guaranteed, high-quality universal care for all, address gun violence and have real gun laws in this country and confront climate change before it is too late. we are capable of this as americans while still ensuring we hold the president accountable. >> beto o'rourke, i appreciate your time tonight. i want to hand it offver to chr for "cuomo primetime." >> thank you, anderson. the president referred to his own great and unmatched decision to let turkey have his own way with the kurds yet his own party is coming at him like never before. we have news on that front. and the president's personal lawyer is here on what the case is for this president on impeachment and that big case over the disclosure of his taxes. this is a big week. what do you say, let's get after

it. >> boy, you know, the irony cannot be lost. the president has done everything to close its eyes to the obvious problems of this president and yet not this time. when it comes to this new foreign policy controversy about taking u.s. troops out of the region around syria, you got senator graham, senator mcconnell coming at him, big words, hot words on wanting to withdraw troops from that area. their concern is obvious, twofold. one, wrong message to our allies, who is going to fight beside us if we won't stay beside them and if turkey goes after the kurds and starts a slaughter, is that blood on american hands? we have congresswoman elaine loria is a democrat in a swing district. she's also on the armed services and veterans affairs committee and served 20 years in the navy,

retiring as a commander. as we say to all veterans, thank you for your service, congresswoman and welcome to "primetime." >> well, thanks, chris. and that's for having me. >> help us understand the weaving of politics and policy on the syria troop withdrawal. the president says i campaigned on this, americans are tired of this, we want our boys and girls back home and i'm doing that. >> well, chris, i really wish i could understand and i think my colleagues and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are very stupefied. i mean, where did this come from? you've seen senator mcconnell, liz cheney, who also serves on the armed services committee, elliott engel, everyone is just incredibly concerned. i mean, there is no indication that this was coming, that we would pull troops out of syria and leave our allies of the kurds who have been our biggest

allies in the lurch. it's another unpredicted episode and americans are not sure how to react to this unpredictability from the president. >> on the we didn't see it coming, i hear you on that. but cnn is told by a couple of people at the pentagon that the people in command around the president were not taken by surprise, there have been multiple calls about this. help the american people understand what is the problem here? everybody wants the troops to come home, not in endless wars around the globe, why not have this group of people come home from in region? >> well, i think it lies in the fact th fact we need to stand by our allies, pull out with no notice. we are allies of the british forces who fought alongside us, lost tens of thousands of people in a battle against isis. we want to say isis is wide out

and truly they're still a threat. we pull out and leave a situation where turkey could potentially invade. i think having u.s. forces there maintain a certain level of sta sta stability. even the secretary of defense was unaware this was coming and he was on the phone with the prime minister of turkey and had agreed there would be safe zones, and we would understand the relationship we had along the border with turkey to keep turkey and syria essentially separated and now at odds. and now we're going to pull out with no clear plan. >> we'll see what happens here. just because the president says something doesn't mean that's actually what happens. he's certainly gotten more pushback than he's used to. >> you can't miss the could ntr that republicans are using angry words about wrong decision

making and this was bad what the president just did with syria. how can they not feel the same way about an obvious abuse of his power in asking the president of ukraine to investigate a political opponent? with are is their high dujon there, in your opinion? >> well, i'm trying to figure that out myself. thinking about my background and having served 20 years in the navy, i didn't serve 20 years in the uniform to watch our constitution being trampled on. this is just inexcusable. it seems like a very clear abuse of the president's power, use of his power and position for future gain to malign a political opponent by requesting a favor from a foreign country. it's really hard for me to understand how this has become a partisan issue because it seems like a very clear issue to our u.s. national security. >> in terms of moving forward and galvanizing any consensus on this, do you think the democrats made a mistake in going down --

look, i know that so many were arguing this should have been an impeachment process along ago, but now the criticism is from those on the right you went down there too fast, you hadn't seen the transcript and it makes it look political and only political. you didn't have a vote. i know it not in the procedures you have to have a vote, but the optics that this had been deliberate, do you think that it was done the wrong way on any level? >> i do not. i have to say i never went to washington to impeach the president. this is the last place i'd like the country to be. i joined with six other of my colleagues, this is a clear and distinct incident where the president used his power to conduct an investigation and find dirt on a political opponent.

