the fact is, we had not done enough to build housing so that we have what we need to get people housed. we just haven't. so here in the city we are lucky because people care about making sure people are housed. the 600 million-dollar affordable housing bond passed by voters will be a great opportunity to invest in building more affordable housing , but we can't build it fast enough. so having access to the abigail, having access to the post street -- post street site and the bristol where there is another step up housing, those are so important to getting people housed now. so i just want to thank everyone who is here today and all of your work that sometimes escapes under the radar and people are not completely familiar with everything that goes into making an opportunity like this possible. it is appreciated, it's going to make a difference for 89 people at post street and 62 people right here at the abigail. it's going to make a difference for so many people and i'm so grateful we have this opportunity to do just that today. how the person who has helped in our efforts to move the n

democrats point to house rules, a house rule cannot override a constitutional privilege. those are the three principles the trump administration asserted. and it created an impeachable offense. the idea that asserting defensive communities in response to subpoenas, acting on advice of the department of justice is an impeachable offense is absurd and dangerous for our government. let me explain why. house democrats obstruction theories is wrong, first and foremost because in government of laws asserting privileges and rights to resist compulsion is not obstruction. .. the supreme court explains to punish a person because he has done what the law claims he allows him to do is a process in violation of the basic soar in for an agent of the state to pursue record of action is to penalize a person to rely on the legal right is unconstitutional. this is the principle that in the past and the clinton impeachment was recognized across the board it would be that it would be improper to suggest asserting rights is an impeachable offense. harvard law professor laurence tribe said th

eastern time, that procession of the house managers from the house to the senate. why does that happen? guest: taking the last point first, i don't know that a procession is entirely necessary but it does emphasize the solemnity of theo cakes and also there's a tradition here that goes back literally centuries because this whole idea of having house managers, that is to say representatives in the lower house presenting the case for the impeachment in impeachment in the upper house goes back to british parliament and that's exactly what happened in those days, the house managers would proceed from the lower chamber to upper chamber with the articles of impeachment in hand and knock on the door and be admitted formally to have the -- that the impeachment articles are received and read and so forth and so on. so some of it is just tradition and ceremony, which emphasizes the solemnity of the occasion and i think given our current political environment is not a bad thing. as to whether or why the house votes on the identity of the managers, i suppose they might not hav

foreign authority of the house to be transferred to the committee, the house has to vote on that. the d.c. circuit has distilled the principles from those cases this way. to issue a valid subpoena, a committee or subcommittee must conform strictly to the resolution establishing its investigatory powers. that was the problem here, there was no such resolution, there was no vote from the house authorizing the issuing of subpoenas under the impeachment power. so this inquiry began with nearly two dozen invalid subpoenas. the speaker had the house proceed on nothing more than a press conference in which she purported to authorize committees to begin impeachment power under the constitution she lacked that authority. as a chairman of the house judiciary committee during the nixon impeachment inquiry pointed out, peter rodino, explained that such a resolution from the house has always been passed by the house, it is a necessary step if we are to meet our obligations. so we began this process with unauthorized subpoenas that impose no compulsion on the executive branch to respond with do

the house adopted the following resolution which, with the permission of the senate, i will read -- house resolution 798, appointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment trial of donald john trump, president of the united states. resolved that mr. schiff, mr. nadler, ms. lofgren, mr. jeffries, ms. demings, mr. crow, and ms. garcia are the impeachment managers to conduct the impeachment trial of donald john trump, president of the united states, that a message be sent to the senate to inform the senate of these appointments and that the managers so appointed may in preparation and conduct of the trial be given articles of impeachment of the senate and take all other actions necessary, which may include the following -- employing legal, clerical, and other necessary assistance and incurring such other expenses as may be necessary to paid from amounts available to the committee on the judiciary under applicable expense resolutions or from the applicable account of the house of representatives. number two, sending for persons and papers and filing with the secretary of the senate on t

house proves its case, but by letting the house prove its case, by letting the house call witnesses, by letting the house obtained documents, by letting the house decide how to present its own case, and not deciding it for us. in sum, by agreeing to a fair trial. let's turn to the precise terms of the resolution. the history of impeachment trials and what fairness and impartiality requires work although with many concerns about the resolution, i will begin with the single biggest law. the resolution does not ensure that subpoenas will, in fact, be issued for additional evidence, that the senate and the american people should have and that the president continues to block, to thoroughly decide the presidency or innocence. moreover,, guarantees subpoenas will not be issued now when there would be most valuable to the senate, the parties, and the american people. according to the resolution the leadery introduced first the senate receives briefs and filings from the parties. next, it is lengthy presentations from the house and the president. now, my colleagues the president's the presid

