>>> HERE IS SOME OF THAT >>> HERE IS SOME OF THAT INTERVIEW WHERE GEORGE INTERVIEW WHERE GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS LED THE PRESIDENT STEPHANOPOULOS LED THE PRESIDENT THROUGH A SERIES OF QUESTIONS IN THROUGH A SERIES OF QUESTIONS IN WHICH THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT HE WHICH THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT HE WAS ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO BREAK WAS ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO BREAK THE LAW AND ACCEPT HELP FROM A THE LAW AND ACCEPT HELP FROM A FOREIGN NATIONAL OR A FOREIGN FOREIGN NATIONAL OR A FOREIGN COUNTRY IN HIS RE-ELECTION COUNTRY IN HIS RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

CAMPAIGN.

LET’S LISTEN TO THIS PIECE OF LET’S LISTEN TO THIS PIECE OF IT.

IT.

>> I’VE SEEN A LOT OF THINGS >> I’VE SEEN A LOT OF THINGS OVER MY LIFE.

OVER MY LIFE.

I DON’T THINK IN MY WHOLE LIFE I DON’T THINK IN MY WHOLE LIFE I’VE EVER CALLED THE FBI IN MY I’VE EVER CALLED THE FBI IN MY WHOLE LIFE.

WHOLE LIFE.

YOU DON’T CALL THE FBI.

YOU DON’T CALL THE FBI.

>> YOU DON’T CALL THE FBI.

>> YOU DON’T CALL THE FBI.

THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES SAYS.

UNITED STATES SAYS.

THE DIRECTOR OF THE FBI IN THE DIRECTOR OF THE FBI IN TESTIMONY JUST A MONTH AGO TO TESTIMONY JUST A MONTH AGO TO CONGRESS SAID YOU ABSOLUTELY DO CONGRESS SAID YOU ABSOLUTELY DO CALL THE FBI.

CALL THE FBI.

YOU MUST CALL THE FBI IN THAT YOU MUST CALL THE FBI IN THAT SITUATION.

SITUATION.

JOINING OUR DISCUSSION NOW IS JOINING OUR DISCUSSION NOW IS SAM STEIN, POT O POLITICS EDER SAM STEIN, POT O POLITICS EDER TO "THE DAILY BEAST," CHUCK TO "THE DAILY BEAST," CHUCK ROSENBURG IS STILL WITH US.

ROSENBURG IS STILL WITH US.

SAM, YOU’RE READING WHAT THIS SAM, YOU’RE READING WHAT THIS STORY MEANS FOR THE PRESIDENT STORY MEANS FOR THE PRESIDENT TONIGHT.

TONIGHT.

>> ON THE ONE HAND, IT’S >> ON THE ONE HAND, IT’S STUNNING.

STUNNING.

IT’S A STUNNING ADMISSION THAT IT’S A STUNNING ADMISSION THAT IN FACT, HE PROBABLY DOES FEEL IN FACT, HE PROBABLY DOES FEEL LIKE HE NEEDS A FOREIGN LIKE HE NEEDS A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT’S HELP FOR GOVERNMENT’S HELP FOR RE-ELECTION.

RE-ELECTION.

IT’S STUNNING TO HEAR SOMEONE IT’S STUNNING TO HEAR SOMEONE UTTER THE WORDS THAT HE DID IN UTTER THE WORDS THAT HE DID IN THAT POSITION.

THAT POSITION.

KNOWING OF COURSE, THAT HE’S IN KNOWING OF COURSE, THAT HE’S IN THE MIDST OF A TWO-PLUS YEAR THE MIDST OF A TWO-PLUS YEAR LONG INVESTIGATION INTO ACTIONS LONG INVESTIGATION INTO ACTIONS DIRECTLY LIKE THIS.

DIRECTLY LIKE THIS.

IT’S JUST A SHEER ALMOST IT’S JUST A SHEER ALMOST POLITICAL AND LEGAL MALPRACTICE.

POLITICAL AND LEGAL MALPRACTICE.

IT’S NOT STUNNING AT ALL ON THE IT’S NOT STUNNING AT ALL ON THE OTHER HAND.