it could affect the outcome of our election. i have never been overly critical of the president. i truly respect the office of the president as someone who served for 20 years in the military. i really just wish that he respected the office the same way that i do and my colleagues do. >> are you behind the democratic efforts to get the president's taxes? that's part of a big decision today in federal court. a district court judge said that the president is not immune to all criminal process and this request from the ways and means should go forward. it was then stayed, that decision, pending appeal. are you behind those efforts to get the taxes? >>. >> chris, i'm behind all efforts to lead to transparency. it's important to understand what the president's associations are, the which bus dealings. the more intertwined things with ukraine, turkey, calling on china, russia, it all becomes

more and more concerning. every bit of transparency we can find and provide to the american public is very important to me. >> do you have any sense of timeline, impeachment? do you see this in months? >> i think we're trying to do this in a very methodical and expeditious way. i would like to see us move forward with some action before the end of the year. >> congresswoman, thank you very. before the end of the year, that would be ambitious. >> there's another vet on the other side of the aisle but on the same page of his democratic colleague when it comes to syria. he's also not afraid to stand up to president trump. will congress do anything to stop the pull-out? republicans adam kenzisinger is here next.

that's what happens in golf nothiand in life.ily. i'm very fortunate i can lean on people, and that for me is what teamwork is all about. you can't do everything yourself. you need someone to guide you and help you make those tough decisions, that's morgan stanley. they're industry leaders, but the most important thing is they want to do it the right way. i'm really excited to be part of the morgan stanley team. i'm justin rose. we are morgan stanley.

a lot of folks ask me why their dishwasher doesn't get everything clean. i tell them, it may be your detergent... that's why more dishwasher brands recommend cascade platinum. it's specially-designed with the soaking, scrubbing and rinsing built right in. cascade platinum's unique actionpacs dissolve quickly... ...to remove stuck-on food. . . for sparkling-clean dishes, the first time. choose the detergent that lets your dishwasher do the dishes! cascade platinum. the number one recommended brand in north america.

unitedhealthcare medicare advantage plans come with a lot to take advantage of. like free vitamins, pain relievers, sunscreen and more. i like the gummies. $0 copays on common prescriptions plus $150 in wellness products. go ahead, take advantage. they're america's bpursuing life-changing cures. in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.

sfx: upbeat music a lot of clothes you normally take to the cleaners aren't dirty dirty. they just need a quick refresh. try new febreze clothing quick dry mist. it eliminates odors and refreshes lightly-worn clothing. breathe happy febreze... la la la la la. this fall, book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a free night. because when your business is rewarding yourself, our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com around here, nobody ever does it. i didn't do it. so when i heard they added ultra oxi to the cleaning power of tide, it was just what we needed. dad? i didn't do it. #1 stain and odor fighter, #1 trusted. it's got to be tide. . the president is getting bipartisan backlash tonight

because of his decision to withdraw troops from syria's border with turkey. why? they say the job isn't done but more important byly, if you aban our allies, there may be a blood letting by the turks. there's hot language of this being called irresponsible, unnerving to its core. republican congressman adam kinzinger served in iraq and he joins us now with his take on "primetime." thank you very much. the president pushing back with a lot of determination to critics of his own party and out. he has two lines of defense. this is what i promised. i'm getting americans out. this is what americans want. what's your take. >> first off, the president has

to lead. that's where a lot of times when people look at public opinion polls, it's america's knee-jerk reaction to get out of any war, i understand that because they have to have leaders that explain why we're doing it. we're generally a pretty peaceful country. when the president says i'm getting out because of all these reasons, tax about endless war, the reality is terrorism's real. and the decision to end a war is not really ours to make when you have a whole group of folks who say, look, we're going to go and create a terrorist attack, whether it's in iraq or the united states, that's not our choice. they haven't changed their mind on it. so, yes, it may have been a campaign promise, but when you become president, i think it has to be more than a campaign promise. and secondarily, too, what we're talking about is the exact kind of fight that those that were against, for instance, the iraq war and everything else were talking about. you know, a small group of american soldiers that can empower local indigenous forces

to fight that fight. that's exactly what our troops are doing there. to say this is an endless war, i have to vehemently disagree. >> the president says turkey's our friend. this is his land. turkey's got concerns, they say these people have terroristic intentions against them, i don't want to get in the way. >> there's no doubt there have been real tensions between turkey and some of the kurds. some of that turkey is legitimately upset about, but that is painting the kurds with a broad brush. now this is the group that we determined back under the last president that we were going to empower to push back and be what we weren't willing to do. we weren't going to put a lot of ground troops on the ground to occupy territory, so we asked the kurds to do it. they did it willingly. they took a lot of casualties and a lot of death and now to abandon them because turkey is

