swedish prosecutors drop a 2010 write case against you in a song for admitting they lacked evidence to charge that we can't expound. on a major policy overhaul the us causes outrage by declaring that it no longer views israeli settlements in the people and west bank as a legal. international law with the law of the jungle. and in no way an anti muslim demonstration erupts into a street brawl after a copy of the koran was set on fire. well those are the headlines for now we back can next hour with another round up and stay with us crosstalk next here on the national.

below and welcome to cross talk where all things considered i'm peter lavelle efforts to impeach and remove donald j. trump from the presidency have clearly divided the country this should not surprise anyone trump is probably the most divisive public figure of our time however all this division over a single person is changing in even damaging institutions is impeachment being normalized. across talking impeachment i'm joined by my guest r.c. maxwell in phoenix he's a republican strategist and the state director of the black conservative better race. and in washington we have christopher barron he is

a conservative strategist as well as the president of right turn strategies and in st paul we cross to david schultz he is a hamelin university professor of political science sorry gentlemen cross-like rules in effect that means he can jump in and out in time any time you want by christopher let me go to you 1st in washington d.c. i watched some of the hearings they're very boring frankly i don't really know what they're talking about i don't see the purpose of it here but one thing that i find really disturbing during all of it is because i know a lot about ukraine i live in this part of the world i follow it very very carefully the people testifying about ukraine their ukraine firster is they don't know much about the country that that's a double whammy for me not only is that useless what they're saying is useless but the outcome of all of this i think is a much bigger more worrisome picture here as the last line in my introduction impeachment is becoming normalized if you look at the founders who look at the. the

federalist papers this was supposed to be an extreme remedy it looks like that's the longer the case and i really fear for the republic if this is good the way it's going to be done there's no crime this is an investigation in search of a crime chris for go ahead. absolutely look look we're causing we've costly her during the 3 years of the term presidency this isn't normal we've heard here this refrain over and over again from the mainstream media of and from the left and quite frankly that's what they should be saying right now this is not a normal impeachment is an extraordinary constitutional process that was put in place not to hash out policy differences but actually to hold the president accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors even if we assume everything the democrats are saying is truthful which it isn't there is no high crime and misdemeanor here this is a policy difference and it is absolutely shameful that democrats are using this extraordinary constitutional process abusing this constitutional process to hash

out a policy difference with this administration in r.c. in phoenix here i sometimes get the impression this isn't pietschmann for impeachment sake is this too is to damage the president i mean if we look at the the the membership of the u.s. senate the republican caucus there's no reason to believe that they're going to go along with this at all as a matter fact if there is ever as a senate trial at least trump and his people be able to call witnesses unlike the situation in congress right now without him ship i mean it is so we seeing a trivialisation of the impeachment process is this is what we've gotten down to you can't beat him at the ballot box so you beat him through a bacon in pietschmann process go ahead in phoenix. yeah i'm going to have to agree wholeheartedly i mean you can look at the previous impeachment proceedings in 1998 and nixon those proceedings started from an actual investigation and this iteration

the investigation was supposed to be the mauler report that gave democrats what they needed in order to move forward impeachment but that was a nothing burger so instead we have an investigation not an investigation we have an impeachment inquiry that's founded upon nothing ok david let me let me go to you in st paul i'm not even understanding i mean i know i'm a political junkie like the rest of you guys and most of my viewers here i really can't understand the rules because they seem is so intensely unfair i mean i'll make it very clear and i've said this for a long time if trump is to be impeached for reason make it a good reason and make it bipartisan i don't see any reason and this is a totally partisan process something the founders never wanted to see happen go ahead and same poll. ok so a couple of observations one historical i just want to bring up here is that they provided $77.00 us constitution is created we have our 1st peach that process $868.00 now another one so 7498 now and now we have another one and so there's

something kind of disturbing for those of us a little bit older to have 3 pietschmann process you know with my life time is starting to raise a series of questions ph to process about the political process whatever it may be such as want to keep it keep in mind here the 2nd thing to keep in mind here you know is is that the peach process if you look at the text of the constitution our constitutional law professor 2 doesn't have a lot of language it and the courts have largely said that congress gets a lot of discretion in terms of how to run it ph the process the reason why i mention that is that you've got people like alexander hamilton james madison and timing the writing of the constitution that set this is what is a political process or the criminal process of anything else and it follows i hate to say this the set of rules that congress really decides this was the fall so i know what all of us i get a lot of talks in the united states look it will ask me well what are the rules

