1796: Live Updates : Vimarsana.com : Live Updates Every Minute from 25K+ News Agencies Across the Globe

gotten a pass on anything in this last year. she's the attacks on her are as tough as they could possibly be. carly fiorina is a whole other bucket of problems for women and hillary is pretty clear. we have both written about this. carly's issue with women is her policies. she's not for women's health. and hillary clinton is going to stand on strong ground with all women voters. >> what do you think? >> since 1796 we have had 5 nominees for president of the united states. all of them have been male. while we have had had two women to save on major party tickets, those tickets lost. so this is an opportunity to lift up women. we're the majority of voters, the majority of who will go out and support candidates. and half of our delegates will be female. when she gave him that look, it's important to lift up women.

since our country's birth. our nation's founders were secretly worried about the foreign intervention. working with a foreign government would be considered a high crime or misdemeanor. james madison argued it was indispensable that some provision be made for defending a country. foreign governments have repeatedly tried to influence u.s. elections. ahead of the 1796 election the u.s. was worried about interference from france. french officials were working to oust federalists like alexander hamilton in favor of republicans like thomas jefferson because they were more supportive of france's war with britain. george washington said in his farewell address, foreign influence is one of the most

to help that. it is going to make things really that much worse. president turley said we are living in the era fears from our founders and what hamilton referred to as a period of agitated passions. i think that said if t so well. this is an age of rage. president washington warned in his farewell address in 1796 that extreme partisanship would lead us to the ruins of public liberty. those were his words. this hyper partisan impeachment is probably one of the most divisive and destructive things that we could possibly do to our american family. let me tell you what i heard from my constituents in multiple town halls and meetings back in my district just two days ago. the people of the country are sick of this. they're sick of the politics of personal destruction, they're sick of the toxic atmosphere that is being created here and they're deeply concerned about where all this will lead us in the years ahead. rightfully so. you know what the greatest threat is, the thing that ought to keep every single one of us up at night is the rapidly

thanks for recognizing me. >> i yield back the balance of my time. >> gentleman yields back for what purpose -- what purposes seeking recognition? >> strike the last word. >> gentleman is recognized. >> mr. chairman, i have to offer a different perspective on this. the doctrine of executive privilege actually began with a subpoena that the house issued to president george washington in 1796 demanding all the papers relating to the jay treaty. president washington refused that subpoena, because he said that the powers of the house did not extend to treaties. he only provided that information to the senate as a function of its treaty approval process. so -- and the doctrine that dates back to those days is derived from the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

and impeachment yet could not serve that role if the house were unable to investigate the president for high crimes and disdemeanors and this is recognized early on starting with the first president. in 1796, the house requested that president washington provided with sensitive diplomatic materials relating to the hugely unpopular gray treaty with great britain. president washington declined because the request included upon his executive function, but washington agreed that impeachment would change his calculus. in the ensuing debates it is noted on the house floor that washington had admitted quote that where the house expresses an intention to impeach, the right to demand from the executive all papers and information in his possession belongs to it. all papers an information. this was only the first of many references to that point in our constitutional tradition. for example, less than 40 years

built early part san and this ugly chapter is not going to help it. it's going to make it worse. president turley said we're living in the era that was feared by our founders. what hamilton renerd to as a period of agitated passions. that says it well. this is indeed a age of rage. president washington said in 1796 that extreme partisanship would lead us to the ruins of public liberty. this is one of the most divisive and destructive things that we can do to our american family. let me tell you what i heard from constituents in multiple town halls and meetings in my district two days ago. the people of this country are sick of this. they're sick of the politics of personal destruction, sick of this toxic atmosphere that is being created here and deeply concerned about where all this will lead us in the years ahead. rightfully so. you know what the greatest threat is? the thing that ought to keep every one of us up at night?

news for freedom in the united states. i yield back, thanks for recognizing me. >> i yield back to balance my time. >> the gentleman yields back. >> strike the last word mr. chairman. >> the chairman is recognized. >> mr. chairman i have to offer a different perspective on this. the doctrine of executive privilege actually began with the subpoena that the house issued to president george washington in 1796 related to all the papers in the jay treaty. president washington refused that subpoena and he's of the power of the house does not extend the treaties. not only do you provide that information to the senate as a function of a treaty approval process. the doctrine which dates back to those days is derived from a separation of powers between

president in these calls but rudy giuliani and omb, devin nunes and lev parnas. these are call logs that show interaction and it is a very big question and a very confusing question, why was rudy giuliani in touch with the office of management and budget? what business could he have had as the president's personal attorney that deals with finances? >> i will tell people, it's not often you want to read things like this but this is 300 pages. it is actually full of detail. there's a lot in here. thank you for your excellent coverage, my friend. thank you. it is tuesday, december 3rd. 223 years ago on september 17, 1796, president george washington wrote this in his farewell address. cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be able to subvert the power of the people and ewe surp the rains of government destroying the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