upset. tombs in the pa too many times -- what's going to happen in our next war when we have to fight locals to fight with us. are they going to trust us? i don't know. >> the pentagon said they were surprised. people in the military and leadership around this country say they were surprised. the president said i consulted with everybody like i always do. do you believe the president on this? >> it's kind of hard to see. i don't think he would have consulted with everybody. he may have asked rand paul and maybe a few others and maybe he did talk to some in the military but they were surprised. the thing to keep in mind the military wouldn't want to have a hundred thousand troops in syria. many in the military wanted to pull back on the strikes in iran. they understand the important of having a few hundred troops that can get local intelligence, which you can't do from the sky. it's important. >> segue, here's what i don't

get. we all know the president has the power to do this. you guys are taking issue because you ever don't like the choice. in fact, you think the choice is wrong. the republicans are using hot language about this president, the kind of language i never heard them use before. is this some kind of projection that's not being used on the ukraine matter. if this is so wrong and worth getting hot about the, how can you look about a president asking a president of another sovereign, ukraine, to vet his opponent and not say it's wrong and not get hot about that? >> you're asking the wrong republican that question because i think, you know, what he asked of the ukrainian president and what i read in the transcript certainly led to a lot of questions that need answers. >> was it wrong? >> what's what? >> was it wrong what he did? >> yeahif you find out that he

held the aid contingent on that, that's one thing. i think it's wrong to talk to a foreign leader about anything regarding our domestic politics. does that rise to the level of people? i think we do a disservice if you say there's impeachment or defend him on everything he do. i think there's something in the middle. i don't think it rises to impeachment. >> you can argue all day whether it's worthy of removal of office. but that's not where your party is. with a few exception, and you're one of them, congressman, they won't even say it's wrong. they'll say what about joe biden, what about when santa claus can't come on time? you know it's wrong. how wrong, how abusive, that's a second question. but we can never get to the second one if we can't agree on the first. fair point? >> i think it's fair but it's

also fair to say to my colleagues on the other side that are saying this, people say if you're going to attack the president, you're never doing enough if you're not going to impeach him. that's the problem. then everybody has to go to their corner my view is this -- there's going to be a day when president trump is no longer president. maybe in a year and maybe in five years. and then as republicans, there will be another democratic president at some point in the future. we have to be able to when we call out any bad behavior, we have to be able to say that we did it equally. you have have your partisan leanings, of course, and i do, too. but when it comes down to things like calling out bad behavior, we have to be fair and be fair all the way around. >> thank you for coming on to speak truth as always. >> you bet. >> this is interesting on two levels. because, yes, how we treat our

allies and do in that region of the world viee vis-a-vis terror very important. you can't get away from seeing republicans so outspoken and disrespectful toward the president on that issue but why not ukraine? why aren't there more cracks in ukraine's fire wall? it's certainly every bit as worthy of attack as the syria decision. a former republicans house intel chair is going to help us understand the policy in that region and then this other foreign region known as washington, d.c., next. ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ the amount of student loan debt i have i'm embarrassed to even say i felt like i was going to spend my whole adult life paying this off thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free ♪ not owing anyone anything is the best feeling in the world,

i cannot stop smiling about it ♪ my lady! those darn seatbelts got me all crumpled up. that's ok! hey, guys! hi mrs. patterson... wrinkles send the wrong message. sorry. help prevent them before they start with new downy wrinkleguard. that's better. so you won't get caught with wrinkles again.

pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. introducing a razor that works differently. the gillette skinguard has a guard between the blades that helps protect skin. the gillette skinguard.

why are republicans willing to come out against the president on syria but not on ukraine? they continue to twist themselves up in knots when it comes to owning an obvious wrong there. just to say it. it's not their responsibility. maybe we're missing something. let bring in someone who misses very little. former congressman mike rodgers understands the inside game and knows syria. >> great to see you, my friend. >> help the american people to understand. we want our boys and girls home. we don't want to waste money and blood in these foreign places. up said we beat isis. why can't they come home? than the military and the other- national security establishment that would love them to come home. here's the problem. isis is a very real problem. it still is today. we can wish it today, we can

want it to go away. it's still there and it has the chance to metastasize again across different borders. the reason we have a small contingency there is to help and coordinate with the troops who have done most of the fighting and candidly, most of the dying in defeating isis. remember all of that land they held and then it was pushed back. the president should get a lot of credit for that. he said put your foot on the gas, go get 'em. and the way we went to get 'em is we allowed our special forces community to leverage up the capability of the fighters we trained them, we gave them medical treatment, you a the things they needed to do to be successful on the battlefield and we said we're going to be with you. by the way, they've got some powerful enemies. they had the turks that didn't like it, the russians, the

