going to lebron james show? >> lebron james is the most popular -- >> melissa: academic all-american right here. thethere are amazing student athletes throughout the country. great conversation though, guys. that's it for us, guys. "outnumbered" starts now. >> harris: fox news alert. democrats doubling down on their impeachment inquiries, blasting rudy giuliani with a subpoena, demanding he produce all documents related to communications with ukrainian officials. now, giuliani is responding, saying he could be convinced to testify of lawmakers let him present the information he obtained. watch. >> i don't know. i'm weighing the alternatives. i go through it. i get all of my evidence together. i get my charts. they let me use videotapes, tape recorders that i have. that's nonsense.

i gathered all of this evidence before the mueller probe ended, so it was clearly under my responsibility as the lawyer for the president of the united states. >> melissa: there is a lot there. this have sources -- one source tells fox news secretary of state mike pompeo was among those listening in on the july call between president trump and ukraine's president, which is at the center of the whistle-blowers complaint. lastly, pompeo denied that he had first-hand knowledge of the call. in the meantime, secretary pompeo a short time ago on twitter accusing house democrats of attempting to intimidate and bully state department officials with their deposition requests. this is "outnumbered." i melissa francis. my partner, harris faulkner. fox news contributor, jessica tarlov. "washington examiner" columnist and now newly announced fox news contributor, kristen

soltis anderson. and joining us on the couch, jason chaffetz. he is outnumbered. welcome to everybody. congratulations to you. let's get to the meat of it. i want to turn to something that you are today for foxnews.co foxnews.com. messing up their impeachment dreams. but i am wondering -- we are just learning that michael pompeo was on the call. does that fit into the thesis that you have there? >> jason: the whole idea that they were going to catch donald trump and have to go to court to get all of this, donald trump just laid it all out. i mean, he just releases the content of the call. look at what he did with the mueller report. he was mr. transparency there as well. he waved attorney-client privilege. >> melissa: why are we hearing about mike pompeo being on the

call, though? >> jason: i don't know that it's relevant. >> melissa: you don't think it's relevant? >> jason: it goes to the call. if you're going to impeach a president, are you going to do it because you're secretary of state was listening on a call or not? if you are going to justify impeachment, you're going to have to say that there was a quid pro quo over there was intimidation, that the other person on the other end of the call said no. it was not intimidation. >> harris: actually, it seriously is about judgment. i mean, when you look at people who actually have been there, and you adjudicating impeachme impeachment, and their take on it, if you are there in that moment, and you have the opportunity to try to turn some judgment wheels, you can do that at secretary of state. not everybody on the call can do that. this is what he told me, could

you do us a favor, though? don't play that again. sometimes in the call that legal experts actually have argued for and against impeachment in this country would have changed something. mike pompeo, former cia, seems like the type of person who might have done that for the president. that's why he's important. do you still have to prove all those things? absolutely. no one is saying that. but it would have been helpful to know -- i mean, maybe we need to talk to the people who were all michael. i don't know how much transparency we have had so far. >> jason: the president didn't have to release this. he could have claimed executive privilege. the point is that he did. all of these other superfluous issues out there, go read the call. was it quid pro quo? i say no. he asked the other person -- the president of ukraine, if he's out there was intimidation. was there some sort of pressure? he also said no. so, when you read it, and you

think the president didn't say anything wrong, you are suggesting that we have to have some sort of correction. i don't think -- >> melissa: if you're talking about transparency, it is a big detail. that your secretary of state was on the call. that it is about putting everything out there. let me get to you and once i can. meanwhile president trump ramping up the search for the whistle-blowers identity. here is what he said yesterday. >> mr. president, do you now know who the whistle-blower is, sir? >> well, we are trying to find out about the whistle-blower. they report things that are incorrect. as you know, and you probably now have figured it out, the statement i made to the president of ukraine, a good man, a nice man, was perfect. it was perfect. but the whistle-blower reported a totally different statement. >> melissa: democrats on the house judiciary committee accusing the president of intimidating witnesses.

