for a whole government approach moving out to the national security council, the state department, doj and others saying we have to work together to develop better intelligence sharing domestically on these matters and we need to document the sheer extent of human trafficking in the united states. liz: we hear what you are saying. sector chief, the del rio sector, he said this, so far this year the men and women of this sector, the border security, they arrested people from 41 different countries. we are talk illegal aliens, people getting smuggled in from places like china, also we are seeing guatemala, brazil, hate ian more. so -- haiti and more. so how is the president getting this done without any help from congress. >> i asked this question many times. i think it speaks to the sheer power of the american presidency. the way the founders organized that office. if there is a determined president on a policy issue he can do it almost by himself. of course, he can't. he needs the implementation aspect from the agencies. while campaigning and doing big rallies and working with legislat

if you back load this with a doj investigation run by prosecutors, it takes much longer. so this statement when you boil it down to what they've on the record argued is, we don't have more time for something we said would be as fast as possible. schiff offered night week private depositions. and also, every takes too long but also, we can't wait a week. we want to do it tonight but we might not be able to but we have to maybe wait a week to wednesday or later. i think it is striking for senator mcconnell who is lauded for controlling his caucus, he has the votes, he started it without a very clear coalition on some basic stuff on day one hflt to change to it handwritten. and as of this hour, he had to adjourn saying i have no plan. >> there's a scrum coming up the hall with one of the republican senators. let's hear it from the capitol hill police department. they are stressed. they've been working nonstop. that's john thune. and we remember that one of our own, a former member of the capitol hill police, ladies and gentlemen, chris matthews who we'll be hearing from late

however these researchers have not heard back from the doj and the dea as of the status of the applications. mr. strait, where is the department of justice, and its process of granting or denying applications that researchers have put forth at a university to study to cultivate cannabis at the university. >> as i said in my opening, we certainly support all research endeavors. one of the challenges we see that often leads to this misperception about delays on the dea side is we look for a complete application before we forward that application to our colleagues at the department of health and human services. so, there's three things that we need. we need a protocol which most researchers if they're federally funded or even state funded have. >> yes. >> a cv for the researcher, which every researcher certainly has. but sometimes the delay is the result of the third piece which is that institutional review approval. sometimes for purposes of timing, the researchers will submit an application knowing that their state university or state system with their university has not met or reviewed the

in 2018, the department of justice shut down the leading site for online sex trafficking, the doj prosecuted a number of violent crimes, now a record number. in the last three years, ice has arrested over a 5,000 human traffickers. they are great people, great people, they are tough, they are brave, and they love our country. overseas, we are also seeing historic progress, incredible progress working with us and using our intelligence with them. when i took office, isis controlled over 23,000 miles of territory, we've defeated them in syria and iraq and its 100%, we have thousands and thousands of prisoners, isis prisoners and it's really been something that's been rather incredible and we did that rather quickly. when we came in as an administration it was all over and we have 100% -- they are bloodthirsty, they are horrible, the founder and leader was trying to rebuild isis, is now dead, we got him and that was a big thing. >> harris: the president of the united states at the white house on sex trafficking, he's getting ready to sign an executive order on that. we are going to pull away fo

there was no criminal investigation at doj. no special counsel, they were forced to act without fbi agents or without resources to do an investigation and you never have to call all of your witnesses in front of the grand jury. that's what happens in trial. and the senate has successfully done this narrative that doesn't conform to how our justice department works. >> it's a bigger challenge for democrats is deciding how to use the guy night oversight -- finite oversight that they have. if they work on this over the next few months, they invest the capital and the time that staffers have into that there's a whole host of other topics that ire not looking at. remember the iran situation, what else is going on in the intelligence community that may have nothing to do with eastern europe like the trump administration is shaping. it comes with a cost working on this project and they have to decide how are they going to use their finite resources. >> and the elizabeth warren question that put chief justice roberts on the spot in whi