house resolution 798. appointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment of donald trump, president of the united states. resolve that mr. schiff, mr. nadler, ms. lofgren, mr. jeffries, miss demings, mr. crow, and ms. garcia are appointed managers to conduct the impeachment trial against donald trump. that a message be sent to the senate to inform the senate of these appointments and that the managers may, in connection with the preparation and conduct of the trial, may exhibit articles of impeachment to the senate and take all other actions necessary, which may include the following. employing legal, clerical, and other assistance and incurring other expenses as may be necessary to be paid from amount available to the committee on the judiciary under applicable expense resolutions. number two, persons and papers filing with the secretary of the senate on the part of the house, any pleadings and conjunction with or subsequent to the exhibition of the articles of impeachment that of the managers may co

house, paul irving. the senate will be back in and out and 40 minutes just under an hour and 40 minutes at two p.m. eastern. we will have live coverage for event of course here on c-span2. c-span2. will open up our phone lines for you to wait in on president trump as the trial is ahead, the two articles of impeachment abuse the power and obstruction of congress is, if you think the press is guilty polite to call is (202)748-8920. if you like to send us a text and wait in that line is 202-748-8003. remind you if you send us a text. remind you if you send us the text make sure you include your name and where you are texting from. we'll get your your thoughts, carlson comments and other news were later to the impeachment coming up shortly with the can't reminder the coverage of the senate beginning at 2:00 eastern resuming then with as majority leader pointed out alive quorum call calling members of the senate to the floor. want to take you back to 9:45 a.m. when procedures got underway on other matters on

in the people's house house every congressperson gets a vote we note the concept. one person, one vote. more generally, the president, as i reviewed the record, has consistently and scrupulously followed the advice and counsel of the justice department and in particular the office of legal counsel. he has been obedient. as you know, that important office, many of you have had your own experiences professionally with that office is staffed with lawyers of great ability and it has a reputation for superb work. it has done such thoughtful work in both democratic and republican administrations and the office is now headed by a brilliant lawyer who served as a law clerk to justice anthony kennedy. the house may disagree with the guidance provided to the president by that office and the house frequently does disagree. but for the president to follow the guidance of the department of justice with respect to an interbranch legal and constitutional dispute cannot reasonably be viewed as an obstruction and most emphatically not as an impeachable offense. history, once again,

and affordable housing. and that's mayor bowser. [applause] today i want to focus on just one of those issues. and it's one where the mayor has done some bold and ambitious work and that is housing. the lack of affordable housing is a growing crisis in every region of this country and communities of all sizes. wages have not kept up with the cost of living, especially the cost of rent. and as a result more and more americans are struggling to make ends meet. and many are falling short and ending up without a proper roof over their head. every day more than 6,000 americans are evicted, many of them families with children. on any given day, about 600,000 americans are homeless across our country. we just cannot accept that. in president trump tweeted that homelessnessing would be "so easy with competence." well, let's just say that competence is not his administration's strong suit. but the truth is they haven't even tried. and about the only time president trump mentions homeless people is when he's attacking them. but that's about p

back, moms 4 housing. a group of mothers and opener fighting homelessness by occupying a vacant house. they are threatened with eviction. hundreds of people turned out last night to protect them. stay with us. ♪ [music break] amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. juan: we turn now to oakland, california, where a group of mothers fighting homelessness are waging a battle against real estate speculators and demanding permanent solutions to the bay area housing crisis by occupying a vacant house with their children. the struggle began in november, when working mothers in west oakland moved into 2928 magnolia street -- a vacant house owned by real estate investment firm wedgewood propertieses. the firmrm tried to o evict the, claiming they wewere illegallyly squauatting on private property, but t the mothers s went to cout and filed a "right to possssession" claim, saying housing is a human right. their naname is moms 4 housing. amy: this