and they are calling on chairman lindsey graham to protect witnesses from what they are calling presidential intimidation. jessica appears before it is not just senate democrats. chuck grassley just released a statement in support of the whistle-blower, saying he absolutely has to be protected. following procedure. they took the two weeks to examine it. you can look at it, firsthand and secondhand knowledge. in contrast to what the president is tweeting about now and what the federalist reported, that there were some issues with out he filed a complaint, but to return to that conversation about mike pompeo, it is not just being transparent. he lied on television a a day's ago. nine days ago and said that he didn't have firsthand knowledge on it. he hadn't read the complaint. if you are on the call, you obviously know what happened on my call here there is a lack of transparency there, and i am personally thrilled of the president released a memorandum. a read out from the call because it confirms that whistle-blower

complaint, which puts another hole in the argument that this is a witch hunt. the two of them were together in concert and shows that the president is his office for his own personal gain. >> harris: couldn't you also, though, argue, and this was a point that i was getting from a legal expert -- that he should expect support from his team. so the question that legal experts have told me is look -- did he have everybody he needed there? were they doing their job? i think that's fair. i'm not questioning whether mike pompeo did his, but i think we do need to know all of the people who are on my call so that we can make a determination. the president should not fly alone. he should have a team. it should be the team that he would want to have with them. then they got to step up and make sure that they are supporting him. you're all nodding at me, but -- >> jason: i'm not nodding at you. before the strategy of going

after the whistle-blower, trying to get the whistle-blowers identity and make it about this person has the wrong strategy for the president to be pursuing. generally, regardless of what party your income you want the president to be able to do it -- you feel comfortable telling your superiors that you have seen something that doesn't look quite right. what most americans one is transparency. they want -- they don't necessarily need -- it doesn't necessarily mean that the whistle-blower is right, that what they saw or what they read is what happened, but we don't want a situation where people feel intimidated and uncomfortable holding their own government accountable. >> jason: one thing that needs to happen is nancy pelosi needs to call a formal vote. people have tried to pursue impeachment, and it has been defeated. nancy pelosi, if she is going to have a formal impeachment inquiry, they need to have a vote. i don't know that it passes, but let's pretend it does. guess what? then the minority, people like

doug collins, he gets to have subpoena authority. nancy pelosi is not going through the due process and allowing the oversight to call witnesses and obtain documents. that is something that has to happen. >> melissa: do they have to say what they want to impeach him over? do they just have to say they want to impeach him, and everyone can cite yes for their own reasons? it's a serious question. >> jason: it is a serious question because it is how they go fishing for evidence. before i'm not sure today she has the votes. it is about taking the temperature and some of those swing districts. but i believe that what has been announced, she is only five or six votes shy of having to go ahead for the inquiry, and there is a clear mandate about the power of office. >> kristen: there is a big difference in the support that we cease for the inquiry. we have actually seen a pretty

significant increase, even among republicans, saying i'm all right with an inquiry. very different than wanting to get folks on -- >> jason: it does not rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry. you can do an investigation, but you call and impeachment and move it to that level is not warranted. >> harris: i like what you saw there just in terms of keeping everybody honest on this. nancy pelosi knows it better than anybody. potentially from what you're saying that there is the process for subpoena and legal movement on the part of the g.o.p. if she doesn't take a vote. did i hear you right? >> jason: that's exactly right. that's why she's going to move it through in record time. she wants to get it out. but she is not doing it the right way if you're not in a fairway. >> harris: okay. >> melissa: far left 2020 democrats want to tax the rich like they haven't in decades. delicious. would it kill the u.s. economy? plus, the "new york times" scrutinizing attorney general barr into the mueller probe.

is this just a lot of noise over nothing? >> he's going to look at a lot of documents. i hope he looks out the u.k., and i hope he looks at us really are. and i hope he looks at ukraine. ♪ great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance,

so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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. o♪ ozempic®! ♪ oh! oh! (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®.

in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? (announcer) ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar.

common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®.

