politics. >> watch the best of c-span's on sunday. "the great pretender about a 1973 experiment led by a psychologist tested psychiatric hospitals and the impact on the profession. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. listen to all of our podcasts on c-span now app. >> healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work and our republic thrives. get informed, straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased unbiased word for

word. opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. 221-2g party lines. we want to know what you think of this effort by house republicans to formalize this impeachment inquiry into president biden and his son and other family members' businesses. we will get to your thoughts in a minute. after the vote the three committee chairs investigating president biden, james comer of kentucky, jim jordan of ohio, and missouri republican jason smith who chairs the ways and means committee. they went to the microphones and talked to reporters. here is what they had to say. [video] >> well, i think we have made

our point clear today. evidence uncovered has shown a very disturbing trend by the biden family. we have spent months on this investigation accumulating evidence. we have a simple question. what did the bidens do to receive the tens of millions of dollars to receive our enemies -- the tens of millions from our enemies around the world? we are united as a conference. we expect to have people honor our subpoenas. we want to wrap this investigation up. obviously, you get to the deposition phase before you wrap up an investigation. that is where we are. we are pleased with the vote today. it will send a message to the white house. we expect you to comply with our information requests and subpoenass. i will turn it over to chairman jordan. >> the house has now spoken, pretty loudly and clearly with

every single republican voting in favor of moving into this official impeachment inquiry phase of our constitutional duty to do oversight. when a majority of the house goes on record in support of an official impeachment inquiry with the power that resides solely in the house of representatives, i think that sends a message. we now think this helps us get the key witnesses we want. there were three names missing. one was the president of the united states. the others are two lawyers we want to talk to. the doj is refusing us to talk to jack daly. we think this is a strong message from the house and the republican conference and every member voted for it. thank you all very much. host: he heard there from two other committee chairs

investigating president biden. before the vote took place on the house floor, jamie raskin, democrat of maryland who is the ranking member of the oversight committee had this to say about republicans' efforts. [video] >> the reason mysteries are called whodunits is they start with a crime and you have to figure out who did it. the biden investigation is a who did it. what is the crime? that gets very tedious very fast. after 11 months of this, no one can tell us what president biden's crime was. much less where it happened, when it happened, what the motive was, who the perpetrators were or who the victims were. maybe the funniest thing i saw yesterday in the rules committee when a congressman kept asking congressman russian dol -- --

he said he did not know it was but that is why we need an impeachment investigation to find out. negus kept asking what it would be looking for. finally, he set a hind crime -- high crime or misdemeanor. yes, but which one? negus was involved with the real impeachment investigation into the clinical insurrection against this congress, the vice president, against the constitution and against the election of 2020. we did not need sherlock holmes and a magnifying glass to find the presidential crime with donald trump. it came right into this house and smashed us in the face. it is true that chairman comber has collected amount of evidence. tens of thousands of pages of documents. dozens of interviews with government officials. all of it clearly shows that joe

biden committed no crime. even their own witnesses that they called to the only public hearing they had said there is not remotely enough evidence to justify impeachment. host: you heard from both sides. shelley and charleston camillus virginia. you oppose this formalizing of an impeachment inquiry. tell us what. caller: yes. if they had evidence which democrats had with former president trump, it is like jamie raskin said. they would come and smack them in the face, but they have nothing because they are looking for something. if you are looking into someone you can always find something t -- exceedin -- excuse me.

