STILL PUSHING THE MUELLER

REPORT.

GET TO THAT SHORTLY.

BUT FIRST, REPUBLICANS FIRED UP

ABOUT THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE

EARLY WITNESSES LACK FIRST-HAND

KNOWLEDGE, LEAVING SEVERAL OF

THEM TO LIE ON ASSUMPTION,

PRESUMPTION, AND SPECULATION.

>> MY ASSUMPTION IS HE DID IT IN

A CLOSED-DOOR SPECULATION.

IT WAS A PRESUMPTION.

SO PRESSURE WAS BROUGHT TO BEAR

ON THEM, CORRECT?

>> I BELIEVE SO.

>> THEY ARE A NUMBER OF EVENTS

YOU ARE INVESTIGATING THAT I

CANNOT BRING FIRST-HAND

KNOWLEDGE.

THESE INCLUDE PRESIDENT TRUMP'S

JULY 25TH 20 TIGHTENING

202019 CALL WITHPRESIDENT ZELENS

202019 CALL WITHPRESIDENT ZELENY

202019 CALL WITHPRESIDENT ZELEN.

>> MY FIRST DAD WROTE A NEW

OP-ED SAYING "ALLEGED BAD

THOUGHTS" ARE NOT CRIMES,

OUTSIDE OF GEORGE ORWELL'S

DYSTOPIAN NOVEL "1984."

IT'S VICTOR DAVID HANSON, JOINS

ME NOW.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> GOOD TO SEE YOU, ED.

>> Ed: YOU MAKE THE CASE THAT

DEMOCRATS HAVE TO COME UP WITH

SOMETHING BETTER THAN "A THOUGHT

CRIME."

WHAT DO YOU MEAN ABOUT THAT?

>> IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW, AT

LEAST IT WASN'T UNDER THE

U.S. CONSTITUTION TO THINK

SOMETHING.

IF I WANT TO THINK ABOUT

SPEEDING AT 80 MILES PER HOUR

AND I TALK ABOUT THINKING ABOUT

IT BUT I ACTUALLY DON'T, I'M NOT

GUILTY OF ANYTHING OTHER THAN

HARBORING A BAD THOUGHTS.

TRUMP MAY OR MAY NOT, WE DON'T

REALLY KNOW, THERE IS EVIDENCE

SUGGESTING HE DIDN'T COME OUT

DELAYING AID AND EIGHT WAS

DELAYED, BUT IT WASN'T CAUGHT

OFF.

THAT'S NOT A CRIME.

THERE WAS A

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANY

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANO

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANY

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANI

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANN

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANU

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANR

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANI

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF ANE

HE DIDN'T FORCE THEBUYERS OF AN,

DIDN'T INTERFERE IN THE SANDS

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DID

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DI'

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DIT

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DIR

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DIA

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DIL

HE DIDN'T DOANYTHING LIKE IT DIY

COLLUDE WITH THE RUSSIANS.

>> Ed: ON THE FIRST POINT,

WHETHER THERE IS A THOUGHT OR

NOT, WHEN YOU HAVE OMB BEING

COUNTERS, THEY WERE GOING AROUND

DEBATING BEYOND EMAILS OUT OF

THE TESTIMONY, SAYING IS THIS

LEGAL TO HOLD IT UP, IT WASN'T

JUST A THOUGHT.

IT MAY HAVE ONLY BEEN DAYS ARE A

COUPLE OF WEEKS, BUT THE AIDE

WAS HELD UP.

>> IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO

HOLD UP AID.

EVERY ADMINISTRATION HAS THE

RIGHT TO EXAMINE, CROSS-EXAMINE,

DOUBLETHINK ABOUT THE AID FOR A

COUPLE OF REASONS.

MAYBE THEY THOUGHT IT WAS

CORRUPT.

THEY SAID UKRAINE COULD BE

TRUSTED UNTIL THEY HAD

VERIFICATION THE NEW PRESIDENT

WAS RELIABLE.

MAYBE THEY THOUGHT DONALD TRUMP

WAS TOO SENSITIVE ABOUT GETTING

AID TO ANYBODY.

THESE ARE SIGNIFICANT REASONS TO

DELAY OR INTERRUPT, BUT THE

BOTTOM LINE IS HE DIDN'T CUT IT

IN THE END.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO CONVICT

PEOPLE OF THOUGHT CRIMES WERE

CONSIDERING CUTTING, WHAT WOULD

YOU DO IF YOU SAID, WELL,

BARACK OBAMA NEVER GAVE THEM

LEGAL AID AND A LOT OF PEOPLE

DIED BECAUSE OF THAT?

BUT WE AREN'T IMPEACHING

BARACK OBAMA FOR THAT.

THAT'S HIS PREROGATIVE AS A

PRESIDENT TO SAY I'M NOT GOING

TO GIVE ANY LEGAL AID TO THE

UKRAINIANS.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT GIVING THEM

LETHAL AID.

REPUBLICANS IT AND SAY WE ARE

IMPEACHING THE PRESIDENT, DIDN'T

GIVE HIM LETHAL AID.

>> Ed: TO YOUR POINT WHAT

ABOUT THE FACT THAT JERRY NADLER

WHO IS GOING TO TAKE OVER FOR

ADAM SCHIFF BECAUSE IT'S GOT

OVER TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

SAYS IN HIS LETTER TO THE

PRESIDENT, BY THE WAY, WE ARE

STILL LOOKING AT ALLEGED

OBSTRUCTION IN THE MUELLER

REPORT AND THAT COULD BE AN

ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT?