iranians, the syrians, assad, all don't like them and would like a pound flesh. we just turned right around and walked away from them. thanks for helping us push back isis, we hope it works out for y you. >> all right, i hear you are on that. help me translate it into another problem that we're dealing with right now. they are going after the president on syria saying you made the wrong call here, it's unnerving, it's all these bad things. they say none of that about ukraine when the case is much more demonstrable there that he did something that's wrong in syriay syria. you may not like what he's done in syria but he's got the power. whereas in ukraine, they know what he did is wrong, mike. i'm not saying that's impeachable. that's a political discussion. but who can look at that call and the surrounding circumstances of the texts and

mr. volker's testimony as understood at this point and not think it was wrong to do what he did? >> right. bear with me. there are some republicans who have come out and said it was wrong. but if you look at porter, if you look at romney, excuse me -- >> portman, romney. >> portman, romney, kinzinger. there have been others as well that just haven't been as public. you're just not seeing this mass rush to the microphone to condemn him. in a way, i get it. a lot of these folks are saying, okay, no, i don't like it, yes, it is inappropriate, i do want to see the facts. contrary to that, remember what the american people are seeing back home, chris. they're seeing this rush of democrats to the microphone saying impeach him, put him in

solitary confinement, i want a quick trial so we can have a hanging. he's guilty, let's get him and all that confuses people. i think members are saying i do think it's inappropriate, let me find out what the facts are here. is it impeachable? i think it's a big question. i don't think the democrats have proved that yet, including the people who are investigating it. they released the whistle-blower report. i think it's dangerous to the whistle-blower. a report came out that said i have seen information that proves collusion. the longer this looks partisan, the more you'll have people say i'm going to find out what's going on before i say something i'll regret in six months. >> it will never be nonpartisan. >> are you saying there's politics in washington? >> i'm saying it is human to e

err. here's our dinner bet. you will never have the democrats make a compelling case to republican ears that this was an abuse of power that rises to the level of impeachment. >> i'm an eternal optimist. if they find high crimes and misdemeanors, i think you will see members move that way. if you don't, it goi's going toa political manure show, as my mother would say. >> your mother would never say that. i appreciate it as always. >> like everything else, through the looking glass the president lost in district today. is that a loss? no, says his attorney. it's a win because they got a stay of the decision pending appeal. by the way, that happens a lot. but one of his main counselors says no, i got it wrong and what we're trying to do on taxes, we want to see them, that's wrong. and what's happening with impeachment that's wrong.

so the case from counsel next. as a cio, you want to move your business forward. but when your team is always dealing with device setups, app updates, and support calls... you can never seem to get anywhere. that's why dell technologies created unified workspace, powered by vmware. ♪ a revolutionary solution that lets you deploy, manage, support and secure all your devices from the cloud. so you can stop going in circles, and start moving forward. the roomba i7+ with cleanng base automatic dirt disposal and allergenlock™ bags that trap 99% of allergens, so they don't escape back into the air. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba™

come on! let's hide in the attic. no. in the basement. why can't we just get in the running car? are you crazy? let's hide behind the chainsaws. smart. yeah. ok. if you're in a horror movie, you make poor decisions. it's what you do. this was a good idea. shhhh. i'm being quiet. you're breathing on me! if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. let's go to the cemetery! i work hard and i want my money to work hard too. so i use my freedom unlimited card. even when i'm spending, i'm earning 1.5% cash back on everything i buy. earning on my favorite soup... with freedom unlimited, you're always earning.

got it. no cover-up spray here. cheaper aerosols can cover up odors in a flowery fog. but febreze air effects eliminates odors. with a 100% natural propellent. it leaves behind a pleasant scent you'll love. [deep inhale] freshen up. don't cover up. febreze.

. so we had a decision from the federal district court today between the department of justice on behalf of the president going after the

manhattan district attorney you can have his taxes either. the judge agreed the district attorney can have his taxes but that decision was stayed pending appeal. big win, say the president's attorney jay sekulow. and he says impeachment will be a big win as well. counsel joins us tonight. thank you as always, sir. >> thanks, chris. thanks for having me. >> help me understand this. how is the district saying i reject all of your arguments, turn over the taxes a win? >> it's a win because the u.s. court of appeals for the second circuit literally within about ten minutes of us filing the application for stay granted it and noted, "the unique issues raised by this appeal" because it's the constitutional issues we raised here. i want to say something here. there are 5,000 d.a. and

