Articles

Are We Headed For A Constitutional Showdown? | Morning Joe | MSNBC


ANALYST, ELISE JORDAN. AND CO-FOUNDER AND CEO OF AXIOS, AND CO-FOUNDER AND CEO OF AXIOS, JIM VANDE HEI JIM VANDE HEI JIM JIM JIM VANDEHEI JIM VANDEHEI MIKA HAS THE MORNING OFF MIKA HAS THE MORNING OFF IT’S NEVER BEEN QUITE THIS IT’S NEVER BEEN QUITE THIS DRAMATIC, NEVER BEEN QUITE THIS DRAMATIC, NEVER BEEN QUITE THIS EXTREME. EXTREME. WE MAY, IN FACT, HAVE A WE MAY, IN FACT, HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN THAT CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN THAT WILL ONLY BE PLAYED OUT IN THE WILL ONLY BE PLAYED OUT IN THE COURTS. COURTS.>>PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID IN AN>>PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID IN AN INTERVIEW YESTERDAY THAT THE INTERVIEW YESTERDAY THAT THE MUELLER REPORT IS THE FINAL, MUELLER REPORT IS THE FINAL, FINAL DECISION FINAL DECISION HE BELIEVES THE CASE IS CLOSED, HE BELIEVES THE CASE IS CLOSED, AND HE WANTS TO MOVE ON, AND HE WANTS TO MOVE ON, OBVIOUSLY. OBVIOUSLY. WILLING TO BLOCK ANYONE IN HIS WILLING TO BLOCK ANYONE IN HIS CURRENT WHITE HOUSE OR FORMER CURRENT WHITE HOUSE OR FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE WHITE HOUSE EMPLOYEES OF THE WHITE HOUSE FROM TESTIFYING. FROM TESTIFYING. HOURS AFTER ANONYMOUS SOURCES HOURS AFTER ANONYMOUS SOURCES TOLD THE “POST” THAT THE TRUMP TOLD THE “POST” THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WILL FIGHT ADMINISTRATION WILL FIGHT CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS, LIKE CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS, LIKE THE ONE SENT TO EX-WHITE HOUSE THE ONE SENT TO EX-WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON McGAHN, THE COUNSEL DON McGAHN, THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF WENT ON THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF WENT ON THE RECORD, TELLING ROBERT COSTA OF RECORD, TELLING ROBERT COSTA OF THE “POST” THAT HE BELIEVES THE “POST” THAT HE BELIEVES ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY IS ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY IS UNNECESSARY. UNNECESSARY. THE PRESIDENT SAYING, QUOTE, I THE PRESIDENT SAYING, QUOTE, I ALLOWED MY LAWYERS AND ALL THE ALLOWED MY LAWYERS AND ALL THE PEOPLE TO GO TESTIFY TO MUELLER. PEOPLE TO GO TESTIFY TO MUELLER. YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT THAT YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT THAT WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT DID WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT DID THE MUELLER REPORT THE MUELLER REPORT I WAS SO TRANSPARENT I WAS SO TRANSPARENT THEY TESTIFIED FOR SO MANY THEY TESTIFIED FOR SO MANY HOURS. HOURS. THEY HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION THEY HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION THAT’S BEEN GIVEN. THAT’S BEEN GIVEN. HE WENT ON, I FULLY UNDERSTOOD HE WENT ON, I FULLY UNDERSTOOD THAT AT THE BEGINNING, I HAD MY THAT AT THE BEGINNING, I HAD MY CHOICE CHOICE PRESIDENT TRUMP ADDED OF HIS PRESIDENT TRUMP ADDED OF HIS DECISION TO ALLOW HIS AIDES TO DECISION TO ALLOW HIS AIDES TO TESTIFY IN MUELLER’S PROBE, I TESTIFY IN MUELLER’S PROBE, I COULD HAVE TAKEN THE ABSOLUTE COULD HAVE TAKEN THE ABSOLUTE OPPOSITE ROUTE OPPOSITE ROUTE “THE NEW YORK TIMES,” MEANWHILE, “THE NEW YORK