the same attorney general mentioned july 25 call that there's nothing to see here so there was no doj investigation, no special counsel investigation . itwasn't as if someone like ken starr handed us a package and said here's the evidence , now you can take a resolution, and resolution becausewe've done the investigative work and we had to do that ourselves . and they would have you believe that any subpoena you issue as a part of your oversightresponsibility , but down the road reveals evidence that leads you to embark on an impeachment inquiry must be disregarded area that cannot and is not the law the law. it would render the oversight function meaningless area court after court that has looked at the congress power to issue subpoenas havealways the same conclusion that is if you have the power to legislate, you have the power to oversee . here we have a violation of the impoundment control asked , congress passes military spending, the president doesn't spend it, he keeps it a secret area we're investigating that, that can't be more rarely within the oversight power of congress. t

the point the doj was making is the constitution requires incremental steps where there is friction between the branches. as i mentioned the other day, friction between the branches and between congress and the executive on information requests in particular is part of the constitutional design. it's been since the first administration. george washington denied requests from congress for information about the negotiation of the treaty. and so, from the very beginning, there has been this friction leading to jockeying for positions and confrontations and a way of working things out when congress demands information from the executives, and the executive asserts to protect the institutional authorities of the executive branch, this year where the executive can be able to keep information confidenti confidential. but the first step in response to that should be the accommodations process. and the courts have described that as constitutionally mandated. it's something that furthers the constitutional scheme to have the branches negotiate and try to come with an arrangement that addresses a legi

that didn't seem right to me because i didn't think that is what the doj would be saying. and they put out a statement. i don't have a transcript of the hearing, they don't have the transcript ready as far as i know. but they said, and this is a quote from the statement. the point we made in court is the congress has numerous political tools it can use in battle with the executive branch. appropriations with the station, nomination and potentially in some circumstances even impeachment. for example it can hold up funding for the referred program, legislation proposes or refuse to confirm his nominees. and this is continuing the statement. but it is absurd for the chairmanships to portray a description of the constitution to somehow endorsing his russian impeachment process -- thank y you. >> the senator from connecticut. >> i send a question to the desk for the house manager. >> thank you. >> the question from senator blumenthal april 191 day after former vice president biden would enter the 2020 u.s. presidential race, the state department executed president trump's order

when doj inspector general horowitz testified before the judiciary committee he said their doj had that quote low threshold end quote to investigate the trump campaign. at the hearing senator feinstein said quote your report concluded that the fbi had an adequate credit can reason to open the investigation on the trump campaign ties to russia. could you define the predicate? horowitz replied quote yeah so the predicate here was the information that the fbi got at the end of july from the friendly foreign government end quote. why is the legal standard for investigating trump so much lower than the standard for investigating biden and why was it okay to get the information from a quote friendly foreign government end quote. the house managers are first. >> the inspector general's report found that the investigation was properly predicated. that was the bottom-line conclusion that this was not a politically motivated investigation. the inspector general also found there were serious flaws with the fisa court process. there were serious flaws in how the fisa applications were written and t

government including the doj, the fbi and the united states secret service. as alluded to earlier, i believe it notable that our members took to the field, went to the, field and went to the ground, visiting, synagogues mosques, temples, and churches, meeting with communities impacted by targeted violent attacks committed by some very heinous violent extremists. these engagements are literally eye-opening, even for air very jaded senior former police officer from the state of new jersey. our nations faith based communities are one of the few institutions that has the resources and the will to bring together people of contrasting political opinions, races, religions and ages, uniting communities from a variety of backgrounds an interest and offering a range of competencies not often found in a single community organization. or for that matter, a police force or government agency for. they have the fundamentals to empower people in developing a sense of ownership among all members of the community and for some, they see it as an achilles heel. unfortunately, th

through all of this ukraine scandal, he never went to doj. he never went through the department of justice. he never went through the established channels that you would go through in order to do something like this. and to me that is so telling. that's the kind of fact that takes this out of the first category, the routine category, the everyday policy decisions and into the second category of secret self-corrupt self-dealing. >> how do you think it plays? >> listen, i'm the one person on this panel who didn't go to law school. >> so you'll have the best answers. >> so what i'm going to apply here is common sense. >> please. >> because i hope i still have a little bit of that. his argument is absurd, and the absurdity of the argument is drawn out when he brings up obama. now obama could have decided to make a foreign policy decision based on polling. presidents do that. i don't know that he did. i don't think he did. but there is nothing inherently criminal or impeachable about that. politicians make decisions on a number of factors. that's

