President trumps impeachment. , and thetion with iran upcoming 2020 elections. And theinternational Mccain Institute posted this as part of its state conference as part of the world. So we are going to jump right in on this panel. With me to my right is nancy, the Editorial Page Editor of the miami herald. You have been in that position since 2013. Delighted you are here. First time we have had the herald participate. On her way. She should be here any minute, National Correspondent for politico. What will be next to her is matt kamensky, her boss, global editor at politico and editor in chief of politico. He had been at the wall street journal before that. Last but not least is jonathan Foreign Policy magazine. Delighted to have all three of you here. Jonathan, welcome. Matt has been here before. Natasha will join us when she arrives. I want to start with the latest developments with this year, the situation with iran. I wanted to ask each and jonathan, i will start with you and then we will reverse the flow. How do you think the president has handled the situation . Jonathan thank you for having me and to all of you for listening. I had a funny thought which i head,expected to enter my which is if iran doesnt respond any further than it has today or yesterday, and if the United States doesnt respond beyond the extent to which it has already, this might actually like i said which was not something i would have anticipated even a few days ago. The mistakes began at the beginning. The approvalithout of congress which is problematic. The legality of the strike was problematic. The timing of the strike was highly automatic. The administration keeps insisting it was done because soleimani was involved in an imminent attack. That is problematic for two reasons. It isnt like he was a bomb planter himself. Iran is a highly institutionalized country. He was a good general but one of many in the countrys army. It is not like iran is a terrorist organization where decapitating for killing one leader decapitates the organization. That are is no evidence terrorist attack was about to occur because the administration hasnt provided us with any evidence. There is also good reason to a rapidit would lead to and worrisome cycle of escalation between iran and the United States which would quickly lead to war. And the unexpected happened, iran responded in a very restrained and moderate way, seems to have deliberately avoided casualties both american and iraqi. , donald trumptes responded in a limited and restrained way for the moment. The twoare seeing is sides of trump at war with one another. One is the side that favors belligerence and has to show he is a bigger man than anybody whoever he is confronting. The other one is conflict adverse and determined not to war ingged into a bloody the middle east which he is convinced the public would not support. We have seen a vacillation between the two. But that is the best case scenario, where we are right now, things dont get any worse. Happens, we are back where we were at the end of the Bush Administration where we had no nuclear deal, we have a hostile iran facing the United States. The prospect for negotiations areeen the two i think nonexistent. And the situation is not stable and it is not likely to remain where it is today. Part of trumps promise was he was going to start ratcheting up sanctions. That makes it likely the iranians will find ways to, under the policy of extreme resistance, the american policy of extreme pressure, to start poking the United States again. Then we are off to the races all over again. Until proven say otherwise, trump is a master of messaging and reading the public mood. End he hashe got a simple sentence here. Themselves in a difficult position to counter it. We killed a guy who is responsible for the death of thousands of americans, someone who caused a lot of trouble in iraq, saved assad, is on one side of the war in yemen. We killed a bad guy, and it will work well for him. Assuming it doesnt do any worse. I dont see a i dont see a contradiction move n his, you know, his to do what he did with soleimani, and then now step back. Public reading of the mood. Not i mean, again, soleimani is not as well known as osama bin laden, but i been the case has already made this was not something not which anyone feels any regret over. If six months from now were in a hot war in the middle east and there are american soldiers there, yes that would be lowest q war at its point but were not there, so i sitting in the white house today, youre feeling pretty good about it. Andancy, how do you see it, also, if you can give us a flavor of what your readers might be saying as well. Well, our readers come down on both sides also. From our g that letters to the editor, and i think trump has a couple of going for him. I think american ignorance. Soleimani . He was not on anyones radar. Im just talking about americans in general. He was not osama bin laden. Had done a lot of damage, but over there. Think american forgetfulness. Think selfinterest will rule as long as as matt and jonathan both said, nothing escalates here. To, can i think selfinterest d the pay the rent . Where is my healthcare