complain about. i will use a different word. if they had something, a scintilla of evidence, they would be all over the tv everywhere. and screaming it from the rooftops. host: republicans argue they need this formalizing of an impeachment inquiry because the white house is blocking them from evidence. the white house lawyer issued a november 17 letter challenging the legitimacy of the inquiry and demanding subpoenas and request for interviews with the biden family members and white house aides be rescinded. gop lawmakers rallied behind the idea, strengthening the house's legal hand by moving to that vote yesterday to authorize the investigation with the vote. they felt like they had to do this because the white house is saying it is not legitimate

without the vote that happened yesterday. how do you respond, shelley? caller:caller: let's see what happens. i've got nothing. host: theresa and tennessee come you support moving forward with this impeachment inquiry. caller: good morning. you just stole my thunder. you said everything i was going to say. the gop had to bring this impeachment inquiry because the doj has blocked them at every move. they do have evidence. they pointed out tons of evidence yesterday and that hearing on watching. for the democrats to, and say they have no evidence, they have suspicious report records from banks. they received $15 million from foreign nationals. they had bank accounts and shell companies. the media -- there is no

evidence whatsoever. there is evidence. the question being this is not an impeachment. it is impeachment inquiry. if there is nothing that joe biden did wrong, you would think he and his party before the election would be glad to have this inquiry over with and him not be impeached. host: how do you respond to republican senator chuck grassley of iowa that he has seen no evidence president biden was involved in his son hunter biden's foreign business dealings? caller: i also member chuck grassley sankey saw bank accounts. i remember chuck grassley saying i saw bank accounts and checks. what about the checks that was given to joe biden for supposed loans? where is the loan contracts?

where is the check that coincides with that? you are not going to see evidence if you don't want to see it. there is more evidence against joe biden then there ever was against trump. host: teresa's opinion. the washington post reporting the foundation of the impeachment inquiry outlined by jordan in a briefing with reporters last week rest on it an unsubstantiated allegation that has become the linchpin of conspiracy theories and false claims regarding the biden family's purported criminal conduct. republicans have alleged that evidence that joe biden as vice president pushed for the firing of ukraine's top prosecutor to squash a probe into the former owner of burisma, where hunter biden sat on the board. u.s. officials, ukrainian anticorruption activist and some republic and everybody that allegation. as part of the year-long inquiry

house republicans also have elevated claims that the biden administration slowed an investigation into hunter biden's financial background. but that testimony has been disputed repeatedly by officials involved in the case. michelle in maryland opposing this effort. caller: good morning. i want to make the point tt the republican voters should think about what'happening here. republicans are doing this action at the behest of donald trp. they cannot stand against donald trump who just wants to protect his owbrand. he wts to bring government to a standstill so hean look like the one who is going to savehe day. if the republicans will not stand up against donald trump theyre not going to stand up for the american people against corporations and against wealthy people who want to just rob from

the middle class and from the poor. host: tie this back to the impeachment inquiry. caller: that's what i'm saying. i'm opposed to this impeachment inquiry. i believe it is all at the direction of donald trump. there is no basis for it. they should speak to people to say we have a government that is not looking in the interest of the people. they will just bend to the whim of anyone who can benefit them. any person, any corporation, any foreign government. host: isaac in woodbridge, virginia. you support moving forward with this inquiry. good morning. caller: how are you doing, greta? host: good morning. caller: it is not for the reasons most people would think. i want to turn back the clock

for about the first time when the democrats did the same thing to president trump at the time. if you look at the poll ratings before impeachment and after, before impeachment his approval rating was about 45%. after his impeachment it jumped to about 50%. i told democrats at the time if the democrats want to continue this impeachment thing then that could potentially shoot them both on the foot. they are doing trump a huge favor. they are giving him a huge gift. whatever dirt you want to throw at your opposition, that will ricochet back at you. host: you think the gift is being returned? caller: that's right. by that logic that means if the republicans move forward, that means biden's approval rating

will go up and that will give trump -- that will give biden an upper edge over trump and the 2024 election for him to gain victory. host: understood. we will see what other viewers think of that idea. we want to get your thoughts. also happening yesterday, hunter biden was supposed to testify behind closed doors before the three committees investigating this impeachment inquiry and looking into the business ties. he defied the subpoena and went before reporters. the washington post says hunter biden's decision to skip the deposition only strengthened speaker johnson's argument among republican lawmakers. the president's son made a statement reiterating he was willing to testify in a public hearing related to the inquiry

but republicans do not want an open process where they can see their tactics or hear what i have to say. here is a little from the hunter biden statement. inquiry >> to suggest it is grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond absurd. it is shameless. there is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen. james comer, jim jordan, jason smith and their colleagues have distorted the facts by cherry picking lines from a bank statement, manipulating texts i sent, editing the testimony of my friends and former business partners, and misstating personal information that was stolen from me.