york times" article that was done and responded to the article by stating that he was aware of the doj investigations into some countries and that he was concerned to president trump was giving world leaders the impression that he had undue influence over what would ordinarily be independent investigations he cited the conversations the president had with the leaders of turkey and china further demonstrating that there was concern about the president abusinthepresident off his office for personal political reasons and approved everybody was in the loop and we should want to subpoena and review the e-mails involving the state department and others. >> thank you, mr. chief justice. >> i sent a question to the desk and on behalf of myself and senators graham, dean, ernst, scott of florida and crapo. >> thank you. senator thune and the others asked the counsel for the president on march the sixth, 2019, the speaker nancy pelosi said, quote, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there is something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, i don't think we should go down

now, that didn't seem right to me because i didn't think that is what doj would be saying and doj has put out a statement. i don't have a transcript of the hearing. they don't have a transcript ready yet as far as i know, but doj said, and this is a quote from the statement, the point we made in court is simply that congress has numerous political tools it can use in battles with the executive branch. potentially in some circumstances even impeachment, for example. it can hold up funding for the president's preferred programs, past legislations he opposes or refuse to confirm his nominees. but it is absurd for chairman schiff to portray our mere description of the constitution as somehow endorsing his rushed impeachment process. thank you. >> mr. chief justice. >> senator from connecticut. >> thank you, mr. chief justice. mr. chief justice, i send a question to the desk for the house managers. >> thank you. >> the questin from senator blumenthal to the house managers: on april 24th, 2019, one day after the media reported that former vice president biden would formally enter the 2020 u

now, that didn't seem right to me because i didn't think that was with what doj would be sayi. i don't have a transcript of the hearing. they don't have a transcript ready as far as i know. but doj said, this is a quote from the statement, "the point we made in court is simply that congress has numerous political tools it can use in battles with the executive branch. appropriations, legislation, nominations, and potentially in some circumstances even impeachment. for example, it can hold up funding for the president's preferred programs, pass legislation he opposes, or refuse to confirm his nominees." this is continuing their statement, "but it is absurd for chairman schiff to portray our mere description of the constitution as somehow endorsing his rushed impeachment process --" >> counsel. >> thank you. >> mr. chief justice. >> senator from connecticut. >> thank you, mr. chief justice. mr. chief justice, i send a question to the desk for the house managers. >> thank you. the question from senator blumenthal to the house managers, on april 24th, 2019, 1 day after the media rep

, i'd like to know the answer to these questions, why doesn't the senate judiciary committee or the doj, someone start to look into this just as we saw happen with the origins of the russia investigation? is that going to happen? >> may be eventually. what we've done is overblown this idea of whistle-blower protection. i'm a big defender of whistle-blowers. eric snowden, the biggest -- edward snowden, the biggest whistle-blower of all time but many people want to put him in jail and kill them even though a whistle-blower. he revealed something we were doing unconstitutional and our government changed, we changed laws because we were so worried about what he revealed and a lot of people have mixed feelings about him. same thing with this whistle-blower. if this was a concocted plots to bring on the president, that's not what the whistle-blower statute is about, but the whistle-blower statute does not guarantee you are anonymous, guarantees you are not fired but i do not want to fire their whistle-blower, but i think the president deserves that this that this was a blow or come forward an

liz: the doj watchdog cia told the fbi looked at it internet rumors. steele said the sources embellished. they said steele embellished. it was over beers. you're exactly right. wikileaks released emails from dnc they went on the move, and went with the dossier to get the fbi probe launched. your reaction. >> they had not admitted potentially anything but they are in deep trouble. why is why the lawsuit was filed for carter page. page's lawyer says this is just the start. i frankly expect the lawsuit will be against the federal government, against the fbi and the doj. liz: you can't sue a government, james comey is out of office, could he be sued? >> you can sue individual government officials under particular federal statute and particular case precedent, a case called bivens action. i think that will be the next lawsuit against these government officials. liz: wow, hans, we'll have you back on. thanks for your insights. come back soon. next up we take you to the border. the trump administration new push to get the transportation industries involved to

