Stay updated with breaking news from Article i. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
you are not legally in this country and you must be removed. those are the people that will be removed. if you have a court order, this is a nation of laws, and guess what? if we're not going to enforce our court orders, then you basically have no borders, boundaries, and rule of law anymore and you have provided additional incentive for people to come in. charles: the supreme court sent back the administration's request to have the citizenship question answered placed on the census report. the administration still trying to figure out whether or not they want to pursue this. the clock is obviously ticking. the report has cob compiled and then -- the report has to be compiled and then of course printed out. where do you come down on this? what essentially in your mind perhaps did the supreme court miss? >> well, i think the supreme court missed at least two things. number one is the purpose of the census is an enumeration for creating congressional districts, article i, section 2, that's as basic as it gets.
let's take a look at that. >> i mean, what's wrong with putting america first because we have all these old trade agreements that are like nafta that took a lot of jobs. >> do you think he honors the constitution? >> what's that again? >> does he honor the constitution? >> i believe he honors the constitution. >> everybody else agree? >> he took an oath. he took an oath to honor the constitution. >> thank you, sir. let me go to another person here. back here. do you want to respond to what he just said? >> i most certainly do. he does not honor the constitution. and i can tell you a couple of places where he doesn't. number one, article i, section 9, the emoluments clause. let's go for that. >> well, i asked the voters in dayton, republicans and democrats how many of them think trump lies. their response spoke volumes. that's coming up next. oh! oh!
president having a personal interest at stake. so, this is part of the regular discovery process. again, this is written right into our constitution. the president had an opportunity to essentially divest himself of his ownership interests. he chose not to. and now it's perfectly appropriate for congress to determine whether there is a constitutional violation. >> yeah, it's the emoluments clause, article i, section ix, clause viii says that no president should accept any emolument, present of any kind from any king, prince or foreign state. that's what you're referring to. let's turn to the latest fight, senator, between president trump and former vice president joe biden. it all started with the president embracing kim jong-un as the north korean dictator taunted biden now biden says the president is behaving underneath the dignity of the office. that's what biden's campaign is saying. what do you make of that?
government, and the extraordinary nature of the president usurping the constitutional powers of the legislative branch, article i, immediately following the preamble. and that's why we were so please and we were able to succeed in passing that legislation. oh, did i mention that, over the leadership of joaquin castro. and now, it's in the senate where leaders are asking the president to withdraw by the constitution of the united states. >> madam speaker -- >> thank you. >> nancy pelosi on that big news, you know, we're going to do a resolution, maybe not. now it's on again. i want to go to garrett haake on capitol hill. so, they're going to take a vote, and what exactly is this going to say? >> chris, they'll take a vote and they'll take a voting today. that response from kasie hunt who had asked the speaker about what had gone on with this resolution that started out as
says look, these investigations are presidential harassment. those are the words he's using. and obviously, the requests are extraordinarily broad in terms of what they're -- documents they're asking for, people and organizations they're requesting information from. are democrats in danger of overreaching by making such broad requests? >> no, not at all. we are just upholding our end of the constitution, which says that we have the right to do this. article i, and i can just speak for me. i'm not out to get the president. i'm out to get the truth. >> you know, obviously, i mentioned lindsey graham, who had back in the day been one of the leaders of the impeachment charge against president clinton, but he's not alone. there are other republicans defending the president. senator john cornyn among them. here he is today. >> i think what the democrats are worried about now is that after all of the hysteria over the alleged collusion that they're worried the mueller
congress, about the power of the purse. you've heard me say over and over again, article i, the legislative branch, the power of the purse, the power to declare war, many other powers listed in the constitution, and of course, the responsibility to have oversight. so the president is doing an end run around that. it is. we will review our options and be prepared to respond appropriately to it. i know the republicans have some unease about it, no matter what they say, because if the president can declare an emergency on something that he has created as an emergency, an illusion that he wants to convey, just think of what a president with different values can present to the american people. you want to talk about a national emergency? let's talk about today, the one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in america. that's a national emergency. why don't you declare that emergency, mr. president?
both categories are in his constitutional purview. now, this is vice chairman of the appropriations committee. don't be surprised if i disagree. congress has the power of the purse, article i, section ix. i believe it's one of the most foundational checks and balances on the executive branch. do you believe the president can ignore congress's appropriations allocations conditions, just ignore them and take -- >> not as a general proposition. but that was a -- i thought that was a good law review article. i gave it as a speech and it was a thought piece. what i was really saying was -- and i say right up front the more i thought about the appropriations power the more c confused i got. i was laying out a potential template, which is this.
the president? >> well, i think that what mitch mcconnell is doing, and i say this as respectfully as possible, is saying we're not needed. congressman may as well stay home. all we need it one person to show up -- donald trump. and that's not what our founders had in mind. they talked about coequal branches of government. article i, the legislative branch, the peoples' branch of government. the president can sign or not, but he should never say i'm not even going to put it on the president's desk. what he signed, and we could have sent a bill of our own making, but we said we'll send exactly what the senate passed with over 90 votes on the floor of the senate or unanimously in committee. we sent that exactly. and then for our separate bill, our homeland security, we took their language exactly.
them back on it floor unless the president approves of them. how do you get around this conundrum if the other half of the first branch of government will only act at the behest of the president? >> well, i think that what mitch mcconnell is doing, and i say this as respectfully as possible, is saying we're not needed. congressman may as well stay home. all we need it one person to show up -- donald trump. and that's not what our founders had in mind. they talked about coequal branches of government. article i, the legislative branch, the peoples' branch of government. the president can sign or not, but he should never say i'm not even going to put it on the president's desk. what he signed, and we could have sent a bill of our own making, but we said we'll send exactly what the senate passed with over 90 votes on the floor of the senate or unanimously in
>> mitch mcconnell, your colleague, your counterpart in the senate, has made it clear that even though these were senate bills that were passed by republicans, that he won't put them back on the floor unless the president approves of them. how do you get around conundrum? >> i think what mitch mcconnell is doing, and i say this as respectfully as possible is saying we're not needed. congress might as well stay home. all we need is one, one person to show up, donald trump. and that's not what our founders had in mind. they talked about coequal branches of government. article i, the legislative branch, the people's branch of government. >> and joy reid joins me now. again, counting down to that town hall here tonight. joy, a lot of interesting stuff in here. but to connect it to what we've been talking about, what everybody is talking about right now, the shutdown is still