>> bill: so, that happen. >> sandra: just another wednesday. >> bill: yes indeed. more to come, right? >> sandra: [laughs] it was big three hours. more to come through out the day. >> bill: "outnumbered" starts now. we will see you manana on "america's newsroom." >> harris: special d. fox news alert, we are waiting to hear from the president of the united nations. he is set to meet with the japanese prime minister, just hours after the white house released a transcript of the president's call with the ukrainian president, and one day after, speaker nancy pelosi formally announced in in the bh and angry. you're watching "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. with me, melissa francis. host a fox to kennedy , kennedy. but marshall is with us, anchor and executive editor of "special report" ."

"outnumbered," and what he's here. >> bret: good to be here. >> harris: it's a light newsday. [laughter] >> bret: i thought i was going to cover the u.n., i don't know what happened along the way. >> melissa: interesting point. the timing is a topic of discussion, for sure. >> bret: fascinating day already, just for the reaction you are seeing from democrats and republicans. looking at the same transcript and fully different ways. as you look through the prism, it depends what you see in that transcript. some are seeing an impeachable offense that is as plain as the front of their face. others are saying, "where is that they are there? can make the case that this is a direct quid pro quo even though the president talks about funding and talks about doing a favor and just getting joe biden cannot" be when you've laid it all out, we are done! >> bret: okay, bye-bye! thanks! [laughter] >> harris: glad you're here. let's good.

the transcript shows president trump asked for information on the biden families business dealings, but did not directly mention u.s. military aid. a senior doj officials as the department concluded the president was not asking for "a thing of value." after the intelligence community inspector general originally suggested the request could be a violation of campaign finance law. the ig also said he found the whistle-blower in all this had political bias, but that it did not disqualify his claim. and today the president remained defiant after the release of the transcript. watch. speak of the single greatest witch hunt in american history, probably in history. but the letter was great letter. many come in the letter reviewing the call that was done at the insistence of myself and other people that read it, it was a friendly letter that was no pressure. the way you have that built up, that call was going to be the call from hell.

problems the problem is the fake news, corrupt reporting. >> harris: however, democrats say the transcript does not not total story. >> his administration has a well-earned reputation for dishonesty, altered facts, and incomplete disclosure. we need to see the complete unredacted complaint without further delay. the witness needs to testify without fear of intimidation. >> harris: chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge's life for us at the justice department. catherine? >> thank you, iris, and good afternoon. we reviewed the transcript. what it shows is this is a 30 minute phone call. about 10 minutes into the phone call, president trump has two asks for the ukrainian president paris one appears to be connected to the hacking of the clinton emails and the forensic review. the second has to do with joe biden and his son. it reads, "there's a lot of talk about biden's son, that he

stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that. whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. biden went about bragging that he stopped the prosecution. so if you could look into it, it sounds horrible to me." the new ukrainian president tells our president that he is going to soon have what would be the equivalent of an attorney general, who he says will be 100% of his person. then he responds, "he or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company." that is hundred biden's company, where he sat on the board. "they mention in this issue. the issue of the investigation is actually the issue to restore the honesty. we will take care of that and work on the investigation of the case." the president then continues, "i will have mr. giuliani give you a call. i'm also going to have attorney general barr call and we'll get to the bottom of it. i'm sure you will figure it out." based on our account and review of the transcript, there are

eight references by the president to either rudy giuliani or the attorney general, william barr. justice department officials have been very firm with reporters today that attorney general barr did not know about the skull until several weeks later. he was not asked to investigate joe biden, nor was he asked to call the ukraine, harris. >> harris: catherine herridge, thank you very much. we are going to go straight to the united nations right now. here's one of the events we've been watching for. the president has a bilateral meeting with the japanese prime minister, shinzo abe. we will watch this play out right now together. >> president trump: is a great gentleman. when i first got this job, everybody said, "you have to get lighthizer, he's a great and fine man who also gets along with the other side." in particular, with japan. they've developed a really great mutual respect. i am grateful, as well, to several members of my cabinet for joining us this afternoon. that's secretary mnuchin, secretary ross,

secretary pompeo, and my thanks also to representative roger marshall. >> translator: [speaking japanese] >> harris: during the moment of translation here, it might be helpful to talk about what japan wants in this meeting. what they are looking for is a u.s. pledge not to impose national security tariffs up to 25% on japanese vehicles and auto parts under a u.s. trade law. there are some things that they will talk about today with regard to the trade deal with china, and in those moments we will fill in. let's listen to the president. >> president trump: we insist on it reciprocal. we want reciprocal agreements from now on, and i'm not just talking about japan. i'm talking about virtually every nation in the world. they have not been reciprocal.