sometand with theall screen xfinity stream app, which is free with your service, you can take a spin through on demand shows, or stream live tv. download your dvr'd shows and movies on the fly. even record from right where you are. keep what you watch with you. download the xfinity stream app today and get ready for xfinity stream tv week. watch shows like south park and the walking dead october 7th through 13th. >> this "new york times" article is the beginning of an effort to shut down the investigation to find out how this whole thing started. let me tell you why. i want to say on national television, barr should be talking to australia. they should be talking to italy. he should be talking to the u.k., to find out if they are

intelligent services with ours improperly. >> harris: that was senator lindsey graham ripping "the new york times" over its latest report attorney general william barr. president trump pressured australia's prime minister to help barr with his investigation and the origins of the mueller pro. but a doj official has told fox news that it was barr who asked the president to introduce him to a number of foreign leaders, describing it as a routine procedure. a separate source was also pushing back on the notion that the president had to pressure anyone for assistance. in fact, we are learning -- because we can see the letter, australia reached out to you barr back in may 2 find out with his investigation. that is something bret baier talked about last night. >> jason: this is the president doing his job. there is no reason why they can't do this and have the sort of interaction.

i think the president was wholly appropriate in the conversation that we had with a ukrainian president. it's entirely appropriate for the attorney general of the united states to reach out and have interactions with others around the world. that's what they're supposed to be doing. >> harris: according to our producer and cnn reporter on our team as well, a number of obama administrations were pushing back on the claim that this was routine. >> jessica: there is an element to it that i think is more important on the appropriateness are not of this barr talking to australia. italy was on the list of "the new york times" reported. there is a dangerous conspiracy theories floating around that the president is promoting that it was the ukraine that hacked us in 2016 and other russians. this has been a touchdown issue for the president that he has had trouble calling out russia with this. he told me that it was fine that he did it, and i believed him. this is what rudy giuliani is

promoting, the so-called crowd strike theory. if you were watching george stephanopoulos on sunday, he was the first homeland security advisor. he came out and was motivated to say that this is someone that hasn't said anything about the administration, to push back against this theory that it was the ukraine that was responsible for this. and if william barr is trying to undermine the central finding of the mueller investigation, that it was the russians are meddled in our elections, that is dangerous. and totally not his place. >> harris: why do you use that were dangerous quotes from rex before if you are convincing -- what the president is trying to do right now is convinced millions of people that it was not russia, but it was ukraine -- >> melissa: that is a conspiracy theory that is meant to show what the president seems to have been looking into or should have been, which is this idea that the origin of the mother probe, did our government

use resources -- did they weaponize our cia -- i mean, our intelligence services, did they weaponize out? and we've gone way away from that. i want to know as we come up to another election that any president in office can use the government to spy on the opponent. and we seem to be forgetting that in the last election, president trump was the one that was shie spite on. >> kristen: they both involve the ukraine and away, voters are going to see them in a very different light. you have the story about the president, simply naming a political opponent, getting his personal attorney involved, some things that voters will not think passes the smell test. we have an official u.s. government investigation, folks were part of the government, being reached out to you by foreign governments, saying hi, we would like to help. they will view these in very different life. >> jessica: doesn't matter that what barr is doing is having conversations, or in the

event both via probe, having conversations with foreign officers that is undermining what our intelligence agencies has -- >> jason: that is exactly what the attorney general should be doing. because he is going to collect evidence. wherever that evidence. and unlike the democrats, republicans, in this case, attorney general barr, is going to collect that evidence. a lot of us, including myself, i think this whole impeachment thing is a little too convenient. a little too tied up. a little too perfect because they know the horowitz report, that the truth will actually be revealed after years of investigations. >> jessica: so this is all concocted? i mean, come on, jason. >> jason: the president didn't bring it up. it was the whistle-blower. >> jessica: doing us a favor. >> jason: president trump try to make this come out -- 's before he wanted it locked away. >> jason: you can't have it

both ways. >> jessica: i am having it the way that the president's abuse the power his office. >> harris: you can't bring it up and then hide it. >> jessica: he headed away in the server -- i don't know what i said that was an accurate. i am following a straight line here. he did not want us to know about this because he knows that it was -- >> harris: why release the information? >> jessica: he was forced to because of the whistle-blower. >> harris: you work dominic heard what i said about the sources -- what is a routine? i mean, you would know. you were on oversight for years. when you look back on those years, oversight is watching everything. what is routine? >> jason: on like what hillary clinton and the obama industry did by destroying tens of thousands of documents, this was preserved and presented. there was a question for a very short. lack of time -- the hearing last week, the director of national intelligence, about whether or not he had executive privilege

to just release it or not, but i think that hearing you helped to clear that up. yes, you're supposed to preserve these. the president did, and he volunteered to put it out in the public. he declassified it. >> jessica: but everyone is saying that it is not normal to store it on the server -- >> jason: i don't think that everybody has. that's not true. >> jessica: who? james corden? >> jason: is the ranking member of oversight. you can to make an argument out of that. >> harris: we are going to move on. 2020 and it kamala harris now calling for president trump's twitter account to be suspended over his criticism of the ukrainian whistle-blower. plus, the intelligence community watchdog now coming back on processing the whistle-blower's complaints. stay with us. ♪ i can't believe it.