what's supposed to happen etc etc i say there's an awful lot of questions out there that people really don't have a clear answers to and i don't want to quite say congress makes it up in the process but over time after 4 impeach with congress sort of mix it up a little bit as it goes yeah but david if i can stay with you here i absolutely agree with you but the way it's being perceived by the public and i and there's been polling data on this is that it seems intensely unfair what is going on here coaching witnesses not allowing the of the of the other party to ask questions not allowing them have a point of order i mean it seems inherently unfair and i think people are beginning to see that. i agree with you the congress has the right to make its own rules ok because it's a this is a political process it's not a trial that goes later in the senate but the this perception and i and i this i just think the democrats have their lives so blinded by their own hatred they can

see that they're really unfair go ahead david finish up ok so what i want to come back to and say here is that is that to a large extent you know i think there are there are problems in terms of the optics for a lot of people in the united states you know for the republicans clearly they're not thrilled with that i'm going to say for people who identify themselves as independents i think there's questions here there's no question that there's a little see a partisan reaction to what's happening to the process here and i think one of the things you have to hold i'm going to try to put the that best face on it you know and sort of hope it gets better is to say that with the now being televised broadcast that maybe now by opening it up to public scrutiny a little bit more public inspection it allows for the public to be able to have what to be able to criticize it it's a little holes or whatever it is you know or some corrections or force eventually what i'm going to hope to get and you know i've got my fingers crossed your soul

will be. russia's i wouldn't i wouldn't i wouldn't i will i've got i'm reading christopher's mind across the globe right now you know why because i want to know where the hearings last week and then i turned over to see you know wall to wall coverage you know this is a blockbuster the walls are coming in and then oxygen is out of the room but no i want to see hearings they put me to sleep i'm sorry christopher go ahead go ahead chris no look i mean the at the end at the end of the day at the end of the day you know this isn't about like changing hearts and minds this is about reaffirming people's already existing world belief about donald trump there's not a single republican or independent who you know is thinking about voting for top of voter fraud who's going to be moved by this impeachment same think there's nobody who's going to who voted against trump who hates trump who suddenly going to like him as a result of this impeachment we were at a stalemate here and again i think the professor's point about that congress sets these rules that's fine it's not

a debate about whether or not congress can do what they're doing the question is should they be doing this is this how they want impeachment to be used going forward because the moment that you make this a political weapon you're the one you wielding it now but the time it will turn and it will be wielded against you and i don't think we need to have impeachment proceeding and that's going to go to all resident man or woman going forward are saying and phoenix jump in go ahead just quickly i think that's the dangerous part of all this of real precedent is being set that you can launch an impeachment inquiry without an actual criminal investigation i agree that you know congress is somewhat allowed to make up their own rules as this goes but precedent has been said that this should follow an investigation by either a special counsel or a criminal investigation we don't have that here what we have here is political theater ok. go ahead david jump in go ahead. say that.

trees right. 3 high crimes and misdemeanors again for good or for a vet to sort of get kind of give you sort of the constitutional history here you know that we have a pretty good idea what treason is somewhat of a good idea what bribery is you know obviously the whole question is what is a high crime in this manner and it's not necessarily the case that it has to be a real crime it could be a lot of different things you know holdover from england that means anything it was malfeasance nazis it's not performance corruption in office and i think the question in the united states is is what is this term actually me and the fact that we never. success. somebody you know. from office as president of the united states we still don't really. go already what i did this year is it's correct i can do that oh yeah well i'll tell you i'll but i'll tell you what it is i'll tell you how it will be decided i'll tell you how it will be decided will be decided to focus groups ok because that's exactly what's

happening right now i mean every single week it's a new the goal post is moved ok and we know it was because of focus briberies more understandable christopher finish off this blog before we go to the break look at the end of the day we can have a debate about what is a high crime and misdemeanor what's the constitutional definition of it it can't be policy differences it cannot at a baseline high crimes and misdemeanors cannot be policy differences and what we're seeing played out in these impeachment hearings where it's a question of policy differences the people the career bureaucrats don't like president trump policy in ukraine the democrats don't like president trump policy in ukraine that cannot be an impeachable offense under any definition well unfortunately c.n.n. and amisom b.c. would probably disagree with all of us on this panel right now during this recording there are i don't know i'm going to jump in here we're going to go to a short break and out for that short break we'll continue our discussion on pietschmann say with our team.