they've been one-way streets. under the market access agreement, we are announcing today that japan will open new markets to approximately $7 billion in american agricultural products. japanese tariffs will now be significantly lower or eliminated entirely for u.s. beef, pork, wheat, cheese, corn, wine, and so much more. this is a huge victory for america's farmers, ranchers, and growers. that's very important to me. >> translator: [speaking japanese] >> harris: all right, we again will fill in this part where they are talking with the translator now. you see on the left the prime minister of japan, and our president there on the right. they will continue their bilateral. as it makes news and we reported to you, you will see it's right here on "outnumbered." i want to bring back the conversation to what is happening. but it is with us today. with these documents that got released. the unanimous push to see with

both democrats and republicans today. >> bret: i said this earlier, but with this transcript of the phone call, we now have more than the whistle-blower had. >> melissa: that's a great point. >> harris: [laughs] amazing. >> melissa: that's a great point. the whistle-blower did not have firsthand knowledge of the conversation and wasn't listening in, and this transcript, as catherine herridge asked me, it's to have 45 people listening on the prayer they're all typing during the phone call and they get together and compare what they all ended. they come out with one solid transcript of everything that was said. that's what we are looking at. >> bret: it does open up a lot of doors. it opens up a lot of questions. one of the problems was releasing the transcript of a foreign leader is there will be calls for the transcripts. >> harris: that's interesting. the >> bret: how does that tie in? will there be calls from democrats?

>> harris: we may hear an answer. german adam schiff is talking on capitol hill. speak of the notes of the call reflects the conversation far more damning than iron many others had imagined. it's shocking that the white house would release these notes, and felt that somehow this would help the president's case or cause. because what those notes reflect is a classic mafia-like shakedown of a foreign leader. they reflect a ukrainian president who was desperate for u.s. support, for military support, to help that country in a hot war with putin's russia. a country that is still occupied by regular russian forces. in which people face a very

dangerous and continuing and destabilizing action by their aggressive neighbor. at the same time, a president of the united states who, immediately after you can president expresses the need for further weapons, tells the ukraine precedent that he has a favor to ask. the president communicates to his ukrainian counterpart that the united states has done a lot for ukraine. we've done an awful lot for ukraine. more than the europeans or anyone else has done for ukraine. but there's not much reciprocity here. this is how a mafia boss talks. "what have you done for us? we've done so much for you, but there's not much reciprocity. i have a favor and want to ask you." what is that favor? the favor, of course, is to investigate his political rival. to investigate the bite ands. it's clear the ukrainian president understands what it is that is expected of him. and is making every effort to

mollify the president. what adds another layer of depravity to this conversation is the fact the president of the united states then invokes the attorney general of the united states, as well as his personal lawyer, as emissaries in the case of the attorney general, as an official head of a u.s. apartment. the department of justice. but he says will be part and parcel of this. the attorney general is denying involvement in this. nonetheless, you can see why the department of justice would want this transcript never to see the light of day. you can see why they have worked so hard to deprive our committee of the list of lower complaints. in fact, the opinion by the justice department is starting in its own regard. in that opinion, the department of justice and fences the absurd

claims that the director of national intelligence has no responsibility over efforts to prevent foreign interference in our elections. well, that will come as news. or at least it should come into the director of national intelligence, who is in charge, among other things, of detecting foreign interference and reporting to congress about foreign interference in our elections. but apparently it's a view of this justice department that the director has no jurisdiction in this area. and it is a sad fact that the direction director of national intelligence would agree to be bound by that view. that the director of national intelligence would adopt a view that he had no jurisdiction over an effort to seek foreign interference in our election. that will be the subject of our hearing with the director tomorrow. what's more, the department of justice opinion doesn't even preclude the director from providing that complaint to our committee, and yet he has. he's withheld in violation of the law.

