political and legal analysis this is. politics larry king we start with the political panel covering some key news developments including that controversial germination at the pentagon for 2 weeks of public impeachment hearings conspiracy accusations about ukraine and russia alex vogel is in washington he previously served as chief counsel. informant general counsel for the national republican senatorial committee and then atlanta robin by role democratic strategist former obama campaign regional field director he's also retired u.s. army ranger will start with alex ford to talk about the implication what do you make of the terminations of the navy secretary in that whole story alex well i

think it's unfortunate any time that you have this kind of turmoil in an important agency like the navy the one thing i would say is i think it is good and productive that the secretary alternately either tendered his resignation or was asked to because at the end of the day regardless of who the president is it's important that they have confidence in those they have leading various agencies and unfortunately it sounds like there's something of a different story coming out of both places but i think it's probably much ado about nothing in the long term robin you're a veteran united states army ranger will you make of it. you know larry i also started off with a legal background in the army before i joined. the army rangers and went through all that so i've got a unique perspective here i do agree with the former secretary of the departing secretary that this is prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces

i think it sets a bad tone going forward you know we had cases like this at ranger regiment where my ranger brothers did the same thing or posed with deceased corpses and they were actually kicked out of the military as a whole so you know that was sort of the standard just a few years ago and we spent a great deal of tax dollars and resources jag corps resources to investigate and prosecute this. navy seal so you know i had it just doesn't set well with me in there larry not at all and i guess what makes you think about the president's intervention well couple of things come to mind here and again. robin's in a better position having served and been a part of this culture directly you have 2 things in conflict here one is from the president's perspective i'm sure he views this as i'm the commander in chief and

this particular case went through a number of machinations obviously he was cleared of everything except for the desecration of a body charge i think because of the way that case went and some of the issues in it the president was more inclined to intervene here in the ultimate resolution as to whether or not he can keep his his trident so i think that was probably a driver as opposed to the normal course of action which robin mentioned in a number of these cases where that was the underlying charge people were treated much more harshly robin what did you make of the president's a vengeance. 2 i agree with with what alex said about look he is the commander in chief he does ultimately have this authority to do this i just think that it sets a bad bad standard i also don't really agree with the president's tweet about this partly being due to cost overruns in the. uniform code of military justice we don't

really care about the cost of prosecuting these cases we care about protecting the good order and discipline of the military as a whole so lots of times we would prosecute cases and the expense of the prosecution would be far outweighing what the you know if someone stole something for example but it's to protect the good order and discipline so i agree with the departing secretary that this is prejudicial to that but the secretary of defense really had no choice but to tender asked for him to tender his resignation because the president had lost faith in his abilities to carry out the president's wishes and let's wish to hearing our. 30 hours of testimony you think it's going to lead to an infusion by the house well a couple of thoughts on this number one importantly i don't think anyone's mind has been changed if you walked into this process thinking that impeachment was a good idea you probably heard enough to feel that way now similarly if you feel

this was a fool's errand i think there's plenty you can take away in the president's defense to make you still feel that way you know as i told someone the other day the standard for impeachment it's not just that it's intentionally vague it's actually pretty clear you can impeach someone as long as you have 218 votes and speaker pelosi does so if the house decides to move ahead they have the votes to do so they have now had a process to do so again they're going to have to come to the judiciary committee and other things can happen but at this point. and i actually find it hard to understand politically speaking how the democrats could not move ahead given everything that they have said to their base voters so i expect that through some process once this gets to chairman adler and judiciary they will move ahead and present articles and given the votes i would be very surprised if the house does

not move to impeach him again that doesn't change anything in the senate where i find it in comprehensible that there would be enough republicans in a trial to move ahead with removal but we've seen that movie before robin adams. barack obama had had these things that. would have been swiftly handled by a republican tom daschle group that. absolutely larry there was sort of a difference to a different standard for much of obama's presidency as long as the republicans had control of congress so i do think that they would have handed him the they were of read him the riot act let's be honest but that's kind of the way politics is ben it's been blood of warfare for quite some time and i think that someone to be honest and fair that some of what we're seeing from some of my peers on my side of the political aisle but we have an overarching goal and duty to