assistant district attorneys throughout the united states. can you imagine if the president of the united states was subject to individual investigations by d.a.s for whatever reason they so choose? >> yes. >> the founders were concerned about that. they didn't want local magistrates impact the the president's role under article 2, not only commander in chief but chief executive of the united states and the unique role the president plays in our constitutional structure. >> we know all of this grow out of an office of legal counsel's opinion. you know the judge rejected the idea the president of the united states could be immune from all criminal process pending his term. just to be clear, getting a stay is not a statement by the appellate court that you're going to win. yes, this is novel and arguably unique issues because it is the president, it hasn't been tested

before and we're seeing something different. that's why you got the stay. you didn't get the stay because it's a win. >> hold it. there's multiple reasons why you get stays. including is there a likelihood of success on the merits, is there irreparable harm, is the decision raising or opinions or issues raised in the pef tigs f -- petition for a stay unique? >> they gave you unique issues. >> the district court judge wasn't going to give us another ten minutes. which i think is ridiculous. >> let's go slow. remember, you've got this highly developed legal mind. for the audience, they're not mostly lawyers. show us the taxes, the manhattan d.a. says show me the taxes, i'm looking at a state potential charge for how these wims weome paid by your lawyer, michael

cohen, i want the taxes. this is about turning over your taxes, not just throwing you in jail. >> let me quote what the u.s. district court judge did in california when the state of california passed a piece of legislation that said to be on the primary ballot you had to provide five years of your tax returns if you're running for president. what did the court there say? it's not constitutional. why? violated freedom of association and the presidential qualification clause of the united states constitution. >> hold on, hold on. jay, jay, the court -- its major part of the holding was we don't like the slippery slope of states being able to create their own tailored qualifications for national office. >> because it violates the constitution. >> that may be appealed also. >> because it violates the constitution. >> no. actually, to be specific the court said the actual law itself was unconstitutional. >> right, they did say that. >> unconstitutional. it violated the constitution.

we'll leave that in the 9th circuit. >> just for people at home, jay, you getting to appeal this decision is not a big win because when they appeal out there, does that mean they won? no. but the bigger issue for people at home is why not just turn over the taxes? why not just turn over the taxes? >> well, we're not required to. when the people elected the president to become the president, he had not issued his tax return. it's not required in the constitution. >> so what? >> because the constitution doesn't require it, chris. >> but that doesn't mean the constitution says you shouldn't. go ahead. make whatever point you want. >> chris, the constitution is not a negative inference, it's a set of positive rights that exist. >> and responsibilities and duties. >> okay. so let's talk about this. you mentioned that the d.a. is asking for the same thing that congress is asking for. you're 100% correct. we're friends, we agree.

we're friends, we disagree. yes, the congress is asking for exactly what the darchlts .a. i for, it was exactly what the house of representatives asked for. that was their subpoena. they didn't even bother to draft their own one. >> so what? >> it's like the extension of the united states congress. they couldn't get the returns because we got those stayed, too. >> listen, if i wanted to pay off to the women they way they did, they wouldn't have sy vance -- >> they're just asking for his taxes. he keeps saying he has nothing to hide. then show the taxes and all this goes away. >> i got to ask you a question. i got to ask you a question hereyou're aher here. i was on a program on another network earlier today, called fox, sean hannity? >> no, it was called ari melber.

>> i saw that one, too. >> we had a conversation, not quite as interesting as this, i'll say. we had a conversation where we're talked about some of the issues that you're raising and one of the things he said is why doesn't everybody just waive their privileges, just have everybody testify. >> i don't agree with that. but this is different. >> so why do you -- you'd say you don't agree with it? why do you think in that case you should not just waive your constitutional privileges. >> first of all, you have no privilege to not show your taxes. >> you don't have a requirement that you do show them, though. >> there are a lot of things you do because it's right not just because you're forced to, especially in politics. >> i'm a lawyer. my job is to look it constitution, see what's at play, see what the issues are. you take the facts, you apply it to the law. is there a positive requirement requiring tax returns to be

produced if you're running for president? >> does it say anywhere in the constitution that the president can't be prosecuted? >> the entire structure of the constitution presupposes that. >> one of the most fundamental understandings is no one's above the law and then you guys walk into federal court and say except him? >> no one's above the law but no one is below the law. and you're not required to show your tax returns for your job. the president wasn't required to show his tax returns for his. and what are they looking for in new york? they want to say no one else could get the tax returns, we did. >> they have a case there that happened in their state that arguably violated the law. he was related to it, he lied about being related to it, now they know he was related to it and -- hold on, i need to take a break and we'll finish this. the president's counsel, jay sekulow, right after the break. under control.