i'm exercising more of my guide to financial survival this is a device used by professional scallywags to earn money. that's right these homes for us are simply not accountable and we're just getting more and more to the. totally destabilize the global economy you need to protect yourself and get in for a while because you're still. tough and i'm on the pull of the highest in my town the way you go through a food. bank itself movie theater i. was in this way got to talk so hard not to think i'm going to dissipate this the ok i was an optimist i reckon

if. this is the only thing that we do is music because everybody fights his way. through our you can call the fee on this bill frist woody allen called the ability to put the helmet on the. but i think is this is the fans that is a constant. welcome

back to crossfire where all things considered i'm peter lavelle remind you we're discussing impeachment. ok let me go back to david in st paul and i'm really glad that you gave us a very short history lesson in the 1st part of the program here i think one of the obviously one of the unique elements of this impeachment effort is that you we and christopher alluded to it earlier is that we basically have the deep state people in the executive branch undermining their boss ok over policy differences or their vision of what policy should be nobody elected any of these people here and i'm sorry from as far as i'm concerned these people there are there are a cartoon version of what an expert would be critical in the country like ukraine in even russia itself here so david i mean this is a new chapter in pietschmann process in the u.s.

because you have basically state functionaries undermining the chief executive who was elected duly elected and sworn in as president of the united states go ahead and st paul. well we have a couple of things that are going on here you know what is well you know i'm not you know i'm not going to claim to be ukraine expert so in terms of whether or not they're experts or not or whether you're right or they're wrong i can't that this is not i feel it's not my field of knowledge there but in terms of what they're being asked to testify about i mean clearly there's a sense in which you know some of them are expressing disagreements clearly in some cases if you listen to the ambassador you know she has she has said that you know her concert was terms of whether or not perhaps there was any laws broken or the u.s. is. being compromised yes the president has to make those calls and what i again maybe i'm going to sound pollyannish in this what i'm really hoping. is that the combination of the house were and possibly

a senate trial that this actually results of the size is active. or has a legitimate meter ok on our insane let me go to you in phoenix here i mean one of the one of the most disturbing factors of all of this process here is that we have people whatever term you like civil service deep state you know security state whatever whatever your choosing is here they seemed to be working in unison with the media and the media is always amplified you know he's wearing a uniform sterling career all that i don't care about any of those things those things mean nothing to me or the former ambassador how did you feel what was your feelings i don't care about your feelings who cares you lost your job you know i mean when you were not had that pleasure of the president people get fired all the time obama fired every ambassador when he came into office does anybody at c.n.n.

an embassy and this i mean see every tell you that go ahead in phoenix i mean i think you hit the nail on the head mentioning how bamma fired literally every single holdover from the previous administration. why so he can craft his own foreign policy so what you see with the goalposts being moved in terms of accusations to get the program to the president but what you also see is the goalposts being moved in terms of what power does the president have on an executive level to make sure that his diplomats or in implementing the foreign policy that he wants to implement i think the biggest mistake the democrats made was the impeachment to begin with but the 2nd biggest mistake they made was a charge creating this whole bribery thing this whole allegation of bribery now if you look at bribery bribery it was almost a good move from the democrats because initially they had this whole vacuous quid pro quo allegation but when you look at vibro bribery within the context look at adam schiff he took $350000.00 from the defense and history and then pushed down to it for an expansion of the united states' military presence so in terms of bribery

it's vacuous these experts aren't experts they are defining terms what does it mean for ukraine to even be a u.s. ally it's all political theater and i think you hit the nail on the head with calling out the hypocrisy and the double standard and you know christiane i found with great amusement for my very distant perch here about. the different channels back channels irregular channels well harry hopkins was one hell of a great intermediary for franklin delano roosevelt during the 2nd world war there were other cut outs the j.f. kennedy use during the cuban missile crisis henry kissinger while he was national security council adviser he kept everybody in the dark about nixon china policy i could go on and on and on ok it's the president's foreign policy he can ask anyone he wants to be to be his be his representative. correction go

ahead go ahead absolutely. or. resident or. elect. elect we. so or. just ross resident that's american for a while i think now today but i think i think we're quibbling here we're quibbling right here i think i did i like that saying it wants no foreign policy will always be within the realm of bureaucrats then why do we need elections why do we elect a president then if the bureaucracy is going to determine policy now i disagree with you on that go ahead christopher go ahead jump in looking at the end of the day foreign policy isn't set by trump when trump is no longer president he won't be setting foreign policy foreign policy is set by the president i mean the fact is we would have absolute mayhem globally if our foreign policy was set by mid level bureaucrats all over the all over the globe who decided that their ideas for

foreign policy are what really matter as was pointed out earlier nobody elected these people if they have an interest in getting involved in setting the direction of american foreign policy they can get into the political arena and run for president themselves the american voters elected donald trump to set foreign policy if democrats and the deep state are unhappy with it they can go and defeat donald trump next november at the ballot box that's the appropriate way to deal with this is not through the abuse of the constitutional process of impeachment ok david you want to clarify keep going i have been a nice little idiology defense of the president horrible constitutional law. ok explain yourself i think the notion that that president doesn't set foreign policy is laughable that's why the term bush doctrine exists beyond president i'm the runner i'm going we have a time delay here so let's not talk over just go ahead david you have the floor go ahead. ok ok i'm sorry ok ok i'm teaching a class again this mester on the cuts costs