TIMES,” MEANWHILE, REPORTED LAST YEAR WHEN MUELLER REPORTED LAST YEAR WHEN MUELLER ASKED TO INTERVIEW McGAHN IN ASKED TO INTERVIEW McGAHN IN 2017, TO THE SURPRISE OF THE 2017, TO THE SURPRISE OF THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL’S OFFICE, WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL’S OFFICE, THE WHITE HOUSE SIGNALLED THEY THE WHITE HOUSE SIGNALLED THEY HAD NO OBJECTION, WITHOUT HAD NO OBJECTION, WITHOUT KNOWING THE EXTENT OF WHAT KNOWING THE EXTENT OF WHAT McGAHN WAS GOING TO TELL McGAHN WAS GOING TO TELL INVESTIGATES INVESTIGATES CHAIRMAN JERRY NADLER SAID CHAIRMAN JERRY NADLER SAID BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE SUBPOENA BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE SUBPOENA COVERS THE TOPICS McGAHN COVERS THE TOPICS McGAHN DISCUSSED IN THE MUELLER REPORT, DISCUSSED IN THE MUELLER REPORT, THEY CANNOT COMPLY WITH ONE THEY CANNOT COMPLY WITH ONE INVESTIGATION AND OBSTRUCT INVESTIGATION AND OBSTRUCT ANOTHER. ANOTHER. SAYING, QUOTE, THE MOMENT FOR SAYING, QUOTE, THE MOMENT FOR THE WHITE HOUSE TO ASSERT SOME THE WHITE HOUSE TO ASSERT SOME PRIVILEGE TO PREVENT THIS PRIVILEGE TO PREVENT THIS TESTIMONY FROM BEING HEARD HAS TESTIMONY FROM BEING HEARD HAS LONG SINCE PASSED. LONG SINCE PASSED. JOE, DON McGAHN MAY HAVE A JOE, DON McGAHN MAY HAVE A CHOICE HERE. CHOICE HERE. THE PRESIDENT CAN TELL HIM NOT THE PRESIDENT CAN TELL HIM NOT TO TESTIFY TO TESTIFY DON McGAHN CAN IGNORE THAT DON McGAHN CAN IGNORE THAT REQUEST FROM THE PRESIDENT AND REQUEST FROM THE PRESIDENT AND SIT BEFORE THE JUDICIARY SIT BEFORE THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BY ANSWERING THAT COMMITTEE BY ANSWERING THAT QUESTION QUESTION>>YEAH, HE CAN.>>YEAH, HE CAN. WE’LL SEE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS WE’LL SEE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS HE CERTAINLY DOESN’T WANT TO BE HE CERTAINLY DOESN’T WANT TO BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS HELD IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS>>RIGHT.>>RIGHT.>>HE’S ALREADY SAID AS MUCH>>HE’S ALREADY SAID AS MUCH HE ALSO DOESN’T WANT TO VIOLATE HE ALSO DOESN’T WANT TO VIOLATE ANY PRIVILEGE THAT THE WHITE ANY PRIVILEGE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE MAY HAVE HOUSE MAY HAVE YOU KNOW, JIM, WE ALL REMEMBER YOU KNOW, JIM, WE ALL REMEMBER WHEN THE PRESIDENT ALLOWED DON WHEN THE PRESIDENT ALLOWED DON McGAHN TO TESTIFY WITHOUT MUCH McGAHN TO TESTIFY WITHOUT MUCH OF A FIGHT IN FRONT OF THE OF A FIGHT IN FRONT OF THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION. MUELLER INVESTIGATION. ACTUALLY, ON THIS POINT, THE ACTUALLY, ON THIS POINT, THE PRESIDENT ACTUALLY HAS A POINT PRESIDENT ACTUALLY HAS A POINT WHICH IS, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WHICH IS, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE COOPERATED WITH THE MUELLER COOPERATED WITH THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION. INVESTIGATION. HE GAVE, YOU KNOW, TONS OF HOURS HE GAVE, YOU KNOW, TONS OF HOURS OF TIME AND INTERVIEWS BEFORE OF TIME AND INTERVIEWS BEFORE THE MUELLER TEAM THE MUELLER TEAM WHY DOES HE NEED TO DO IT AGAIN? WHY DOES HE NEED TO DO IT AGAIN? YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT REASONING THAT REASONING THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, BECAUSE HE TESTIFIED FOR SO LONG BECAUSE HE TESTIFIED FOR SO LONG IN FRONT OF MUELLER, THAT IN FRONT OF MUELLER, THAT PRIVILEGE, THAT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, THAT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, I WOULD THINK FOR ALL PRIVILEGE, I WOULD THINK FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, THAT’S INTENTS AND PURPOSES, THAT’S WAIVED, AND ANY COURT WOULD WAIVED, AND ANY COURT WOULD DETERMINE IT WOULD BE WAIVED. DETERMINE IT WOULD BE WAIVED.