insurance . All legitimate issues, and i think also forgiveness. Forgiving people also. I think the ball is in the Democrats Court now. Kind of trump has played this well when we didnt hes he was going to, played it well as hes played missteps had the temerity to c soleimani what he was, a terrorist missteps well and we see, say, and Elizabeth Warren, and a murderous terrorist, pulling back because the left is now saying you cant that sounds complementary to trump. So the democrats are going to voice, their heir backbone, their principles. Beyond. Issue, and how lets stick with the democrats on this issue. How do you see this after noting if at all the democratic the nomination race . I dont. Dont unless, y Something Big happens here. In iowa has gues been how fascinating its been democrats play out. Between isolationists, but even biden who can play the experience card, i think, has and of hed by the strength of the ressive wing Democratic Party to take maybe hostile stance on this than he would otherwise do. If youre sitting in the white progressive wing of the party is shaping the response on soleimani, way it around the debate medicare for all and around a lot of issues, suddenly it makes trump go from being kind of a little bit off the mainstream to american the mainstream and in a strange way, the safer choice for americans, would never thought we would be here, at this point in the campaign. Jonathan, do you see it having an impact on the democratic race . Does it play, for example, to advantage of somebody like buttigieg, who served in the military . First of all, i agree, with nancy, that if things stay concept y are, the doesnt escalate then its not oing to be much of an issue going forward. And certainly not debate it, rators dont ask about they tend to shy away from Foreign Policy questions. Campaign e the spontaneously making a big issue out of it or bigger than they are. Talk re determined not to at Foreign Policy. I know this because i have eached out to every one of the campaigns to ask for interviews over the last six months, and by campaign d managers and people at virtually every one of the campaigns, look, we know that at some point have to focus on Foreign Policy, but frankly, we really not want to and so were going to even do the work to engage until something forces our hand. This, i dont think, on its own, is going to be the thing hand. Forces their biden is sort of embracing this issue. It plays to his strengths. And i ink thats right think it also plays to sanders trength because he has a very clear sort of left wing eist position, ss ts a very clear issue for biden. Buttigieg, but for others its too nuanced. It was the clarity that rattled Elizabeth Warren to walking back her original, and i point assessment. Could you also touch on the and how this is playing with floridas two senators with the congressional members as well, how are they playing this . Is it along the lines that you split . Ed of a oh, absolutely. Think they are solidly behind trump and solidly behind what he did. Rubio and rick scott. Do you see so if this it does contained and not get any worse, looking down horizon, all three of you, are there Foreign Policy issues hat could prove important, maybe not pivotal, in the election . Sually our elections are about the economy or things of that nature. Imagine that, n you know, on the Foreign Policy level, thats coming down the pike . Nationally, its not as clear. Perhaps through the lens of immigration. Yeah. To be how that continues handled or mishandled depending what we default upon. Florida, uth venezuela, and cuba, to a far its a egree haiti, but Foreign Policy issue here. Think, the pew results, china has been, is, and will the soviet be what ago, inas maybe 30 years kind of focusing on the conversation, not just about but cas role in the world also what america is. It is sort of power thats rising, trump has been very the ssful in turning narrative around china toward we were quite, you know, the business community, was always very pro china, and thats changed dramatically in three years. And its not only trump. I think youre seeing it from rising republicans, marco rubio, i think thats what will be with us in this cycle, and beyond. I mean, i think hes exactly right. Another slide on pew survey dont American Voters care about Foreign Policy, when its called Foreign Policy. About is hey do care economics and trade and terrorism, right . And so in so far as foreign in both of volved those issues, and it certainly already, trade war certainly, if the conflict with in a ways to terrorism that affects americans living within the United States, then major issueake it a in the campaign again. Can i ask the two of you, maybe, just about secretary pompeo, indications, i guess, said hes not planning to run for the senate kansas. And there was an article describing pompeo, i think it as Andrea Mitchell wrote, saying, hes the most powerful secretary of state in a long time. Would you describe Foreign Policy process under way with a randnew National Security adviser, also a pretty new secretary of defense. You can tell me if you disagree, matt, i dont permission, i u know you will do that anyway, things example