either the house side or the -- frankly the white house side has really not talked that much. we were commenting earlier, and i think it's important to point out again -- rachel noticed this -- the difference in the tables between the house managers and the -- i mean the white house has no paper. >> the near table -- now the far table. we just took the other side of the room. so now the near table is the trump legal team. far table is the democrats. >> the trump lawyers have made rhetorical arguments. i think the house managers have presented compelling case of substance. time will tell whether they can keep that pace up over the next week to ten days to two weeks. >> we're at letter "j." i'm told we'll go back in for the reading of the vote. you mentioned this. i've lost track of which day you mentioned this, but it is germane that there are fewer members of the senate north of 80, you thought, than when you served in the chamber. so these hours and long periods wouldn't be as taxing as some of the senate makeup that we've seen the last couple of decades. >> i see the three o

and it's the same in the house. here there was no vote to authorize a committee to exercise power impeachment and this law has been boiled down by the d.c. circuit in exxon corp. versus ftc, to explain it that way, to issue a valid subpoena, a committee or subcommittee must conform strictly to the resolution establishing its investigatory powers. there must be a resolution voted on by the parent body to give the committee that power. and the problem here is there is no standing rule. there was no standing authority giving manager shift's committee the authority to use the power of impeachment to issue compulsory process. rule 10 of the house discusses legislative authority. it doesn't mention impeachment. and that is why in every presidential impeachment in history, the house has initiated the inquiry by voting to give a committee the authority to pursue that inquiry. so, coulden tr ee een -- contrary to what manager jeffries suggested, there has always been in every presidential impeachment inquiry a vote from the

so again, housing is the solution. housing is the answer. by making sure that these survivors, survivors of the worst epidemic in modern time can survive this crisis of housing and stay in our city, the city that they made great, is something not only the aids foundation and q. foundation is committed to, but i mayor breed as well as supervisor mandelman are all committed to. i couldn't be prouder to be part of today's announcement and can't wait for their collaboration with the q. foundation and more of our partners in the room in ensuring everyone has access to affordable housing. [applause] >> i can't even remember when i first met rafael nadal him in. it was before my hair was grey. [laughter] and he has always been such an incredibly grounded, honest, and natural communicator. of the many things i like about raphael is he has the ability to so easily put into words his values and how his policy positions connect with them and do it in a way that leads everybody else to that place. is like, this is why we believe in what we believe, and

is more than just the capital and the white house. but because we host them, we hear about all the partisan bickering all the time, from the white house we hear fear mongering and we hear indecisiveness. but let me tell you why i am hopeful about the future of our nation. we can solve our nation's most pressing problems if we have the right leader in place to turn innovative ideas, fresh ideas, into reality. mike bloomberg is the only candidate who will unify our trump, and defeat donald and has a blueprint to rebuild america and improve the quality of life for all americans. he is committed to giving every american a fair shot through his housing affordability and all in the economy plans, putting an end to gun violence with common sense gun reform. and mitigating the causes of climate change. i have known mike for many years, and i know firsthand his long-standing commitment to making cities stronger, more prosperous, and more inclusive. that's why today i am endorsing mike bloomberg to be president of the united states. [applause]

so again, housing is the solution. housing is the answer. by making sure that these survivors, survivors of the worst epidemic in modern time can survive this crisis of housing and stay in our city, the city that they made great, is something not only the aids foundation and q. foundation is committed to, but i mayor breed as well as supervisor mandelman are all committed to. i couldn't be prouder to be part of today's announcement and can't wait for their collaboration with the q. foundation and more of our partners in the room in ensuring everyone has access to affordable housing. [applause] >> i can't even remember when i first met rafael nadal him in. it was before my hair was grey. [laughter] and he has always been such an incredibly grounded, honest, and natural communicator. of the many things i like about raphael is he has the ability to so easily put into words his values and how his policy positions connect with them and do it in a way that leads everybody else to that place. is like, this is why we believe in what we believe, and

the house. how does the trial got under way in less there's some oh right the trial will get underway by 1st all of the members of the senate and all 100 will be sworn in they're basically the jurors and the judge the chief justice of the united states john roberts will be the presiding officer and under existing rules the presiding officer would make an initial rulings on relevancy of evidence admissibility of evidence subject to overruling by the whole senate so i believe that if the republicans tried to call hunter biden as a defense witness to the charge that there was a deal with mr zelinsky that he would get his money if he was opening and vesta geishas against the opponents. trying to help from there would be denied is not relevant to the particular charge but anyway that's how this system would operate under existing rules but remember the senate can change the rules at any time by simple majority vote if we expect as mr mcconnell the majority leader has said that they have the ability t