>>YEAH.>>YEAH. IT IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR THE IT IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR THE WHITE HOUSE BECAUSE DON McGAHN WHITE HOUSE BECAUSE DON McGAHN IS SORT OF THE STAR OF THE IS SORT OF THE STAR OF THE MUELLER REPORT AND, I THINK, HAS MUELLER REPORT AND, I THINK, HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE THE STAR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE THE STAR OF THIS WHOLE SAGA, DEALING WITH OF THIS WHOLE SAGA, DEALING WITH DONALD TRUMP DONALD TRUMP HE KNOWS SO MUCH, AND HE HE KNOWS SO MUCH, AND HE TESTIFIED FOR SO LONG. TESTIFIED FOR SO LONG. I DO THINK BECAUSE THEY WAIVED I DO THINK BECAUSE THEY WAIVED THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, NO THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, NO MATTER HOW MUCH THE PRESIDENT MATTER HOW MUCH THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK AND WANTS TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK AND DRAG THIS OUT, EVENTUALLY, MOST DRAG THIS OUT, EVENTUALLY, MOST PEOPLE WHO LOOKED AT IT THINK PEOPLE WHO LOOKED AT IT THINK THAT McGAHN PROBABLY WILL END UP THAT McGAHN PROBABLY WILL END UP TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS IT’S PROBLEMATIC IT’S PROBLEMATIC DON McGAHN, OBVIOUSLY, READ THE DON McGAHN, OBVIOUSLY, READ THE MUELLER, SOME OF THE MOST MUELLER, SOME OF THE MOST CAPTIVATING SECTIONS IN THE CAPTIVATING SECTIONS IN THE REPORT ARE ABOUT McGAHN AND REPORT ARE ABOUT McGAHN AND ABOUT EFFORTS TO OBSTRUCT ABOUT EFFORTS TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE AND OBSTRUCT THAT PROBE, JUSTICE AND OBSTRUCT THAT PROBE, BEING INSTRUCTED HIMSELF TO TELL BEING INSTRUCTED HIMSELF TO TELL THINGS THAT HE KNEW TO BE LIES THINGS THAT HE KNEW TO BE LIES THAT’S A BIG PROBLEM THAT’S A BIG PROBLEM THE PRESIDENT READ THAT REPORT THE PRESIDENT READ THAT REPORT OR READ THE SUMMARY OF THE OR READ THE SUMMARY OF THE REPORT OR WATCHED THE COVERAGE REPORT OR WATCHED THE COVERAGE OF THE SUMMARIES OF THE REPORT, OF THE SUMMARIES OF THE REPORT, AND HE’S LIVID THAT THESE PEOPLE AND HE’S LIVID THAT THESE PEOPLE WHO WORKED FOR HIM TESTIFIED AND WHO WORKED FOR HIM TESTIFIED AND EMBARRASSED HIM. EMBARRASSED HIM. HE IS NOT JUST SAYING, DON’T YOU HE IS NOT JUST SAYING, DON’T YOU TESTIFY, DON McGAHN. TESTIFY, DON McGAHN. HE IS SAYING, ANYBODY INSIDE THE HE IS SAYING, ANYBODY INSIDE THE WHITE HOUSE, ANYBODY AFFILIATED WHITE HOUSE, ANYBODY AFFILIATED WITH THIS, TURN DOWN THE WITH THIS, TURN DOWN THE SUBPOENAS. SUBPOENAS. PROTECT MY TAX RETURNS PROTECT MY TAX RETURNS WE WANTS TO DRAG THIS OUT, AND WE WANTS TO DRAG THIS OUT, AND HE DOESN’T WANT ANYONE ELSE HE DOESN’T WANT ANYONE ELSE SITTING BEFORE CONGRESS. SITTING BEFORE CONGRESS. HE BELIEVES, AND PROBABLY HE BELIEVES, AND PROBABLY RIGHTLY SO, THAT REPUBLICANS RIGHTLY SO, THAT REPUBLICANS WILL STAND BEHIND HIM, BOTH IN WILL STAND