Senator Bernie Sanders recovers from a health scare as the impeachment uproar threatens to drown out the democratic primary. Focus on this man, what hes doing. With months left in the primary campaign, who is standing out . Ill speak to president ial candidate senator Amy Klobuchar next. Hello. Im jake capper in washington. The state of our union is watching the evidence pile up. We begin this morning with breaking news. The lawyer for the first whistleblower tells me he is also representing a second whistleblower who has spoken to the Intelligence CommunityInspector General. The news first reported by abc is another development that could play into the impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Its the latest in a stream of new evidence this week wbacking up the original whistleblower complaint. The public call for ukraine and china to investigate his 2020 rival. Perhaps most damning, Text Messages between three senior u. S. Officials discussing what looks like a quid pro quo in office of x in exchange for y with ukraine. Including this, heard from white house. Assuming president zielinski convinces trump he will investigate, get to the bottom of what happened in 2016, we will nail down visit for washington. Or this text. Quote, as i said on the phone, i think its crazy to withhold Security Assistance for help with a political campaign. We should note we invited the white house onto answer questions on the show this morning. They did not offer a guest. al we also invited both of the president s personal lawyers. We invited every leader of senate leadership. They declined or did not respond. The president no longer holds prez briefings. On one of the most critical news weeks of the last three years here are three of many questions we feel need to be answered. One, why did senior u. S. Diplomats believe that u. S. Military aid was being withheld as a tool to pressure ukraine to announce an investigation into the bidens and into attempts to undermine the Mueller Investigation . Two, can this white house name another instance, just one, in which President Trump personally pushed a foreign leader to investigate an american citizen to was not one of his political opponents . Three, would you think it entirely appropriate for a democratic president to news the power of his or her office to demand Foreign Governments conduct investigations into republicans . And their families . As always, the invitation for an official to answer the questions stands. Here with me to talk this are two republicans speaking out and challenging President Trump for the republican president ial nomination. Mark sanford and joe walsh. Congressman sonford, the president called for both ukraine and china to investigate biden. He did that publicly. We saw pushing the ukrainians to push a probe if they wanted a u. S. Meeting. Military aid was being held awaiting the announcement for an investigation into the bidens. You have said the impeachment inquiry is justified. Would you vote to support such an inquiry if you were in the house of representatives . I dont know. I suspect so. Again, i think we need to take this incrementally. I think to your point there ought to be a vote before we go into the inquiry. If you look at the last three impeachments and in fact, one in which i took the vote, you formalize the process as opposed to having an openended process which is the route that pelosi is taking right now. Youre not sure if you would vote for it . I would take the vote in terms of inquiry, ultimately as ive said previously, i dont know that ultimately impeachment is the best way to go. I think probably censure is. Thats a larger conversation. Would i want to investigate this . Yes. Congressman walsh, what do you say . I dont understand that, with all due respect, mark, this president deserves to be impeached. Nobody from the white house and no high level republicans are on this show today because theres nothing to defend. This president betrayed his country again this week. Would i vote if i were in congress on the inquiry . Theres enough we know now to vote to impeach this president. He stood on the white house lawn this week, jake, and told two additional Foreign Governments to interfere in our election. That alone is impeachable. This is a strong term im going to use, but im going to say it on purpose. Donald trump is a traitor. Now, i know theres a lot of talk about treason. Right . People on both sides, jake, have been irresponsible using that word, treason. Im not accusing this president of treason. Our founders were very specific as to what treason is. But when you look at traitor more broadly defined, this president betrayed our country again this week. Its not the first time he did it. Excuse me. I dont know that we should move forward incrementally. This president needs to be impeached, jake, just based on what he, himself, has said. And republicans better get behind that. Congressman sanford . I respectfully disagree. In other words, the nature of a process is not to come to the conclusion at the beginning of it. And for people to step out and say he needs to be impeached is to actually diminish and discard what the very process thats laid out by our Founding Fathers. And so i do think we ought to be incremental. Are there troubling charges out there . Yes. Do they need to be investigated . Yes. But to jump to conclusions and say he needs to be impeached, what hes done is treasonous is to say were not going to go through the process the Founding Fathers laid out. Jake, you go through the process, but again, mark, with all due respect, the president of the United States, and this is not the first time hes done it, is telling Foreign Governments to