Skip to main content

tv   Politicking  RT  January 31, 2020 5:30pm-6:01pm EST

5:30 pm
join me every 1st on the alex salmond shill and i'll be speaking to guests of the world of politics sports business i'm showbusiness i'll see you then. after days of trump's impeachment trial have anyone's win change one way or another expert analysis on this edition of politic. of the politicking on larry king the house managers have presented their case strums legal team resolve its defense as the proceeding change anybody's mind on from skilled or innocence for answers we begin with i'll explain to them on their
5:31 pm
job polic senior editor at large and in the house council bought news he joins us here in studio and in new york city stephen been hogged the former federal prosecutor he's with ken starr during the investigation into president. upon which the articles of impeachment against clinton were based ok joel so far as you look at the proceedings how do you look at them as that go on. i think that the white house counsel has made a very effective argument and they did it in less time than the democrats took which i think also helped because they were very concise and clear in their reasoning i think the 2nd article of impeachment is toast there's no way that the senate would. convict him on that and probably one of the 1st either but i think
5:32 pm
you may even get significant number of democrats coming over and voting with republicans against conviction on the 2nd order of impeachment which is obstruction of congress as for the 1st article of impeachment the question as we're speaking right now is how the vote will come out on witnesses and i think there could be 2 or 3 republicans that vote to hear more witnesses even do you agree with jools and zoom for. it from a political perspective i do not think that the president will be removed i just don't think there are enough votes there and i still think it's up in the air about witnesses but i think what we're seeing is that that witnesses are are a very it's still a pretty steep climb to to to get the 4 votes that they're going to need saving don't you think this should be witnesses as there are in every trial in the previous. and they had previous things like this there's always been witnesses. i think there should be witnesses i think that
5:33 pm
a trial typically includes evidence and evidence comes in the form of witness testimony and in the form of documents or other materials so i think there's a need for witnesses on the other hand this is a very particular kind of a trial it is a political trial and the votes you know we get to impeachment because of substance we start with substance and you can't even get to an impeachment unless you get to a certain level of allegation and proof for and then once you get to that level substance it becomes a political question and so now the question of whether to have witnesses or the question to remove the president of the united states is a political question and if not enough senators fear for their job. about witnesses then there will not be $51.00 votes if not enough senators fear for their job of removing the president then there won't be 2 thirds majority that's that's necessary so you know if we're talking about up to a pure criminal trial or a civil trial in the court of the united states it wouldn't even meet the
5:34 pm
definition of trial but this is just not exactly that and so. you know i'd like to see witnesses i'm a guy who likes disclosure but. the senators get to decide and they're going to make a political decision on that. go alone should you want to hear from the studio so 1st of all there have been witnesses already and in fact the democrats used their 24 hours of opening arguments to play a lot of the witness testimony that when and how issues and then republicans played the bits they said democrats left out but there have been witnesses now there's a question of procedure if democrats refused to allow republicans to call any new witnesses in the house why should republicans reward that behavior by allowing democrats to call witnesses now senator ok better children actually dealt with that question in the question and answer period and he said in. a trial and again point is a good one this is not a typical trial but in a trial you don't see a witness for the 1st time when you are sitting before a jury there's
5:35 pm
a discovery phase and as a secular also pointed out in the clinton trial they had depositions but those depositions were of witnesses who had already testified before there were no new witnesses what i think is happening is democrats are not actually interested in what both is going to say what's the proof for that schumer dismissed on tuesday the idea of going to court to get bolton's manuscript the bits that they could get that wouldn't be top secret or so forth he just dismissed out of hand the idea of subpoenaing the manuscript even as an interim measure i mean if you want the facts why don't you just go for whatever you can get the witness might be harder claims of executive privilege but he's got this book already well you've got documents right they want documents and witnesses why not get the documents you don't want that the reason they're doing this in its initial point this is kavanaugh 2.0 they're just trying to delay this and string it out as long as possible in the hopes that more things come out they just want to throw as much dirt at the president or give them out you've got the guy who was in the room with them saying this is what he heard well the guy is the conservatives conservative we don't know
5:36 pm