so the house had to change tactics and strategies. seven house members made presentations. they had 24 hours to make the case and then the senate lawyers would have 24 hours. it is down to the managers of the case representing. host: one of the managers in 1999 was lindsey graham. now senator graham. he has been outspoken on the process. altogether there are 27 members of the u.s. senate in office. is that number surprising? mr. ritchie: it is surprising that it was just 21 years ago and so many senators are new to the senate. this shows how quickly the senate seats are turning over these days. i would suspect a much larger percentage of senators in 1999 had been there in 1974. people tended to stay longer. this is a very new process for the majority of senators. for others, it is, here we go again. they've been through the process. senators have to spend a lot of time in their seats being quiet. not what they like to do. the president chooses his defense. he could defend himself but presidents lawyers have advised not to come because you do not want to inflame the situatio

there were 71 requests by the house for relevant evidence. so far the white house produced 0. documents. in this impeachment inquiry. 71 requests, 0 documents. donald trump is personally responsible for depriving the senate of information important to consider in this trial. this point cannot be overstated. when faced with a congressional impeachment inquiry a process expressly set forth by the framers of the constitution in article 1, the president refused to comply in any respect. he ordered his senior aides to fall in line. as a result of donald trump's obstruction, 12 key witnesses, refused to appear for testimony in the house's impeachment inquiry. no one has heard what they had to say. these witnesses include central figures in the abuse of power charged in article one. what is the president hiding? equally troublesome they did not make any legitimate attempt to reach a reasonable accommodation with the house or compromise regarding any document requests or witness subpoenas because donald john trump wasn't interested in cooperating. he was plotting a cover-up. it is imp

they said the house charges. the house impeaches and the senate tries. the senators like in every other trial in america and every other impeachment in history should get the documents and hear the witnesses themselves. >> one of the more moderate republican senators susan collins is questioning why this is only just being revealed right now. she suggested this means you and your house colleagues did an incomplete job. those are her words. if she is skeptical of this new information, how likely is it that it will be included. >> what the senators need to realize that the reason why we haven't had documents up until now is because the president has refused to turn them over. if senator collins or other senators are interested in the documents or why they haven't been available yet, they should turn those questions to the white house and say, why are you hiding this? why are you holding this back. why aren't you releasing this information. if you're going to claim that somehow the president should be exonerated, show us the proof. in terms of lev parnas he

as you know, the house subpoenaed acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney. the white house press briefing in october and i know you seen it before, mister mulvaney confirmed what we suspected. mister mulvaneyadmitted president trump withheld the aid to pressure the ukraine into announcing an investigation into the conspiracy theory that ukraine interfered in the 2016 election . here's his words. >> did he also mentioned to me that the corruption related to the dnc server left and mark absolutely, no question about that andthat's why we hold up the money . >> after this stunning admission, the house issued a subpoena to require mister mulvaney to testify but on the day of mister mulvaney's deposition the white house sent a letter to his personal attorney. prohibited from obeying the subpoena and the letters", the president directs mister mulvaney not to appear at the committee's scheduled deposition. when the issue disorder, president trump doubled down on his previous blanket order . he did sell half of the house voted to approve resolution 660 which in no u

we've heard from the house managers that they offered the president due process at the house judiciary committee and manager nadler described it as that he sent the Ãbthe president's counsel a letter offering the president to participate in the president's counsel refused as if that was the only exchange and there was just a blanket refusal to participate. let me explain what actually happened. i should note before i get into those details there was a suggestion also that due process is not required in the house proceeding that it is simply a privilege. that wasn't the position that manager nadler has taken in the past in 2016 he said " the power of impeachment is a solemn oresponsibility assigne to the house by the constitution and to this committee by our peers. that responsibility demands a rigorous level of due process. and in the clinton impeachment in 1998 he explained, what does due process mean? it means among other things the right to confront the witnesses against you, to call your own witnesses and to have the assistance of counsel. i think we know all those rights were den

they were approved by the house. they are the ones who will act as prosecutors in making the case against mr.ru of abuse of power and obstruction of congress. an historic day here in the united states, and that trial of president donald j. trump is due to begin in earnest next tuesday. after a long weekend in washington. you can find much work of alne the day' on your website. to see what we are working on at out onme, check u twitte i am laura trevelyan. thank you for watching "bbc world news america." announcer: funding for this presentation is made possible by... the freeman foundation; by judy and peter blum-kovler foundation, pursuingions for america's neglected needs; and by contributions to this pbs station om viewers like you. thank you. ...is justhere. that's where... man: she took me out to those weapons. i we're off to a great start. good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight. rep. pelosi: we are here today threshold in american history. judy: the u.s. house formally votes to send the artic