abide by the constitution as the impeachment is laid out as part of the constitution to fully and thoroughly investigate this and i agree with alex that nancy pelosi is a master at counting the votes and she knows she's got the votes so i just think that we will see this ultimately dry articles of impeachment in the house where do you predict that all legal. well at the end of the day i think the house will move ahead probably before the end of the year and then we'll come into january and we'll have a trial in the senate. very rules driven organization and the very rules driven process all indications are the senate will meet 6 days a week all senators must be seated in quiet which will be a challenge for many of them and we will work through that process again i don't believe anything has come out that's going to alter any of those likely votes from the participants and with the net result unfortunately in that context is the worst

of all possible worlds which is the house going ahead with impeachment and the senate not doing anything i say the words from a small the democratic perspective i think it is not productive i don't think that impeachment was designed by the framers to be taken lightly and i think knowing the ultimate outcome in the senate as we do now as we understand it now i should say i think it's unfortunate that we're going to go through this exercise particularly challenging for the half dozen or maybe more democratic members of the senate who in january will not want their butts planted in a seat in washington the want to be in cold places like new hampshire and it's going to roil that democratic debate and frankly make it easier for whether it's mayor pete or mr bloomberg or others who are not tied to their senate duties to go ahead and make a run at the nomination so it may have an impact there as well robin what do you

make of what's going on with. the investigation in dubai. you know you have lindsey graham who once called donald trump a race baiting saying the full and describe joe biden is a good win as god is over created what do you make of lindsey graham's involvement in this there are a couple things to unpack here larry one of those is that jamie harrison is running against lindsey graham right now and in his district in south carolina and is within the single digits of catching up to him so and look lindsey graham yes he used to be criticized critical of the president but with approval ratings in the ninety's now for reform republican approval ratings of the president lindsey graham really has to kind of fall behind the president and and defend him at all costs i don't like that he's doing that bush that he would have a gut check here especially as a i guess former service member but he's in the fight of his life let's be honest

so i understand why he's making this strategic move it's just not going to go anywhere especially i want to make the fact the point that lindsey graham once called joe biden once said that joe but there was no finer man than joe biden so this is just a political ploy. what do you make of the giuliani situation well i was in his insurance falls it's super complex and one of the things will be fascinating is the strategic question the democrats have to answer now theoretically all of their their questioning is done that's their timeline they can extend that timeline and one of the reasons to extend it would be to get the testimony of possible from mayor giuliani he does not since he was not a white house employee enjoy the protections that many of the white house employees who have not testified enjoy and it's a real question whether they want to make

a play for that. as you know the mayor has been fairly expansive generally when he talks to the media i think they'd like to take advantage of some of that but i think it's a critical strategic question for them whether to move ahead now or whether to slow this process down frankly to hear from people like mayor giuliani potentially who could theoretically have relevant and maybe even interesting information speaking of mayors robin what do you make of. former new york city mayor michael bloomberg heading into the race. that is fascinating to me you know they've been rivals for hears in the billionaires club bloomberg and donald trump even when they were both just civilians so this is interesting my take away from this larry is that michael bloomberg doesn't like to seem my party the democratic party our party moved quite

so far to the left so i think he's his plan here is to invest $100000000.00 of his own dollars to sort of swing this toward centrists i'm not so sure that he's all that interested in actually winning the nomination i think he just wants to get the message out that we need to elect a centrist in the primary of so that because that's the way to win a general election alex imagine thanks to both of you that for again real soon thank you larry. we'll be right back with more politicking after the break. there are a slew of russian and lights. in

a world of big partisan movies lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the fast and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks.

tariff long russian airlines. max keiser financial survival guide stacey let's learn us out fill out let's say i'm a strike at. greece some banks have to fight prostrate scott thank you for helping . destroy 6 that's right. debt slavery. is your media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe from. high salacious full community. are you going the right way or are you being

led. directly. what is true what is faith. in a world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. for a mate in the shallows. and welcome back to politicking 2 weeks of public hearings 12 witnesses 30 hours of testimony what's the most significant takeaways and all the questions answered visa v the impeachment inquiry assessment now from criminal defense attorney and legal analyst trent copeland who joins us here in st louis take on how. well he did it that's the big take away right he is donald trump he did what he's accused of doing he conditioned ukrainian aid that was