interfere in our election. And heres another thing. He asked china this week to investigate his fellow americans. If that alone, and thats what our founders feared, jake. If that alone isnt impeachable, then nothing is. Yes, begin the process. But lets lets lets go with begin with the end in mind which is, again, are there troubling charges . Yes. Could you make the argument that you are making . Yes. But do you think you could get 20 republican senators to go along with that argument . The answer is no. Thats why david brooks wrote an eloquent column last week saying while there was certainly reason to move forward, it didnt make it politically prudent, because ultimately an impeachment query is not a legal query. Its not in the judiciary. Its a political move. And so the question in this political season is do we tant to completely wipe out the democratic debate thats taking place among the democrats and some degree of a Republican Debate were trying to have as to what we believe as a country, with we want to go, whats important to us . Because the giant sucking sound will be this impeachment query sucking every other piece of debate both in washington and outside washington at the door. And the question is from an elitist standpoint, should 100 senators make the call on whether or not this president stays in office . Or should we, in fact, have that query come next november . I think thats legitimate. I think theres precedent here. Andrew jackson in 1834 was censured. It said were not going to say nothing, but we dont know that we can actually pull off a change, therefore, were going to let the people decide. I want clarify. Congressman sanford, do you worry at all about a precedent where it is acceptable for a president to use the power of his office to pressure foreign leaders, especially of countries that really need u. S. Help like ukraine, to pressure them to investigate rivals . Because if that precedent is acceptable, and i hear people in the president s camp saying thats okay, do you worry about that . Completely. It goes on forever. Right . I completely agree with you. Let me be 100 clear. I dont think its right. End of story. The question is what do you do about it . And thats a more complex question. Which is do you look at censure . Do you look at impeachment . What does impeachment entail in this is where its worth everybody reading david brooks column last week. He argues articulately that whats done here is wrong. The question is what do you do about it . Thats where it becomes more complex. Do i want to set this precedent . No. And again, politics the damned, being political prudent be damned. We have a president who stood in front of his country and said i want a Foreign Government interfering in our election. Thats wrong. Thats impeachable on its face. I want you to respond. I want to play some sound wait. Wait. But what you dont want to do what you dont want to do is give trump the reason to be able to say i was an solved of guilt. That will set more precedent Going Forward than doing Something Like a censure. Because if you dont come up with the 20 republican senators on the senate side, guess what. Hes not impeached. And, therefore, you do set precedent Going Forward on, again, what he did and guess it must be okay. He got cleared by the senate. He wasnt impeached. Washington d. C. Gobbledygook. Either the Republican Party stands up now and says we oppose this, we oppose collusion. We oppose Foreign Governments interfering in our election. Either we stand up with one unifying voice with that right now, mark, and we dont get involved in the gobbledygook of censure or impeachment, or is it politically prudent. How about we republicans do what is right, sir . I completely agree. But you know what . We have process in this democratic form of government that we own for a reason. Begin the process. Which is to say you can call it gobbledygook, but process matters. Thats why its important they begin the process with an Impeachment Vote which is whats taken place on the three previous impeachment queries. Is that impeachable if a president tells a Foreign Government to interfere in our election, uses the power of his office to benefit him politically, is that impeachable or not . Absolutely. In other words, is it wrong . Yes. But the question of is it impeachable is, again, a political call based on the construct of what political calls gave us. Do you think its impeachable . I do. Do you think that alone is impeachable . What you and i think is irrelevant to the larger process thats in play and whats going to happen next. And im simply saying lets look at what are the costs . The costs in this case if we proceed are there is going to be no focus by cnn, fox, and everybody else on what the democrats are talking about and what the republicans are talking about. Were going to supersede this National Election with an impeachment kwooer query. So i just we only have a minute left. This has been a great debate to sit here and watch. Congressman walsh said hes not voting for President Trump no matter what, period, end of story. Congressman sanford, you said in august you would vote for President Trump over former Vice President joe biden in 2020. Do you still feel that way today if those are the choices . I dont know. I mean, again, what ive said is im an issue guy. And so, for instance, Elizabeth Warren, i just read in this mornings papers is proposing to tack on another 2300 of additional spending for Social Security even though the system is already bankrupt. Im going to base my decision based on who is closest to me with particular regard to debt and deficit and Government Spending where i think weve gone off the tracks in