating this forever, all of themoney will go to of kailey: lawyers. the longer things drag on, it is

great news for lawyers but not necessarily the people awaiting. it does beg the question, because these settlements are so small relative to when you look at their revenues, does it incentivize bad behavior because frankly, they can afford to pay out even with all of the thousand cases against them. david: it bears remembering that over 400,000 americans died because of opioid overdoses. it is a stunning number. any thanks to bloombergs kailey leinz. coming up, we are awaiting the news conference with president trump and the president of italy, patrick: we are going to italy,ou -- president of sergio mattarella. this is bloomberg television and radio. ♪

david: this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio. we are still waiting for the news conference from the white house between president trump and the president of italy. we turn to our chief content officer to set it up. there are two stories here. came togio mattarella talk to president trump about, and what the principal want to talk about. >> they are not the same. it is orchestrated chaos. donald trump usually takes two questions. they're usually not about the meeting he just hand. he extorts the press to ask questions about that. they're going to go right to impeachment and syria and to the bidens. david: there are some issues between italy and the united states. it includes the basic -- the hawaii -- theill

--huawei issues. >> they can discuss them, but whether going to resolve them as far from certain. the 5g issue -- the 5g issue is for italy, butue for all of europe. themesne of the central of the big trade discussion between the u.s. and china. it did not get resolved in the phase one agreement. david: according to the headlines coming out of the meeting in the oval office, president trump is saying again that china wants to make a deal. but it may not get done until i meet with them down in geely. >> he did say the president will sign the deal then. we and others are reporting the whole issue of what they agreed to is still very murky.

whether or not the chinese can actually buy the chinese -- by the agricultural goods they said they way. david: initially, president trump said there is going to be a lot of agriculture. bloomberg had reported, the chinese are saying, only if he do not have the tariffs going into effect november 17. it is unclear if they will get the agricultural products bought. >> you can imagine a scenario where we get close to the meeting where it is supposed to get signed, and trump says, they backed out of what the agree to when in fact, they never agreed to it in the first place. david: and then we have this little impeachment inquiry going on. every day, some state department official is caught up to testify. we hear various reports about what happened. it does not strike me -- whatever you think about the results -- does not strike me this is an organized foreign

policy disciplined approach to dealing with ukraine. >> does not. you mean from the white house. there have been tons of reporting that there is no central strategy on how to defend the president. they take this line of the process is unfair. to a certain extent, they have a legitimate claim. david: there are supposedly three amigos. president trump took to mick mulvaney -- rick perry, who is the senator energy. rick perry, who is an envoy. they said to try to straighten it out. pretty extraordinary. >> there are people who have never been confirmed by the senate. they make statements. they refine them as time goes on. mo veiny is a key figure. -- mick mulvaney is a key

figure. he probably will not appear. more way for the committee to site and impeachment charge. david: is there any reason the president of united states will be word? >> not yet. i do think the 2020 election is going to decide the fate of donald trump. not this inquiry. contenthat is the chief officer, marty schenker. we will bring you the news conference when it happens. that will be coming up shortly. also ahead, we get reaction to last night's democratic debate from former pennsylvania governor, ed rando. life new york, this is bloomberg, balance of power. ♪ from the couldn't be prouders

to the wait did we just win-ners. everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network

designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. call, click, or visit a store today. david: this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio. still waiting for the news conference from the white house. it was scheduled for noon but

has been delayed. it will be between president trump and the president of italy. right now we want to turn to bloomberg first word news with mark crumpton. mark: president trump set a trade deal with china probably will not be signed until he meets with chinese president xi jinping at the apec summit next month in chile. the president announced the move at the white house alongside the italian president. is rejecting the trump administration's demand for a cease-fire in syria. the president of turkey also said he has turned down a u.s. offer to broker talks between turkey and the kurdish militia. says turkeydogan will not sit at the same table as what he calls "terrorist organizations." in kashmir, four civilians have been killed and others injured in a clash between pakistani and indian troops. this comes after police in indian-controlled kashmir arrested 13 women for holding an