OTHER HAND.

THIS IS HOW TRUMP IS.

THIS IS HOW TRUMP IS.

HE VIEWS THE WORLD IN A VERY HE VIEWS THE WORLD IN A VERY BINARY FASHION.

BINARY FASHION.

THINGS GOOD FOR HIM ARE GOOD AND THINGS GOOD FOR HIM ARE GOOD AND THINGS BAD FOR HIM ARE BAD.

THINGS BAD FOR HIM ARE BAD.

IF A GOVERNMENT WANTS TO HELP IF A GOVERNMENT WANTS TO HELP HIM, THAT CAN’T BE BAD.

HIM, THAT CAN’T BE BAD.

WHAT STRUCK ME IS NOT WHAT STRUCK ME IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THIS MEANS FOR NECESSARILY WHAT THIS MEANS FOR TRUMP HONESTLY.

TRUMP HONESTLY.

WHAT STRUCK ME IS WHAT THIS WHAT STRUCK ME IS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR DEMOCRATS.

MEANS FOR DEMOCRATS.

FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE HE TOOK FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE HE TOOK OVER THE HOUSE, THE CONSTANT OVER THE HOUSE, THE CONSTANT REFRAIN WHEN WE HEARD TRUMP SAY REFRAIN WHEN WE HEARD TRUMP SAY THINGS LIKE THERE, WILL THE THINGS LIKE THERE, WILL THE REPUBLICAN PARTY EVER STAND UP REPUBLICAN PARTY EVER STAND UP TO HIM AND THE ANSWER WAS ALMOST TO HIM AND THE ANSWER WAS ALMOST UNIVERSALLY NO.

UNIVERSALLY NO.

THAT CHANGED IN JANUARY OF 2018, THAT CHANGED IN JANUARY OF 2018, SORRY, 2019.

SORRY, 2019.

WHEN THE DRAZ TOOK OVER THE WHEN THE DRAZ TOOK OVER THE HOUSE.

HOUSE.

SUDDENLY, THE ONUS OF SUDDENLY, THE ONUS OF RESPONSIBILITY FELL ON THEM RESPONSIBILITY FELL ON THEM BECAUSE THEY HAD THE POWER TO DO BECAUSE THEY HAD THE POWER TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE INFLECTION THIS IS ONE OF THOSE INFLECTION POINTS AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY POINTS AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY BUT THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ONE BUT THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ONE WHERE NO LONGER DO WE SAY AN WHERE NO LONGER DO WE SAY AN REPUBLICANS WE KNOW WHAT THEY’RE REPUBLICANS WE KNOW WHAT THEY’RE GOING TO DO.

GOING TO DO.

IT’S WHAT WILL THE DEMOCRATS DO.

IT’S WHAT WILL THE DEMOCRATS DO.

WILL IT BE ENOUGH TO SAY WE’RE WILL IT BE ENOUGH TO SAY WE’RE GOING TO LOOK INTO THIS, AND GOING TO LOOK INTO THIS, AND HAUL SOMEONE BEFORE A COMMITTEE HAUL SOMEONE BEFORE A COMMITTEE OR WILL THERE BE AMPLIFIED OR WILL THERE BE AMPLIFIED PRESSURE TO BEGIN IMPEACHMENT PRESSURE TO BEGIN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OVER HIS COMMENTS LIKE INQUIRY OVER HIS COMMENTS LIKE THAT.

THAT.

MY EARLY READING IS THAT THE MY EARLY READING IS THAT THE ANSWER IS PROBABLY NO.

ANSWER IS PROBABLY NO.

THAT THIS WILL FALL INTO THE THAT THIS WILL FALL INTO THE ETHER OF TRADITIONALLY LOONY ETHER OF TRADITIONALLY LOONY TRUMP COMEENTS.

TRUMP COMEENTS.

>> WE’VE GOT SOMEONE TO ANSWER >> WE’VE GOT SOMEONE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU, SAM.

THAT QUESTION FOR YOU, SAM.