when doj inspector general horowitz testified before the judiciary committee he said their doj had that quote low threshold end quote to investigate the trump campaign. at the hearing senator feinstein said quote your report concluded that the fbi had an adequate credit can reason to open the investigation on the trump campaign ties to russia. could you define the predicate? horowitz replied quote yeah so the predicate here was the information that the fbi got at the end of july from the friendly foreign government end quote. why is the legal standard for investigating trump so much lower than the standard for investigating biden and why was it okay to get the information from a quote friendly foreign government end quote. the house managers are first. >> the inspector general's report found that the investigation was properly predicated. that was the bottom-line conclusion that this was not a politically motivated investigation. the inspector general also found there were serious flaws with the fisa court process. there were serious flaws in how the fisa applications were written and t

barr switched doj's position on putting mike flynn in prison. and then all of a sudden puts his guy in to be the u.s. attorney in the district of columbia, which is the place where you can put your thumb on the scales, if you have that job. so there is stuff going on within the department of justice that we have never seen before in my lifetime. and i've been fairly close to the department of justice as a former prosecutor. that bright line between politics and the rule of law, trump is destroying it. and that's what those republican senators don't fully appreciate yet. >> yeah. i think the -- there's a right word for this. the ability to just do something knowing that certain crowds will attack you for it but knowing, fine. 2000 gore and bush, the gore v. bush case. they said let's take equal protection of the laws, let's take something we've never taken before, we don't care about civil liberties stuff, but let's use it now and have different counting methods in different counties and the re78dy will be we're giving the race to our guy. i mean

i'll just say that i work on a regular basis with doj, with dea, and at the leadership level there is absolutely no distance between us in approaching this as a public health issue. it doesn't make sense to put a person with a use disorder who has been using because of their addiction into long-term incarceration without treatment. it makes absolute sense for me to get the people who are pushing tons of methamphetamine to our youth across the country to get them behind bars as soon as possible. but i'll let director carroll because he deals with the law enforcement -- i'll come back to that. >> what we know is that drug courts work for people that have an addiction. we're able to push people and hold their hand and get them into treatment if they are suffering from the disease of addiction. what is so disheartening is that when there are prosecutors or judges out there that don't take seriously the people's addiction is to greed. the only thing they care about is lining their pockets and preying on the victims that do have a substance abuse disorder. those are the people we need to ta

the same attorney general mentioned july 25 call that there's nothing to see here so there was no doj investigation, no special counsel investigation . itwasn't as if someone like ken starr handed us a package and said here's the evidence , now you can take a resolution, and resolution becausewe've done the investigative work and we had to do that ourselves . and they would have you believe that any subpoena you issue as a part of your oversightresponsibility , but down the road reveals evidence that leads you to embark on an impeachment inquiry must be disregarded area that cannot and is not the law the law. it would render the oversight function meaningless area court after court that has looked at the congress power to issue subpoenas havealways the same conclusion that is if you have the power to legislate, you have the power to oversee . here we have a violation of the impoundment control asked , congress passes military spending, the president doesn't spend it, he keeps it a secret area we're investigating that, that can't be more rarely within the oversight power of congress. t

there was no doj investigation or special counsel investigation. it wasn't as if someone like ken starr handed us a package, said here's the evidence, now, you can take up a resolution, impeachment resolution because we have done the investigative work. we had to do that work ourselves. and they would have you believe that any subpoena you issue as part of oversight responsibility, that down the road reveals evidence that leads you to embark on an impeachment inquiry must be disregarded. that cannot and is not the law. it would render the oversight function meaningless. court after court that looked at the congress' power to issue subpoenas reached the same conclusion, and that is if you have the power to legislate, you have the power to oversee. here we have violation of impoundment control act, congress passes military spending, the president doesn't spend it, gives no reason, keeps it a secret, we're investigating that, that can't be more squarely within the oversight power of congress, to find out why aid we appropriated was not going out the d

to there was no doj investigation, there was no special counsel investigation. it was like someone like ken starr handed us a package, saying, now, here's the evidence. you can take up a resolution because we've done the investigative work. we had to do that work ourselves. they would have you believe that any subpoena you issue as pafrt your oversight responsibility, that down the road reveals evidence that leads you to embark on impeachment inquiry must be disregarded. that cannot be and is not the law. it would render the overwrite function meaningless. court after court that has looked at congress' power to issue subpoenas have all reached the same conclusion, and that is, if you have power to legislate, you have the power to oversee. here we have a violation of the control act. the president doesn't spend the money, he gives no reason, he keeps it a secret. that cannot can be more than what's going out the door. they would say, you can't look into thatly. it would krip pelle your oversight capacity, and without your oversight capacity, your legacy capacity