anti-india protest. says it has summoned an indian diplomat to launch its protest against a cease-fire -- $350,000 towarded avoid killed in the 2012 sandy hook school shooting in connecticut. this comes after he filed defamation lawsuit against conspiracy theorist writers who claim the massacre never happened. the jury decided james spencer must pay the father. global news 24 hours a day, on air and @tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. david? david: ed rendell has won his share of races, from district attorney and then mayor philadelphia and then governor of pennsylvania. this time he is rooting for his friend, joe biden. we welcome governor rendell

coming to us from philadelphia. thanks for being with us. gov. rendell: my pleasure. david: you've not been secret about your support for vice president joe biden. one of the questions was whether anybody would ask about his son, hunter biden. that was put to rest pretty early on. this is what the vice president said. >> my son did nothing wrong. i did nothing wrong. i carried out the policy of the united states government in rooting out corruption in and around ukraine. does that put it behind him? gov. rendell: donald trump will never but it go. if joe biden is the nominee the day before the election, he will be talking about it. donald trump can only win by deflecting election away from himself. he cannot call joe biden a socialist. joe biden is a moderate, middle-of-the-road politician. he will not be able to use the

socialist strategy against joe, so he will have to make up stuff. the idea that hunter biden and joe biden did anything wrong is made up by donald trump. it is the reason why none of it is sticking with democratic voters. david: at the same time, the vice president has said if he gets to be president he will not let hunter biden do what he did before. he question asked is why would not let him do it in the future if he did it in the past. gov. rendell: hunter biden answered it tuesday morning when he said he thought it was a mistake to have done it, to have taken that role. even though hunter biden did nothing wrong and joe biden was not affected in any way on the u.s. policy by the fact that his son worked for the gas company, it still creates the appearance of a possible conflict. in government, you have to stay away from the appearance because appearance is the same thing as

the reality. it becomes reality. david: you made an important point about vice president joe biden being the moderate in the center of the stage. literally in the center of the stage. the two other suppose it front runners, it is early going, elizabeth warren on one side and bernie sanders on the other, they seem to double down on what my might -- on what one might call progressive or left of center views. does that help vice president biden? gov. rendell: i think he does. elizabeth warren and bernie sanders are both attractive candidates because they are talking from their heart, they are speaking about what they believe. politicsproblem is in it is not what you believe should be done. it is what you believe you can get done. , i do not think handle the question asked to her , your plan for medicare for all , will it cause americans to get a tax increase? the answer is of course it will.

bernie sanders has admitted that, to his credit. you can say yes it will cause a tax increase, but most americans will say more on the reduction of premiums and co-pays. that is probably not entirely correct. at least it is an answer. upple will start totaling the promises elizabeth has made. by the way, i love to see everyone of her promises come true, because she is right on. they will come up with a figure thehe 20 million dollars -- $20 trillion to $30 trillion range. that kind of increase in federal spending can only be done if families earning $80,000 or $90,000 a year pay eight to $10,000 more in taxes. elizabeth will have to deal with that somewhere down the road. the new york times or someone will write an article totaling up of the promises she made, what it would cost, balancing

the wealth tax she wants to impose. the wealth tax will not come near to covering the positive the things she wants to spend money on. are talking with former pennsylvania governor at rendell. i want to go back to something you mentioned. elizabeth warren's apparent failure to address the direct question about whether the taxes of the middle class will go up. every time she got asked that question, she changed it to the cause, we will save some money on health care. what is wrong with the debate forecast -- format we do not get that kind of stuff. why didn't a moderator or another candidate sake let's talk about taxes? gov. rendell: a moderator can ask that question but then elizabeth can get the answer she wants, which is costs will go down, and then it is over. it would be incumbent on one of the moderators if he asks a question and she does not