JOINED BY LLOYD DOGGETT, ONE OF JOINED BY LLOYD DOGGETT, ONE OF THE SENIOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE THE SENIOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.

WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.

CONGRESSMAN TO, SAM STEIN’S CONGRESSMAN TO, SAM STEIN’S QUESTION, WHAT DOES THIS QUESTION, WHAT DOES THIS BREAKING NEWS DUE TO THE BREAKING NEWS DUE TO THE IMPEACHMENT MOMENTUM IN THE IMPEACHMENT MOMENTUM IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES? HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES? >> I THINK IT ADDS MORE REASON >> I THINK IT ADDS MORE REASON FOR US TO MOVE AHEAD WITH AN FOR US TO MOVE AHEAD WITH AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.

IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.

THE PRESIDENT’S COMMENTS ARE THE PRESIDENT’S COMMENTS ARE ASTOUNDING.

ASTOUNDING.

THEY’RE ALARMING.

THEY’RE ALARMING.

THEY’RE A THREAT TO OUR NATIONAL THEY’RE A THREAT TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.

SECURITY.

IT’S AS IF WE WERE BACK IN 2016 IT’S AS IF WE WERE BACK IN 2016 AND SESAYING RUSSIA, IF YOU ARE AND SESAYING RUSSIA, IF YOU ARE LISTENING.

LISTENING.

TONIGHT HE’S REALLY SAYING THE TONIGHT HE’S REALLY SAYING THE SAME THING NOT ONLY TO RUSSIA SAME THING NOT ONLY TO RUSSIA BUT TO ALL OUR ADVERSARIES.

BUT TO ALL OUR ADVERSARIES.

HE IS FOR ONCE TELLING THE TRUTH HE IS FOR ONCE TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT HE WOULD DO AND I ABOUT WHAT HE WOULD DO AND I SUPPOSE THE HEADS OF CRIMINAL SUPPOSE THE HEADS OF CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS DON’T TELL THE FBI ORGANIZATIONS DON’T TELL THE FBI BUT WE EXPECT MORE OF OUR BUT WE EXPECT MORE OF OUR PRESIDENT.

PRESIDENT.

AND SO I DO FIND I THINK SAM IS AND SO I DO FIND I THINK SAM IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

I DO FIND THAT STILL ASTOUNDING I DO FIND THAT STILL ASTOUNDING THAT REPUBLICAN ENABLERS WILL BE THAT REPUBLICAN ENABLERS WILL BE SILENT OR WILL MAKE SOME EXCUSE SILENT OR WILL MAKE SOME EXCUSE FOR THE PRESIDENT BUT NOW WE’RE FOR THE PRESIDENT BUT NOW WE’RE TO JUNE.

TO JUNE.

HALFWAY THROUGH THIS YEAR, AND HALFWAY THROUGH THIS YEAR, AND DEMOCRATS HAVE YET TO GO TO DEMOCRATS HAVE YET TO GO TO COURT TORE ENFORCE SUBPOENAS, COURT TORE ENFORCE SUBPOENAS, REQUIRING ANYONE TO COME BEFORE REQUIRING ANYONE TO COME BEFORE THE CONGRESS OR REQUIRING THE THE CONGRESS OR REQUIRING THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS OF LATE.

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS OF LATE.

IT’S TIME FOR US TO ACT TO BEGIN IT’S TIME FOR US TO ACT TO BEGIN THIS INQUIRY AND IF YOUR MEMBER THIS INQUIRY AND IF YOUR MEMBER OF CONGRESS WON’T ACT, THEN THE OF CONGRESS WON’T ACT, THEN THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO SAY WHY NOT AND PUBLIC NEEDS TO SAY WHY NOT AND TO ASK THEIR MEMBER TO REFLECT TO ASK THEIR MEMBER TO REFLECT THEIR CONCERN THAT WE HAVE A THEIR CONCERN THAT WE HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO IS ENGAGED IN ONE PRESIDENT WHO IS ENGAGED IN ONE CRIMINAL ACT AFTER ANOTHER WHO CRIMINAL ACT AFTER ANOTHER WHO ALWAYS PUTS HIMSELF FIRST AND ALWAYS PUTS HIMSELF FIRST AND OUR NATION LAST.