BEHIND HIM, BOTH IN CONGRESS AND VOTERS. CONGRESS AND VOTERS. HE FEELS — ONE OF HIS AIDES HE FEELS — ONE OF HIS AIDES TOLD US LAST NIGHT HE THINKS IT TOLD US LAST NIGHT HE THINKS IT IS A GOOD POLITICAL ISSUE. IS A GOOD POLITICAL ISSUE. HE’LL TAKE IT TO THE COURTS LIKE HE’LL TAKE IT TO THE COURTS LIKE HE DID HIS BUSINESS CASES BEFORE HE DID HIS BUSINESS CASES BEFORE BEING IN THE PRESIDENCY, AND BEING IN THE PRESIDENCY, AND THEY THINK HE CAN DRAG IT OUT TO THEY THINK HE CAN DRAG IT OUT TO ELECTION DAY ELECTION DAY IT HURTS DEMOCRATS TO FIGHT HIM IT HURTS DEMOCRATS TO FIGHT HIM ON THIS TOPIC THAT HE FEELS HE ON THIS TOPIC THAT HE FEELS HE WON BECAUSE THE MUELLER REPORT WON BECAUSE THE MUELLER REPORT DIDN’T CALL FOR AN INDICTMENT OR DIDN’T CALL FOR AN INDICTMENT OR SAY HE OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE, SAY HE OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE, SPECIFICALLY. SPECIFICALLY.>>I THINK THE PRESIDENT IS>>I THINK THE PRESIDENT IS RIGHT IN THIS CASE RIGHT IN THIS CASE I DON’T THINK HE IS GOING TO GET I DON’T THINK HE IS GOING TO GET MUCH PUSHBACK FROM REPUBLICANS MUCH PUSHBACK FROM REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS. IN CONGRESS. I DON’T THINK HE’LL GET MUCH I DON’T THINK HE’LL GET MUCH PUSHBACK FROM THE VOTERS BY PUSHBACK FROM THE VOTERS BY DEFYING CONGRESS AND HAVING A DEFYING CONGRESS AND HAVING A SHOWDOWN WITH THE DEMOCRATIC SHOWDOWN WITH THE DEMOCRATIC HOUSE. HOUSE. THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, JOHN THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, JOHN HEILEMANN, NOT TO THE EXTENT HEILEMANN, NOT TO THE EXTENT WE’RE SEEING RIGHT NOW, BUT WE WE’RE SEEING RIGHT NOW, BUT WE ALL REMEMBER BACK IN 2011 WHEN ALL REMEMBER BACK IN 2011 WHEN THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE OVERSIGHT THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO GET COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO GET INFORMATION ON FAST AND FURIOUS INFORMATION ON FAST AND FURIOUS FROM THEN ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC FROM THEN ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER HOLDER HELD HIM IN CONTEMPT HELD HIM IN CONTEMPT FROM 2011 TO 2016, THEY DIDN’T FROM 2011 TO 2016, THEY DIDN’T GET ANY OF THE ANSWERS THAT THEY GET ANY OF THE ANSWERS THAT THEY WANTED WANTED I’VE GOT TO SAY, I, FOR ONE, I’M I’VE GOT TO SAY, I, FOR ONE, I’M READY FOR THE COURTS TO BRING READY FOR THE COURTS TO BRING SOME SORT OF RESOLUTION TO THIS. SOME SORT OF RESOLUTION TO THIS. A CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS DOES NOT A CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS DOES NOT HAVE THE BITE THAT IT SHOULD HAVE THE BITE THAT IT SHOULD HAVE. HAVE.>>RIGHT.>>RIGHT.>>WE LEARNED THAT NOT ONLY IN>>WE LEARNED THAT NOT ONLY IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION BUT IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION BUT IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. WHITE HOUSES, FOR THE MOST PART, WHITE HOUSES, FOR THE MOST PART, HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RUN ROUGH SHOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RUN ROUGH SHOT OVER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES. OVER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES. THINK IT IS TIME FOR THE D.C. THINK IT IS TIME FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT TO CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT TO STEP IN AND BE AGGRESSIVE AND STEP IN AND BE AGGRESSIVE AND GIVE SOME OF THE ARTICLE ONE GIVE SOME OF THE ARTICLE ONE POWER BACK. POWER BACK.