andrew johnson has the big eye on him. yet he tried to redeem himself, he ran for the senate and became a u.s. senator from tennessee after he was president to try to build himself back into good graces. an argument can be made for george washington to be number one. playing to my home audience here. [laughter] >> we see how low washington got because of slavery and because of the time he was in. it is hard on that ranking to be rated high when -- so it brings your number down. lincoln being a child of illinois, never having slaves, that the brings his number up quite a bit. the one thing, i mean i do not think there is a presidency without george washington. because, it is important to not just be a one term or -- one termer. people who said when george walker bush died, he is the best one term president. john f. kennedy was a one term high. but it is a good sign to be reelected. like richter talked about james monroe. he did get reelected. so he is a two-termer. herbert hoover did not. it did make a difference. with wash

national historic site, and she tells the story of how they found the new records of andrew johnson, which these things are hiding in people's attics and museums handle. i have a couple videos in the modern-day tv news. there is a lot of resources and teams of links to the books and sites and things like that. >> when you look over your shoulder at the building over there -- >> i think about john adams statement when he writes to abigail. he did in the white house for about five months and says may not and the honest and wise men ever lived under this rule or under this roof, and so i think about that and the traditions we have in a country of the presidency. >> here is the book called 101 presidential insults, what they thought about each other and what it means to us. they offer is mike purdy. the president as a private businessman was extremely adept at fending off criminal investigations, so he might charm fbi agents, he might threaten people, he might hire well-connected lawyers, he might have heated for many years support a favorite charity through all kinds of ways he could ge

he's a full 30 points below andrew johnson. and all of these people, this is something to think about. this is a point richard made. all of them are below william henry harrison who was only in office for one month, so we're -- i think richard called them all net negative presidencies. okay. let's take a look at how the modern presidents fared. ronald reagan was the only one who made it into the top ten. lou cannon, his terrific biographer who covered him as a underi journalist in california is the chapter he did. he had a lot to say about reagan's command of storytelling as he was in the office. next, george h.w. bush in 20th place. it will be interesting to see what happens to him now that he's past, now that more records are available and there's a bit of a halo effect once presidents leave office. next time we do it, we'll see whether or not he remains the k bookended by the two adams presidents. bill clinton came in at 15. we had david marinist's bo biograp biography. the "washington post" reporter, you're familiar with hi

and then andrew johnson became the president. and he proceeded to defy the radical republican congress who were trying to vindicate the 600,000-plus deaths in the civil war. not to mention lincoln's death. by doing things like passing the first civil rights act of 1866, which president johnson vetoed. the congress also passed a law saying the president could not fire the secretary of war, who was in charge of the union troops who were occupying the south to protect the formerly enslaved. andrew johnson promptly fired him anyway and got impeached. it's hard not to wonder on this president's day how history might have played out if lincoln had not made the worst decision of his presidency and hannibal hamlin had become the 17th president instead of andrew johnson. when can he come back, the daunting task the primary electorate is facing in trying to beat donald trump. colonial penn can help. hi, i'm jonathan, a manager here at colonial penn life insurance company. and with coverage options starting at just $9.95 a month, you can ge

adopted, only one president faced an impeachment trial before the united states senate. 1868.as andrew johnson in now, we are concluding our second impeachment trial in just 21 years. while each case must stand on its own facts, this trend reflects the increasingly acrimonious partisanship facing our nation. the founders warned against excessive partisanship fearing that it would lead to instability, injustice, and confusion. ultimately posing a mortal threat to our free government. this, the against founders constructed an elaborate system of checks and balances to prevent factions from sacrificing both the public good and the rights of other citizens. impeachment is part of that elaborate system. the founders set a very high bar for accused, requiring that the president may only be removed by a two-thirds vote of the senate. recognized that in removing a sitting president, we would be acting against not only theofficeholder but also voters who entrusted him with that decision. thus, the senate must consider whether misconduct occurred, its nature, and the traumatic and impacttive -- disrupti