,espond yes or no, to say "senator, with all due respect, it is a yes or no answer your to we will not -- it is a yes or no answer and we will not stop asking the question until we get an answer." david: at one point senator warren said we have to be the party of big ideas. you said you're fine with big ideas but you have to be able to get them done. that seems to be vice president biden perspective. does that ignite the base? and you turn out voters on that kind of message? primary, al: in the little harder. in the general election you do not have to worry about igniting the base. i have been in politics for 42 years. i have never seen an electorate as fired up as the democratic base. they are coming out to vote against donald trump no matter who our nominee is. it does not matter. they are coming out to vote against donald trump. will it ignite the base in the

primaries? no, it won't. remember the key fact in all of the polls. 59% of democratic voters say the most important thing to them is who is the candidate who can best beat donald trump. that is more important than where the candidate stands ideologically. donald trump has done joe biden a big favor. he may not think so at first, but it is f he took out a billboard and placed it in every one of the 200 biggest american cities saying joe biden is the democrat i fear to run against the most. he is the person who could give me the toughest fight. by directing his attention at joe biden, he is elevating bided . -- he is elevating joe biden. david: there is a perception in the media that vice president joe biden who got out to an early lead is losing something of his momentum to elizabeth warren. you believe that is true, and if so, did he do enough to regain

that momentum? gov. rendell: i do not believe it is true. the last two polls taken chronologically were the fox news poll on sunday and that hill poll on friday. the fox news poll had bided 10 points up on warden -- on warren and 14 up on sanders. -- had joed bided up biden up on warren and sanders. i do not think he has lost much momentum. i thought last night was his best performance in the four debate. he was energetic and strong from the beginning to the end. his closing was sensational. the best thing he did all night. he stayed strong and energetic, which i think allays any fears people have of him not having the energy to carry on the campaign. that was number one. number two, he displayed his knowledge of foreign affairs, which he is up here and the rest of the field is down there when

it comes to acknowledging foreign affairs, and he made good points and answered clearly to all of the questions involved. he fought when it was appropriate to fight. he complement to the other candidates when it was appropriate to complement them. i thought he had a terrific performance. the only people who may have done a tad better -- i think mayor pete did well and i thought amy klobuchar knocked it out of the park. she was funny, witty, made good points. her exchange with elizabeth warren was terrific, saying you are not the only one who has big ideas, do not denigrate our ideas because our ideas can change things just as easily. david: many thanks to former pennsylvania governor at rendell. i'm delighted to say we will have more with governor rendell at 1:00 eastern time on the second hour of "balance of power" on bloomberg radio. we are still waiting for the news conference from the white house. president trump and the president of italy will be

speaking. ons is "balance of power" bloomberg television and radio. ♪

david: this is "balance of power" on bloomberg television and radio. i am david westin. david o stewart did not start out to be an author or expert on impeachment. he entered private practice in washington where he did white collar criminal law, including defending judge walter nixon and his impeachment trial before the u.s. senate. he is now the author of several acclaimed books, including "a peach mint -- including, "impeachment, the trial of andrew johnson." thank you so much for being

here. there's a lot of talk right now about whether what is being done with the investigation of president trump is fair. why doesn't he have counsel present as question. from president before, isn't it true what the congressman from texas says that in the case of nixon and in the case of clinton, opposing counsel were present? >> it is true, but it is an incomplete story. both of those cases went forward after long special counsel investigations which had nailed down all of the relevant facts. by the time it got to the house, it was time to bring people forward publicly and let the public see what the evidence was and what the situation for impeachment was. in this case, we have not had that. they are finding things out every day. it is an investigative stage. they have held out the possibility they will have public hearings and once they

nail down what the facts are, i think that would be a good thing to let people see what the fuss is about if there is a fuss. i think the sequencing is not unfair. republicans are present in the hearings. they are represented. this is no star chamber and it is entirely appropriate under the constitutional requirements. david s.: that is one of my quit -- david: that is one of my questions. there are not many times in history we have had an investigation of impeachment. what is provided in the constitution? are there statutes that provide for what the process should be? david s.: the constitution is terse on the house responsibility. it simply says the house has the sole power of impeachment. the house gets to do whatever it chooses to do, subject only to considerations of fair play and what is politically feasible. i think an appeal to the constitution does not help you

