Rep. Biggs says Dems’ impeachment inquiry is off the rails


>>Harris: MIKE EMANUEL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET’S GET MORE NOW BRINGING IN REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN ANDY BIGGS. HOUSE JUDICIARY MEMBER CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS. THAT’S NEW AND CONGRATS ON THAT. GOOD TO SEE YOU.>>THANKS, HARRIS:>>Harris: FIRST OFF WITH RUDY GIULIANI. CHECK WITH LAWYERS ABOUT THAT CLIENT ATTORNEY AND EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO MAKE SURE THAT GETS WORKED OUT. HE IS ALMOST CERTAIN THAT HE WILL APPEAR.>>YEAH. I THINK RUDY GOING TO APPEAR BEFORE THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS A GOOD THING. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT. I THINK HE IS GOING TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION THAT’S GONNA COUNTER BALANCE SOME OF THIS STUFF THAT’S COMING OUT CONSTANTLY DRIP BY DRIP. CONTEXTUALLY SET UP BY THE DEMOCRATS. I HOPE HE DOES GO AND SAYS WHAT’S ON HIS MIND BECAUSE I THINK HE HAS SOME FACTS THAT WE ARE JUST NOT HEARING.>>Harris: ALL RIGHT. THAT’S ON THE SENATE SIDE. I WANTED TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT. YOU ARE ALSO JUDICIARY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CHAMBER THERE. SO THIS SUBPOENA FROM DEMOCRATS TODAY, TALK TO ME ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS AND I DO WANT TO BRING THIS UP IF I CAN FROM AMBASSADOR SONDLAND, THOSE TEXT MESSAGES FROM FORMER AMBASSADOR OF UKRAINE BILL TAYLOR. TAYLOR SAYS AS I SAID ON THE PHONE I THINK IT’S CRAZY TO WITHHOLD SECURITY ASSISTANCE FOR HELP WITH A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN. GORDON SONDLAND SAYS BILL, I BELIEVE YOU ARE INCORRECT ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S INTENTIONS. THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN CRYSTAL CLEAR NO QUID PRO QUO OF ANY KIND. BUT THE PRESIDENT, WHITE HOUSE BLOCKING SONDLAND FROM TESTIFYING. AND YOU SAY WHAT?>>WELL, WE REALLY DON’T HAVE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. WE DON’T HAVE EVEN HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ACTING LIKE A HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. WHAT YOU HAVE IS A CHAIRMAN AND HIS COMMITTEE MEMBERS ROOTING AROUND HOPING TO CONTEXTUALLY SET SOMETHING UP FOR AN IMPEACHMENT. AND SO I THINK THE PRESIDENT IS EXACTLY RIGHT HERE. THIS THING IS OFF THE RAILS. THERE IS NO PROCESS. THERE IS NO PROCEDURE. OF THE HOUSE RULES, THE HOUSE PRECEDENCE, NONE OF THOSE ARE BEING FOLLOWED. AND THEY ARE DOING IT BECAUSE THEY’RE HELL BENT ON TRYING TO IMPEACH THIS PRESIDENT, WHICH DOESN’T MAKE SENSE TO ME. I THINK THE PRESIDENT KNOWS THAT THE AMBASSADOR WOULD ACTUALLY BE HELPFUL TO HIM WITH HIS TESTIMONY.>>Harris: INTERESTING.>>YEAH, BUT YOU HAVE CLOSED DOOR HEARINGS GOING ON FOR PETE’S SAKE.>>Harris: I WANT TO STEP IN WITH THIS NUGGET OF INFORMATION THAT WE ARE LEARNING ABOUT AMBASSADOR SONDLAND AND THAT BETWEEN THOSE TEXT MESSAGES THERE WERE SEVERAL HOURS THAT PASSED AND SOMETIMES THAT HAPPENS. YOU COULD BE OUT TO DINNER. WHO KNOWS. IN THAT TIME WE DO KNOW THAT SONDLAND ACTUALLY TALKED WITH THE PRESIDENT BEFORE HE CAME BACK AND SAID NO QUID PRO QUO OF ANY KIND. I KNOW YOU SAY THAT HE COULD PROBABLY HELP THE PRESIDENT, COULD HE?>>YEAH. I THINK HE COULD BE HELPFUL.>>Harris: THAT’S NOT PROBLEMATIC TO YOU.>>LOOK, NOT REALLY. I WILL TELL YOU WHY. IF I RECEIVED SOME KIND OF TEXT. I MIGHT CALL THE PRESIDENT AND SAY LOOK, YOU KNOW, WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THIS IS THIS. MAYBE HE IS CONFIRMING IT. I DON’T THINK THAT’S PROBLEMATIC. I DON’T THINK THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE RELEASED AND LEAKED TO THE WHOLE WORLD AND YET, THIS STUFF KEEPS COMING OUT TO THE WHOLE WORLD BUT I DON’T THINK IT’S PROBLEMATIC FOR HIM TO SAY, LOOK. THAT’S NOT WHAT THE PRESIDENT WAS DOING. AND, YOU KNOW WHAT? IF THIS WAS AN OPEN DOOR HEARING AND NORMAL IMPEACHMENT HEARING, THE PRESIDENT’S COUNSEL WOULD BE THERE REPUBLICANS COULD SUBPOENA WITNESSES. AND YOU COULD MAYBE GET TO THE BOTTOM OF ALL OF THIS AND GET TO SOMETHING THAT MAKES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENED. BUT THE WAY THIS IS HAPPENING WITH THE DEMOCRATS IN CHARGE, IS JUST ABSOLUTELY UTTERLY SO BIASED BIASED.