OUR NATION LAST.

>> AND CONGRESSMAN, WE NOW HAVE >> AND CONGRESSMAN, WE NOW HAVE A PRESIDENT TONIGHT WHO IS A PRESIDENT TONIGHT WHO IS SAYING HE WOULD VIOLATE THE LAW.

SAYING HE WOULD VIOLATE THE LAW.

HE IS WILLING TO DO THAT AND SO HE IS WILLING TO DO THAT AND SO I’VE NEVER SEEN IN THE I’VE NEVER SEEN IN THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS, THERE HAS IMPEACHMENT PROCESS, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN IN THE IMPEACHMENT NEVER BEEN IN THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS AN ISSUE INVOLVING THE PROCESS AN ISSUE INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT’S FUTURE BEHAVIOR.

PRESIDENT’S FUTURE BEHAVIOR.

YOU NOW HAVE IT SEEMS POSSIBLE YOU NOW HAVE IT SEEMS POSSIBLE NOW TO CRAFT AN ARTICLE OF NOW TO CRAFT AN ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT EVENTUALLY THAT IMPEACHMENT EVENTUALLY THAT WOULD SAY BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT WOULD SAY BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT SAYS THAT HE WILL DO THIS, HE SAYS THAT HE WILL DO THIS, HE WILL VIOLATE THE LAW IN THE WILL VIOLATE THE LAW IN THE FUTURE, WE VOTE TO REMOVE HIM FUTURE, WE VOTE TO REMOVE HIM FROM OFFICE.

FROM OFFICE.

THERE’S SOME VERSION OF AN THERE’S SOME VERSION OF AN ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT HERE THAT ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT HERE THAT ACTUALLY HAS A FUTURE TENSE IN ACTUALLY HAS A FUTURE TENSE IN IT AND I DON’T THINK WE’VE EVER IT AND I DON’T THINK WE’VE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE.

SEEN THAT BEFORE.

>> LAWRENCE, HE THINK THAT’S >> LAWRENCE, HE THINK THAT’S RIGHT.

RIGHT.

OF COURSE, WE NEED AN OF COURSE, WE NEED AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO PERHAPS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO PERHAPS NARROW IT DOWN A BIT BECAUSE NARROW IT DOWN A BIT BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE CRIMINAL WRONGDOING THAT IS AN CRIMINAL WRONGDOING THAT IS AN APPARENT HERE, IT WOULD BE APPARENT HERE, IT WOULD BE ENCYCLOPED DICK IMPEACHMENT ENCYCLOPED DICK IMPEACHMENT DOCUMENT.

DOCUMENT.

WE NEED TO INQUIRE CAREFULLY.

WE NEED TO INQUIRE CAREFULLY.

WE BEGIN WITH THE PRESUMPTION OF WE BEGIN WITH THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE BUT THERE IS SO MUCH INNOCENCE BUT THERE IS SO MUCH TO SUGGEST THAT HIGH CRIMES AND TO SUGGEST THAT HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED MISDEMEANORS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED HERE AND THAT IT IS OUR HERE AND THAT IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT AND ACT RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT AND ACT PROMPTLY INSTEAD OF COPYING TO PROMPTLY INSTEAD OF COPYING TO DELAY AND DELAY.

DELAY AND DELAY.

THAT’S THE TRUMP GAME IS TO THAT’S THE TRUMP GAME IS TO DELAY AND DELAY.

DELAY AND DELAY.

AND WE NEED TO NOT BE AIDING AND AND WE NEED TO NOT BE AIDING AND ABETTING IT.

ABETTING IT.