article that was done and attorney general barr responded to the article by saying he was aware of doj investigations into some countries and that he was concerned president trump was giving world leaders the impression that he had undue influence over what was ordinarily independent conversations. he cited conversations the president had with leaders of turkey and china. further demonstrating that there was concern about the president abusing the power of his office for personal political reasons. again, it proves that everybody was in the loop and we should want to subpoena and review those e-mails involving the state department and others. >> thank you, mrs. manager. >> mr. chief justice. >> senator from south dakota. >> i send a question to the desk on behalf of myself of senators moran, earnst, scott of florida and crapo. >> thank you. >> senator thune and the other senators ask the counsel for the president on march 6, 2019, speaker nancy pelosi said "impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, i don't thi

for the bank and worse than analysts projections company management blamed the hefty price tag the doj is restructuring plan for the loss of hundreds of branches slated to close by 2022 in some 800000 jobs will be cut the bank had to shell out billions of euros of penalties and its investment banking division which is. instead it wants to concentrate more on its corporate and private customers once posted solid growth but years of scandals and profit warning have seen its share prices drop and become extremely volatile at today's press conference georgia c.e.o. david at some explaining to do. well in in the core businesses and these are those businesses where we are not only irrelevant but leading and which are the future cornerstones of torture brink we have done good progress and in order business divisions of course we are suffering from the low interest rate environment in particular in europe but therefore we have grown parts whether it's on the loan side whether it's in the investment funds whether it's in the debt capital markets we were very successful and hence i would say fro

but this former doj official said to me that there are no prior restraint issues. what does that mean exactly? >> this is an important discussion. i agree with david wholeheartedly. the prior restraint issue means the first amendment says you get to say -- you get to speak out in public and in this context, john bolton is also a private citizen. for the government to tell him what he can and cannot say goes directly to the first amendment of the constitution. now, does that mean there aren't legal consequences sometimes for saying some things as a government official, yes. he's a private citizen. this goes back to whether or not the government can tell him in advance you can't say things. executive privilege is a very weak one as we've talked about. it's not like national security secrets. as we talked about before on this very panel, if anyone knows what not to divulge, it's john bolton. i would reframe it a little bit from the way david framed it, not because i don't agree, but because i hope the way john bolton would think about this is i'm not the person decidi

that foreign interference, as long as it doesn't meet bill barr's contribution definition under this doj, is totally okay. that is not our policy. it is dangerous. >> ed: you made a case a moment ago that you believe the biden should be investigated. let's turn it around on you and say, when alan dershowitz says the president is doing something in his reelection interest, that it's okay. answer mike warner's question about wha whether you are lettig the president off the hook. >> when you get elected, you say you will do certain things. if you hustle to do all those things, is that impeachable? would you think people are supposed to do? if you are sitting in office you will do what you said you need to do. is it because you did that? is that impeachable? by the way, joe biden, who thinks we are stupid enough to believe that joe biden should be able to get a prosecutor fired, his son gets paid $83,000 a month, and everybody should be okay with that? the thing sinister about this? it's then trying to cover up and help joe biden, that's all this is. this is partisan stuff. adam schiff is a

and the whitewashed doj investigation somehow makes anything and everything the president has done in terms of soliciting foreign interference legitimate. that is not the policy of the united states government. that is not what mr. trump's own director of the cia, director of the nsa, national intelligence,, director of fbi who of all said their top priority going into 2020 is to make sure that foreign interference does not continue and is not allowed. the president's counsel cannot in the sense gave the green light for that kind of behavior to continue. i hope and pray cooler heads will prevail, but i think there was a dramatic step backwards in terms of protecting the integrity of our election in terms of the signal sent by the president's counsel. >> referred a lot of shock reaction from democrats about that, from counsel. have you heard from republicans? >> i cannot imagine there would be any republican senator on the intelligence committee that would endorse the president counsel's position of foreign interference as long as it doesn't meet bill barr's contribution definition und