and00 it is not a piece of good news for freedom in the united states. and ied yield back to mr. negus with thanks for recognizing me. >> and i yield back the balance of my time. >> gentleman yields back. what purpose does mr. mclien tock seek recognition? >> to strike the last word, mr. chairman. mr. chairman,t i have to offer different perspective on this. the -- the doctrine of executive privilege actually began with a subpoena that the house issued tous president george washingto in 1796 demanding all the papers related to the jal treaty. president washington refused that subpoena because he said that the powers of the house did not extend to treaties. he ultimately only provided that information to the senate as a function of its treaty approval process. so the -- and the doctrine that dates back to those days is

that everything in washington has become bitterly partisan, and this ugly chapter is not going to help that, it's going to make things really that much worse. president turley said earlier that we are now living in theira that was feared by our founders, what hamilton referred to as a period of agitated passions. i think that says it so well. this has indeed become an age of rage. president washington warned in his farewell address in 1796 that extreme partisanship would lead us to the ruins of public liberty. those were his words. this hyperpartisan impeachment is probably one of the most divisive and instructive things that we could possibly do to our american family. let me tell you what i heard from my constituents in multiple townhalls just two days ago. the people of this country are sick of this. they are sick of the politics of personal destruction. they are sick of this toxic atmosphere that is being created here. and they are deeply concerned about where all this will lead us in the years ahead. rightfully so. you know what the greatest

goating the executive to a refusal and treating that as impeachable, the house would effectively be able to function with a no confidence vote power. now, that is not the framers' design. the legislative and executive branchs frequently clash on questions of constitutional interpretation, including about congressional demands for information. these conflicts have happened since the founding in 1796. george washington, first psz resisted demands from congress for information about injay treaty. and there have been conflicts between the president and congress in virtually every administration since then about congressional demands for information. the founding fathers expected the branchs to have these conflicts. james madison pointed out that the legislative, executive and judicial departments must, in the exercise of their functions, be guided by the text of the

yet impeachment could not serve that role if the house were unable to investigate the president for suspected high crimes and misdemeanors. this is recognized early on starting with a very first president. in 1796, the house requested that president washington provide it with sensitive diplomatic materials related to the unpopular jay treaty with great britain. he declined. since this request intruded upon the executive functions. but washington agreed it would change the calculus and then noted on the house floor that washington had admitted, quote, that where the house expresses an intention to impeach, the right to demand from the executive all papers and information in his possession belongs to it. all papers and information. this was only the fist of many references to that point in our constitutional tradition.

executive branch are supposed to be co-equal and saying you can't check us when checks and balances are fundamental to how this country was established. >> it's laid out for people who want to read about what the framers intended. the branches of government, we start the constitution with the legislative branches. they intended for congress to be equal with the president but to still be a pillar to understand that we are not electing a king. we're not electing a dictator. these people are to do their jobs to represent the constitution and the united states. citizens in the best of their ability to make sure there's no overreach. as i've said before on this network, george washington in 1796, warned us about the influence of foreign powers which we're seeing now. the second part of that address is really helping the country recognize that we cannot have a

have been grossly overbroad from the house of representatives and i think the letter from the white house counsel is very overbroad. there is no such thing as saying constitutionally, you don't get to do a do over and congressional authority to investigate is very broad. these battles have gone back through the beginning of the republic. go back to 1796, congress wanted president washington's papers and he said you're not going to get them. ms. madison said, he was a congressman, we have a right to do anything we ask for it but the president has a right to say i don't want to give it to youny and this is part of the checks and balances. >> laura: we will have the executive on to something the left is saying. there is a piece saying, they are trying to say they have a divine right to the information. they are always jockeying for power.

>> i think both sides have a problem, i think the subpoenas have been grossly overbroad from the house of representatives and i think the letter from the white house counsel is very overbroad. there is no such thing as saying constitutionally, you don't get to do a do over and congressional authority to investigate is very broad. these battles have gone back through the beginning of the republic. go back to 1796, congress wanted president washington's papers and he said you're not going to get them. ms. madison said, he was a congressman, we have a right to do anything we ask for it but the president has a right to say i don't want to give it to you and this is part of the checks and balances. >> laura: we will have the executive on to something the left is saying. there is a piece saying, they are trying to say they have a divine right to the information.

the code red procedures. what latitude will different school districts had. we already have senate bill 1796 that was passed last year. i gave them a lot more authority and responsibility there was no criminal or civil penalties attached to that. they were trying to protect the children and educators and were getting the most pushback from some of them in some areas of florida. we are in a wrap up our game. and we can ask our legislators to make the schools engage with us to keep children safe. >> there are many who oppose measures like this.