intelligence committee and the charm of the house judiciary committee decided not to. they decided their inquiry was finished and mode right ahead shows not to pursue the same witnesses they apparently would now like would nala the senate to precommit to pursue an arson. as i've been saying for weeks nobody nobody will dictate senate procedure to not state senators a majority of us are committed to upholding the unanimous bipartisan clinton president against outside influences with respect to the proper timing of these mid trial questions and so if any amendments are brought forward to force premature decisions on meant trial questions will move to table such amendments and protect our bipartisan president it was sen moves to amend the resolution or to subpoena specific witnesses or documents will move to table such motions because the senate will decide those questions later in the trial just like we did back in 1999 now mr president today may present a curious situation we may hear house managers themselves agitate for such a menace we may hear a team of managers led

chuck ruff was white house counsel. he had a brilliant opening statement. >> ruff opened on a humble note. >> there was no one who does not feel the weight of this moment. >> then struck a harsher tone. >> constructed out of ceiling wax and string and spiderswebs, a theory that would land to a theory of otherwise innocuous, indeed exculpatory events, a dark and sinister cast. >> but to put into context what the senate was debating. >> you are free to criticize him, to find his personal conduct distasteful but ask whether this is the moment when for the first time in our history the actions of a president have so put at risk a government the framers created that there is only one solution. >> ruff had set the stage for the defense arguments, but that would have to wait until the next day. this night was reserved for the president's state of the union address. >> the idea that the defense would open their arguments on the day of the state of the union, i think to people on the outside would think, oh, my god, that's the m

i think the white house counsel has done a brilliant job in really treading house managers case, and they have done it by using established law and the constitution. i mean, they have spelled it out to where not putting in fluff stories. they're not talking about -- when i was a child and i grew up to be a judge. i mean, when not talking about -- they are presenting the law. what i've seen our house managers do and other democrats is take that constitution, threw it on the ground, from right under the bus and, oh, by the way, let's not just don't under the bus, let's put it in reverse and do it again. but why are they trying to impeach and remove this president? is it because they know that he will be reelected this fall? the point that was just made in this last 30 minutes or so was that we have record unemployment here in the united states. we have a booming economy. people in iowa are thrilled that we have the u.s. mda -- usmca being signed a a trade deals wh china. there is so much going on good and positive for this country and the democrats hate it that we have a larger-than-li

if we view the compulsory process, part of the article -- the houses -- house's standing it's much -- is much less clear. thee understood that district court has local rules and other things. we do not come in and asked the district court to do something. we think any party can come in and asked the district court to and ask the district court to do something. >> no court is ever denied the house access to grand jury materials in an impeachment, right? there is no example of that. to our knowledge, courts have not had two parties coming on exercise with an respect to records. case --case, it is a the question is we think the question is we think the committee was permitted to ask. >> the committee only sought authorization. >> i think the concluding paragraphs of their application ask for them to direct us to do so the -- do so. >> what do you think that is part of the supervisory power of the district court? when a court demands the department of justice to release documents you just think it is part of it's supervisory power? >> i think this is a very under theorized area. >> what i

president, a message from the house of representatives. the house clerk: mr. president, i have been directed by the house of representatives to inform the senate the house has passed h. resolution 798, a resolution appointing and authorizing managers of the impeachment trial of donald john trump, president of the united states. the president pro tempore: the message will be received.

white house. up to capitol hill and emily wilkinson. it was a sense what the atmosphere is like. what you expect between now and 1:00 eastern time when they gaveled in the senate? emily: this morning there has been an air of formality. we have seen senators begin to comment. we have already seen statements made by adam schiff, who is a house impeachment manager, as well as head of the intelligence committee, and chuck schumer, both saying the process going to be voted on today is not fair and should not be compared to what was done for the clinton impeachment. at this point, we are all in a waiting pattern. everyone knows this starts at 1:00. i think there is a sense we are all very eager to get this underway. david: we are eager to see what you referred to as a formality. is there any suspense? is it pretty clear majority leader macconnell will get his way on these rules? emily: i think the votes today -- macconnell has been saying he has the 51 votes needed for this to pass. there remains other