a appropriated by congress legally done by congress he condition that aid and he asked ukrainian president to investigate the bidens embarrassment in exchange for the 80 so he did it that's my biggest takeaway and 12 witnesses career foreign service officers decorated military men who came in and all testified that donald trump did that any asked for in exchange for there being an investigation into buns that's bribery under any standard so you think he'll be impeached. i think that the articles of impeachment by the house of representatives will move forward i think there will be a trial in the senate i don't think he will be removed i think he'll be impeached as the constitution provides in the house of representatives and i think the senate will likely find him not guilty i don't think he'll be removed is the trump case

warning you'd like to prosecutor the defendant that's a good question larry and steve castor by example you're steve castor is the g.o.p. counsel and steve castor and i would say law school i'm familiar with steve steve by extension as representing the g.o.p. but really donald trump's interest i wouldn't want to be steve castor and i've heard people say on social media he's done a bad job the truth is he has a bad case and that's a bad job to have fact of the matter is i wouldn't want to defend trump or the g.o.p. in this instance because the facts aren't on their side for. so we have still have unanswered questions in your mind or not of course we have unanswered questions we have a number of witnesses who have not testified namely mick mulvaney the chief of staff who went on camera days after this came to light and said there's a quid pro quo and quid pro quos happen all the time he needs to testify he walked back that testimony he needs to testify i think we also need to hear from my pump

alle the secretary of state i think we need to hear ultimately from rudy giuliani who is at the center of all of this so the truth of the matter is the people who we need to hear from most of the people that donald trump is preventing from coming forward to testify you can't prevent it he can't prevent giuliani. giuliani does not work for the government of giuliani's subpoenaed you're going to have to tell many you would think so right but this president has defied all the laws of both political gravity and he's defied all conventional laws that normally associate with this kind of conduct so the truth is if giuliani is called to testify my guess is that he will assert some kind of amorphous executive privilege hill assume there's some sort of protection that he has attorney client privilege between he and the club he in the present and will assert some sort of immunity that prevents him from testifying i think a lose ultimately that is litigated but i think that's what i'll do or what witness

and they of the 30 witnesses impress you the most. fiona hill fiona hill could not have been a stronger witness and unlike every other witness lawyer who testified and he came from congress and couldn't remember certain things need it documents feel hill didn't she remembered everything she's a career foreign service harvard educated harvard trained foreign service officer she remembered it all and she was concerned about enter testimony larry didn't just go towards this quid pro quo business it also went towards the idea that our country our government is now descending into these conspiracy theories that russia has propagated and she said listen i'm not here to defend one side or the other i'm simply here to give you the facts and i'm also here to tell you that this narrative that the g.o.p. is pushing for this is a narrative that specifically comes out of the kremlin this is

a narrative that benefits no one other than russia and so she gave a pretty stern warning to the g.o.p. and to congress and to the world at large what do you make of the trump putin relationship it's a it's a i can explain it right i mean trump comes after everybody if you so much as say a cross word against him he's coming after you and the one person he has not come after is vladimir putin and there are no circumstances under which he'll criticize anything that this dictator this autocrat someone who our country has been really at odds with. had a cold war with ronald reagan said look this country is the evil empire and this president donald trump has done everything in his power to help prop up vitamin a putin has been an incredibly strong leader so i can explain the relationship i don't know if their financial entanglements the donald trump has that prevents him from speaking his own personal truth that's a vitamin put in but the reality is it's an impossible relationship to expose

embassadors sunderland a disappointment he was a disappointment larry and you know in a word he was too cute by half right someone came in and within the 1st 5 minutes of his opening statement he said look everyone was in on this there was a quid pro quo and we were all operating at the president's orders but with in seconds of having said that it became clear that his testimony was going to be depended upon not facts but his presumption and so and look into the credit of the g.o.p. as many of them said 2 plus 2 may equal 4 but 2 presumptions plus 2 presumptions doesn't equal even one fact so gordon saw and he undermine his credibility by simply saying oh well i thought there was a pretty quick quote well well gee i thought everyone was in on it but i never heard this directly from the president and i think he intentionally tried to distance the president from the facts that were very clear abundantly clear to