that that's what bolton said the new york times article that brought all this out didn't even quote him didn't quote him that well he can't deny it because his books under review by the national security council and he can't say what's in the book publicly because it might be subject to classification could be top secret could be secret and certainly the communications of a president with a senior advisor would fall into that category so he's he's put himself in this situation because he didn't have to submit the book that way but i think what's happening here is democrats are just trying to prolong this process it's just like brett kavanaugh whatever accusations we can demand again this is not necessary to their case they said they can prove it they have an overwhelming case go forward with the case you indicted you impeached in the house and let the senate decide stephen wouldn't you want to hear from mr bolton i would i would like to just correct one point in civil cases to get depositions in criminal cases with the exception. a very small number a handful of states there are no depositions so in a criminal case you see witnesses for the 1st time at the trial all the time and
5:37 pm
that's that's just a very normal part of the criminal process i would like to hear from bolton i really like to hear what he has to say i would like to hear from in the house i like to hear from anybody who has anything relevant and material to say about this is the situation that's just where i'm at i'm a guy who likes. transparency so that i would love to see all the witnesses but i do agree that this is a political. trial and so the democrats want to at least some of the democrats maybe all who knows want bolton to testify for political purposes but the republicans don't want bolton or anybody else to testify for their own political purposes so i don't think anybody comes to this fight you know with a pure heart just the facts ma'am you know from dragnet i think this is a political event and people are making political decisions can i just say one thing about that i want both him to testify who would would you want i want him to
5:38 pm
or they might know but not in the impeachment proceedings i think you bring him into oversight and you can raise issues there but the way they ought to have done this was the proper way allowing republicans to call witnesses as well remember all these democrats who say they want both and they don't want hunter biden they don't want the whistleblower the person who made the accuser arguably the president has a 6th amendment right to cross-examine the person who brought this up in the 1st place adam schiff never allowed himself to be questioned at the house judiciary committee so democrats don't want the witnesses republicans want so that's one of the reasons i think both is me not coming as a witness because republicans of said ok if you get bolton in you get moving the or whoever we're getting 100 biden joe biden the whistle blower and all these other people who have kept from us we're going to get adam schiff to tell us how this all happened he said he was going to bring the whistleblower to testify and then he changed his mind good job with the witnesses getting the full publicans as of right now it doesn't seem they have the votes yet to get witnesses but it's still an open question. i know cory gardner who was on the fence has come down
5:39 pm
against witnesses joni ernst who was thought of as being on the fence come down against witnesses lisa murkowski and mitt romney seem to be leaning toward witnesses romney has a personal issue with the president more koski the room he's made since his statements is not personal well he has a longstanding personal grievance against i would actually have his speech in 2016 in march when he attacked trump in vigorous and personal terms and he has not forgotten that trump proved him wrong by winning and he's never forgiven trump for that you know he invented a whole fake twitter persona he called himself pierre delectable and he would comment on trump's things i mean this is this is a guy with an obsession against trump so he's going to call for whatever makes from look bad lisa murkowski it's hard to know but she also voted against brett kavanaugh so i think she's likely to come down in favor of calling more witnesses susan collins hard to know i think she may come down for more witnesses because she voted for brett kavanaugh so she kind of wants to keep in the middle of the road i
5:40 pm
don't know if they'll get lamar alexander i don't know if they'll get that for 34th republican and then the question will come down to the chief justice who could cast a tie breaking vote in a 5050 tie i don't think john roberts is going to want to do stephen what do you think is going to happen. you know it's i think it's impossible the talent start of the question but you have a poll that i've seen that's a 75 percent of people only united states want to hear witnesses but you have mcconnell pushing very hard to keep everybody in line there you know as i said before you have a political situation here where there is substance that got us here and then politics from there it's kind of hard to see how the politics are playing out it's clear that bolton 'd changed the politics i don't think we're anywhere near witnesses when we started but you know the bolton testimony i think pushed along in that in that way if something else came forward i think that could change but we'll just see who wins is that mcconnell keeping everyone in the. nor is that the
5:41 pm