what? that our new house is haunted by casper the friendly ghost? hey jill! hey kurt! movies? i'll get snacks! no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on our car insurance with geico. i got snacks! ohhh, i got popcorn, i got caramel corn, i got kettle corn. am i chewing too loud? believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

it's what gives audible there'smembers an edge.ening; it opens our minds, changes our perspective, connects us, and pushes us further. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories: audible. i that's the retirement plan.e, with my annuity, i know there is a guarantee. it's for my family, its for my self, its for my future.

annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retire your risk dot org.

>> melissa: the intelligence community inspector general pushing back on allegations that whistle-blower rules were changed just before the ukraine called -- they say that the law never require them to have a recall of events, but employees did in fact make minor tweaks to the language in the form. "in the process of reviewing and clarifying those forms, the i cig understand that certain language in the forms could be read incorrectly, that they must possess first-hand information in order to file an urgent concern compliance with a congressional intelligence committee." what was your thoughts on this? >> jason: i don't think it was

necessarily embedded in the law, but can you imagine the chaos with all the anonymous things that would be coming in? the intelligence community is different than any other one in congress. it is deemed an urgent concern, then they automatically have to produce this to the intel committee. that was the schism. did this qualify? does this not qualify? i think, having heard the hours of testimony from the director of national intelligence, it was proceeding with caution because of the executive privilege question which had to go to the office of legal counsel. the question that i think republicans have behind the scenes is why did you ultimately make this clarification? this only prompt you to make this clarification? when the inspector general for the intelligence committee comes and testifies on friday, i think that's going to be one of the central questions for devon nunez. >> melissa: why did they make the change? why did they make the clarification?

sorry. go ahead. >> harris: no, i was missing clarification, looking at the documents. the law never said that it must contain first-hand information. but it was easy to misconstrue. >> jason: for instance, the oversight committee, we get a couple dozen complaints every single day. you have to sort through that. there are 13,500 inspector general's out there that fall under 72 different branches. so, you can imagine with 2.2 million federal employees, how many things are percolating. >> harris: the people though -- >> kristen: i think the american people want, if you are in the government, the real identity, you see things that aren't going quite right, because it is a federal bureaucracy that is so large, you want to have federal systems in place so there can be a level of self-regulation where it is easy for folks to have a level of oversight. i don't mind that you can go and bring -- hey, i heard that something funny was happening

here, and i want to lodge a complaint. i want to make sure that this gets looked into. i think that for the most part, people are so comfortable with things like having more information, having an inquiry. anything that increases the amounts of information about what is going on in the government, they tend to be -- >> jessica: that is still not there for from office. but it's all of how we got to having to clarify was first published in the federalist. the president started talking about it. his defenders thing about the whistle-blower was a fake. there was no information. you shouldn't be able to have secondhand information. and like i lines were changed. they had to come out and defend the whistle-blower. speech you know, saying that what is the impotence dominic impotence for them to change the language, to say about we are

clarifying? >> jessica: okay. i still think -- >> melissa: the language was changed. we want to know why. >> jessica: i thought it was to make sure everyone was absolutely clear about that. the documents have not changed. that little clarification year-to-year and that you could always accept secondhand information because you have a two-week investigation not corroborated what the whistle-blower reported. >> jason: and when you talk to people that are actually on that committee, they weren't ever getting reports of urgent concern that were percolating up. but suddenly, suddenly, all of a sudden, this came. it was so professionally written with footnotes and precise language. it just causes a lot of suspicion. i hope we protect the identity of the whistle-blower. i think that is paramount. but who provided the information to the whistle-blower, they should be going headstrong after those people because that is leaking information. you cannot -- >> jessica: protecting -- >> jason: no, then you give it to the proper entities.