the fact that the president of the united states would invoke the attorney general sends a further message to the ukrainian president that this is not just me asking, this is not just rudy giuliani asking, this is the united states government asking. and we plan to effectuate that through the department of justice. whether those steps are taken place yet or not, or whether they have not been prevented by the whistle-blower complaint and all that has followed from that revolution revelation. here we have the president of the united states engaged in a shakedown of a foreign president. a president of the united states, even as he is withholding vital military support to an ally, asking a favor of that ally to investigate his opponents. just by way of background here, so we know what's at stake, in 1994 we tried to get ukraine to give up nuclear weapons it

inherited from the soviet union. they were reluctant to do so because those weapons might be a guarantee against aggression by their neighbor. that is, by the soviet union. but we and our allies persuaded the ukrainians nonetheless to give up those weapons, and we assured ukraine that we would help guarantee its territorial integrity. well, russia would then invade ukraine, and over the years since that invasion of the united states has provided, albeit not enough, military support to ukraine. but the most recent support to ukraine was held up by this president. hundreds of millions of dollars. for reasons that the president would not, and the secretaries were not, able to communicate. even to leaders of their own party, like mitch mcconnell, who said yesterday that he couldn't find out why this aid was being withheld. i think we know why the aide was being withheld. notwithstanding the president's

now conflict explanation's. "well, it's because he wanted them to investigate corruption. no, it was because we wanted europe to give them more money, even though europe has given them more than we have." i think we know why the president was withholding that assistance. regardless, ukraine understood exactly what was being asked of it. ukraine understood exactly what they needed from the united states. and the president of the united states would interfere with our national security, would interfere with the national security of our ally, and do so for the illicit purpose of trying to advance his election campaign, having already sought for help in his first presidential campaign, would not abuse the power of his office yet again, this time to seek the help of another nation in his present campaign, is the most fundamental betrayal of his oath of office. i would be happy to respond to questions, but one final point about the whistle-blower.

we still don't have the complaint. now that we have the department of justice opinion, i think it telling that they have released that and yet not release the inspector general's legal analysis that takes issue with it. this is, again, bill barr's justice department tried to put out a misleading spin. in this case, in the form of the departments opinion. nevertheless, that complaint needs to be provided to our committee. it needs to be provided in its entirety. that whistle-blower needs to be given instructions about how to come to our committee, and that whistle-blower needs to be given the complete freedom to report any allegation of wrongdoing that has come to that whistle-blower's attention. he will not brook any kind of interference, given how pervasive this cover-up apparently is. i would be happy to answer questions. >> reporter: mr. chairman, the white house says that this proves there was no quid pro quo

because the withheld military aid never even came up in the conversation. what is your response to that? >> my response is the president of ukraine brought up his country's need for military assistance. immediately thereafter, the president of the united states said, "i have a favor i want to ask of you." and whatnot with the subject go. there was only one message that president of ukraine got from that call, and that was, "this is what i need, i know what you need." like any mafia boss, the president didn't need to say, "that is a nice country you have come it would be a shame if something happened to it." that was clear from the conversation. there was no quid pro quo necessary to betray your country or oath of office, even though many read this as a quid pro quo. i'm not concerned whether it's a quid pro quo or not. ukraine understood with this president wanted. he made it abundantly clear. he made it redundantly clear. he had his emissaries making it

clear. he needed what he needed to do if you want to get military assistance. that is to help the president of the united states violated his oath of office. >> reporter: what specifically do you see as the impeachable offense? >> well, i think in its most naked form -- and says what our inquiry is going to look into -- the president has now admitted the notes of this call, and we don't even know if these are the complete notes of this call. it indicates the president of the united states shaking down a foreign leader, essentially undermining the national security of this country for a personal political gain, and one that violates his oath of offic office. it's very powerful evidence of that kind of potential