of how have changed is this memo that purportedly got a few days ago, or a week or two ago, for how to e option respond to the missile strike. The Iranian Missile strike on iraqi base that included option e, take out soleimani. Think that option would not have been on the memo earlier in Trump Administration because you had adults in the room as everybody calls them. Moderates like responsible policymakers like mcmaster, like who were aking sure that options like that were not moderates like responsible getting to the president. I think many of you in this room served in government know, you dont put a crazy your on a memo to principal if you dont want your principal to take that decision. That i thinkcision pompeo very much wanted the president to take, and there was with any stature equivalent to his to take it off the memo. Second. On a this chair is not for elijah sover, its for welcome, to you, from politico. I want ask you, natasha what you think about whats been said far. I think its an interesting parallel between the obama years and later on. Likeobama came in, he felt he needed adult supervision, too. Had clinton. T the pentagon, and pin netta and he put people around him that he was comfortable with. Rump has done that sooner than obama did. I think he seems to like obrien natasha would know better a good o, he has relationship with pompeo, andes per, so for better or for worse i think hes surrounded by both that hes sees table with and eyetoeye with. Dont want to question my competitors reporting on this but there have been other reporters that the soleimani option did not just sort of come outofthebox in the middle of december and is something that talked about for several months. Pompeo and pence had bending his ear on this. You can disagree with the decision but it seems in a way there is a more functional process. Whenever you use the word to the trumpregard administration you should pause because it doesnt really apply often but it seems to be sort of a semblance of a functional process around Foreign Policy have had ay not before, when you had that kind f committee of rivals around him. Yes, but its a highly process, right . That leads in really one direction. Certain kind of process. And certainly it is a process in tune with the president s instincts and desires. Best guably its not the process because its not presenting him with as many i think did it before. Natasha, do you want to jump n on sort of a Foreign Policy decisionmaking process, obrien role versus versus esper. Its already been said that pompeo is probably the most powerful secretary of state kissinger. And the chiefofstaff all wrapped in one. Es a person the president really trusts the most. Es pesce esper is beholden to pompeo and the c. I. A. Director. Thats what were told on idea of any kind of check his worst impulses is mute at this point. A yes mankind n of through and through. Hes not challenging him in a john kelly used to, for example, so i think thats why people are kind of worried he gets reelected in 2020, really the only check going to be on the president is congress, and as really hasnt t worked out so well. He was impeached but how is that going to turn out in the senate . Acquitted ing to be rather quickly. So the amount of constraints on him at this moment i feel likeeak, and the people that are surrounding him more and more obviously are to him and are more pro trump than they ever have been. I would say that it took him a while to get to this point. You know, the flip side is, i to say s a little odd aside, t what you set there is suddenly some stability. A s not fighting with tillerson. Kelly. Ot fighting with a the revolving door of his inner slowed. Seems to have its not stopped. There is a flip side here. Remains , what worrisome. You touched, nancy, a little ago on the issues of cuba and venezuela obviously being thisimportant to people in community. Could you maybe talk a little bit about how the administration those issues and how you think hes seen here as well. You think that one reason, know, we wrote an editorial last called h the headline marco rubio [inaudible] ut i think that for all the antipathy between them during rubio paign, as long as has trumps ear on venezuela, cuba, that relationship that reluctance for rubio to actually better isten to his angels here, if he still has them, will remain. Remain. But yes, venezuela remains a here, as does cuba. The lack of tps, being offered venezuelans who are here really does stick in their crawl but i think they will also stick with trump. Based on venezuela were this backdoor diplomacy happening. It just came out in the Washington Post that Rudy Giuliani was trying to make some maduro. Deal with this is fundamentally the issue policy that foreign he has people around him that he really trusts that arent that arily in government, dont have any experience and hes going policy that he has to rely on them more than he does his advisers who have, you know, have left of them experience. Do you have insight into the becauseiuliani dynamics there were phone calls concerning ukraine between the two, it appears. Given that giuliani does number be playing on a of issues that really would be