everyone in the room what did you make of the republicans on the committee and how they handled it. disappointing you know look what we've seen larry is that the republicans here no matter what donald trump says or does they're going to simply look the other way i mean he did this the quid pro quo was established this is if you know a bank robber goes in you rob a bank he goes home he gets on instagram he post a picture and the caption is i got all the money i want to the bank and it was a perfect heist the propaganda position is well they didn't use the word robbery therefore there is not a robbery and the idea that this is what their defense is is almost laughable now trump has completely as repeatedly complained is not being granted due process as easy he'd have a point if it wasn't for the constitution but the constitution larry specifically says that there is no due process as he and his supporters are describing in an

impeachment inquiry in the house of representatives this is like an an indictment this is like an investigation if you're being indicted or investigated you don't get to participate in the end in the investigation you don't get to call the shots you don't get to call witnesses that's at the trial and at a trial in the senate he will have due process as he describes it we'll hear from he'll have an opportunity confront and cross-examine witnesses 11 opportunity present his own defense he'll have an opportunity right now that's a red herring and anyone who understands the constitution and even an 8th grade level knows that that is b.s. go back to the clinton help me with how the senate handles this i know that this will bring cordial high justice he says that he's the judge yes and is how does it work to democrats speak of public and speak so you can can the president come the president can come. i don't think there's any chance present will come but it's

exactly as you described it's going to look a lot like a grand regal trial the chief justice john roberts of the supreme court will sit as a presiding judge in this trial and there will be witnesses who will be called to testify there will be evidentiary objections there will be witnesses who will come and the chief justice like a judge in any other proceeding will make decisions on the spot and here's one interesting thing or i think that to the extent that certain witnesses are called and there is an assertion of privilege and i think you alluded to this a moment ago when you describe your rudy giuliani if he is called the chief justice will have to make a decision on the spot just like a judge as to whether or not there is no miscible ruling that brings in that witness or whether or not there's an evidentiary objection that's been properly lodged is the rules lead or regular trial rules very similar to read what trial is look it's not criminal in nature he certainly doesn't the president is not going to

be put in jail if he's impeached or removed so it doesn't have all of the earmarks of a criminal trial is certainly not like a civil proceeding because look this isn't about money this is about the removal of the president but it is going to have a lot of the earmarks is a have a lot of the the nomenclature that we that we're in the we see in normal criminal proceedings telecast it's likely to be telecast i can't imagine that there's going to be in justices that the chief justice does not decide whether or not will be telecast if it is of public interest in this clearly is of public interest this will be televised from a lot of things what did you make of the whole story with the navy. i was surprised you know remember donald trump has made it his point larry to be you know quote unquote strong for defense strong for members of our armed service but what he has done is in effect he's undermining the very principles for which he says he's

strong look there has to be a a a pecking order in our military there has to be in some way a chain of command that has to be followed and when military officers violate that chain of command when they violate their orders when they violate the express conditions of what makes them a military servicemen they have to be punished and trump has undermined that by simply saying well no i don't want this guy punished and he doesn't want to punish because he likes the optics of being quote unquote strong for the military but the very nature of doing this he's undermining the military principles themselves what do you make of these military people taking pictures with people they've killed larry it's the most unseemly thing ever and this is why this guy was this military officer was correctly sanctioned was correctly disciplined and donald trump is now inserting himself in the middle of that and remember if we don't stand up against that what we'll see ourselves is an isis officer an isis military fighter we'll see

officers from other countries when we're in war capturing our military men and women and holding them up in the same way so these principles aren't one offs this is something that's important for us and our country going forward as overstrained thank you my pleasure let's turn copeland we thank him and we thank you for joining us on this edition of politicking remember you can join the conversation on my facebook page or tweet me at kings things and don't forget to use the politicking hash tag and that's all for this edition of politicking.

aeroflot russian and lives. in a world of big partisan movies lot of things and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the bats and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks.

aeroflot russian and lights. the u.s. house of representatives has wrapped up its 1st round of impeachment hearings against president trump but it's not done with trying to oust him with new impeachment proceedings ahead is impeachment of viable strategy against the president. i.

think. meeting between the chief of nato and france's president fails to resolve tensions within the alliance or the old mark still costing doubt over its purpose of whether nato can go on as it is. in the grip of political instability we've talked to a local mayor who was brutally beaten in public you leave humiliated barbe rivals about the president able moron as. he also cut off my hair. to mean to change me here and i want people to see to step back and say never mind the believe and cannot believe like this when the media. and germany's highest court rules in favor of a man convicted of murder over 30 year.