impeachable offense. we want to get the full facts before the american people and we also want to make sure we take corrective action. i want to think that with dominic whistle-blower. we still don't know whether this was the subject of the complete. but this single courageous individual may have had the effect of forcing the white house to provide ukraine with this funding. knowing that these matters were going to come to light. this whistle-blower has already had a tremendous impact in exposing wrongdoing of the president of the united states and helping protect our national security in a way that his or her boss was unwilling to do. by that i mean the director as well as the president of the united states. >> reporter: yesterday came out and report of what the speaker announced. after seeing what you sign this transcript, is there any doubt in your mind that house democrats will -- >> i don't want to get out of

ourselves here. what we have learned, what has been admitted and what we see in writing is about as damaging as you can imagine. it will be a decision for us when we conclude our investigative work whether to bring this or other matters in the form of articles to a vote. we will cross that bridge when you come to it. no one should have any illusions about the seriousness of what was already uncontested. that is that the president of the united states has betrayed his oath of office, and sacrifice our national security in doing so. that, i think, is quintessentially with the framers were concerned about. i think it's quintessentially with the framers thought was the sum and substance of what might warrant a presence removal from office. i don't want to understate the

significance of what's been revealed, but i also don't want to get too far ahead of myself. report back do you expect to hear from the whistle-blower as early as this week? what more do you expect to hear from him or her, or the full complaint, that you can't already glean from the memo of this interaction between president trump and his ukrainian counterpart? >> i certainly hope to hear from there was a boy this week, perhaps as soon as tomorrow after the director testifies. but that whistle-blower is trying to make sure that whistle-blower is not subject to any further retaliation. i say "further" because the president has already retaliated against him or her. retaliated by suggesting that whistle-blower is disloyal to our country. they'd be there representing some other country. but they are a partisan act. that they have some hidden bias. there's already been already been retaliation by the president. i would have thought and hoped that the director of national intelligence would have spoken out publicly in defense of his

employee, or contractor. that is someone reliant on the director to protect them. i don't know whether it will happen tomorrow or not. i think it was a lawyers eager to come be with her committee. this is already a month overdue. at least a month overdue. we are determined to make sure that whistle-blower has an opportunity once more that no one is sitting next to them trying to put a gag on what they can say. >> harris: i don't know if you caught some of the incendiary things that the house until committee chairman was saying there. adam schiff sings about the president like, "here we have a president of the united states engaging in a shakedown of a foreign leader." he referred to him as a mafia boss. bret baier? this took on some interesting new light. >> bret: well, sure. adam schiff has been in this framework for a while. he's been calling for investigations.

obviously, the russia investigation. and said he had evidence of collusion. he now believes is the moment that has tipped, he said the rubicon has changed this weeken weekend. what is happening here is he's putting mouth the words of the ukrainian president. and we are going to hear from the ukrainian president later today. >> harris: and a couple hours. >> bret: it'll be interesting to hear from his perspective, how he saw the call and whether he perceived pressure that shift describes. >> kennedy: that's with a good point. sorry, i just want to add to that. what adam schiff is saying that this call can only be taken one way by the ukrainian president. that's a really bad move, because all you have to have is the ukrainian president saying, "i did not infer that at all from the conversation we had," and it completely refutes adam schiff's statement we just heard. which was very long on adjectives and very short and dominic on facts. >> harris: and some nouns. >> leslie: i'm going to go to vegas for this one. the ukrainian president is

never, ever in his lifetime going to say, even if he felt pressure, that he was pressured. because he doesn't want to stop getting aid from the united states. if i was the leader of ukraine i would be like, "nope, i didn't see it that way." >> kennedy: but what if he really didn't see it that way? how do you know the difference? >> leslie: i don't. here's the problem with this -- if you are in a criminal court of law and you have a merger with nobody, what you do? there is circumstantial evidence and that's what they put before the jury. i see this as a lot of circumstantial evidence. we too you really impeach on circumstantial evidence? a >> leslie: for abuse of power, you can. >> melissa: shifts that he was mafia boss and given lots of aid. and that we aren't getting anything back. that's not at all was said in the call. what he said was, "we are giving you a lot of time and a lot of effort to come a much more countries are. doing more to help you then you