what is it a national security issue with biden which would have went through doj, which could have been through different channels? see, that itsad to is like we are living in the 1960's again, where you are saying republican and democrat is just saying black and white. america needs to wake up and realize that the decisions we make for the present affects the future. we cannot keep living in the past, ok? that is just about all i need to say, and i hope people receive this message and understand that when we look at our children, our grandchildren, what type of world will we have them in? service, theews msn story, news corporation, platform, knews ewz, the website features headlines from more than 400 large and small publishers from "the washington post" to the anchorage daily news, as well as the left leaning daily kos and the washington examiner. the headlines, curated both by artificial intelligence and human editors, include links that send readers directly to publisher websites. the media companies can make money from the advertising and subscriptions news. tom does not yet have

is okay if it doesn't fall into the classic definition of a campaign contribution, and the whitewash doj investigation somehow makes anything and everything the president's done in terms of soliciting foreign interference legitimate. the president's counsel in a sense gave a green light for that kind of behavior to continue. i hope and flpray cooler heads will prevail but a dramatic step backwards in terms of protecting the integrity of our election. >> audible gasps when the president's counsel tried to claim that it's proper for anyone running for office in the united states to take information from a foreign country. >> this idea that you would take information from a foreign government seeking to impact an election and then weaponize that or use that because it may be credible is -- i've just never heard anything like that. i think it's absolutely unconscionable and i think we're in new territory. >> ah. jeremy bash, ukrainians died in the middle of this so-called drug deal that was going down at aid was being held up. i have to say that at this point, what the republican defense was

is okay if it hasn't fallen to the classic definition of a campaign contribution, and the whitewash doj investigation somehow makes anything and everything the president has done in terms of soliciting foreign interference legitimate. the president's counsel tonight in a sense gave a green light for that kind of behavior to continue. i hope and pray that cooler heads will prevail, but i think there was a dramatic step backwards in terms of protecting the integrity of our election. >> there were audible gasps on the democratic side when the president's counsel tried to claim that it's proper for anyone running for office in the united states to take information from a foreign country. >> then there was impeachment defense attorney alan dershowitz arguing yesterday that there was no fault until the president's interest in hunter biden because of joe biden's candidacy for president saying that there would be no issue if the president had called foreign investigation of burisma while in his second term. take a listen to this. >> the argument has been made that the president of the united st

each time anyone in the executive branch gets a subpoena, it's open season for the white house and doj to star start investing sers about house rules and parliamentary precedent. this is not how the separation of powers works and to accept the argument would undermine the house and senate ability to provide oversight of the executive branch. it would also make impeachment the knowledge. there was no resolution fully authorized in the impeachment of very. but again, there is no requirement for the full house to take a vote before conducting an impeachment inquiry. they invented this theory as the chief judge of the u.s. district court in dc statehood, and this is a direct quote, this claim has no support in the u.s. constitution or governing roles in the house. the constitution itself is to exercise this whole impeachment power of impeachment, but instead confirms the house shall have the rule to determine the rules of its own proceedings. numerous judges have been subjected and impeached by the house and convicted by the senate without any previous vote of the house authorizing an impe

and the whitewashed doj investigation somehow makes anything and everything the president has done in terms of soliciting foreign interference legitimate. that is not the policy of the united states government. that is not what mr. trump's own director of the cia, national intelligence director of fbi have all said their top priority going into 2020 is to make sure that foreign interference does not continue and is not allowed. the president's counsel in a sense gave a green light for that kind of behavior to continue. i hope and pray that cooler heads will prevail, but i think there was a dramatic step backwards in terms of protecting the integrity of the election into the signal sent by the presidents council. >> we have heard a lot of reaction from democrats about [inaudible] have you heard from republicans -- >> i have not. i cannot imagine there would be any republican senator on the intelligence committee that would endorse the president council's position that foreign interference, as long as it doesn't meet bill barr's contribution to finish in under the doj is totally okay. t

the executive branch gets a subpoena, it is open season for creative orders in the white house and doj to start inventing theories about house ruse and parliamentary president. this is not how the separation of powers works. and to accept that argument would holy undermine the house and senate's ability to provide oversite of the executive branch. it would also make impeachment a nullity. the president argues there was no resolution fully authorizing the impeachment inquiry. but again, there is no requirement for the full house to take a vote before conducting an impeachment inquiry. president trump and his lawyers invented this theory. as chief judge howe in the district court has stated, and this is a direct quote, this claim has no support in the u.s. constitution or governing rules in the house. the constitution itself says nothing about how the house may exercise its sole impeachment, power of impeachment. but instead confirps the house shall have the role, the sole power to determine the ruse of its own proceedings. this conclusion is also confirmed by precedent. numerous judges