the responsibility of the secretary of state, do you have their dynamics . Yes. Pompeo used giuliani as a thorn and he views him as deal e who he just has to with, because the president views giuliani as kind of a security blanket. Blanket. They have known each other for decades. They go back, you know, a long time, to their new york days, giuliani is that his most loyal soldier. O when giuliani asks the state department to look into allegations of corruption, you now, regarding joe biden or, you know, tell the state department, look, you really look at what shes doing, pompeo looks at that and ays, okay, i guess we have to because hes the president s personal lawyer and this is someone who he trusts. Crossed the t president and doesnt really plan to. Weve touched on a player who is has a central impeachment controversy, and that is Rudy Giuliani. Impeachment e the process playing out . Could iran, even if its ontained have an impact on at least the timing of the process . Can you tease out for us how you this might unfold . Again, i have yet to meet a Single Person in this country whose mind has changed about onald trump as a result of the impeachment process. Nd thats the fundamental problem for the democrats. I think pelosi had to do what so much because she had pressure and shes got a unified picking up a lot of buyers regret on impeachment. You know, the candidates just to move on from the impeachment conversation. As a win for it them. Congress, too, i think, ust look at the trump fundraising numbers during the impeachment saga. Him, has been a winner for with his base, and hasnt really been a winner with the democratic base. Terms of the way it turns out, i mean, you know, wake me 10 months and it will be exactly the way i think it will out unless something crazy things happen and crazy things happen all the time. Pretty ar its been a dull show because its so predictable. Johnson, take us a little impeachment e issue. Looking at how its playing on the broader International Stage . You have to make a distinction in answering the question between what other impeachmentel about and how its affecting their behavior. Their could affect behavior. I think that there is such fear of and donald trump rds around the world that citizens be happy leaders would to see anything take this guy out whether its an election, strike. Ent, or a meteor they are not being picky. Was a poignant moment during bill clintons trial, or the impeachment process, i dont emember at what stage it was, when he went to the United Nations and got up before the General Assembly and gave a a ech, and there was spontaneous standing ovation from countries around the world. I this was interpreted and think rightly so, as a sign of for clinton t despite the impeachment. Its pretty hard to imagine the today and happening thats both because of the ifference in the feelings towards the president , and the stakes actually involved in the impeachment trial itself. As for whether its going to actually change the way that behaves, i think it depends on how the process plays out. If it continues long enough, that countries feel like its distracting the distracting the u. S. Government, then, you know, otentially making trump into a lame duck, then i think what well see is, an acceleration of process, frankly, thats not new, has been going on since the beginning of this administration. But was well under way before became president under the Obama Administration as well, when much of the rest of the united lt like the states was retrenching. Was no longer interested in what was happening elsewhere. Was no longer willing to come to the defense of friends and allies, and i say this as a perception rightly or wrongly, but i think it was real, and caused was a number of things. Starting to hedge cozying up or striking new deals with u. S. Russia ins, china and particular. This is something thats happened dramatically in the last few years. Really striking example was hina signing up excuse me, italy signing up for Chinas Initiative last year but there like een lots of examples this. Youll also see proxies, like israel and saudi arabia, continuing to take matters into their own hands and worrying nearly as much as they did in the past about what about ton might think what they are doing, because they will feel like nobody is really paying attention. And i think youll see u. S. China and like russia feeling less constraint, ecause it will be the perception that the Trump Administration isnt paying attention. Ll of this, i think, leads up to a much more dangerous world. Nancy, if you would bring it nationally but also in florida, and in miami, how do you see the impeachment process out . Ng again, i see the same that we see with pick an issue. Gauging from letters, from conversations, impeachment is either the right must happen, or this is a waste of time. Know that you people hate trump. Thats just how its playing out. Natasha, what else is out here that hasnt come out yet that might weigh in on this . I mean, youve got john bolton to saying he is willing estify if subpoenaed by the senate. Could that be something that would change the dynamics . Potentially. I think it is unlikely right now senate is going to subpoena john bolton, and i think bolton knows that, and i dont think that hes come up good excuse for why he can testify before the senate but he cant testify before the ouse, in the same impeachment trial. The real reason is because one is controlled by the republicans obviously. You know, what we hill, the top russian adviser who left, during her about john testimony bolton, about his opposition to what was going on was really the testify what he could to right . There were a few meetings he was n with the president where he voiced his opposition to the aid, the deal they are cooking up in the ukraine but apart from that its unclear if he would delve into those conversations because, you ny know, executive privilege, which he president still has not exerted but he could. So i think the possibility of out, which isming very real, could further trump as the senate trial looms. Because we know that there is they are hiding. The office of management and to release fusing roughly 20 emails between that ffice and a top aide to mulvaney about this ukraine aid and the discussions that went on behind the scenes about the real rationale for it. As press outlets continue to this stuff and more comes out about what the president was telling his happening, at was you know, with regard to this hold on ukraine aid, thats biggest piece of it is the money, and that could, i think, have a big impact on Public Opinion if not on republicans in the senate. Drawn out process, does that play to the benefit of he republicans or the democrats, how do you see the involved . Time thats i think my guess is that the democrats would like to move on possible. As soon as primarily because this scandal hard its obtuse, ukraine is kind of hard to get really, what und, it is, why it matters. So my guess would be that the would probably want to do this fast. The people of trump can use really u know, to nurture that. A martyr complex around, you know, they are all out to get me. Thats a very effective message constituency that he needs to mobilize. Jonathan, were talking about obviously, involved in impeachment. There were striking comments senator paul and senator lee about the intelligence briefing provided the situation in iran. Do you see that as an aberration that republicans will hold is thereimpeachment or sufficient frustration with the iran situation that it could lead to some splits . Boy, i dont see much of i think thats wishful thinking. Im going to ask each of you to finish the following sentence. The democratic nominee is going to be [laughter] nancy . The democratic nominee is going to be the person who can i dont have a name. I do not have a name. Have a name. Not to be ll waiting impressed. Who has a definitive, succinct resonates one with democrats, who do want to get two, with mp, and moderate republicans, who are appalled and also could use a change. Be much sage needs to ore succinct than my answer to your question. Yeah. If i had a Million Dollars and said you could have this money the u correctly guess who democratic nominee is going to be guess versus an educated guess. Lose hink its biden to but he needs to be careful. To up his game. I dont meanr, and to sound lets face it. Dont get a u Million Dollars. I just want an answer. Im not in the prediction anymore, after 2016. Think, i do think its biden to lose. Ut, you know, dont sleep on warren. And buttigieg, hes, i mean, im se, a political reporter per but speaking to my colleagues aout i, i mean, he really has huge shot here, and, yeah, i ould make a case for actually any one of them. Even yang to be honest. Long as swer was as mine. I was going to say. Matt, can you give us a answer . T okay. Boomer. It will definitely be someone s. Their 70 probably not bloomberg. If you judge candidates, but who is the most appealing on who sort of gets your attention . Buttigieg. Lets keep the channel on. You want to watch what they say, debate in e at that l. A. Think yang is too much of anlei outlier and buttigieg is too young and it is too early, so we will have another president who should be retired, probably. Jonathan . It is torture it is torture to put a bunch of journalists up on stage and ask them to give short answers. I also need to caveat that i have an unbroken record of guessing these things wrong. I think i would be doing a disservice to whatever candidates name that comes out of my mouth because then i would be guaranteeing they dont get the nomination, it is a kiss of death. You see how i am eating up minutes . Think theaid, i dont debates are having much impact on most voters. Factors,he structural the underlying factors will dominate and i think it will be biden, and probably biden and klobuchar. That point. Amplify good two had a pretty months, a pretty good 12 months. He has been pretty much the same place in the polls since the beginning. A great columnd called grandpa simpson runs for president , but he stuck around. And more recently he seems more there, he hasnt made as many mistakes and he is getting into it. I think warren is probably fading. It would be amazing if you had a Bernie Sanders and bite and biden runoff. Going to ask one more question and they were going to go to the audience for questions. Let me ask you nancy, we will start with you. Donald trump is reelected, what kind of foreign would you expect . Scorchedearth . That was a short answer. Isi think any president unleashed, more looseygoosey in the second term. Assuming hes not going to go for a third term or attempt it. But i also think he will probably, even trump will be worried about legacy. It will be interesting to see what transpires during a second term with kim jongun. Natosha . I think it will be unrestrained and all he cares about is winning. I think he will be even more impulsive. We have seen he doesnt exactly stick to the promise of being more isolationist, wanting to pull out of the middle east. He has turned that on his on its head so we cant trust anything he says about his Foreign Policy whatever that might be. So it is hard to predict. But i think congress will be the theyck on him, and voted just hours ago on the war powers resolution, the house. Seeing how that plays out will be interesting. Part of the thing that is interesting to me is that our allies are preparing for a trump win. They are not going to be caught flatfooted again. Diplomats around the world are saying we are prepared for trump reelection no matter what. They are making plans for what that is going to look like. It is really anyones guess at this point. Let me just ask, do you anticipate this and it would vote on the war powers resolution it would not pass it, what it . No, i dont think so. There are a few republicans that have signaled they are on board but getting enough will be tough. Matt . I would see it through a prism of what i call trump paradox. He is on the one hand the most an opaque,t is chaotic process, and yet we are arguably exterior and sing the most transparent presidency we have ever had. We know what is on his mind almost instantly. Even the thing we thought was devious, the ukraine scandal, that came out very fast and we know most of the details. The other paradox is, i think trump is checked primarily by Public Opinion. Readingry sensitive to the National Mood and reacting to it. A bunch of iranians at our embassy, not going to repeat benghazi, im going to hit them and step back because no one wants a repeat of the iraq war. Is other paradox is that he rash in his communications but hes not that rash in his actions. There are some things the ukraine thing is rash, you could argue about soleimani, but there is a case to be made that if you had another republican president , lets say jeb bush, the public mood would be different but i would say that 75 of the policies and judicial appointments would be exactly the same. Trump is not such a big risk taker. I dont know if you remember in the campaign when there was this firework went off are something or something, he ducked really quickly. He is not a profile in courage, i guess. Or not known as one. I would not think that necessarily he would be el dorado in the second term just based on how he has behaved in his first term. Let me just say, if folks want to ask questions come the microphones are there, please line up. Ic medical science making a see medical enormousmaking leaps forward in an effort to keep ruth bader ginned Ruth Bader Ginsburg alive. Apart from that, it will be sheer and total can you swear on cspan . Mayhem. The levels of selfdealing i think will grow exponentially. But i agree with what nancy said that i think trump will start again for his legacy and agree with what natasha said in that a lot of what he talks about he does naturally care about. What he does care about and we have seen this throughout his career and presidency, is making deals. I think we will see him start to swing for the fences on every area where there is a deal possible. In some cases, that might turn out to be a good thing. We may see deals possibly with china that resemble the template u. S. Mexicocanada act, essentially a rehash of nafta, not very different, in workern nafta protections and some other areas. That, trump can, for lack of a better word, trumpet as an, schmidt but dont represent anything new. As anere is a accomplishment but dont represent anything new. But there is a danger he will give away far too much for far too little. If you could say who you are and try to keep it brief. Ask my roberto, before i question, i want to add, because you were talking about cuba and venezuela, i think the crisis in nicaragua is also important and in will it will influence u. S. Policy and elections here. Thisestion, you talk about a little bit but i wanted to expand, when we are talking about the impeachment trial in the senate, do you think that will sway the Senate Majority . Will it swing back to the democrats . Im thinking of people like Senator Cory Gardner of colorado, if he votes to acquit trump, that will not help in a state like colorado. Also Susan Collins in maine. Thank you viewed thank you. Is inrew, my question regards to the iran situation. Last week there were wargames with moscow, beijing, and tehran. They have been underreported by the Washington Press corps. Beijing, the Chinese Communist they areparty, breaking sanctions against iran every day and supporting the iran regime, buying iranian oil at a discounted price, and we are about to sign a trade deal on thenext week pentagon reports up to 3 million the pentagon reports up to 3 Million People being held in concentration camps. How come people in the Washington Press corps arent holding the administration account on that . It seems like it is the parlor game and not the substance a lot of the time. Who wants to address these . We at Foreign Policy did cover the wargame last week and we have been covering the attention and concentration camps consistently in a way that the situation in china is now tainting supply chains and all sort of different industries. Kotten and others as well viewed on and others as well. I think in order to have change, the situation wont have change until the u. S. Government sees the issue and under this administration that is not likely to happen. But great pressure can come from Corporate America as well and that tends to happen when consumers force Corporate America to take these issues seriously. That is what i would hope for. , he ishe senate trial not going to get convicted unless something dramatically changes, and because the issue has not taken off the way i think nancy pelosi would hope, i dont think it will be a litmus issue for a Susan Collins, where vote to convict, or cory gardner. I agree with matt. I think cory gardner is one to watch, Susan Collins, mitt romney, but ultimately it is good politics for them to say this is going to be a fair trial and i want to hear witnesses and see documents. Ultimately theres no evidence they are actually going to break with the majority. Back over here and then there. My name is ernesto. Question and concern regards iran. Lets say we were to shift our thinking and accept the fact that we have been in a de facto state of war with iran since 1979, would that solve many of the questions regarding the soleimani strike . My name is alexander. My question is in regards to the impeachment in the house. The perception among the American Public of an expedient, rushed impeachment, how do you think that will play out in reelection for House Democrats and maintaining their majority . Of questions surrounding the soleimani killing, i would have to say im not sure how many outstanding questions there still are. I think that there is or there should be agreement that this was a very bad actor. Really didntike just fall out of the sky last week. Buildingbeen a long march, it has been under discussion. I think that we need to understand who soleimani truly the terrorist, being the murderer. To ryan crocker, actually wrote together and trying to bring a stable government to afghanistan. , he was a complicated person. I am not sure what further outstanding questions there are about him. On the house . Think, if you talk to any democrat, they would tell you that impeachment was good politics for them. Y understand that especially with the moderate democrats that this was a tough decision, to go down this road. Ultimately their hand was forced by the fact that the day after Robert Mueller testified about Russian Election interference and all of contacts with the Trump Campaign and the russians, trump got on the phone with the ukrainian president and invited in interfere in 2020. That was the straw that broke the camels back. They could not ignore it anymore. Trying to slow walk and impeachments process without calling it impeachment never took off. When this happened, thats when the momentum and the steam was really gained in the Democratic Caucus for moving forward on this, because they could not justify not doing it anymore. Havingionale i think for the process be the way it was, back to back hearings, you have the private depositions and then out in the open and it seemed to move very quickly, it was again this question of at the time, it was urgency. This guy poses and National Security threat, we are coming up on the election, if we dont hold him accountable, how will he be held accountable . Willpresident precedent this set for the future . I think nancy pelosi has given the other side some ammunition by holding onto the articles of impeachment as long as she has because it undermines the argument that this really is urgent, which is what the democrats have been messaging for the last couple of months. It remains to be see how this will play out in 2020 for democrats, but i dont think any of them would tell you this is something they did because they thought it would help them win reelection. This side and then over here. My name is francisco. My question is mainly directed toward mr. Temperament. Klobuchar as a feasible candidate for the president ial election in 2020. Many analysts saying she does not have enough national traction or funding to be anywhere near close to a potential candidate. What about her as one of the few remaining moderates on the campaign trail makes you see her as a good candidate . You asked about klobuchar . Let me get one more. My name is leanne. My question is more gear toward getting more understanding of what americans actually value, because right now if it is about record, and my personal opinion, i think Bernie Sanders has the best record compared to Elizabeth Warren or joe biden, and when you compare the age aspect, i do understand that it does feel like there is a huge divide in the American Public right now. As well as in Foreign Policy. It feels like we are on the same page where we want to take care of our american soil first but it kind of feels like one has to be more lets cut immigration and do these were attractive processes, and the other feels more, lets take up infrastructure and more inward policies. My question is gear to more toward getting to that, what do the American People care about right now . You had a klobuchar question. Pickthink she is a smart for biden for a number of reasons. She balances the ticket in terms of gender and age, but she is also first of all, philosophically, she is fairly close to biden in that she is a moderate and has moved in that direction as the campaign has gone on. Haslike biden, she also strong appeal in purple areas. She has a very good area of record ofa very good winning areas by a strong margin that are not safe democratic territories, and thats something the democrats need, that biden needs, so they can win back wisconsin, pennsylvania, michigan and other areas. And she had a breakthrough performance at the last debate, where she could be stiff, she seemed relaxed, a smaller stage fit her well. Some people thought she was a credible candidate. It is hard to imagine she gets the nomination but she is very appealing as a vp pick. , the one thattion stuck in my mind last couple of weeks was what percentage of americans feel positively about the economy . Was 40 and now it is 76 . For all of the Trump Presidency a small minority are obsessed with Cable Television whether it is msnbc or fox, and most people are not consumed by politics day today they look around. How are things . 20 ,y good, my 401 k is unemployment is at 3 , the country is generally at peace, the soleimani thing notwithstanding. There are constituencies that have things they care about a lot but generally the mood is good and i think that naturally favors the incumbent always still. This is where trump is more of a conventional president and i think we realize. With apologies, i only have have time for one more. Thank you for being here. Question goes back to the iranian conflict. In terms of what the iranian attacks they had at the military base in iraq, we dont really know how the u. S. Will respond, however isnt it the case that the if it is the case the u. S. Retaliates, what nations will enter the picture . The nations will come into picture in terms of this will theyand what undergo if the u. S. Retaliates . , i do think iran is a fundamentally weak state in the region, thats why it has to use asymmetric means. There are not many natural iranian allies. The chinese will complain but they would be happy to see the u. S. Enmeshed in something that ,ould be costly and distracting but they arent going to support the iranians, the same for the russians. If you look around the region, all of the sunni states, their sworn enemy is iran. The world war iii scenario that has been thrown around in the media the last week and a half to havet is a fun thing trend on twitter but it is quite hard to game out how that would come about. I dont see what the other side looks like. Everything that my esteemed colleague said, but that doesnt mean the conflict has to be an existential one. The iranians because of their had wastedhave damage the u. S. Through proxies have had wasted damage the u. S. Through proxies and it doesnt mean it is a frontal reprisal through the United States. What should concern all of us is that the United States is highly exposed throughout the region. We have Something Like 100,000 troops throughout the broader middle east. Close friends or like israel and saudi arabia that are highly vulnerable. There are Oil Installations the iranians can attack. The iranians have also gotten very good at cyber. That is an area where there is no doctrine, no deterrence, a virtually ungoverned area of warfare. Finally, i think the most likely response is that the iranians will continue escalating and theirestart with vigor Nuclear Weapons program, and that is something that, while it might not lead to world war iii, is something that should concern us all very much. In my final minute because i did not learn the first time i tried this, im going to try again. In november,ction the u. S. President is going to become of the winter is going to be . Isnt that the same question . I asked you for the democratic nominee would be. I did not learn the lesson that you dont want to answer these questions. Try again. Remember how i said i have an unbroken record of always calling the wrong victor and i feel bad. The name that is gonna come out of my mouth is guaranteed to not win the election donald j. Trump. [laughter] it that astick to baby boomer will win. I think trump. I am thinking trump. I got an answer from each of you. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in thanking our guests. A perfect panel. [applause] the impeachment of president trump. This week, the house will vote on impeachment managers, sending the articles of impeachment to the senate. Follow the process live on