senators that are more scared about the 75 members that will no longer only think they want to hear it will on friday right well no on friday and by the way if it goes to witnesses i don't think that the president's anything to fear but remember they're going to have hunter biden at the very least they're going to have a whistleblower and they probably have to have adam schiff it's for that reason alone i think the democrats will back away from witnesses they actually don't want the full story of how this attempted coup because in my view that's what this is how this attempted coup came out i don't think this started with substance i think this started with politics and i don't think democrats want those witnesses because they don't want that story being told david what do you make of the way this is started handled himself before the for this impeachment hearing. i thought is quite good i think you know the the republican defense here really has to start with a very strong view of the of the president's powers and a very broad view and i think judge starr. made
5:42 pm
a very strong case for a wide ranging executive power and also the notion that the that this would not be an impeachable offense because it falls within the president's because. you know allowing the the president has the power to run a foreign affairs essentially so i think he did a good job better than i just did of laying out that position you know can i say with regard to i didn't support clinton's impeachment even though i felt he had committed crimes i didn't think they were important crimes relating to matters of state and i oppose this impeachment now obviously i'm supporting trump and i'm conservative and so i would i would oppose him being impeached and removed but i actually support a smaller executive a weaker executive and i still don't think that the president should be impeached i just think that the case is so weak and that the constitution bars this case from
5:43 pm
even being brought and it's not a question of whether we want to stronger or although that is correct that's part of the argument now on the senate floor whether the president was disobeying foreign policy or whether he said that is. that's all within the executive i'd like to see a more vigorous congress i'd like to see a congress that is good at holding the administration in check i just wish they wouldn't abuse their power. thanks to both of you we'll be having you on again jol and stephen we thank them for their time today will be back with more politicking after the break. tariff long russian airlines. you know world big partisan
5:44 pm
lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the back and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. and.
5:45 pm
terror of russian airlines. 2020 presidential campaign is. the 2016 race but this time around the insurgent. who is not even a member of the democratic party again are not interested in establishment politicians in fact. sanders showdown. we don't want a kind of instead empty plaza with an axe and the monument we want a kind of plaza urban bustle streets filled with events with the theater with business stays this conference and maybe i love going to conferences and debates and such events like the battle of ideas or the bobby confronts this these are the
5:46 pm
kind of things will it be striving on gives us a whole us making connection with other people to set up projects. in december a justice department investigation into the origins of the so-called russian. found that was insufficient evidence for some of the foreign intelligence surveillance act warrants issued for tom campaign staff a caught a page one of the main characters in the probe george pava double as another tom campaign staffer was also swept up in that investigation and in 2017 he pled guilty to lying to the f.b.i. i was sentenced to prison george profitable is joins me on the set to talk about what the d.o.j. findings means in his case and in terms of this recent launch congressional campaign thanks for coming back thanks so much for having me larry i get me
5:47 pm
a little confusing the last time you were on michael horowitz since you were on the inspector general the department of justice completed his investigation of the origins of the russian probe how did you get swept up in this it's an incredible story larry and thanks a lot for having me what happened exactly as according to the horowitz report there seems to have been some sort of surveillance on particular associates such as myself general flynn and even carter page even before we joined the dollars from campaign this was actually in the horowitz report itself i had been working in washington d.c. for 5 years leading up to my work advising both the ben carson campaign. from campaign and eventually his friends tame now why i was under surveillance according to the horowitz report there seems to have been some sort of targeting against me for ties related to my business ties if you will to israel the middle east and my associations with this individual joseph smith said it's
5:48 pm
a very convoluted story that even the horowitz report i don't think really got to the core of why did you plead guilty there are a lot of reasons why i think people plead guilty to various charges in the american justice system there could be intense pressure in my case i wasn't allowed to actually hire the proper legal counsel that i did want in washington d.c. i was told by special counsel that if you choose a particular lawyer that you wanted in washington d.c. who just happened to also be the brother of joseph schmidt's who i worked with on the campaign will throw you in jail you can do it i was under sealed indictment of some nature i couldn't raise money and they basically told me if you don't plead guilty to this we're going to come after you with various charges that at the end of the day at 29 years old i want to continue with my life and i just threw in the towel so yes there are 14 days in prison it was 11 once and then leave 100 of those and find the spirit of you said is through all of this why did i need this why do i
5:49 pm