are. germany does almost nothing for you." not that, "you aren't giving us anything back." he misrepresented what was in the transcript. right there. 360 also question whether it was real. there are workers responsive for transcribing this transcript. the white house saying this is what they put out. there is one part in the transcript that has ellipses and there was this controversial doll not controversy on social media saying something was left out. they say it was just voice trailing off and they put that to note it to. it's all this intrigue, and here it is. this is the actual thing. >> harris: real quickly, because we will scoot and get back to this conversation later in the hour. i'm curious how much of this create the slippery slope. you got this meeting now between our president and zelensky later today. i don't know, do you just say, "hey, everybody, were on your cameras, because i can't expect privacy anymore."

will this damage relationships with other world leaders they think we are going to pass out transcripts? >> bret: i think it's a dangerous precedent, and one that secretary pompeo was worried about. this is a unique circumstance. the white house thinks that having this out is a great thing. democrats and a lot of people on capitol hill say it doesn't help your case, because it lays out a lot of open questions about what was next. is there another call they want to hear? >> harris: they are already saying they haven't seen the whistle-blower complete yet but we know things are coming. so it's interesting. like i said, we will get back to it later. the impeachment drama is actually building over all of this on capitol hill. republicans are now going after speaker pelosi's move to launch a formal inquiry, impeachment inquiry, against president trump. the political impact ad of 2020. we we will get into it. >> the democrats need to explain to the american people while they chose to trash thousands that have built up the american

people and help this president when he is wanting to put america first. ♪

>> the fact is the president of the united states, in breach of his constitutional responsibility, as ask a foreign government to help him in his political campaign at the expense of our national security as well as undermining the integrity of our elections. that cannot stand. he will be held accountable. no one is above the law. >> melissa: house speaker nancy pelosi doubling down today in criticism of president trump's call with the ukrainian leader after announcing a formal impeachment inquiry of the president yesterday. but president trump tweeting, "will the democrats apologize after seeing what was on the call with the ukrainian president? they should. a perfect call. got them by surprise.

most house democrats backing pelosi's move, but others wary of the impact. republicans, meantime, slamming pelosi's decision. >> make no mistake, yesterday was a dark day for america. it was a dark day for the rule of law, but the speaker of the house would claim the president violated a law without ever having any information to judge it on. it was a dark day for national security. but you were willing to jeopardize the national security of our country, today and in the future, because of your own political bias. >> melissa: the white house today also firing back at democrats. >> the president has done nothing wrong. we've said that time and time again. the problem with this is you have a democrat party with a complacent and compliant media. whatever they say, the media will pare parrot.

without fact-checking are going to multiple sources. here's why. they wanted to be truthful so badly that they will manufacture a crisis. >> harris: i want to ask you, as the democrat on the couch, every democrat has sat here and said that impeachment hurts those moderate democrats who are responsible for putting nancy pelosi back ie driver's seat in the house. has the math on that change can max i don't think it has we have a very different population for this is why speaker pelosi has been so hesitant to do this. she's talked about how divisive it is of the country. she knows the history of what happened to bill clinton when he was impeached. we also know that even though you see polls as to what the people and democratic party are feeling, the majority are moderates and centrists and the majority of not only democrats, but those swing voters, swing state voters, independent ofs, and those voters may not be happy trump though mike withdra.

they won't be happy with impeachment. >> melissa: so she made the chase down my choice to put herself on the line up at those democrats in jeopardy. >> leslie: i was surprised not only that she given, but when. i certainly would have waited until they have every piece of i think she was pushed by not only the seven freshman democrats, by more and more numbers and her party, saying they want impeachment. not just by jerry nadler. >> melissa: here's what she said in 1988. let's listen. >> the republican majority is not judging the president with fairness, but impeaching him with a vengeance. the investigation of the president from the mental principles which americans hold dear. privacy, fairness, checks and balances, have been seriously violated. and why? because we are here today because the republicans in the house are paralyzed with hatred