you don't give it to some other person who then takes the ball and dribbles down the floor and passes it -- >> jessica: who is the proper entity? >> jessica>> jason: give it diro the inspector general. you don't give it to somebody else. >> harris: what is so fascinating is don't make it. be a whistle-blower. but that is not -- at least as far as we know, that is not what happened. >> jason: outing that people with this information. they should go headstrong after those people. >> harris: how do you feel about the president talking about the whistle-blower? you want to know who it is, so on and so forth. >> jason: i think you should protect the identity of the whistle-blower, but you have to talk to the whistle-blower first. we still don't have a enough information to know definitively. >> melissa: tax the wealthy, that is now coming under fire

from "the new york times." will this actually hurt elizabeth warren and bernie sanders campaigns? we will debate. ♪ >> you make it big, i mean really big. i mean one-tenth of 1% big. pitch into sense so that everybody else gets a chance to make it in this country. [applause] ♪ (melissa) somebody would ask her something and she would just walk right

past them because she didn't know they were talking to her. (deborah) i just could not hear. i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair, but nobody even sees them. (avo) our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader for over 70 years. (deborah) when i finally could hear for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. (avo) get special anniversary savings and your chance to win a seven day hawaiian cruise. call 1-800-miracle today.

♪ >> you got the top 1% on a more wealth on the bottom 92%. you've got here in new hampshire and vermont, people working two and three jobs, and yet 49% of all new income goes to the top 1%. >> after a lifetime of hard work, everyone in this country is entitled to retire with some dignity. that means protecting social security. [applause]

i've got a plan for that. increase payroll taxes on the top 2%. >> melissa: that's always the answer. 2020 democratic hopefuls elizabeth warren and bernie sanders come under scrutiny in "the new york times," which publish concerns from economists and business leaders who believe that it would hurt economic growth. no kidding? the proposal would tax the wealthy to finance far left initiatives, including medicare for all and free college tuition. a christian, i'm going to let you have first crack at this. what blows my mind is that you confiscated every dollar that everyone who makes over $200,000 a year makes, threw it onto some island there to die, you still wouldn't have enough to pay for these things that they are talking about. it's like they can't do math. and it's so frustrating to me, and apparently "the new york times" is getting frustrated as well.

>> kristen: the reason they make these claims and always get a little more cagey when you ask how will this change the tax burden on the average american, 70% of people in this country consider themselves middle-class. they think it is not going to affect me. well, their reality if it is affecting unemployment and economic growth, it will affect you. the math doesn't add up to be able to pay for them just by slapping more taxes on the ridge. ultimately, things like medicare for all -- if you look at countries where they provided generous benefits, denmark, the middle class is taxed at 50%. if you want to sell this to the american people, but you are trying not to be honest with them, that is the game that some of these democratic candidates are trying to play right now. >> melissa: bernie sanders, when pressed, is honest. he says everyone's taxes will go up. but you won't have health care premiums. that is not honest, but it is

better in my mind. >> jessica: kind of fudging around whether they will be taxed more. this is i think the danger zone for democrats here. there was a poll out that warren is up 20 points in favorability with democrats but only one point overall with the electorate. so, her surgery is really within the democratic base. it's not going over to an independents. certainly not republicans. when you have the general election, that is concerning to me, and the reports from wall street or you saw mark zuckerberg comments, which were picked up about the threat that elizabeth warren poses to big tech companies and people like him. we have to be very careful about the kind of rhetoric and the demonization of people who have done very well. not all of them are evil, obviously. just like 50% of them. [laughs] when you are going to win president, there are a lot of wealthy americans, we live in a

capitalist society, and you can get ahead. i don't want billionaires feeling like the democratic party, saying you didn't earn that or you don't deserve that. >> melissa: also missing the point of the larger economic concept, which i mean in my mind, in my study, has proven over time that when you grow the economy more, more people benefit. when you clamp down in these ways and you tax everybody a whole lot more, that the economy contracts. >> jason: it is just basic economics. you are right. these democratic socialist have a math problem. you didn't even mention that the screen new deal and some of these other things i would just be devastating to the economy. they put them out there as theories, but they are going to destroy the united states of america, and the way that we do things. they also fail to recognize the the american people are doing pretty well right now. they are feeling good. consumer confidence -- every economic indicator is up high.