washington d. C. Congressman walsh, final word. Im running against President Trump because hes unfit and a clear and present danger to this country. Theres no way in hell i would vote for him in november. The election is about trump, period. All right. Thanks to both of you for the spirited debate. We appreciate it. Thanks for being here. Well have you both on again. Coming up, democrats say they have found the smoking gun in the case against President Trump. Are they ready to convict the president now . In 2008 mike pence explained his thinking on impeachment. Its safe to say hes changed his mind. Stay with us. Do you want me to go first or do you want to go first, brea . You can go first. Audible reintroduced this whole world to me. So many Great Stories from amazing people. Makes me wanna be better. To connect with stories that im listening to thats inspiration. With audible originals, theres something for almost every taste in there. Everything you ever wanted to hear. Our ability to empathize through these stories can be transformational. Its my own thing that i can do for me. Download audible and start listening today. My bladder leak underwear. Orried someone might see so, i switched. To always discreet boutique. Its shapehugging threads smooth out the back. So it fits better than depend. And no one notices. Always discreet. Hendless shrimp even hotter . S you bring back Nashville Hot oh yeah its back. Crispy shrimp. Tossed in a spicy rub. And drizzled with sweet amber honey. More shrimp more ways. Endless shrimps just fifteen ninety nine. Hurry in. Pain happens. Saturdays happen. Aleve it. Aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. When pain happens, aleve it. All day strong. What might seem like a small cough can be a big bad problem for your grandchildren. Babies too young to be vaccinated against whooping cough are the most at risk for severe illness. Help prevent this talk to your doctor or pharmacist today about getting vaccinated against whooping cough. Talk to your doctor or pharmacist today with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. Fixodent ultramax hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. So now you can eat tough food without worry. Fixodent and forget it. Welcome back to state of the union. Im jake tapper. Joe biden is taking on President Trump directly this morning calling him wholly unfit to lead. He writes trump is pushing debunked conspiracy theories and smears hoping to undermine my running for the american presidency. The American People know me and they know him. To be clear the ukrainian prosecutor general says hes seen no ed of hunter biden. Joining me now a member of the Senate Judiciary committee, senator Amy Klobuchar. Thank you for joining us. Our fellow democratic senator Elizabeth Warren said on friday she had seen enough evidence to convict President Trump in an impeachment trial in the senate. Take a listen. You have seen enough evidence to convict yourself . Yes. You would vote right now to look, i think the evidence is clear. When donald trump released the transcript in which he solicited a Foreign Government to interfere in the 2020 elections, he broke the law. Senator, would you vote to convict President Trump right now . Jake, i have been very clear. I think this is impeachable. That the case should be heard by the house and it should come over to the senate. Now, i dont know what counts are going to have or how theyre going to do this, but my focus is on the fact that youve got a president thats acting like a global gangster. He is basically going to one leader after another, trying to get dirt on his political opponent. I consider that a violation of our laws. I consider it a violation of the election laws. Youve got the smoking gun document, but now youre getting even reports of another whistleblower thats going to back up with the first whistleblower says. So i am really, really focussed on getting the evidence out for the American People and really calling on our republican colleagues to take this on in this serious matter to put the country in front of their own partisanship as we get this very serious case that i believe will come over from the house. Thats right. And just to reiterate for those tuning in, the whistleblower measuring zaid who represents the first whistleblower has said hes representing a second whistleblower. Somebody who has spoken to the Intelligence CommunityInspector General and that has firsthand accounts that back up the first whistleblower. Your answer sounded like you were saying the impeachment process should go forward but you didnt say you would be ready to convict right now. I understand youre a believer in the process. Do you think its irresponsible for senators to say right now that they would vote to convict in is that irresponsible . I think people will say different things. I personally as a former prosecutor like to look at the evidence. You might convict on a number of counts and not on another one. Thats not the point here. The point is we have some of our republican colleagues that are basically treating this as a joke with very few exceptions. And they are the ones thats going to matter. Because were going to need Something Like 20 republican votes to get up to 67. You look at the fact that weve had a few glimmers of people trying to look at this differently. Senator grassley defending the whistleblower after the president implied he should be executed. You had senator romney just this last weekend being willing to come out and say what was very, very wrong about making these kinds of threats when youre in the middle of trade negotiations with china, using the leverage that should be used to help our farmers and our w