there is no fairness or decency in what these republicans are doing. they have lied over and over about every aspect of my personal and professional life. their lives have become the false facts believed by too many people. no matter how many times it is debunked they continue to insist my father's support of ukraine against russia is a result of a nonexistent bribe. they displayed naked photos of me during an oversight hearing. they have taken the light of my dad's love -- the light of my dad's love for me and presented it as darkness. they have no shame. the same committee chairman have

engaged in unprecedented political interference in what would have already been a five-year investigation of me. yet here im, mr. chairman. -- here im, mr. chairman -- here i am, mr. chairman when you said we can bring people into for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose. i have chosen. i am here to testify in a public hearing today to answer any of the committee's legitimate questions. republicans do not want an open process where americans can see their tactics, expose their baseless inquiry, or hear what i have to say. what are they afraid of? i am here. i am ready. host: before the capitol yesterday hunter biden

delivering a statement. the chair of the oversight committee has been the lead into this impeachment inquiry. he responded to that statement by hunter biden. here is what he had to say. [video] >> in the beginning joe biden said he never met with any of these individuals. now he know he met with all these individuals. the narrative when we started was that no money ever transferred to the bidens while joe biden was vice president. now we know a huge percentage of the money transferred while joe biden was vice president. the majority of shell companies were incorporated while joe biden was vice president. we have a lot of questions about some very concerning transfers. that is what we have the thousands of pages of bank records. we have been transparent with the media. this has been the most transparent congressional investigation since i have been in congress for seven years. we have reduced four bank memorandums with bank

statements. this is a concern. this is about public corruption at the highest level. the president's son does not get to set the rules. he's had a pretty good run with the department of justice, with the irs, and with the fbi. these two committees are going to hold firm. we have taken steps to go buy the book in this investigation. now we are in the phase where we do depositions. what he did today is unacceptable. host: chair of the oversight committee james comer. now we want to hear back to your calls, what you think of this back-and-forth. diane in jacksonville, florida. you will pose. caller: yes, i do oppose. i think they are wasting taxpayer money and time when they should be working on our budget. listen, i'm not absorbing hunter biden.

he's basically admitted he did wrong. where does that link him to the president? if we start linking our children to the crimes -- parents to the crimes of our children then we should be investigating donald trump for that, because his children also received a large sum of money. nevertheless, back to hunter biden. i do believe that young man has issues. they nd to be investigated but i do not believe it has anything too with joe biden. if it does then so be it. as a republican myself i think we should be working on our budget. we should be working on trying to make things better for the american people. i am not concerned right now about a tit-for-tat. that is basically all this is.

host: do you think republicans should pursue contempt of congress against hunter biden for not complying with that subpoena yesterday? caller: no. if you look back to the trump trial, how many people actually showed up? most of them did not show up. the ones that showed up, including jim jordan, all they did was say i don't remember or they said no comment, fifth amendment rights or whatever. when you go pleading the fifth you are basically wasting my time. host: that argument was made by adam kinzinger, the former congressman from illinois. he was one of two republicans along with liz cheney who sat on the january 6 committee. yesterday in an interview with

cnn he called jim jordan a hypocrite on this issue of following through on subpoenas. he said he's for the sanctity of the subpoena by the u.s. congress until he is the one that gets subpoenaed by the u.s. congress. he voted against enforcing subpoenas against people like steve bannon and people like mark meadows. he went on to say this is the hypocrisy that is mindnumbing from jim jordan. there is this in the washington post. ask generally yesterday if the president think congressional subpoenas could be adhered to, the white house books person said i am not going to speak to that. i'm just not. asked whether the president had the same position as he did in 2021 when he said those who don't comply should be prosecuted by the justice department, she said i don't have anything to add. the washington post notes this