it would be a different scenario, a different story if the economy was doing so poorly. >> melissa: well, we are seeing some slowing right now. i could be worrisome to the trump administration. looking at some of the forward leaning indicators. especially business spending. >> jason: but if you look at what elizabeth warren -- bernie sanders, leaders within the democratic party, they are self described democratic socialists. >> jessica: only one of them. >> jason: they really do believe that the solution is more government. i believe government is a problem. they want more government. they can't even run the veterans administration. amtrak. they want to take over health care. they want to take over everything. that is what is scaring the living daylights -- that's why as jessica said, only 1% in the general public because they don't want our government in their lives. that is what they would get with the democratic president. >> harris: you have someone like elizabeth warren. this is mark zuckerberg. the right answers -- if she gets

elected president, then i would bet that we would have to face that legal challenge, and i would bet that we would win the legal challenge. and does that still -- i will just read of the way that he wrote it. then she wrote something using that same work. around and around a ghost. it's interesting. >> melissa: 12020 democrats of the president should be signed from his favorite social media out. wouldn't that be a first amendment rights violation? ♪ as a struggling actor,

i need all the breaks that i can get. at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing.

here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.

♪ >> harris: senator kamala harris says it's time to censor the president. the california senator and 2020 candidate is calling on twitter to suspend the president's account. that these tweets have gone too far. here's what she says. >> i frankly think that based on this and all we have seen him do before, including attacking members of congress that his twitter account should be suspended. i think there is plenty of now

evidence to suggest that he is irresponsible with his words in a way that causes harm to other people. some of the privilege of using those words and that we should probably be taken from him. >> harris: all right, let's all use our words. melissa. >> melissa: i think that if we turned off twitter altogether, the world would be a happier place. i would like to go back to a time when there was no twitter. sorry, twitter. i love you. i mean that in my heart, for real. >> harris: you are talking about like eye contact and wor words. >> melissa: just the way that everybody rattles off on twitter. not just the president, but i would love for the present and also get off twitter. >> jason: is such a violation of the first amendment. they want to suppress the ability of the president to talk directly to the people. we have pretty well established that big news narrative that's out there. unhinged. just lets it rip. there is some negativity to that, but there is a whole lot more positive.

>> melissa: he's actually done the run around what everybody else has done, coming out to the edge of his driveway, talking to reporters. so i would say that that is amazing that you get to see him do it in real time, answer the questions. i don't think he needs twitter anymore because there will always be cameras at the end of his driveway. >> harris: he likes to do what he wants -- i don't know. comedian and actor rob schneider on kamala harris said this. he tweeted this. which is ironic to get "officials asking for this is grossly un-american. free speech is protected, not just the speech you like, but also the speed you find abhorrent. kamala harris, you are either for all of it or not of it." >> jason: yeah, rob. >> kristen: that speaks to me more of the government shutting

people speech down. they wish that he did not have the tool of this. when i do focus groups, swing voters, even some of the president's supporters, melissa, they cu echo your sentiments. that is very different than taking a position, which i believe in this case, she is doing to make a big splash because she is fading in the home i clear last. get the president off twitter. >> harris: different topic, but also calling to shut somebody down. joe biden says take him off the air to the networks, to the editors. don't put him on the air. it just seems like the censorship is part of the battle from the left. and i don't know if that is going to work because that makes them thirsty for more words. use your words. >> jessica: use your words, but also use truthful words. i think that is what kamala harris was talking about. >> harris: she didn't say that things weren't truthful.

dangerous, danger, which you have used it several times this hour. saying that she felt like the president was pushing against the whistle-blower. she has accused the president of lying. >> jessica: that is in the ongoing conversation. okay. anyway, i am not for suspending his account. i think that he should have to unblock everyone that he blocked because he is the president of the united states of america. rudy giuliani should be able to go on tv, and the anchor should be prepared with the appropriate push back when he telling untruths. that is my stance on it. >> harris: california governor also using his words. he is being called on to help with the homelessness crisis by declaring a state of emergency. should he make this move? we will debate it. ♪ gold has stood the test of time.

even since 2000, the value of gold has increased by over 400% and owning gold is easy... ...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 now and ask for the million dollar special. $1,000 in gold and silver for the first 1,000 qualified new customers. with rosland, there are no hassles, no gimmicks, and we have the fastest shipping around. time tested. easy to own. make gold your new standard. call rosland capital today at 800-630-8900 and ask for the million dollar special. that's 800-630-8900.