of pare down my president clinton. >> melissa: bret, what you think about that? it sounds kind of familiar. schiff maybe up to 200 come close to it, but you are not there yet for impeachment. she hasn't move forward with a formal vote, which is key to point out. without that, you don't have the subpoena power that comes with impeachment inquiry. they are not there yet. they have to lobby the caucus to get there but they don't have the numbers. >> melissa: when she goes and says it's the camera, "we are starting this inquiry?" i think for most americans, those who were voting for those moderates, they see her charging at impeachment. >> harris: my question of the audience is. i know a lot of republicans see it, but i get the feeling she's talking to the people in her own pockets. i think it's a little bit of lip

service to say, "look, i'm listening to you and doing what you said." you had al green yesterday going around doing a victory lap, much like democrats did before the bob mueller report came out. yes, it is a wider audience, but i look at what julian castro tweeted. i will read the second part. "congress should cancel recess and begin impeachment proceedings immediately." this is the smoking gun, he say. there are people within the democratic party who might not even be as far left as we would say, with bernie sanders or elizabeth warren. the they are left on this issuef impeachment. they are looking for that in the crisis they have in politics. what you do and you can't beat somebody? would you do if you don't have economics or health care plan you agree on? you make the other guy look really bad if you can. >> melissa: here's what tulsi gabbard said to kennedy the other night. we will get your take on their side. >> i feel strongly this is not the route we should take. a politicizing something that really the american people need

to be trusted to decide who they would like to see as our president and commander in chief. >> i'm concerned about going to end impeachment. as i've also stated before, it could split the country apart. there are people who feel strongly on both sides. it's going to cost a lot of money. it's going to be an issue with of the countries internationally. >> melissa: kennedy? >> kennedy: that is a rare commodity for democrats running for president. that is a measured response and rationalism. i think tulsi gabbard looks at the political landscape and sees that there is not quite the upside that emotional democrats think there is with this fight. also, we don't even have a smoking gun because we haven't arrived at the crime scene. let's stop forensically picking things apart. >> harris: call julian castro and tell him that. this is where we collect the facts. bret, you and i were talking about that. irrespective of your emotions. the facts don't even know feelings. you look at it all. by not collect it all before you

go down a very familiar road? risky, politically, for democrats? >> kennedy: at leslie's right. wait until the end of the week. it's just a couple more days. >> melissa: the president under scrutiny over the ukraine controversy. while some say that she could hurt former vp biden the most. >> and vice president biden called for the prosecutors to be fired, and that we will cut off all aid, there is a conflict. something i hope someone will look out over here. ♪ america is experiencing a strong economy that is certain. but history tells us that economies don't live in a vacuum. we need to prepare for uncertainty. and you can with rosland capital - a trusted leader in helping people acquire precious metals. call rosland capital today at 800-630-8900 to get started. gold bullion, lady liberty gold and silver proofs, and our premium coins, can help you preserve your wealth. call rosland capital at 800-630-8900

to receive your free rosland guide to gold, gold & precious metals ira and silver brochures. with rosland, there are no hassles, no gimmicks, and we have the fastest shipping around. prepare for uncertainty. make gold your new standard. call rosland capital today at 800-630-8900, 800-630-8900. that's 800-630-8900.

wwithout it, i cannot write myl tremors wouldname.xtreme. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month. prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. for sixty years, aarp has been fighting for people like larry. and we won't stop. join us in fighting for what's right.

run with us... on a john deere 1 series tractor. because changing your attachments... whether it's for this job... this job... or even this job... should be as easy as... ♪ what about this? changing your plans. nothing runs like a deere™. yeah. run with us. search "john deere 1 series" for more. get your 1 series for just $99 dollars a month at your john deere dealer.