>>YEAH.>>YEAH. I MEAN, LOOK, JOE, I THINK, YES, I MEAN, LOOK, JOE, I THINK, YES, ON THE CURRENT TRAJECTORY WE’RE ON THE CURRENT TRAJECTORY WE’RE ON, WE’RE HEADED FOR A COURT ON, WE’RE HEADED FOR A COURT BATTLE, AND ONE WITH BATTLE, AND ONE WITH EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH STAKES. EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH STAKES. THE POLITICS ARE A LITTLE THE POLITICS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT, I THINK, FOR THIS DIFFERENT, I THINK, FOR THIS PRESIDENT, THIS CONGRESS, OVER PRESIDENT, THIS CONGRESS, OVER THESE ISSUES THAN THEY WERE OVER THESE ISSUES THAN THEY WERE OVER FAST AND FURIOUS OR A VARIETY OF FAST AND FURIOUS OR A VARIETY OF OTHER TIMES WHEN EXECUTIVE OTHER TIMES WHEN EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WAS CLAIMED IN AN PRIVILEGE WAS CLAIMED IN AN OVERBROAD WAY. OVERBROAD WAY. THE HISTORY PEOPLE GO TO WILL BE THE HISTORY PEOPLE GO TO WILL BE TO GO TO NIXON AND WATERGATE TO GO TO NIXON AND WATERGATE I THINK YOU ARE — I THINK THE I THINK YOU ARE — I THINK THE INTERESTING QUESTION TO ME IS INTERESTING QUESTION TO ME IS THE POLITICAL ONE, WHERE IF YOU THE POLITICAL ONE, WHERE IF YOU THINK ABOUT WHERE THINGS WERE THINK ABOUT WHERE THINGS WERE FIVE DAYS AGO, NANCY PELOSI WAS FIVE DAYS AGO, NANCY PELOSI WAS TELEGRAPHING TO THE ENTIRE WORLD TELEGRAPHING TO THE ENTIRE WORLD THAT SHE DID NOT WANT TO PURSUE THAT SHE DID NOT WANT TO PURSUE IMPEACHMENT. IMPEACHMENT. MUCH OF THE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS MUCH OF THE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS WAS RELUCTANT TO PURSUE WAS RELUCTANT TO PURSUE IMPEACHMENT. IMPEACHMENT. IN THAT SENSE, DONALD TRUMP’S IN THAT SENSE, DONALD TRUMP’S SFWER SFWER INTERESTS AND MUCH OF THE INTERESTS AND MUCH OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S INTERESTS DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S INTERESTS WERE ALIGNED, IN THE SENSE THAT WERE ALIGNED, IN THE SENSE THAT DONALD TRUMP DOESN’T WANT TO BE DONALD TRUMP DOESN’T WANT TO BE IMPEACHED AND THE HOUSE IMPEACHED AND THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS WERE NOT EAGER TO TRY DEMOCRATS WERE NOT EAGER TO TRY TO IMPEACH IT. TO IMPEACH IT. SOMEHOW, BY DEFYING THE HOUSE IN SOMEHOW, BY DEFYING THE HOUSE IN SUCH A BLANKET WAY ON THIS ISSUE SUCH A BLANKET WAY ON THIS ISSUE AND OTHERS, AND GETTING INTO AND OTHERS, AND GETTING INTO SUCH A PRONOUNCED FIGHT WITH P SUCH A PRONOUNCED FIGHT WITH P LE O LE O PELOSI, IT SEEMS THE PRESIDENT PELOSI, IT SEEMS THE PRESIDENT IS INVITING IMPEACHMENT. IS INVITING IMPEACHMENT. HE IS MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR HE IS MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR DEMOCRATS NOT TO TAKE THE STEP, DEMOCRATS NOT TO TAKE THE STEP, THE STEP THEY WEREN’T EAGER TO THE STEP THEY WEREN’T EAGER TO TAKE TAKE IF THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE IF THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PLAY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PLAY THE GAME THE WAY THEY’RE PLAYING THE GAME THE WAY THEY’RE PLAYING IT, WITH THIS LEVEL OF IT, WITH