>> vo: my car is my after-work mde♪ music ion zone.al. >> 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. ♪ i want to tell as many veterans near ras possible about newday's va streamline refi. it's the closest thing to automatic savings that we've ever offered. at newday, veterans can refinance their mortgage with no income verification, no appraisal and no out of pocket expenses. and we've extended our call center hours so that every veteran can take advantage of these near record low rates.

>> melissa: known to an ongoing homeless crisis in los angeles. they are calling on gavin newsom to declare a state of emergency. but the plan also happens -- the "l.a. times" writing "some question whether an emergency declaration would be merely symbolic, given president trump's rejection of more federal funding and governor gavin newsom's commitment of programs and support for more regulatory relief." and this comes after san francisco removed small boulders from a residential side street yesterday, those men to determine homeless people from camping out on the sidewalk. i would ask you, from a government point of view, declaring a state of emergency to get more funding. as i understand the situation, there has been a lot of funding measures to get money into the area, and it hasn't resulted in

shelters or ineffective things that would work. >> jason: i think the democrats in california don't have any answers. i don't think they have any solutions. i don't care how much more money they throw at it. i think their fundamental policies are causing and exacerbating this a problem. >> melissa: what what's all this? >> jason: we need a whole program to do that. you've got to get tougher on crime, engage dumb i enforce the laws that are out there. do you talk to these people. you can just allow them to set up these encampments right there and then go to the bathroom right out on the street. so, gavin newsom presided over a city that is one of the worst in the country. they made him governor, and what does he do? he was not trying to say hey, we want to make sure that college athletes get paid. instead of working what is a serious problem in california. >> kristen: one of the key things that you said was regulatory relief. you think about the bluest, most

progressive states in the country, they often time have regulations that make it very difficult for housing development. a place like san francisco, the reason you have a housing crisis is because people there support regulations that make it much harder to build exactly the kind of affordable housing that would be needed. speak to lot of people have said that about ellie. they are all of these regulations to sell multifamily dwellings and other areas. >> jessica: especially when you have fancier neighborhoods. of course we want to help, but then when it comes down to actually relocating homeless families into your neighborhoo neighborhood, -- my uncle runs a not-for-profit that gets formally incarcerated people -- the biggest pushback's. it mental illness is a huge part of this. remember when -- there was a bed for every single homeless person. they had somewhere that they could go.

that came from making sure that we are investing in the red programs in the right community centers. places that -- >> melissa: what has changed now in new york? specifically in new york. >> jessica: affordable housing. we haven't been building as much affordable housing. that was the cornerstone of mayor de blasio's pitch. they haven't been able to move forward. there are regulations that stand in the way, for sure. he has absolutely fallen short on that front. >> jason: there are still a lot of addiction problems that they have to get real on. there are lots of things that they could do, but these policies that they are implementing, particularly in california are exacerbating the problem. i am tired of gavin newsom -- to where he spends his time in the things that he decides to take on, like donald trump, as opposed to where he does have jurisdiction, is inexcusable. >> melissa: there you go. thank you so much.

thank you to congressman jason chaffetz. we are back here on the couch at 12:00 eastern tomorrow. now, here is harris. >> harris: the show down after house democrats impeachment inquiry has reached a whole new level. let's go "outnumbered overtime." i'm harris faulkner. the latest developments now on ukraine. house democrats subpoenaing rudy giuliani for all ukraine and related documents. and we are learning secretary of state mike pompeo was on the president's call with the ukrainian leader in july. it's a phone call out the center of the whistle-blower complaint. and we are learning president trump as the prime minister to help investigate the origins of the mueller broek, amid reports that barr also made -- however, the justice department says this is standard procedure as far as reviewing the probe it. i would have the australian part, that there is pushback. heavy pushback,