the house managers over a 23 hour. kept pushing the false statement that it was either russia or ukraine but not both. they kept telling you that the intelligence the community and mr. mueller with russiaia alone with regard to te 2016 elections. of course that's not the report from only wrote focused on russia interference although there is some information in letters regarding ukraine and all point to those in a few moments. inin fact, let me talk about the letter right now. this is a letter dated mamay 4, 2018. the general prosecutor for the office of the prosecutor general of ukraine, it was a letter requesting that his office cooperate with the mueller investigation involving ukraine issues and issues involving ukraine government signed by senatorat mendez senator leahy d senator durbin. i am doing this to put this in entire perspective. house managers try to tell you that the important, the whole discussion and my colleague talked about this between president zelensky and president trump in the bilateral meeting

consensus in 1974 among house democrats and house republicans was the order of the day. it became apparent then that narrow partisan views aside, the house judiciary committee would step into the breach only in so far as evidence of criminal presidential conduct warranted it. the tapes of oval office conversation provided that evidence. the supreme court overruled a claim of executive privilege and ordered the release of tapes to the house judiciary committee. as a result three days later, the high crime of obstruction of justice including perjury at the time teethered to a second article was approved by a vote of 27-11 and 28-10 respectively. the second article of impeachment alleged unlawful use of the cia and its resources including covert activity in the united states and interference with the law enforcement actions of the fbi. the crimes alleged were serious involving unlawful electronic surveillance of a opposing political party, attempts to alter testimony under oath. six republican house committee members joined all 21 democrats in supporting those two articles.

president, a message from the house of representatives. the house clerk: mr. president, i have been directed by the house of representatives to inform the senate the house has passed h. resolution 798, a resolution appointing and authorizing managers of the impeachment trial of donald john trump, president of the united states. the president pro tempore: the message will be received. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that pursuant to rule 1 of the rules and procedure and practice, when sitting on impeachment trials, the secretary of the senate inform the house of representatives that the senate is ready to receive the managers appointed by the house for the purpose of exhibiting articles of impeachment against donald john trump, president of the united states. agreeably to the notice communicated to the senate. further, that at the hour of 12:00 noon on thursday, january january 16, 2020, the senate will receive the managers on the part of the house of representatives in order that

in the halls of the house and senate today, action on impeachment. in the u.s. house this morning, they approved the appointment of the seven um impeachment managers. and since then, the speaker has signed the articles of impeachment in an engrossment ceremony just a short while ago in the ray burn room on the house side of the capitol. just after that, the articles of impeachment were walked over to the u.s. senate led by the house clerk cheryl johnson and the sergeant at arms and the seven managers. there's speaker pelosi now walking across the rotunda into the statuary hall. >> good afternoon. good afternoon, my colleagues. as you know, on december 18th, the house of representatives upheld its constitutional duty and voted articles of impeachment against the president of the united states, donald trump. he said in the course of the debate that he did not uphold his oath of office to protect, preserve, and defend the constitution of the united states. the president takes a special oath, a little different from the congressional oath. in fact, he takes an oath

sixty-five units will house formerly homeless veterans who are new to the housing. affordability will be maintained for the life of the project which is our new standard for restriction. item number seven is requesting authorization to issue multifamily housing revenue notes in an amount not to exceed $44 million to provide construction financing for the residential project. the transaction fundamentals have not changed since the project was approved by the board of supervisors and the mayor in august -- on august 9 th, 2019. the issuance is still a conduit financing with no recourse for the city's general fund. the project continues to be in compliance with all city requirements for the issuance of tax-exempt debt including prevailing wage and l.b.e. requirements. since submitting the application for bond financing, the developer has secured a debt limit allocation and with this city, identified a financing team including a lender and equity investor, bond council and other attorneys, and the city's municipal advisors. the financing team has met several times and d

house. this is a point i made earlier. the constitution assigns the sole power of impeachment to the house, not to any single member of the house. so the press conference that speaker pelosi held on september 24th did not validly initiate an impeachment inquiry nor did it validly give power to committees to issue subpoenas. so we're talking now about the d.o.d. documents. what efforts did they make in their proceeding to get these documents that issued one valid subpoena totally authorized under the constitution? it was unprecedented because it was in the house and never happened before in the history of impeachment. it was unlawful, it was unauthorized, and that's why no documents were produced. and they made no other efforts to pursue that. so, we've heard a lot about the rule of law. the rule of law applies to house democrats as well, and they didn't abide by it. it was unprecedented to have a process in which the president had no opportunity to present his defense, no opportunity to pres