THIS LEVEL OF ADEPRESSION ANDA ADEPRESSION ANDA AGGRESSION AND LEVEL OF TOTAL AGGRESSION AND LEVEL OF TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL DISREGARD FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL PREROGATIVES IN CONGRESS, HE’S PREROGATIVES IN CONGRESS, HE’S BACKING NANCY PELOSI INTO A BACKING NANCY PELOSI INTO A CORNER IN SOME SENSE, WHERE CORNER IN SOME SENSE, WHERE SHE’LL HAVE TO START DOWN THE SHE’LL HAVE TO START DOWN THE PATH IN A STRAIGHT FORWARD WAY, PATH IN A STRAIGHT FORWARD WAY, TOWARD IMPEACHMENT TOWARD IMPEACHMENT I THINK THE PRESSURE ON I THINK THE PRESSURE ON DEMOCRATS FROM THE DEMOCRATIC DEMOCRATS FROM THE DEMOCRATIC BASE IS RISING AS THEY SEE THE BASE IS RISING AS THEY SEE THE WHITE HOUSE ACTING WITH THIS WHITE HOUSE ACTING WITH THIS KIND OF IMPOTENCE. KIND OF IMPOTENCE.>>AGAIN, THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT>>AGAIN, THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT DONALD TRUMP WOULD HOPE WOULD DONALD TRUMP WOULD HOPE WOULD HAPPEN HAPPEN THAT’D BE THE REACTION I THINK THAT’D BE THE REACTION I THINK HE’D HOPE TO SEE HE’D HOPE TO SEE IF IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS START, IF IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS START, HIS NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE HIS NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE GOING UP, WILLIE GOING UP, WILLIE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT YESTERDAY WE TALKED ABOUT THAT YESTERDAY ANOTHER THING THAT THIS ANOTHER THING THAT THIS CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN BRINGS CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN BRINGS UP — I WOULDN’T CALL IT A UP — I WOULDN’T CALL IT A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, WHICH CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, WHICH WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF DONALD WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF DONALD TRUMP HAD FIRED MUELLER, BUT TRUMP HAD FIRED MUELLER, BUT THIS CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN THIS CONSTITUTIONAL SHOWDOWN ONCE AGAIN SHOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN SHOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, OF ALL THE INSTITUTIONS THAT OF ALL THE INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE HELD UP WELL DURING THE HAVE HELD UP WELL DURING THE CHALLENGES BROUGHT ON BY THE CHALLENGES BROUGHT ON BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, ONE THAT TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, ONE THAT CONTINUES TO CAUSE ME PROBLEMS CONTINUES TO CAUSE ME PROBLEMS IS THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY IS THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. GENERAL. THAT WAS THE CASE BEFORE BARR THAT WAS THE CASE BEFORE BARR GOT IN THERE GOT IN THERE THINK ABOUT THIS, WHEN A THINK ABOUT THIS, WHEN A CONGRESS HOLDS AN ADMINISTRATION CONGRESS HOLDS AN ADMINISTRATION IN CONTEMPT FOR NOT TESTIFYING IN CONTEMPT FOR NOT TESTIFYING OR NOT TURNING OVER DOCUMENTS, OR NOT TURNING OVER DOCUMENTS, THEN, TO BE PROSECUTED, YOU HAVE THEN, TO BE PROSECUTED, YOU HAVE TO GO WHERE? TO GO WHERE? TO A U.S. ATTORNEY. TO A U.S. ATTORNEY.>>RIGHT.>>RIGHT.