in the executive branch gets a subpoena, it's open season for creative orders in the white house and doj to start inventing theories about house rules and parliamentary precedent. this is not how the separation of powers works. and to accept that argument would wholly undermine the house and senate's ability to provide oversight of the executive branch. it would also make impeachment a novelty. the president argues that there was no resolution fully authorizing the impeachment inquiry. but again, there is no requirement for the full house to take a vote before conducting an impeachment inquiry. president trump and his lawyers invented this theory. as chief judge howell of the u.s. district court in d.c. has stated, and this is a direct quote, this claim has no textual support in the u.s. constitution or governing rules in the house. the constitution itself says nothing about how the house may exercise its sole power of impeachment. but instead confirms the house shall have the role -- the sole power to determine the rules of its own proceedings. this conclusion is also confirmed by prece

he could've asked the doj to make an official request for assistance to the mutual legal assistance treaty. it's worth noting the president only cares about hunter biden to the extent that he is the vice president's son. and therefore, a means to which to smear a political opponent. but president trump specifically mentioned vice president biden and asking for the removal of a former prosecutor on that july 25 call. that is when he wanted it. not an investigation into hunter biden, this is yet another reason that there is no basis investigating vice president biden. can we get slide 52 up? the slide shows clearly that despite that this conduct occurred in 2015, it wasn't until vice president biden began consistently beating trump in national polls in the spring of 2019 by significant margins. that the president scared of losing. the president wanted to keep a cloud over a former political opponent. this wasn't about any genuine concern of wrongdoing. the evidence proves that this is solely about the president wanting to make sure that he could do whatever it took to make sure that he could

specifically he could have asked the doj to make an official request for assistance to the mutual legal assistance treaty. it's worth noting the president only cares about hunter biden to the extent that he is the vice president's son. and therefore, a means through which to smear a political opponent. but president trump specifically mentioned vice president biden in asking for the removal of the former prosecutor on that july 25 call. that is what he wanted, not an investigation into hunter biden. this is yet another reason you know that there is no basis for investigating vice president biden. can we get slide 52 up? the timing shows clearly that despite the fact that this conduct occurred in 2015, it wasn't until vice president biden began consistently beating trump in national polls in the spring of 2019 by significant margins that the president targeted biden. he was scared of losing. the president wanted to cast a cloud over a formal political opponent. this wasn't about any genuine concern of wrong doing. the evidence proves that. this was solely about the president wanting to m

that is what the doj watchdog found. final point danny, before i let you get the final word, james comey, the director, he knew by october 2016 that the justice department was really worried that they were using the anti-trump steele dossier. he knew it was funded by democrats, he knew it was opposition research, they worried that steele was a democrat operative. the fbi under james comey went ahead any way to get fisa wiretaps to spy. your reaction? >> oh, my gosh, that is disgraceful, when you say one of the lawyers say you did the wrong thing. i met with james comey after the hillary clinton exoneration, i had the same conversation with him, he needs somebody on the staff not looking for a promotion or transfer, to tell him that is a bad idea you're doing now. he didn't have that. everybody wanted to go along with what he wanted to do. that is what we have today. we need durham, to do detailed, develop excellent report. he is capable of doing that. i hope he has courage to do that. we'll see. liz: danny coulson. come

out from folks is your next conceivable catalyst for the stock hearing something from the ftc or the doj. ents, whenst our two c you had them seek an injunction in december, you know, probably a reasonable indication that they would look to make a move against them. paul: these lingering clouds, the regulation, perhaps one of the reasons we have seen the stock decline, despite what was a reasonable set of numbers. decelerated bys. 550 basis points. that was a pretty big chunk. and a definite disappointment. because i think that, to your question earlier, that the present view is that it was a pretty healthy advertising quarter. was a pretty big standout. taylor: are they spending enough to prepare for the 2020 elections? michael: i think so. they have had a very good and consistent track record of giving folks range and they have come in toward the lower end of that. and also worth noting, which they clarified, is you have $550 million headwinds that showed up in gna, so the numbers were actually a lot better than if you take the one-off. what you saw on the headline. taylor: you pointed