>> CHUCK LOSSEN BERG, THIS IS >> CHUCK LOSSEN BERG, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES OF WHAT ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES OF WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ROBERT COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ROBERT MUELLER INTERVIEW OF DONALD MUELLER INTERVIEW OF DONALD TRUMP THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

TRUMP THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP REFUSED TO BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP REFUSED TO SUBMIT TO THAT INTERVIEW AND SUBMIT TO THAT INTERVIEW AND THEN EVENTUALLY ROBERT MUELLER THEN EVENTUALLY ROBERT MUELLER DECIDED NOT TO TRY TO GO THROUGH DECIDED NOT TO TRY TO GO THROUGH THE SUBPOENA PROCESS WITH THE THE SUBPOENA PROCESS WITH THE PRESIDENT WHICH COULD EASILY PRESIDENT WHICH COULD EASILY HAVE TAKEN A YEAR OR SO.

HAVE TAKEN A YEAR OR SO.

BUT IMAGINE IF YOU WILL THE BUT IMAGINE IF YOU WILL THE PRESIDENT IS BEING INTERVIEWED PRESIDENT IS BEING INTERVIEWED BY ROBERT MUELLER AND IT MOVES BY ROBERT MUELLER AND IT MOVES INTO A TERRITORY LIKE THIS.

INTO A TERRITORY LIKE THIS.

WE SAW HOW EASILY WITH GEORGE WE SAW HOW EASILY WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS THE PRESIDENT STEPHANOPOULOS THE PRESIDENT SIMPLY WENT AHEAD AND SAID WHAT SIMPLY WENT AHEAD AND SAID WHAT HE WOULD DO IN A FUTURE HE WOULD DO IN A FUTURE SITUATION EVEN WITH THE SITUATION EVEN WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT HE HAS TODAY.

KNOWLEDGE THAT HE HAS TODAY.

>> YEAH, THIS SEEMS TO BE A GOOD >> YEAH, THIS SEEMS TO BE A GOOD ILLUSTRATION, LAWRENCE, OF WHY ILLUSTRATION, LAWRENCE, OF WHY THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYERS THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYERS PROBABLY WERE VERY MUCH OPPOSED PROBABLY WERE VERY MUCH OPPOSED TO HAVING HIM TALKING TO TO HAVING HIM TALKING TO MR.

MUELLER AND TO MUELLER’S MR.

MUELLER AND TO MUELLER’S TEAM.

TEAM.

PRESIDENT IS A FREE SPEAKER.

PRESIDENT IS A FREE SPEAKER.

HE JUST SORT OF WANDERS DOWN HE JUST SORT OF WANDERS DOWN PATHS.

PATHS.

HE DOESN’T GIVE MUCH THOUGHT TO HE DOESN’T GIVE MUCH THOUGHT TO THE TRUTH.

THE TRUTH.

AND HE DOESN’T GIVE MUCH THOUGHT AND HE DOESN’T GIVE MUCH THOUGHT TO WHAT HE SAID PREVIOUSLY.

TO WHAT HE SAID PREVIOUSLY.

FROM A CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER FROM A CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER PERSPECTIVE, THAT’S PERILOUS.

PERSPECTIVE, THAT’S PERILOUS.

UNDERSTAND THE MUELLER TEAM UNDERSTAND THE MUELLER TEAM THOUGHT THEY HAD MOST OF WHAT THOUGHT THEY HAD MOST OF WHAT THEY NEEDED AND THEY WERE THEY NEEDED AND THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE REPORT TAKING WORRIED ABOUT THE REPORT TAKING TOO LONG IF THEY HAD TO LITIGATE TOO LONG IF THEY HAD TO LITIGATE AN ISSUE OVER A SUBPOENA TO THE AN ISSUE OVER A SUBPOENA TO THE PRESIDENT.

PRESIDENT.

BUT THIS DOCILE STRAIGHT AS YOU BUT THIS DOCILE STRAIGHT AS YOU KNOW THE, WHY YOU WANT TO SIT KNOW THE, WHY YOU WANT TO SIT DOWN WITH THE SUBJECT OF THE DOWN WITH THE SUBJECT OF THE INVESTIGATION AND TALK TO HIM.

INVESTIGATION AND TALK TO HIM.

YOU WANT TO HEAR IN HIS OWN YOU WANT TO HEAR IN HIS OWN WORDS WHAT HE WAS THINKING.

WORDS WHAT HE WAS THINKING.

TODAY HE TOLD US.