will do what this house did. chris: senator graham, thank you, thanks for joining us. always good to talk with you. >> thank you. chris: up next, speaker pelosi chose the impeachment managers who will prosecute the democrats case against president trump. congressman hakeem jeffries, the highest ranking house leader on the team joins us next. ♪. ust be why you're always so late. i do not speed. and that's saving me cash with drivewise. my son, he did say that you were the safe option. and that's the nicest thing you ever said to me. so get allstate. stop bossing. where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. this is my son's favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady? [tina] you're an old lady. thouwhich is breast cancer metastthat has spreadcer, to other parts of the body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therap

addressed to the house managers. the house of representatives withdrew its subpoena to compel charles kupperman's testimony. why did the house withdraw the kupperman subpoena? why didn't the house pursue its legal remedies to enforce its subpoenas? >> senators, i thank you for the question. when we -- our practice in the house was to invite witnesses to come voluntarily, if they refuse, to give them a subpoena. in the case of dr. kupperman, he refused to come in voluntarily, and we subpoenaed him. almost instantly upon receipt of the subpoena, a lengthy complaint was filed in court where he sought to challenge that subpoena. interestingly and contrary to i think what you're hearing from the president's counsel here today, the house took the position that a witness cannot challenge, does not have standing to challenge a congressional subpoena. we were joined by the way in that position by the justice department, which also said that the -- that dr. kupperman didn't have jurisdiction to challenge or get a declaratory j

the president refused to comply with the house subpoenas before the house vote and after the house vote. the only logical explanation is the one that president trump gave us all along, he was determined to fight all the subpoenas because in president trump's view according to what he said he can do whatever he wants. now, that's not what the constitutional republic entrusted to us by the founders had in mind. this argument doesn't just apply to impeachment, it would apply to ordinary oversight investigations, and not just to the house but the senate, by sanctioning the president's blanket obstruction, the senate would be curtailing its own subpoena power in the future as well as the house's, and the oversight we have as we now know it would be permanently altered. i yield back. >> thank you, miss manager. >> mr. chief justice. >> the senator from kentucky. >> i have a question to present to the desk for the house manager schiff and the president's counsel. >> thank you. the presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted. >> mr. chief justice. >> the senator from wisconsin.

will do what this house did. chris: senator graham, thank you, thanks for joining us. always good to talk with you. >> thank you. chris: up next, speaker pelosi chose the impeachment managers who will prosecute the democrats case against president trump. congressman hakeem jeffries, the highest ranking house leader on highest ranking house leader on the team joins us when we started our business we were paying an arm and a leg for postage. i remember setting up shipstation. one or two clicks and everything was up and running. i was printing out labels and saving money. shipstation saves us so much time. it makes it really easy and seamless. pick an order, print everything you need, slap the label onto the box, and it's ready to go. our costs for shipping were cut in half. just like that. shipstation. the #1 choice of online sellers. go to shipstation.com/tv and get 2 months free. shipstation. the #of course i'd love to of ontake an informal poll. i used to be a little cranky. dealing with our finances really haun

will do what this house did. chris: senator graham, thank you, thanks for joining us. always good to talk with you. >> thank you. chris: up next, speaker pelosi chose the impeachment managers who will prosecute the democrats case against president trump. congressman hakeem jeffries, the highest ranking house leader on the team joins us ever since we moved here, i've been noticing it. i think the house is changing him... -[ gasps ] -up and at 'em! ...into his father. [ eerie music plays ] is it scary? -[ gasps ] -it's in eco mode. so don't touch it. mm-hmm. i can't stop this from swinging. must be a draft in here. but he did save a bunch of money bundling our home and auto with progressive. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents, but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. -hello? -sorry, honey. [ telephone beeps ] butt dial. when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more.. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dr

speaker of the house and party affiliation. the speaker of the house spearheads impeachment effort in order to remove sitting president and vice president, it is not what you know, it is when you knew it. so they can remove the vice president and the president of united states if this was host: host: successful -- -- host: caller, what are you looking for? caller: everyone is talking about the back-and-forth, but the big scenario is this has so much damage, and c-span is helping keeping it relevant, as is the story on all the networks. host: ok, we will leave it there, and you can respond if you wish. guest: i do think there is obviously concern, concern throughout the government, that there has been this confusing relationship between president zelensky, andnt exactly what transpired between them. i think that is one of the reasons why we would be well- served if some of the witnesses who participated in those negotiations, the chief of staff, secretary of state, and others, came and provided testimony instead of refusing to t