much. the presidents are interesting because with andrew johnson in 1868, the house had no process. he fired the secretary of war, edwin stanton, and five days later the house impeached him. they had no hearings, they had nothing. they just knew he had fire the secretary of war. they thought that was illegal, and they impeached him. we are being a lot more and there than that, has been no constitutional violation. it is difficult to violate that constitutional provision. david: not much of one. exactly. there has been a lot of back-and-forth about whether the house is obligated or should have a formal resolution begetting the impeachment process, which has happened in prior instances. nancy pelosi said she will not do it. this is what she said. >> the reality at this time is we will not be having a vote and

i'm pleased with the thoughtfulness of our caucus in terms of being supportive of the past -- of the path we are on in terms of fairness and seeking the truth and opposing -- upholding the constitution of the united states. david: what difference would it make if they did have a formal resolution? david s.: i think you get more credibility if you have had the chamber vote. this procedure is fine under the constitution. quite frankly, it is a political calculation. the speaker is probably trying to figure out how good the case is, if they really want to go forward, and do they not want to put their members through what may be a difficult vote if they do not have to? that is a political calculation. impeachment is a political activity. it is not a judicial process. it is a political process. david: we are talking with david

and expert an author on the impeachment process. let's talk about the trial in the senate, if there is one. we heard last night on the debate stage from one of the jurors in that trial if it happens, senator kamala harris. she was emphatic on what she thinks already about what is going on. this is what she said. >> the reality is i do not think the impeachment process will take long. as a former prosecutor, i know a confession when i see it. he did it in plain sight. david: you have tried cases. if this were a criminal trial, you would have cause to excuse that juror. can you have senators take positions in advance of how they will vote in the end? david s.: funny president for that. like i said, it is a political process, and politicians they would they want to say. you know going into an impeachment trial that some of those jurors have made up their

minds even before they hear a word from you. there is an interesting point, which is what does the trial really consist of? by the time the clinton case got to the senate, for example, we had the kenneth starr report and all sorts of public disclosures. they did not have a trial in the senate. they had basically closing arguments. that was different from the johnson case 100 some years before when they had a full trial with testimonials and objections. i think the clinton model is much more like what you would see, because i think it is likely any facts, if there is a proceeding, will be known. it is the president. the president's actions tend to be known. what is testified to by the people close to him will be known. the house, if they want to go forward are going to reveal that stuff.

takes a little while for people to get used to the notion that those standard criteria for judicial proceedings, which i as a lawyer would have demanded on behalf of my client during impeachment trial, do not necessarily apply. david: to follow on that port, even more in the richard nixon case, when it took more time to get the tapes, in this case president trump volunteered the rough transcript of the discussion he had with the president of ukraine. there is no dispute about what was said. david s.: does not appear to be. that was a terribly important disclosure. very good for the country. i think there are things we do not know. there are people now refusing to testify and there may be issues about failure to disclose information and documents and failure to give testimony. it is such early days. this is just a few weeks in.

in a month, maybe even two months, we will know a lot more. david: we continue to wait for the news conference at the white house with president trump and the president of italy. stewart, if you work advising the authorities in the house and senate, this is serious business when you talk about impeaching the president of the united states. we should all part of our partisanship and figure out what is best for the united states. how do you advise that they make sure the people of the united states feel that whatever is done is legitimate? david s.: i cannot agree more with the premise of your question that this has to be done in the sunlight and with an open heart. it is the presidency. these are our institutions of democracy and they matter. we have to protect them to the extent we can. i would advise them to expect to have public hearings if they find enough they think they want to go forward, and frankly i

would also advise them that maybe they should say so. even specify how they might go forward. objections process are a distraction. they are trying to change the subject. this is not unusual. if you get those off the table, i think that would be in the interest of everybody. david: people are gathering for that news conference with president trump and the president of italy. there will be questions asked at this news conference about this impeachment process and what is going on. how has it affected the ability of the president to function while the process is going on, whether it is richard nixon or bill clinton? david s.: it is hard to predict and hard to evaluate. i think it is a restriction. he will be dogged by these questions wherever he goes. hampered,what certainly when he talks to foreign leaders, they are on