I THOUGHT WE ALREADY DEALT WITH

THAT.

>> WE DID.

THE ONLY FOUND THERE WAS NO

COLLUSION, ROBERT MUELLER SAID

THAT THERE WAS NO ACTIONABLE

EVIDENCE THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN

INDICTMENT FOR THE PRESIDENT AND

WHEN HE WAS QUERIED ON THAT,

THAT WAS NOT BECAUSE HE WAS THE

PRESIDENT.

IF HE HAD BEEN ANYBODY ELSE, HE

WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INDICTED

BECAUSE THERE WASN'T THE

EVIDENCE.

WHAT IS THE SUBTEXT OF ALL OF

THIS?

THERE IS NO NEW WITNESS IS FOR

THERE IS NO DOCUMENTARIAN

EVIDENCE.

THERE IS NO SPECIAL COUNSEL.

THERE IS NO LEON JAWORSKI,

THERE'S NO KEN STARR REPORT.

UNLESS THEY CAN BRING IN A

MARQUEE WITNESS LIKE JOHN BOLTON

WHO HAS NEW INFORMATION OF

DIRECT TESTIMONY IN CONVERSATION

WITH THE PRESIDENT, THERE IS

NOTHING.

THEY KNOW IT.

THERE IS AN IRONY HERE, BECAUSE

WE WERE TOLD THAT NOTHING HAD

BEEN HARMED OR IMPERILED THE

AMERICAN ELECTORAL PROCESS LIKE

COLLUSION WITH THE RUSSIANS, AND

BARACK OBAMA AS HE WAS EXITING

OFFICE SAID TO DONALD TRUMP,

QUIT WHINING ABOUT THE ELECTION

ELECTIONS.

THAT COMPLAINT IMPERILS THE

AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS.

WHAT HAVE WE HEARD SINCE THEN?

WE'VE HAD HILLARY CLINTON

QUESTION THE INTEGRITY,

NANCY PELOSI GOT A FUND-RAISER

QUESTIONING THE INTEGRITY OF

2020.

AL GREEN, CONGRESSMAN, AOC, AND

CONGRESSWOMAN HAVE BOTH SAID

WITHOUT IMPEACHMENT,

DONALD TRUMP WILL BE ELECTED.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING AND

THERE

IN THEIR VIEW.

WE ARE NOT A BRITISH PARLIAMENT

TERRY GOVERNMENT.

YOU DO NOT USE IMPEACHMENT TO

PRECLUDE OR PREEMPT A NEW

ELECTION.

IT'S DONE MORE HARM TO THE

INTEGRITY OF THE AMERICAN

ELECTORAL PROCESS IN ANY ACCESS

OF RUSSIAN COLLUSION.

>> Ed: THE LAST QUESTION, TO

LIVE

ARE THEY JUST TRYING TO STOP

THEM AT ALL COSTS?

LOOK AT THIS FROM FAREED

ZAKARIA.

THEY SAY, PEOPLE OFTEN ASK

THEMSELVES WHAT THE FOUNDERS

WITH THINK OF AMERICA TODAY.

THE GREATER SHOCK TO THEM WOULD

BE THE INCREDIBLE GROWTH OF

PRESIDENTIAL POWER, TENSIONS OF

PROFOUND DEMOCRATIC CHANGE FROM

A FIERCE POLITICAL BACKLASH, AND

THE PRESIDENCY THAT REFUSES TO

BE CHECKED.

MY OPTIMISM IS WEARING THIN.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT

THOUGHT OUT THERE ON THE LEFT

THAT YOU SHOULDN'T BE OPTIMISTIC

ABOUT THE FUTURE OF AMERICA?

>> THEY APPARENTLY AREN'T

OPTIMISTIC BECAUSE THEY TRY TO

USE A LOT OF EXTRACONSTITUTIONAL

MEANS TO CHANGE THE NATURE OF

THE REPUBLIC.

THE ONLY THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE

EFFORT, VOTING MACHINES, 20 FOR

THE AMENDMENT, MUELLER,

CHALLENGING THE ELECTORAL

COLLEGE, SIX OF THE 14 CHALLENGE

COLLEGE, SIX OF THE 14 CHALLENGS

WANT TO PACK THE SUPREME COURT.

THERE IS A FEELER MOOD IN THE

COUNTRY THAT THE DEMOCRATIC

AGENDA, THE PROGRESSIVE AGENDA,

DOESN'T APPEAL TO 51% OF THE

VOTERS.

THEY DO NOT WANT REPARATIONS,

THEY DO NOT WANT THE GREEN DEAL,

THEY DO NOT WANT MEDICARE FOR

ALL.

IN LIEU OF A CONVINCING MESSAGE

AND CONVINCING MESSAGE IS, THEY

ARE ATTACKING THE PROCESS AND

SAYING DONALD TRUMP CANNOT BE

PRESIDENT, WE WILL DO THIS AND

THIS AND THIS TO STOP IT BUT ALL

THEY HAVE TO DO IS HE'S ELECTED

PRESIDENT, HE IS OUR COMMANDER

IN CHIEF.

WE AREN'T GOING TO USE TERMS

LIKE THE RESISTANCE BUT WE ARE

IN THE OPPOSITION AND WE HAVE A

COUNTER AGENDA, HERE IT IS.

LET THE VOTERS DECIDE IN LESS

THAN A YEAR.

THEY LOST CONFIDENCE IN THE