with less eczema, you can show more skin. so roll up those sleeves. and help heal your skin from within with dupixent. dupixent is the first treatment of its kind that continuously treats moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis, even between flare ups. dupixent is a biologic, and not a cream or steroid. many people taking dupixent saw clear or almost clear skin. and, had significantly less itch. that's a difference you can feel. don't use if you're allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur, including anaphylaxis, which is severe. tell your doctor about new or worsening eye problems, such as eye pain or vision changes, or a parasitic infection. if you take asthma medicines, don't change or stop them without talking to your doctor. so help heal your skin from within, and talk to your eczema specialist about dupixent. it's either the acertification process.t or it isn't.

it's either testing an array of advanced safety systems. or it isn't. it's either the peace of mind of a standard unlimited mileage warranty. or it isn't. for those who never settle, it's either mercedes-benz certified pre-owned. or it isn't. the mercedes-benz certified pre-owned sales event. now through october 31st. only at your authorized mercedes-benz dealer. unitedhealthcare medicare advantage plans have a lot to take advantage of like medicare's largest health care network. hey, that's my dermatologist! $0 copays on all primary care doctor visits plus rewards for preventive care. go ahead, take advantage.

that's what happens in golf nothiand in life.ily. i'm very fortunate i can lean on people, and that for me is what teamwork is all about. you can't do everything yourself. you need someone to guide you and help you make those tough decisions, that's morgan stanley. they're industry leaders, but the most important thing is they want to do it the right way. i'm really excited to be part of the morgan stanley team. i'm justin rose. we are morgan stanley. woman 1: i had no symptoms of hepatitis c. man 1: mine... man 1: ...caused liver damage. vo: epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c.

vo: whatever your type, ask your doctor if epclusa is your kind of cure. woman 2: i had the common type. man 2: mine was rare. vo: epclusa has a 98% overall cure rate. man 3: i just found out about my hepatitis c. woman 3: i knew for years. vo: epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. vo: before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up, and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. vo: tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b, other liver or kidney problems, hiv, or other medical conditions... vo: ...and all medicines you take, including herbal supplements. vo: taking amiodarone with epclusa may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. vo: common side effects include headache and tiredness. vo: ask your doctor today, if epclusa is your kind of cure.

okay, quick recap. we're getting after it with the president's lawyer jay sekulow. i'm arguing on a transparency side we should get the president's taxes and he's saying he doesn't have to. jay sekulow says we won, we got a stay. i say, no, these are unique issues. here's why i think you will lose on appeal. the district court judge said this is repugnant to the constitution what you are arguing, that the idea of federal supremacy and presidential immunity from judicial process is unqualified and boundless in its reach. it cuts across the grain of constitutional precedent. in other words, it comes from the office of legal counsel, not case law, not legislation.

certainly not from the constitution. i think you don't have basis and you don't have an application. you're going to lose. what's your argument? >> i think it's exactly in the constitution, the supremacy clause, the whole idea of separation of powers. i this i we'nk we going to win. we're going to win this. here's why. you cannot have a president subject to 5,000 local district courts w-- district attorneys wo have a problem with the president of the united states. i saw the district court's opinion. i think he's wrong and he's going to be reversed. >> they're asking for documents that could be relevant to -- >> you mentioned clinton v. jones. they say it did not raise that issue of clinton versus jones, the idea of a state proceeding

interfering with the president of the united states in a criminal process. i completely disagree. i think that was a question that was left open and i think we carry the day. can i ask you a question, chris? go ahead. >> look, i'm always happy to have you weigh in on the dialogue. let's transfer from the legal to the political. you can conflate the two as needed when it comes to impeachment. i don't see a fair reading of that phone call and the surrounding context as we understand it from mr. volker who i say every night this president has never bad mouthed volker, no one around him has ever disparaged the strength of his testimony. and volker made it clear people around the president who care about him thought it was wrong, that he shouldn't do it and they tried to fix it, including people in ukraine. how can you look at what he did there and not say it was wrong? i'm not saying illegal, i'm not

saying impeachable, but wrong? >> well, my job is the lawyer. so my job is not to weigh in on the political aspect of this. i think this first of all, none of us know, you don't know what volker said behind closed doors. we've heard bits and pieces that came out. i look at the transcript, and i look at the transcript, and i say is there anything in that transcript that rises to the level of an impeachable offense? and if you look at the entire transcript and even look at the conversation about my colleague, rudy giuliani, or vice president biden or his son, it is about five lines of a -- supposedly a 30-minute conversation. i'm sure it was being translated. let's say it was 15 or 16 minutes. probably a minute and a half. to make that an impeachable offense is absurd. >> well, but it's not just about the phone call. it's about the months-long planning that went into it. let me ask you this. what is the standard of an impeachable offense to you,