alert and anxious about what he might ask and whether they might end up with some political problem of their own from having met with the president and having made a statement or listen to a statement. david: we've been talking with ofid o. stewart, author "impeached." we go to the white house where president trump is coming out with the president of italy. they have been having meetings, and now they will have a joint news conference to discuss what they talked about and also something about china and impeachment. my honor to it is welcome the president of italy to the white house. we have known each other for a while. we have dealt with each other for a while. we have had great conversations. we have had a productive discussion throughout the day with our staffs and representatives, and i look

forward to hosting the president and his daughter at a reception for the italian americans this evening. i look forward to that very much. the united states and italy are bound together by a shared cultural and political heritage, dating back thousands of years to ancient rome. over the centuries, the italian people have blessed our civilization with magnificent works of art, science, philosophy, architecture, and music. -- we paywe play tribute to the italian explorer who led a voyage of discovery to the new world, a gentleman known as christopher columbus, and to me it will always be called columbus day. some people do not like that. i do. today the united states and italy draw strength from our cherished heritage as we work together to safeguard our people and promote prosperity as nato

allies. our countries cooperate closely on a wide range of critical defense issues, including the protection of our nations against radical islamic terrorism. the problem is italy is only paying 1.1% instead of the mandated 2%, which of itself is a low number, it should probably be 4%, anywhere from 4% to 5%. only eight of the 28th nato countries are paying the 2%, meeting 20 of the countries are delinquent in the payment to nato. they have been for many years. most,y is at 1.3% at depending on calculations. spain is at less than 1%. turkey is almost paid up. i want to thank the secretary-general because he is going around saying president trump was able to raise over

$100 billion last year, which is true. it is still only a large fraction of the amount of money that is owed by many of the countries that are not paying their dues. we hope italy will boost its defense spending in order to meet nato's minimum 2% of gdp and i will say they have just purchased, and we learned about today, 90 brand-new beautiful f -35's. the strike fighter program is doing phenomenally well. one of our major challenges is instability in the mediterranean and north african areas. much of the volatility in that region stems from the violence in libya, which is very close to italy's borders. the president and i were talking about that at great length. a big problem. the ongoing conflict has led to a migration contest, placing

unfair burdens on italy in particular. i have asked the european union get much more involved. they are not involved enough. they do very well with us on trade. they had a trade surplus with the united states over the past five or six years of $150 billion a year. they have to get more involved and help italy. the italian government has stepped up as a leader to fight this illegal immigration. we urge our nato and european partners to take firm action to halt illegal immigration and uphold sovereign borders. immigration control is critical to national security and essential to the well-being of our citizens. nations must be able to properly manage entry and admission into society. you know the legislation we had passed. we had no help with from the democrats on our borders. absolutely nothing.

the closure of loopholes, which would be easy to do, they refused to do. they want open borders. italy does not want open borders. we will not have open borders. our numbers are very good. i want to thank mexico and the president of mexico for the great help they have given us. they have helped us much more than the democrats. here in the united states, we are taking dramatic action to secure our borders, shut down smuggling networks, and speed the removal of illegal immigrants. gange moving the ms 13 members out by the thousands. we are dropping them out of our country and we cannot -- and they cannot come back. what we have done with guatemala is honduras and el salvador close to a miracle, the agreements we have signed. they accept them bank and we keep them back. a much different relationship than we've ever had with those countries.

i want to thank the leadership of those countries. we have been working well together. our message is clear. if you enter illegally into the united states, you will be promptly returned home. they are all returning home. we have had years of people coming and staying. that is the end of that. and i alsoattarella discussed the steps we must take to enhance commerce. our nations are already investing nearly $70 billion in each other's economies. without the burdens as unfair as they are, and posed by the european union, we would have a much higher number than $70 billion. we can do more. we can achieve fairness and reciprocity, which we do not have now. america's trade deficit with italy accounts for 20% of our billion --to $170

according to some estimates, could be $178 billion. we welcome the trade agreement with e.u. that ensures a level playing field with american workers. it has not been that for many years. i could solve the problem instantly. it would be too harsh. andould involve tariffs european products coming into this country. we are going to try and do it without that. that would solve the problem instantly. welcome italy's participation in combating predatory trade and investment practices worldwide, especially in technology. shield ourogether to intellectual property, critical infrastructure, ports, and data