specifically he could have asked the doj to make an official request for assistance through the mutual assistance treaty. it is worth noting the president only cares about hunter biden to the extent that he is the vice president's son. therefore a means to which to smear a political opponent. president trump specifically mentioned vice president biden in asking for the removal of the former prosecutor on that july 25 call. that is what he wanted. not an investigation into hunter biden. this is yet another reason that you know there is no basis for investigating vice president biden. can we get slide 52 up? the timing shows clearly that despite the fact that the conduct occurred in 2015 it wasn't until vice president biden began consistently beating trump in national polls in the spring of 2019 by significant margins that the president targeted biden. he was scared of losing. the president wanted to cast a cloud over a formal political opponent. this was not about any genuine concern of wrongdoing. the evidence proves that. this was solely about the president wanting to make sure that h

doj look at it, look at the statute, analyzed it and determined there was no violation and it closed the matter. and it announced that months ago. when something it's over to the department of justice to examine, you can't callnt that a cover-up.me everything here was done correctly. the lawyers analyzed the law. the complaint was sent to the appropriate person for review. it was not within the statute the required transmission to congress. was handledng entirely properly. so w again, actually extraneouso the matters beforeal you, theres nothing about these two points in the articles of impeachment, but it merits a response when reckless allegations are made against those at the white house and at the department of justice. justice. and with that, mr. chief justice, i willer use back my te to mr. sekulow. -- yield back my time to mr. sekulow. . >> thank you mister chief justice, majority leader mcconnell and democratic leadership work, house managers, membersof the senate . what we are involved in here, we conclude is perhaps the most solemn of duties under our constitutional framewo

in a move the doj filed temporary retraining orders against two companies that allegedly allowed calls they knew were fraudulent. >> apple boasted record earnings in what they call a blockbuster quarter. >> they credit iphone sales for the numbers after the devices brought in 556 billion. >>> and some lucky drivers could soon be allowed to add emojis to their license plates. >> a vermont lawmaker proposed the bill which would allow drivers to display one of six options on their plate. the bill doesn't say which emojis those will be. >> which would you use? >> i want angry face, because i'm that type of driver. >> icrying laughing. >> those are your tech bytes. >>> santa clara county okaysntyy action plan to fight homelessness. >>> an old water well springs to life in the south bay. the living room of a house now a construction zone. america's getting sicker. sick of donald trump, there are one million more uninsured americans every year under trump. and he's repeatedly tried to repeal obamacare. mike bloomberg will make sure everyone without health coverage can get it, and everyone who

. >> the doj is suing five u.s. companies alleging they were behind hundreds of millions of scam calls. most of the calls came from india. this story will definitely sweeten your day. a 6-year-old is going viral for his brutally honest reviews of shirley temple. >> 3.5. >> that is so good. i'm going to give that a 10. >> biggest shirley temple i have ever seen in my life. >> there is no cherries. >> i give that 6.3 because it is very eviscerated. >> u.s.a. really nothing to say because it's just a great shirley temple. jillian: he is the cutest. shirley temple king leo kelly has more than 96,000 followers on instagram. and i bet more now after this. isn't he great? steve: have you got to figure he has no idea who shirley temple was. ainsley: that's true. steve: none. jillian: i felt the same thing his parents are brave you give a kid that he is bouncing off the walls. brian: absolutely. ainsley: and he has had quite a few. brian: sugar works against children although they love it. what made america great five new ep

ordinarily you'd say, well, the fcc, the fbi, the doj. it's time for local citizens to say, we don't want this station here. we don't want to listen to it. we don't want russian propaganda here. we want you out. >> and one more you weren't expecting on your dance card tonight. just around dinnertime tonight we learned 50 traumatic brain injuries suffered by american men and women in uniform during the rocket attack, the back and forth volley with iran. this is a whole new big number. this is the signature wound of our last two wars. >> well, we just finished talking about russian propaganda. the question we have to ask ourselves is, is this white house giving us propaganda about injured u.s. service members? why did it take so long? i understand fog of war. i understand they need to quantify the injuries. this has taken way too long for the truth to come out, and the credibility of our entire system is at stake. >> i hate what we have to discuss, but you're the best at it. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> frank figliuzzi here with us