counselor? >> well, i mean, the constitution says high crimes and misdemeanors. >> what does that mean? >> i don't see -- well, you know, here's what it means. it means that a conversation from a head of state to another head of state that is exactly what that transcript shows never could reach the idea of a high crime or misdemeanor. what is the high crime or misdemeanor involved in there? >> such a gross abuse of office that you use the state department, the white house, and the department of justice to try to secure relief in your election by finding dirt on an opponent that ukraine had to deliver or risk not getting valuable aid to fight off the russians. >> that's very interesting except it's not true. so that's not what the transcript says. >> which part of it? >> it's an interesting comment, which reminds me of the adam -- let's compare it. why don't you actually read the transcript. >> many times. >> i'd like someone to read the actual transcript. >> i have, many times. i read it top to bottom on my radio show. i've read it 100 times. >> congressman schiff was supposed to read it, but instead of that, he made up a story. that was after, by the way -- and this is why -- you said you want to talk about the politics.

let's talk about that for a moment. first of all, the politics of impeachment. first it was russia, no collusion. then it was obstruction, no obstruction. then remember robert mueller which everybody is basically forgotten about? >> he didn't say no obstruction. he said, i'm not looking at obstruction because i can't indict a sitting president that he gave us a list of ten things -- >> he said there was no obstruction. and robert -- >> bill barr said it, and you think the american people are going to rely on his word at this point? that that's dispositive? >> you think the american people are going to buy the robert mueller report as the basis of impeachment? >> they're not using it, which i think hurts them politically. >> that they're not using? >> yeah, i think it's a problem. >> they're not going to use it. >> they said it was so important, and now they're not using it. >> i was on your show the day of that testimony, chris, and you and i both said it. so were the commentators on cnn saying it. that was an abysmal performance or whatever that was. now, let's take it a step further. now in the judiciary committee, by the way, there's been no articles of impeachment. >> not yet. they don't have to do that.

>> so what happens? so right now in the judiciary committee -- >> they don't have to do that by the way. >> i don't think that's correct. >> it is. >> it's the house in the constitution. the house, not a committee. >> the house has the power. how they administer that power is up to their own rules, and it is not in house procedure that they have to have a full chamber vote. >> you think the house's rules -- let me give you a little constitution 101. you're a smart lawyer. house rules can't override the constitution of the united states. they can't make a rule that goes against the constitution. but let's assume -- >> there is no rule that goes against the constitution. they just started in the committee. they'll have to have a vote as the constitution requires on whether or not there are actionable articles of impeachment. if they get a simple majority -- >> which we all agree they have not had. >> not yet. >> so far in the judiciary committee, i don't get to, the white house counsel -- we don't get to ask questions. we don't get to call witnesses. we can't take depositions. you talk about a lack of due process? >> it's a political process. >> this is a farce, chris. it's political theater.

>> the trial is in the senate. >> it's political -- yeah, but the impeachment process -- so who are they going to call as their witness? let's talk about this for a moment, chris. who's the witness going to be? we've got a whistle-blower that we can't identify because of the whistle-blower statute. >> good. >> we don't get to cross-examine that individual. >> why should you? >> but it's going to be the basis of an article of impeachment? >> yes. >> that whistle-blower forgot to tell the inspector general that they were in conversations with adam schiff, who forgot to tell the american people -- >> first of all, schiff -- >> hold it. >> schiff got early word on this guy. hold on, jay. schiff got early word. so did the white house when the whistle-blower went to their agent's counsel and the counsel went to the white house and the doj. so everybody got early word. that's fine. make this clear to the american people. >> adam schiff said he did not get an early word. >> of course he did. the guy came to him, so i call that early word. if somebody comes to you about it -- >> chris, he said he did not get an early word. he is the chairman of the

intelligence committee, and he said he did not get an early word. he said that on national tv. >> i'm not disagree with you about that. i'm saying -- >> okay. >> i think he did get early word on the whistle-blower. what he said is for him to justify. i'm telling you did shall. >> i say discount the whistle-blower. we don't need it. we have the transcript, and we have the context of the texts from volker. just to be clear, this is -- >> how do you have a transcript, chris? >> you don't get to have a lawyer come in and argue before congress for you with articles of impeachment. you don't do that. >> well, do you remember the clinton impeachment proceeding? >> yes. >> do you remember what happened in the house of representatives during the starr report? >> yeah, i do. >> okay. >> and? >> that was a hearing. >> i know those are hearings. >> they had their starr report. it just ended up being the mueller report and it didn't work out so well. >> that was an actual impeachment process. it wasn't a special counsel. it wasn't an extension of the