morning if the house approves the contempt resolution against hunter biden and goes to the justice department which will decide whether to pursue the contempt referral, contempt of congress as a misdemeanor criminal offense that could result in up to one year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000. let's go to mark and carlisle, pennsylvania, supporting this impeachment inquiry. hi mark. caller: good morning. i have a couple of points. please don't cut me off. number one point is, how does joe biden who has been in the public light for so many years worth millions of dollars? not only the bidens. the clintons, the obamas. these people are just leeches. i think not only them but we need to investigate hello c,

schumer. whoever is a -- pelosi and schumer. whoever is a multimillionaire in congress. let me finish and then you can ask what you want. he bought a house for two point something million in cash. he always claimed he was a poor senator. he dropped out of the race in the 1980's because he lied. he has lied his whole life. ask me whatever you would like. i'm sick of fake republicans calling on the republican line talking about trump. trump is a legitimate businessman. that is what he does. hunter and joe are not businessman. host: the point i would make is there are very wealthy republican lawmakers as well. he hung up. you can find out how joe biden made money after he left the white house when he served as vice president. those are public records.

eric in canoga park, california. you will pose. caller: yes. isn't the whole point moot because it happened when he was vice president? hunter biden is not running for president. joe biden has nothing to do with this. just one of the point with that caller, he made his money by book deals, as many past presidents have made their money. both deals. -- book deals. and speeches. you can look at their taxes, like most presidents do who show their taxes. unlike president trump. i think this whole thing is to put biden in a bad light because he's doing a great job so far for what he was given. they are just trying to set it

up for trump to take over. i just think it is an embarrassment. this is not the way. we are losing our democracy with the way these people are working in the house. that is all i have to say. host: mark in ohio. caller: mary christmas to you, your family and to the c-span staff. what joe biden is doing is -- we have homeland security. i am 68 years old. i have never seen this country in such bad shape. we have homeland security but we are the least secure now. we have an open border. that is treasonous. read the constitution. the federal government only has the right to pass the senate -- for the defense of the nation. this is treason

nothing more than treason. the democratic callers, don't forget the fake dossier hillary clinton -- can they think? do they have a memory? it was not that long ago, folks. host: you brought up border security and that reminds me of an update for all of you this morning. a couple of headlines in the papers this morning. this one from the new york times. the white house considering immigration crackdown for aid to ukraine. tying aid to ukraine to immigration policy is still underway. there is a possibility of a deal in the making. this is the last week for the house and senate to be in session before the break for the holiday. we will have to wait and see if they can get a deal before they leave here in the nation's capital.

yesterday the senate passed the defense bill turning back the right wing is what the new york times says. the senate overwhelmingly passed on 886 billion on defense bill that would set pentagon policy and provide a 5.2% pay raise for military personnel, defying hard right republicans who tried and failed to attach deeply partisan restrictions on abortion. the vote 87-13 to approve the legislation, and permit components of a key and a pacific security partnership with britain and australia, and direct hundreds of millions of dollars in military assistance to ukraine and israel. the ukraine and israel programs authorized by the bill are distinct from a $111 billion

spending bill to send additional weapons to those countries. among other ask managers that is currently stalled in congress. this is separate. the ndaa bill is separate from the debate for money to ukraine. it has money in it as well. the defense bill would extend into 2025 a program that allows the intelligence committee to conduct warrantless surveillance of foreign individuals located outside the united states. section 702 of fisa. it has prompted a backlash in the house for many republicans are angry at their leadership for agreeing to drop a number of provisions the hardliners attached over the summer. this is now coming to the house today for a vote. it's effective the pass with a coalition of republicans and democrats. ella in north carolina, you oppose.