get involved in the 1st place you had dealings in the middle east i imagine you a successful. would you need it oh you know i was i have to say i felt relatively compared to other people who were in this industry and in washington at my age i was very successful but one thing i do say to everybody who asked me the same exact question is i don't i wouldn't change a thing i wouldn't change anything about working for both ben carson and donald trump because i think the 2016 election was certainly the most consequential election especially of my lifetime and having the ability to contribute to both to 2 individuals one who became the secretary of hud and the other who's the sitting president in any way that i could i think that's something that i always cherished for the rest of my life as you live. according to the f.b.i. and actually this is an excellent point that you should brought up my of 30 to us from the f.b.i. who were recently declassified and in these 3 o 2 as they stated that puppet up us never lied to us he misremembered certain
5:50 pm
dates and then we wanted to basically reach out to him to see if he could help us even more the moment i decided i didn't want to work for the f.b.i. or to wear wires for the f.b.i. then the hammer came down on me and that's it's all actually public now have you been contacted by anyone a lawyer or your lawyers come to a good one in the government to explain the department of justice report i have nots but just like most americans i had an opportunity to really relish the fact that we are now exonerated i mean when you see that the department of justice itself releases statements that their own warrants and targeting of americans associated so a presidential campaigns was illegal that's a big deal and i think that statement is going to continue to reverberate through this entire election cycle and we might actually see possible criminal proceedings on people who conducted this illegal surveillance against us moving forward another investigation is happening conducted by u.s. attorney john durham which would build upon the in i.j.
5:51 pm
report what do you expect there the john durham probe actually goes to. the core of my entire story much more than the muller probe much more than the horowitz reports there have been reports that john durham and attorney general william barr are actually basing their investigation off of my accusations whether it was my closed door testimony to the house oversight committee a year and a half ago in front of congressman john radcliffe and congressman mark meadows or of a certain elements have come out recently in my book or in headlines this investigation is much different than the horowitz reports and the miller report this delves into the involvement of the cia and foreign governments in their interference in spying on americans associated to a presidential campaign it's a very sensitive matter you have u.s. allies caught up in this the president himself has called out the u.k. and australia for spying he has tweeted this and this is what john durham is
5:52 pm
looking into your book called the state target how it got caught in the crossroads of the plot to bring down president drome. again i ask you ever regret in the of this. the one thing i do regret is talking to the f.b.i. without in the tourney in the united bed movie in hindsight of hindsight of course is 2020 but when you're just leaving the inauguration as i was having meetings with ryan's priebus and anthony scare you looking to see what position i'd have in the administration and the f.b.i. comes to your house a day or 2 later you're not really thinking that there was any criminal malintent that you were involved in or you're actually under investigation which apparently was the case and we now know was the case are you running think congress in california's 25th district the seat was held by katie hill who got a silver in trouble and she had to resign. you're going to run the against steve knight isn't the the favorite so steve knight was the sitting congressman before katie hill took over and i'm very happy to say that i am necked and neck with him
5:53 pm
in terms of fund raising i'm a 1st time candidate running in a district that i don't even live in right now i live adjacent to the 25th congressional district it's about 30 minutes away from where i live currently and i've raised almost as much money as he has we're reaching $3000.00 individual donors we're surpassing over $100000.00 in donations t.v. appearances have continued to you know happen and i'm just getting my policies out there and i think is really resonating with the people people want an outsider to shake california politics up they want a candidate who will work with the administration and will hold certain people accountable namely the intel agencies who did conduct this horrendous hoax upon the american people you don't have to live in the district no you don't just have to be a resident of california if i have had the privilege to call california home for the last 2 years with my wife i know a lot of the issues that the people face in both that district in the state as a whole and a lot of what happens in california moving forward is not simply going to affect
5:54 pm
the state but the entire country as a whole what is your the key to your campaign is what the key to my campaign is. working a getting to d.c. on day one knowing the players reaching out to them and working with them california today is deemed the resistance of state unfortunately i don't think it's it behooves the voters in this state to be called that and to know that the caliph that the state of california has sued the federal government over 50 times since the president was elected i need to get to washington d.c. i need to reach out my hand to the president to various congressmen and work with them we need a bipartisan approach to the homeless crisis here to the tax crisis here to the security and the immigration crisis that's affecting californians are never in an every day level and even environmental problems that we're facing my district is burning down and we need to deal with that the democrats are favored to win the state right certainly the presidential is this foregone conclusion how do you win