doj. it's exclusively -- >> starr was the last one. then you go to the senate, and they have the trial. my point is this. high crime and misdemeanor doesn't exist outside of politics. >> chris, how do you have the transcript of this conversation? how do you have it? >> the president. >> elected to release it. >> yes. >> so much for the -- by the way, remember, it was quid pro quo. then it was cover-up, except the transcript was released. then it was whistle-blower one. now we've got whistle-blower two. it doesn't matter what whistle-blower two says. that's the opinion of -- >> you don't need any of it. you've got the transcript, and you've got the text of the people who were around him. >> the white house released the transcript. >> that's what you should do. you didn't do me a favor, brother. this is the president of the united states. i shouldn't have to beg you for transparency. you should offer it up. >> hey, chris, do you think it's really a good practice to start giving out transcripts of head of state conversations? you think that's a good

practice -- when you are not telling the truth about asking a foreign power to investigate your political opponent -- >> we released the transcript. >> you surrender the deference of that type of confidentiality. >> you never surrender the deference of the united states constitution, my friend. >> it's not the constitution. >> never. >> the constitution doesn't protect that transcript. and by the way, it didn't protect corey lewandowski when the white house said he's got executive privilege. >> hold it. >> he never even worked in the white house, jay. you guys are playing games -- >> you don't have to work in the white house to have executive privilege. >> how? that's where it extends to. >> no. it extends to people giving advice to the president. >> they only use it with people who work in the white house in that capacity for the president, and i think he should have that privilege. but that's not what corey lewandowski was. that's game-playing. and you released the call. good for you. release your taxes too. >> chris, you know what you're asking? you want to cut and piece the constitution to suit the end

game here, and you know what the problem with that is in that's dangerous for the entire country. >> you gave the transcript out. it wasn't tribanscribed really from a recorded call. i don't love their protocols and i don't like how they put it in this password-protected place either. >> that's not my zone. i'm the president's counsel. i am not the white house counsel, and you know that. >> i'm not blaming you for it. i'm saying i don't like it. and i'm saying that high crimes and misdemeanors, jay, it only exists in politics. and it's about, according to our founding fathers, it's about people in positions of public trust buziabusing that power. >> chris, you're a smart guy. how does this end? how does this end? do you really believe the president of the united states will be impeached and convicted in the united states senate based on that phone call with ukraine? do you really believe that? i do not. >> i don't think that's a fair representation. >> well, that's what the constitution requires. you're the one who said senate makes the trial.

>> the phone call is a window into a months-long effort by this president, his counsel -- not you, rudy giuliani -- state department officials, the white house, and the department of justice to help this president promote his own personal political agenda. >> you don't get to impeach the president of the united states for a window. >> it's a window into all these things he did. >> what's the rest of the evidence? >> the texts. the texts. >> what do the texts show? >> he wants the deliverables. >> who does? >> the president. that's what his guy sondland, who's testifying tomorrow, said. he wants the deliverable. taylor, the ambassador he put in, says, i don't think we should have ukraine assistance predicated on how they do in our election. >> you don't think, though, that the president -- you don't think that transcript violates the law, though, right? you don't think it's a legal violation? >> i think abuse of power is a very significant thing for these proceedings. i don't see treason or bribery, but i don't think it's an

exhaustive list, but i've got to go. i'm out of time. >> it's not a high crime or misdemeanor. >> i understand your take on it. we'll see what the democrats can make as a case. i always appreciate you sussing it out. be well. i'll see you again soon. thank you again for watching. "cnn tonight" will digest what happened here and so much more news with d. lemon right now. there's his laugh. >> my friend -- my new friend jay-z says, a wise man once told me -- >> you dropped something. >> can you hear? >> yeah, i hear you. you dropped something. >> a name. never argue with fools because people at a distance can't tell who's who. >> well, jay sekulow has got such good hair, they'll always know that it's not me. but i'll tell you what. i'll tell you a few things. one, you know my position on this. you've got to hear the arguments that could beat you. jay sekulow is a talented attorney, and let's not forget this. if i were in a pinch like this president was with mueller, i'd want someone like jay sekulow. they found a way to get this president out of his own head. everything in his head was telling him