>>Harris: CONGRESSMAN, DO YOU SEE US GOING DOWN THAT ROAD? NANCY PELOSI KNOWS AT SOME POINT THE PRESIDENT IS PUSHING THROUGH A LETTER THAT HE WANTS A FULL IMPEACHMENT VOTE — ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT VOTE ON THE HOUSE. SHE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE THE VOTES. EVERYWHERE I’M READING SHE IS SHORT BY AT LEAST EIGHT. DO YOU THINK WE ARE GOING IN THAT DIRECTION? DO YOU THINK WE WILL GET THERE. THAT WAY THE REPUBLICANS CAN SUBPOENA AND THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE?>>WELL, I THINK THE REASON SHE DID THE WAY SHE DID BECAUSE SHE DOESN’T HAVE THE VOTE. HER BASE PEOPLE CONTROL HER WITHIN CONGRESS. THE FACTION IN CONGRESS REALLY LEFT PUSHED HER REAL HARD ON IT. I THINK ULTIMATELY SHE IS GOING TO KEEP PUSHING TO GET THE VOTES. EVEN THOUGH I THINK SHE KNOWS IT’S A HUGE MISTAKE. AND THE REALITY IS, IF SHE DOES, THEN WE GET SOME — THEN WE GET SOME AUTHORITY BACK THAT THEY ARE DENYING TO US, IF THEY FOLLOW THE RULES. BUT THEY HAVEN’T FOLLOWED THEM SO FAR, WHY WHY EXPECT THAT THEY WOULD?>>Harris: YOU KNOW, CONGRESSMAN, HAVE YOU INTRODUCED A RESOLUTION TO CENSURE ADAM SCHIFF OVER HIS PARODY READING OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S PHONE CALL WITH THE UKRAINE PRESIDENT. THAT HAPPENED DURING A RECENT HOUSE HEARING. WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING TO DO HERE?>>WELL, I THINK WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MR. SCHIFF IS COMPLETELY OFF THE RAILS. YOU DON’T — IF THIS TRULY WERE AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, HARRIS, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A CLOSED DOOR HEARING. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO PREVENT THE REPUBLICANS FROM HAVING ACCESS TO COUNSEL FOR THE PRESIDENT. THE WAY THIS IS UNFOLDED IS ABSOLUTELY AN ABUSE OF POWER AND AUTHORITY. AND THAT’S REALLY WHAT WE ARE GETTING AT. SO WHEN YOU STAND UP BEFORE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND I MISLEAD THEM WITH THAT PHONY PARODY, AND IT INDICATES YOU DON’T TAKE IT SERIOUSLY BECAUSE IT’S A PARODY, THAT’S MEANT TO BE COMEDIC, NUMBER TWO. THAT MEANS YOU DON’T TAKE IT SERIOUSLY BECAUSE YOU ARE INJECTING AND FALSIFYING INFORMATION IN EVIDENCE. THAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH MR. SCHIFF.>>Harris: ALL RIGHT, OUR VIEWERS RIGHT NOW AND I DON’T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE, THIS WE ARE SCROLLING THE NAMES OF 83 REPUBLICANS WHO ARE CO-SPONSORING YOUR BILL TO CENSURE SCHIFF. YOU KNOW, AMERICANS WILL LOOK AT THIS. THEY HEAR THINGS LIKE CENSURE AND CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS AND NOTHING EVER SEEMS TO HAPPEN. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DOES IS THE END GAME HERE AND DOES IT AFFECT THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AT ALL?>>WELL, THE END GAME WOULD BE THAT THEY NEED TO GET SOMEONE IN CHARGE OF IT, A REAL IMPEACHMENT.>>Harris: WHO WOULD YOU RATHER SEE?>>YOU KNOW WHAT? NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NON NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NOE NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NOO NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NOF NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NOT NOPE OF THE CHAIRMAN THAT — NOE CHAIRMAN INVOLVED IN THIS MAXINE WATERS, CUMMINGS, ELLIOTT OR ADAM SCHIFF, JERRY NADLER HAS BLOWN IT AS WELL. THEY ARE NOT FAIR ARBITERS. SO THERE HAS GOT TO BE SOMEBODY. I BELIEVE THERE ARE FAIR ARBITERS BUT THEY MAY BE YOUNGER AND INEXPERIENCED AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PUT THEM UP TO BE CHAIRMAN OF A COMMITTEE LIKE THIS. SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT CAME INTO CONGRESS WHEN I DID, THEY DON’T HAVE THE SENIORITY SO THEY WILL NOT GET THE OPPORTUNITY, I THINK THEY WOULD BE FAIR ARBITERS. I DON’T WANT TO SAY THEIR NAMES BECAUSE THEY WILL GET THROWN UNDER THE BUS BY THE LEFT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT I THINK ARE FAIR.>>Harris: THAT’S INTERESTING. THAT’S AN HONEST ANSWER. REALLY, WHAT I KIND OF EXPECT YOU TO SAY WELL, I DON’T WANT IMPEACHMENT I’M NOT PICKING ANYBODY. BUT YOU GAVE A REALLY HONEST ANSWER AND THANK YOU VERY

Posts created 6838

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top