the house managers tell you they know better. and this is really a theme of the house case. i want you to remember this. every time the democrats say that president trump made demands or issued a quid pro quo to president zelensky on the july 25 call, they are saying that president zelensky and his top advisers are being untruthful. and they acknowledge that's what they're saying. they said it over the past few days. tell me how that helps u.s. foreign policy and national security to say that about our friends. we know there was no quid pro quo on the call. we know that from the transcript, but the call is not the only evidence showing that there was no quid pro quo. there couldn't possibly have been a quid pro quo because the ukrainians did not even know that the security assistance was on hold until it was reported in the media by politico at the end of august, more than a month after the july 25 call. think about this. the democrats accuse the president of leveraging security assistance to supposedly force president zelensky to announce investigations, but how can that po

house of representatives.] sip on this vote the yeas -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 228. the nays are 193. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal which the chair will put de novo. the question son agreeing to the speaker's approval. journal. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? mr. nadler: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, madam. pursuant to the permission granted in clause -h of rules 2 of the u.s. house of representatives, th

the house. he's a target for members of president trump's legal team. >> adam schiff, who is the house management leader, has had a problem with the truth since he's been holding these hearings in the house of representatives all the way back to the mueller report. so we will -- it's not a rebuttal, but what we are going to do is attack. attack all of the misstatements. >> president trump's team will get the 24 hours to protect their defensive push up against the articles of impeachment. his attorneys are likely to bless the impeachment managers to bring forward a totally partisan case, and will likely call it a weak case. that's expected to start tomorrow it will likely be a shorter saturday session. meanwhile, minority leader chuck schumer tries to demand for more information. >> the american people, to each of their senators, democrat and republican, is asking now and will ask on into the future -- "why were you so afraid of witnesses and documents? what's wrong with getting the truth on some

natalie is at the white house. >> nancy pelosi said at the start of this week the house would introduce a war powers resolution and we learned today it is expected to get a vote tomorrow. this comes even as the president and iran had signaled a desire to de-escalate, but a number of democratic lawmakers remain concerned that the president did not consult congress ahead of the decision to attack the top iranian general and they have a lot more questions about the strategy moving forward. today all members of congress were briefed by top administration officials about what led up to the strike, but even some republicans were not satisfied with the information presented today. >> drive-by notification or after the fact briefings like the one we just received are not adequate. >> my reaction to the briefing is it was utterly unconvincing. >> alice 2 publican senators support the war powers resolution being introduced by democratic lawmakers in the upper chamber even if it passes the house overall it is facing an uphill battle in the gop controlled senate where a number of republicans of exp

the president refused to comply with the house subpoenas before the house vote and after the house vote. the only logical explanation is the one that president trump gave us all along, he was determined to fight all the subpoenas because in president trump's view according to what he said, he can do whatever he wants. that's not what the constitutional republic entrusted to us by the founders had in mind. this argument doesn't just imply applied to impeachment, it would imply applied to ordinary oversight investigations and it doesn't just apply to the house, it would also apply to the sena. by sanctioning the president's blanket obstruction, the senate would be curtailing its own subpoena power in the future as well as the houses. and the oversight obligation that we have as we now know it would be permanently altered. i yield back. >> thank you, ms. manager. mr. chief justice. >> senator from kentucky. >> i have a question to present to the desk for the house manager schiff and the president's counsel. >> the presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted. >> mr. chief j

and the house committees did, the democratic house committees. >> can we get your ponce to agencies -- response to agencies reporting earlier today -- >> yeah. have they verified the recording yet? [inaudible conversations] >> pardon? >> "the new york times" says they just handed it over to house democrats. >> okay. well, as long as it's verified, this is the kind of despicable conduct that the president engages in, the despicable kind of conduct. a lifelong public servant, a woman who dedicated her life to this country, and because she's standing for truth and won't let him break the law, he is vicious to her. no president should be like that. regardless of anything having to do with impeachment, no president should be like that and treat people that way. but he has done it time and time again. okay? thank you, everybody. >> i think what we have all seen is just four days of partisanship. this has been a very partisan process through this whole charade. if you look, i've been putting out tweets all day about what democratic senators have said in the past about bill clinton, and the