TODAY HE TOLD US.

>> I JUST WANT TO READ FOR THE >> I JUST WANT TO READ FOR THE AUDIENCE ONE MORE TIME WHAT THE AUDIENCE ONE MORE TIME WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS ABOUT THIS.

LAW ACTUALLY SAYS ABOUT THIS.

IT SAYS IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR IT SAYS IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR A FOREIGN NATIONAL DIRECTLY OR A FOREIGN NATIONAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY TO MAKE A INDIRECTLY TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION OR DOE OF MONEY OR CONTRIBUTION OR DOE OF MONEY OR OTHER THING OF VALUE OR TO MAKE OTHER THING OF VALUE OR TO MAKE AN EXPRESS OR IMPLIED PROMISE IN AN EXPRESS OR IMPLIED PROMISE IN CONNECTION WITH A LOCAL, STATE CONNECTION WITH A LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL ELECTION.

OR FEDERAL ELECTION.

THE SAME LAW MAKES IT AGAINST THE SAME LAW MAKES IT AGAINST THE LAW FOR A PERSON TO ACCEPT THE LAW FOR A PERSON TO ACCEPT SUCH A THING AND SAM STEIN, SUCH A THING AND SAM STEIN, PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID TONIGHT HE PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID TONIGHT HE WOULD ACCEPT THAT, HE WOULD WOULD ACCEPT THAT, HE WOULD VIOLATE THE ACCEPT PORTION OF VIOLATE THE ACCEPT PORTION OF THAT LAW.

THAT LAW.

THERE’S NO OTHER MOMENT IN OUR THERE’S NO OTHER MOMENT IN OUR HISTORICAL RECORD OF A PRESIDENT HISTORICAL RECORD OF A PRESIDENT SAYING THAT HE WAS WILLING TO SAYING THAT HE WAS WILLING TO COMMIT A CRIME, WILLING TO COMMIT A CRIME, WILLING TO VIOLATE A LAW.

VIOLATE A LAW.

WHAT LAW WOULD THE PRESIDENT WHAT LAW WOULD THE PRESIDENT HAVE TO ANNOUNCE HE’S WILLING TO HAVE TO ANNOUNCE HE’S WILLING TO VIOLATE FOR THE HOUSE TO START VIOLATE FOR THE HOUSE TO START TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST HIM? TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST HIM? >> I THINK THAT’S A BETTER >> I THINK THAT’S A BETTER QUESTION FOR YOUR OTHER QUESTION FOR YOUR OTHER PANELISTS.

PANELISTS.

THE DISTINGUISHED CONGRESSMAN.

THE DISTINGUISHED CONGRESSMAN.

>>>.

>>>.

>> CONGRESSMAN DOGGETT IS ALL >> CONGRESSMAN DOGGETT IS ALL READY TO GO TO IMPEACHMENT.

READY TO GO TO IMPEACHMENT.

HE’S NOT ONE OF THE DEMOCRATS HE’S NOT ONE OF THE DEMOCRATS WAITING FOR MORE.

WAITING FOR MORE.

>> I WILL SAY THIS AND THIS WAS >> I WILL SAY THIS AND THIS WAS MENTIONED ON YOUR PREVIOUS MENTIONED ON YOUR PREVIOUS PANEL.

PANEL.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE PRESIDENT AND HIS TEAM POINTED PRESIDENT AND HIS TEAM POINTED TO WHEN THIS WAS FIRST BEING TO WHEN THIS WAS FIRST BEING LITIGATED AFTER 2016 ELECTION, LITIGATED AFTER 2016 ELECTION, WAS THEIR LACK OF FAMILIARITY WAS THEIR LACK OF FAMILIARITY WITH THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS WITH THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS AND LAWS IN GENERAL.

AND LAWS IN GENERAL.

THAT SERVED THEM WELL IN THAT THAT SERVED THEM WELL IN THAT CAPACITY I BELIEVE MUELLER CAPACITY I BELIEVE MUELLER REFERENCED THAT IN FACT WITH DON REFERENCED THAT IN FACT WITH DON JUNIOR.