5:55 pm
so katie he'll raise $6500000.00 to operate steve knights her current or my competitor christy smith has raised about $850000.00 so clearly there's a lot of money going into the democrats to maintain hold on this seats well let's not forget the 25th congressional district was a historic republican district buck mckeon was a congressman then you had steve knights and it's a middle class conservative district as long as our messaging comes through and we do raise money and we have grassroots support i think we can take back this district the president trumbull campaign ringback i don't think the pres actually i've been told from people close to the president that he is actually not getting involved in this particular race and actually i don't think it makes sense for him to actually even get involved in any primary races i think of a republican gets or the primary whoever it might be in any race then the president if this is an individual who would like to work closely with the administration then the president should get involved so if you are the nominee you would expect
5:56 pm
the president to support you since you support him so vigorously i don't expect anything from the president the president it's. it's his judgment and his he can do as he pleases just like he could pardon anybody he wants or he doesn't need to if he supports me of course i would be honored to have his support your attorneys to dish in the what. all right welcome to our tea international we are cutting into politicking with larry king because in just a few minutes from now on after 4 years of political turmoil the u.k. will officially leave the european union after almost 5 decades of membership across live now to our sister channel our to the u.k. for the final countdown on this historic day they are already in process. so deeply unfair so there's got to be a change of those $2000000.00 pieces this country at any election who get their seats because they stand for the tory party or the labor party in their particular seats and they don't have to bother trying and that's quite wrong they should have to fight for every vote and they don't let's let's also look at what's been
5:57 pm
happening tonight we've had the european flag lowered it's very symbolic it's the end of an era do you think that when people voted and they did all those years ago now is a long time ago that that actually see this and is it manifesting itself in a way that they they wanted to vote for. i think it's the expectation would be that there would be a degree of we marking shall we say on the fact that we are we are leaving i think the still my view is that it's relatively subdued. you know we haven't had a you may say it's a bit silly but we haven't had things like big ben sounding you know we've got a 50 pence coin and we've got i know we've got a goldfish which apparently sold out but you know the point is that i can remember back in 9073 i wasn't very old at the time but i did my stamp collection i had a stamp and we you know when you hear that the royal mail refused to have a brick system you're left thinking wait a minute what's going on here this you know we haven't actually got everybody
5:58 pm
joining in with this and you know and the whole symbolism if you like of bricks it just doesn't seem to be happening we haven't got people joining in because 5248 in the country target invited and and the prime minister i have to say has not been doing a very good job. in the country he's been slightly triumphalist has a lot of play dumb breaks it tonight though that a bit but i mean after after michael has done others came out and said don't rub our noses in it and what francois being trying to get big ben to become a 50 p. piece which is 775 and 2 phased coming onshore and so if you wish and this you know i don't think that's really what should be about by the way i just say i'm scottish parliament if they want to for the european flag or should they want to they want to follow suit. american flag why shouldn't they. have up on the fly pole but they say you know i guess but my point this is for me just completely distorted symbolism you know we go out. and. no stand arguments over the flag
5:59 pm
arguments over big ben sounding you know. we see a lot of people celebrating part of the square off tonight but have an anticlimax to think because obviously we were just starting with breaks in many ways because i'm afraid i've only got a minute to go now before we leave i mean i've got no idea what the hangover 2nd be like for morning for some people but i don't think it's going to be you know a big party this weekend less than a minute said to say that it wasn't it wasn't a massive need favor of joining and we disagree massively in favor of keeping either so apathetically and apathetically out with 49 seconds to go well be careful because you know that then just on demanding this whole argument about democratic procedure and democratic voice you know i've known and i we sponsored to join their end and else time up the time since it doesn't go away we've got to really cut 30 to 31 now 30 seconds to go before britain says that was the close of champagne but they said let's shut up there is. where the cultural i like how you look and feel
6:00 pm
about so here we go let's watch now what happens because less than 17 seconds now and that's what's not. so. i mean you see people like that just waiting. for the. super bowl. on.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on