a lot which includes constitutional law and foreign policy and again you know nice theory that you know one of your you know commentators is making here from a policy perspective from a constitutional law perspective you know in fact we don't treat the presidency or the executive branch as a unitary executive we treat is what as a system of checks and balances separation powers that includes what many mechanisms in place i'm groups can put in place checks on presidential power it turns out he does foreign policy we're going to talk about the not plan but then you had all that unless. they hang on guy hang on guys here let me go to let me go to phoenix here i am not going to i'm not going to quibble with david on this here my point is i'm going to go to it's phoenix in a 2nd here my point is here is that the the the bureaucracy is not affording the same treatment to donald trump as they did to like brock obama or george w. bush they're denying the president the impetus the direction he wants to go to not

have and they're not affording him the same thing other presidents have had that's the difference here go ahead in phoenix r.c. . i mean can you show me where in the constitution it says that the president isn't allowed to dictate foreign policy take a look at the bush doctrine take a look at what obama did with trying to normalize relations with iran look at what reagan did every president is allowed to dictate their own foreign policy what you saw happen when president was elected was you saw a dejected washington a deck dejected of washington d.c. mostly from the bureaucratic side because they know that things are about to get shaken up and in order to prevent that you see what's happening with these impeachment hearings this week and last week ok. let me go back to let me go back to christopher in washington i'm going to make a prediction here right now. people talk about independents or people that have made up their mind in the age of trump i think just about everybody has ok just by the nature of the environment that we have here i'm not going to say that's good or

bad but i think it's just a fact here does this whole process in power trumps base because i tend to think it will be this will be a reason for people to go out and vote ok because like the cavanagh cavanagh that cabin i hearings this is another version of it here and people found that to be fundamentally unfair and actually un-american go ahead christopher. look it's absolutely going to motivate the president's base and is motivating the president's base middle a lot of the people who turned out to vote for the president in 2016 were people who had voted for democrats before who hadn't trishna voted for republicans you know the people who hadn't shown up to vote in a long time if ever because they felt like they were no longer being heard in this political system they felt like donald trump heard them well now what they're hearing is the democrats want to have to cancel their vote the democrats want to to remove this president and have their voices no longer heard this is absolutely

going to fire up the present base and by the way i would point out democrats could be doing the exact same thing they're doing right now holding hearings about this discussing this without it being under the guise of impeachment and that could have actually been a political winner for them that's an interesting way for democrats they decided to take this too far ok david how does this change the the meaning of impeachment there's been this particular process. from a constitutional point of view does it broaden and deepen our understanding of it or as the actually model things now go ahead i think it's modeled more because 1st you know we're dealing with 3 prior cases of presidential speech in american history we don't have a lot of really good guy in terms of now process that so i hope you all can see that now 2nd it's the fact that because. of the complexities that all 3 of you raised here regarding say who who controls or rule of congress and the

role of a career civil servants messrs and it all again leaves us with this with this perplexing question about still what is a high crime but sue does raise questions regarding the say how the process also go or and so i simple answer is to say that we don't have much more clear. regarding process as you please let me let me go let me go to phoenix r.c. i want to give you the last 30 seconds here to the swamp needs to be drained it's not it's not happening last 25 seconds go to you. well it's not happening although impeachment has been a boom for the president and republicans in terms of fundraising at the same time there is a widening kind of nks to monks trump supporters towards the president wondering why he's continuing to hire people who are never trampers and people who are quote

unquote aligned with the deep state and additionally you know there are this angsty has to be resolved by the president the president needs to vet these people a little bit better and he needs to make sure that he does what he promised the american people he was going to do what donald trump made him donald trump made him famous i mean he made himself famous by 2 words you're fired that's all the time we have gentlemen many thanks to my guests in phoenix washington and in st paul and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r.t.c. a next time and remember.

the world is driven by a dream shaped by from person. who dares thinks. we dare to ask. the more i tried to understand venezuela the more i could see the signs of all solitary unism emerging on my continent as well.

however what venezuela's critics didn't didn't do was compare human rights issues to those in other countries on the american continent. civil and political rights have been violated in venezuela. but they're violated every day in colombia and they're violated every day in mexico and they're violated every day in brazil. what i call human rights. what i call selective integration. you schol enormous in the nation with regard to one country. and you keep quiet with regard to many other countries where the situation is many times worse. in brazil the police killed 14 people a day on average.