JUNIOR.

000 ANY DON’T HAVE THAT EXCUSE.

000 ANY DON’T HAVE THAT EXCUSE.

THEY KNOW THAT THE LETTER OF THE THEY KNOW THAT THE LETTER OF THE LAW OUTLAWS THIS TYPE OF LAW OUTLAWS THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR AND BEYOND THAT, THEY BEHAVIOR AND BEYOND THAT, THEY ARE LIVING IN THE POLITICAL ARE LIVING IN THE POLITICAL OUTCOME OF HAVING ENGAGED IN OUTCOME OF HAVING ENGAGED IN THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR.

THERE’S BEEN A TWO-YEAR LONG THERE’S BEEN A TWO-YEAR LONG SCANDAL AND INVESTIGATION BY SCANDAL AND INVESTIGATION BY SEVERAL CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES SEVERAL CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES AND THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE AND THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE INTO THIS TYPE OF FLIRTATION INTO THIS TYPE OF FLIRTATION WITH ASSISTANCE FROM A FOREIGN WITH ASSISTANCE FROM A FOREIGN POWER.

POWER.

IT’S MIND BOG THAT HE WOULD DO IT’S MIND BOG THAT HE WOULD DO IT AGAIN.

IT AGAIN.

LIKE I SAID ALSO, IT’S ALMOST LIKE I SAID ALSO, IT’S ALMOST EXPECTED AT THIS JUNCTURE.

EXPECTED AT THIS JUNCTURE.

THIS IS WHO HE IS.

THIS IS WHO HE IS.

CHUCK MENTIONED THAT MAYBE TRUMP CHUCK MENTIONED THAT MAYBE TRUMP IS SOMEONE WHO WILL BE IS SOMEONE WHO WILL BE COMFORTABLE SAYING — IN THIS COMFORTABLE SAYING — IN THIS CASE, I HAPPEN TO THINK THAT HE CASE, I HAPPEN TO THINK THAT HE WAS BEING COMPLETELY HONEST.

WAS BEING COMPLETELY HONEST.

HE DOESN’T SEE ANYTHING HE DOESN’T SEE ANYTHING ETHICALLY WRONG WITH SPENDING ETHICALLY WRONG WITH SPENDING THE ASSISTANCE OF A FOREIGN THE ASSISTANCE OF A FOREIGN POWER AND HE WONDERS WHY OTHER POWER AND HE WONDERS WHY OTHER PEOPLE DON’T SEE THE WORLD AS HE PEOPLE DON’T SEE THE WORLD AS HE DOES.

DOES.

IL NOTE, THERE WAS ONE IL NOTE, THERE WAS ONE HISTORICAL PARALLEL.

HISTORICAL PARALLEL.

WE’VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE.

WE’VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE.

AL GORE RECEIVED THE STOLEN AL GORE RECEIVED THE STOLEN GEORGE W.

BUSH CAMPAIGN DEBATE GEORGE W.

BUSH CAMPAIGN DEBATE PREP BOOK.

PREP BOOK.

THEY GOT IT IN THE MAIL.

THEY GOT IT IN THE MAIL.

THE FIRST THING THEY DID WHEN THE FIRST THING THEY DID WHEN THEY GOT IT IN THE MAIL WAS THEY GOT IT IN THE MAIL WAS ALERT THE FBI.

ALERT THE FBI.

SO THERE IS A HISTORICAL SO THERE IS A HISTORICAL PRECEDENT FOR DOING SOMETHING PRECEDENT FOR DOING SOMETHING RIGHT IN THE SITUATION.

RIGHT IN THE SITUATION.

TRUMP CLEARLY DOES NOT EITHER TRUMP CLEARLY DOES NOT EITHER KNOW THE HISTORY OR DOESN’T CARE KNOW THE HISTORY OR DOESN’T CARE FOR IT.

FOR IT.

>> IN THE INTERVIEW, GEORGE >> IN THE INTERVIEW, GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS MADE THE EXAMPLE STEPHANOPOULOS MADE THE EXAMPLE OF THE AL GORE TO PRESIDENT.