>> he can do anything and get away with it. the president believes he is above the law. perceiving information to investigate a political opponent. but is not the conduct of an american president. >> kennedy: joe biden hammering the president over his phone call with ukraine's president. while some political analysts see biden benefiting from the

controversy, others are not so sure. they say it opens the door to republicans poring over his son's ties to ukraine. that it would be alongside the awkward question, "what did they expect to achieve by allying with the vice president's hot mess of a son?" that will be the centerpiece of the biggest political news event of the year. it could be too steep to overcome." there was a lot going on in this story, bret baier. it is not all politically beneficial for the front runner. >> bret: know, and he's not addressing it head on right now. he's not talking about it a lot. in part, because there is a lot of they're there. and giuliani is out saying there's more to come. "the new york times" has done this investigation. they say there's other parts of the investigation yet to come. it's key to point out that while

vice president biden talked about openly getting rid of that prosecutor, holding back the billion dollars, that he was acting on behalf of the administration. however, the owner, the ukrainian oligarch, then had said that they were pleased with that action. there was a benefit there to that country. which hundred biden was on the board. there's other parts of the story, and details, that may factor in there and could be vulnerable. >> kennedy: this is a lot of money we are talking about. was hundred biden then energy expert? it's a handsome sum to be paying a newbie. >> there is no denying that getting rid of this prosecutor was a financial benefit 200 biden. there is no way to not see that.

what i don't understand about this is that it definitely hurts joe biden. it doesn't help them to bring all these things back up and talk about it again. so you have to wonder, for democrats who want to get rid of president trump, if you're hurting the person that polls have identified as the most electable against president trump, aren't you just helping president trump's because in getting reelected? unless you think think you are actually going to impeach him. which it doesn't seem like -- no one has ever actually done out of office. do you think elizabeth warren is more able to win candidate at this point? >> kennedy: why doesn't she continue running for president track why doesn't she continue talking about the issues and let congress do their job so we aren't distracted with something that is not going to end in conviction or removal? >> harris: i want to touch on what you said and then i will get to that. i think it's interesting,

because you look at democrats, maybe you assume that, like you say, they would go for the person with the biggest name recognition or whatever. but if you look at what representative ilhan omar tweeted out, or what she told "the guardian" over the weekend, biden might not be the one. i'm paraphrasing her. with that was an interesting line of argument. if you have 2020 candidates who can focus in on just the issues, as you say, and maybe not messed up and talk about impeachment, they've also got to be looking at those progressives who are critical of joe biden. saying, "wait a minute, if i get on that train and weaken them in the same way, maybe i could step up." >> kennedy: it's a dual prong scandal that hurts the president on the front runner that a lot of democrats don't like. seems like a utility. >> leslie: there are definitely democrats who don't want to buy because he's a centrist and a moderate. not only within the democratic party, the people more willing to vote for him just in the state of texas. but he might not be the nominee. i'm not just saying that because

of what's going on now. i'm saying that because, as elizabeth warren rices, joe biden seems to fall. this going to come down 1 of 3 ways. this could be joe biden's swift boat, as it was to john kerry. this could be nothing, because the voters didn't care about mueller and they really don't care about this. where this could help him, because he's getting very feisty with trump and he's not seeming as old and forgetting things when he is talking about this issue. >> bret: if this comes up in the debate, bernie sanders is asked about it, will it affect your biden? he said, "that's it for you to decide." >> kennedy: oh, mercy! bernie, to cables mock written gloves off ! >> harris: i don't know if you remember that, but we do. >> kennedy: and neither nearly every 2020 democrat supporting policies impeachment inquiry. the impact on the race as the subject

's suck all of the air out of te room. we are already oxygen-deprived. that's next. ♪ too many people in pain settle for a restless night's sleep. there's a better choice. aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid and the 12-hour pain-relieving strength of aleve. that dares to last into the morning. so you feel refreshed. aleve pm. there's a better choice.

thand find inspiration who win new places.ct... leading them to discover: we're woven together by the moments we share. everything you need, all in one place. expedia. >> vo: my car is my after-work de♪ music ion zone. >> vo: so when my windshield broke... i found the experts at safelite autoglass. they have exclusive technology and service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ your business can do a lot in 10 minutes. like make a big sale. surprise and delight a customer. or come up with the winning idea. and 10 minutes is all you need to finally give your business the internet technology it really needs.

we'll prove it. give us 10 minutes. if we can't offer you faster speed or better savings than your current internet service, we'll give you 300 dollars for your time. call now to get your comcast business 10 minute advantage and take your business beyond. comcast business. beyond fast.

>> grateful we are moving forward. when i say "we," i mean america.