>>WHO HAS TO GET THE APPROVAL>>WHO HAS TO GET THE APPROVAL FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. ONE OF THE REASONS ERIC HOLDER ONE OF THE REASONS ERIC HOLDER FROM 2011 TO 2016 WAS ABLE TO FROM 2011 TO 2016 WAS ABLE TO IGNORE SUBPOENA AFTER SUBPOENA IGNORE SUBPOENA AFTER SUBPOENA AND CONTEMPT CITATION AFTER AND CONTEMPT CITATION AFTER CONTEMPT CITATION, SEEMS TO ME CONTEMPT CITATION, SEEMS TO ME WE NEED TO RE-EXAMINE THE ROLE WE NEED TO RE-EXAMINE THE ROLE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND MOVE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND MOVE IT BEYOND BEING SUCH A PARTISAN IT BEYOND BEING SUCH A PARTISAN POSITION TO ALMOST BEING LIKE POSITION TO ALMOST BEING LIKE THE FBI DIRECTOR, WHERE THE AG THE FBI DIRECTOR, WHERE THE AG IS APPOINTED FOR TEN-YEAR IS APPOINTED FOR TEN-YEAR SERVICE. SERVICE.>>YEAH.>>YEAH. WILLIAM BARR, OBVIOUSLY, SHOWED WILLIAM BARR, OBVIOUSLY, SHOWED HIS HAND LAST WEEK, WHEN A LOT HIS HAND LAST WEEK, WHEN A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE HOPING HE’D STAND OF PEOPLE WERE HOPING HE’D STAND IN THE BREACH AND HAVE A CLEAR IN THE BREACH AND HAVE A CLEAR AND CONCISE EXPLANATION AND A AND CONCISE EXPLANATION AND A FAIR EXPLANATION FOR WHAT WAS IN FAIR EXPLANATION FOR WHAT WAS IN THE MUELLER REPORT THE MUELLER REPORT HE GOT AHEAD OF IT AND PUT A HE GOT AHEAD OF IT AND PUT A PARTISAN SPIN ON IT. PARTISAN SPIN ON IT. WE KNOW WHERE HE STANDS, AND I WE KNOW WHERE HE STANDS, AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS ELISE, IT IS NOT JUST THE STORY ELISE, IT IS NOT JUST THE STORY OF BLOCKING TESTIMONY FROM THE OF BLOCKING TESTIMONY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. WHITE HOUSE. THERE’S ALL KINDS OF THERE’S ALL KINDS OF STONEWALLING STONEWALLING WE CAN GO BACK TO THE TAX WE CAN GO BACK TO THE TAX RETURNS AND ALSO A LAWSUIT FILED RETURNS AND ALSO A LAWSUIT FILED BY BE TRUMP AND THE TRUMP BY BE TRUMP AND THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION AGAINST ELIJAH ORGANIZATION AGAINST ELIJAH CUMMINGS, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CUMMINGS, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, BECAUSE HE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, BECAUSE HE IS SEEKING TRUMP ORGANIZATION IS SEEKING TRUMP ORGANIZATION FINANCIAL RECORDS. FINANCIAL RECORDS. THE PRESIDENT ACCUSING CUMMINGS THE PRESIDENT ACCUSING CUMMINGS OF OVERSTEPPING HIS ROLE IN OF OVERSTEPPING HIS ROLE IN OVERSIGHT. OVERSIGHT. THEY ARE BATTENING DOWN THE THEY ARE BATTENING DOWN THE HATCHES AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND HATCHES AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND SEALING THE PLACE OFF. SEALING THE PLACE OFF.>>DEFINITELY YOUR POINT ABOUT>>DEFINITELY YOUR POINT ABOUT WILLIAM BARR, WE SAW IN THE WILLIAM BARR, WE SAW IN THE DISPLAY THAT’S WEEK THAT HE IS DISPLAY THAT’S WEEK THAT HE IS WILLING TO TAKE AN INCREDIBLY WILLING TO TAKE AN INCREDIBLY STRONG STANCE ON BEHALF OF STRONG STANCE ON BEHALF OF EXECUTIVE POWER. EXECUTIVE POWER. I THINK TO JOHN’S POINT, ABOUT I THINK TO JOHN’S POINT, ABOUT HOW THE POLITICAL WINDS ARE HOW THE POLITICAL WINDS ARE SHIFTING AND GROWING TOWARDS THE SHIFTING AND GROWING TOWARDS THE INEVITABILITY OF IMPEACHMENT, INEVITABILITY OF IMPEACHMENT, AND YOU LOOK AT DONALD TRUMP AND YOU LOOK AT DONALD TRUMP CONTINUING TO FIGHT IT, AND HE CONTINUING TO FIGHT IT, AND HE MAY NOT WANT IT, BUT REPUBLICANS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *