Page 14 - Process Argument News Today

>> there is going to be due process, its going to be fair. there will be a form in which the president is given the opportunity to call witnesses to cross-examine, to have his representatives present, and i am surprised that the republicans say they are not going to vote for a resolution that, in effect, gives them what they asked for. >> laura: but the resolutions as the president cant ask questions, or may be denied the ability to ask questions if certain documents arent turned over to the com...

Youre losing the process argument. you want a substance argument? bring it on, adam schiff, because we know the ukraine didnt even ask about a hold on eight until august 29th, that was released shortly thereafter. you know what, the united states of america had to get off ukraine in order to release the hold on it? nothing! >> laura: the opinions of people listening in on the conversation -- at the president knew were listening, those opinions of a transcript we already have are supposed to run ...

Cole, the senior republican on this rules committee is making the argument thath entire inquiry, the investigation, is invalid, does he have any grounds here? >> he does not, but i will tell you in my experience as a lawyer, and as a former legislator, typically when there is no substantive argument to be made, a process argument will be made as generally a delaying tactic as the side that doesnt like the inevitable outcome is trying to delay things and throw as much mud at the wall as possible ...

Phone calls with the ukrainian president, with other world leaders about -- will they be willing to defend having this kind of tractional foreign policy, to have a personal lawyer have such a position of stature even if informally in the making of american foreign policy, thats when they go mute, thats when they walk away. that tells you everything. >> so, natasha, its steve rattner. it seems know with the vote today the republicans are going to lose some element of their process argument becaus...

>> i wouldnt expect him to say i will now allow them to testify. the rules are still unfair, they still do not afford the president with sufficient due process. they will continue to make the case. a process argument. theres only so far the president has been able to go to stop people from testifying. what is remarkable one person after another who worked for him or even in one case still works for him either at the white house or state department or the pentagon have come forward and given test...

Procedural vote unless you cross party lines. >> okay but sahil, what -- yes, it was a procedural vote but it was not a procedural vote. it was big enough she decided to have the gavel which that sends a message. >> absolutely it did. the speaker of the house typically does not vote. this was unusual magnitude. look, one thing it does is this moves the whole impeachment process to a new phase. so far, its been procedural. republicans have been calling this a sham, a farce. a lot of them have not...

That gives the president the power to issue reprieves and pardons says, quote, except in cases of impeachment. and by the way, its not appealable either. the supreme court has said, because the constitution says that the senate shall have the sole power to try impeachment, you cant appeal a senate conviction to the supreme court. >> jill, you were a special prosecutor in richard nixons watergate proceedings. pete was just giving us a little historical perspective, but were living in a whole new ...

It is being chaired by a democrat from massachusetts, as it continues, lets bring in eli sto stokels. they have been pushing for the transcripts to go public. once they are, what about gordon sondlands account being vastly different from everyone else that we have heard from. >> yeah, lets broaden it out beyond that. they are claiming this process argument and theyre pushing saying release the transcripts. from everything that we have heard so far about the testimony that happened behind closed ...

With the grvenlth he testified before the grand jury -- the grvenlth he testified before the grand jury. >> right. >>. >> when they were adopted they were adopted by a peace vote before a resolution went to floor. when we had to implement the rules, the chief counsel for the republicans and i had to sits down world trade center white house counsel chuck are you familiar, chuck ruff said to the chief counsel of republicans and myself, the white house intends to fully cooperate with this impeachme...

Were. >> yeah, im second that notion. so, if we -- in 1998, the reason we won the debate was because we decided early in january and february when we knew we were going for impeachment towards the end of the year what our strategy would be, what the offense would be. we picked up on the prosecutortorial excesses of ken starr, he withheld a witness of monica lewinsky and was cited for grand leaks of material. he was overly obsessed with the sexual details of an marital affair. we prosecuted them ...