>> donald trump will leave congress, in my view, no choice but to initiate impeachment. >> i believed then and i believe now that in donald trump we have the most corrupt president. this because this is a moment of truth for the country. i think this is a moment of truth for the republican party. sooner or later it had to come. speak of the president of the united states withholds that aid in order to go after a political opponents. i think that was a bridge too far for people. >> melissa: 2020 democratic candidates speaking out after speaker nancy pelosi announced a formal impeachment inquiry into president trump over a july phone call with the president of ukraine. a number of candidates also voicing their support on twitter. we have a bunch of those tweets for you. bret, when you hear cory booker saying things like he withheld aid unless he did his

bidding," the transcript comes out and doesn't say that, doesn't matter? or do you expect candidates to go to the most hyperbolic place? and that's politics? >> bret: a number of the things in the early reporting have not come forward exactly in that transcript. there's a lot of people that read into that transcript a lot of things, but will be are seeing -- again, more than the whistle-blower saw -- doesn't deliver on some of those early reports. i think in the democratic primary process impeachment is a pretty big draw. there's a lot of push from the aocs and the others you really think this is the way to go. even if they don't have the articles of impeachment nailed down. >> melissa: for some of the more moderate candidates in the house or anywhere else who are trying to get reelected, you could say that an overreach, promising there is something here and there is not and they don't get to impeachment, would hurt them.

does it play the same for any of the 2020 2020 candidates? does it hurt me of the more it it help all of them to be on the bandwagon >> leslie: if you get helps. not only do you have to have you have to have a united front within the party. you are in the primary. you don't want to be the one to say, "i don't read that same as you." >> kennedy: tosi tulsi gabbard made the next debate, she might say that. >> leslie: l think she is. she's not top three and she won't be the nominee she's not going to the democratic nominee provides their going for. >> kennedy: they won't say, " " this is my thing about that. if the president has reached the height zenith of crimes and misdemeanors, that warrants. if you don't like and releasing the same thing and exhibiting

the same behavior you know about when he was elected, you can't remove him from office for that. you can vote them out, but if you want him -- it is so odd to me that all these people who want the job want to make it very easy to remove them from the job they want. if we go forth with this impeachment, if they do it with every successive administration. >> melissa: that's a good point. must be after the break. atesnear record lows. refi now at newday usa with no income verification, no appraisal, and no points. x? our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition... for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-seven vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. now you can, with shipsticks.com!

no more lugging your clubs through the airport or risk having your clubs lost or damaged by the airlines. sending your own clubs ahead with shipsticks.com makes it fast & easy to get to your golf destination. with just a few clicks or a phone call, we'll pick up and deliver your clubs on-time, guaranteed, for as low as $39.99. shipsticks.com saves you time and money. make it simple. make it ship sticks. we have some great new ideas that we want to present to you today. [son]: who are you talking to? [son]: that guy's scary. the first item on the list is selecting a chairman for the... for the advisory board what's this? as well as use the remaining... child care options run out. lifetime retirement income from tiaa doesn't. guaranteed monthly income for life.

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 ♪ >> melissa: our thanks to bret baier. i can't believe the day is only half over. what are you watching for the rest of the day? still so many events going on. >> bret: the biggest of the 2:15 p.m. meeting with ukrainian president. but open dialogue between the president on him, and hearing his take of the call and what he says. the other thing is the turkish president on "special report" tonight at six rpm. >> melissa: you have that interview, you're saying chris wallace sat down with the

leader of iran. that is kind of blowing by already pay that was a huge interview, a lot there. they of course accused iran -- i mean, israel, of supporting isis. a lot of things to solve. we would keep an eye on it all. we are back here on the couch tomorrow. here's harris. >> harris: we begin with this fox news alert, as we await the president's meeting with ukraine's president. democrats have lodged a formal impeachment investigation. a big hour. "outnumbered overtime," i'm harris faulkner. the white house releasing that transcript of the president's car with ukrainian leader back in july, showing the president thought a review of the biden family business dealings. they did not leverage u.s. military aid as a quid pro quo, as has been claimed. president trump today at the front of the call, while taking aim at democrats. watch. >> the single greatest witch hunt in american history, probably in history, but a