that of course was the impeachment of andrew johnson. although political parties were pretty different then than they are now. johnson was a democrat. when they voted to impeach him in the house, it was mostly a party line vote. 1868, right? mostly a party line vote. a few crossovers for the impeachment vote against him in the house. when johnson's impeachment went over to the u.s. senate for them on decide whether they would actually throw him out of office, no members of the president's party would cast a vote to actually convict him of the articles of impeachment and remove him from office. no senator from the president's party would vote to convict him. that was the one presidential impeachment we had in the 1800s. in the 19th century. then we had one presidential impeachment in the next century. in the 1900s, the impeachment of president bill clinton. and again, like when andrew johnson, it was mostly a party line vote in the house. when the house voted to impeach him. when they passed the articles of impeachment against president c

what i will say is there is a distinction the way i both read the andrew johnson and when i say readst security that did a great piece on it. if you notice what robert said is, look, in the andrew johnson case when the chief justice broke a tie it was just transactional procedural ties. so i will distinguish mine because this could potentially impact the outcome. but in that history chief justice chase did make evidentiary decisions. there are some judgments clearly acting as a judge. >> what he left out and it's a terrific book about the trial of andrew johnson. chase made a number of decisions. he was political. he then was voted down by the senate. so what he can do -- >> the senate can overrule him. >> ectly. the chief justice can get out there and it's not an overleaning example of the judicial branch because the legislative branch can overrule it. >> let me give ron klain the last word here on the chief judge's role in this trial. >> so i disagree with much of what has been said. there's normal rules about interbranch separation and an elected judge don't apply here. the consti

the main thing that drove andrew johnson impeachment , they lied. sound familiar? that is the kind of thing that it seems to me the founders did not want to have in that we are in the routine of doing this all the time with the policy difference so i'm glad it ended the way it did don't do this again. >> and senator romney in the doghouse? [laughter] >> we have no dog houses here. the most important vote is the next vote. >> talk about what is on the senate's agenda given that animosity from the speaker and the president last night can congress really accomplish anything? >> i think the house with the representatives is the problem we have very different approaches to america's problems between the house and the senate prick i think we have a chance to do some moree business. i certainly hope so. infrastructure, land and conservation, even in the midst of the election sometimes i think of things we can do together and although you completely bought into the notion we are somehow dysfunctional i would point you back to the end of last year when there were a in that

adopted, only one president faced an impeachment trial before the united states senate. 1868.as andrew johnson in now, we are conclg

nominee went to nixon said you have to go his own people, but a brutal process, you mentioned andrew johnsonhave a great letter from robert johnson the defacto chief of staff, he was secretary to the president, his son. and he took his life after johnson's left the white house. he died in a suicide. that lets you how brutal that process is. i said, i asked ivanka how are you holding up, she said, i will not be bitter, i choose to be happy, i can't function unless i am happy, so i choose to be happy. i thought that was remarkable. >> you look at bill clinton, a successful president, with the economy. and i would make the case that his you know as we look back. his presidency has been stained. no pun intended by what happened. and i wonder if you were advising donald trump, you know moving forward, how do you move beyond peopl impeachment? it is an embarrassment to a president. >> i am the last guy -- if i were advising trump he never would have been elected president. i have advised presidents, some were successful, but he breaks the mold, it is amazing to he what he has been able to accompli

the main thing that drove andrew johnson's impeachment is they just didn't like him. sound familiar? i mean, that's the kind of thing seems to be the founders did not want to happen, that we would get into a routine of doing this all the time because we had a policy difference or a personality difference. i'm glad it ended the way it did. i hope the message to the house of representatives, don't do this again. >> how long will senator romney be in the doghouse? >> we don't have any dog houses here. the most important vote is the next vote. >> can you talk about what is on the senates agenda going forward, and given the obvious animosity between the speaker and the president at last night state of union speech, you think this congress can really accompt anything legislatively with this white house? >> my biggest

the most important, andrew johnson of tennessee. we will come back to him. ndrew jackson hamilton of texas. andrew danson of arkansas. a few others. they cast the emancipation proclamation for southern audiences as a seeming punishment that, in time, would do momentous good. in an address to texans, they promised that their sins would be pardoned if "like the prodigal son, they repent and ask to be forgiven." he said, would deliver whites from their bondage and deliver texas on a .ew route here's the key point. as hamilton's reference to the prodigal son suggests, loyal americans turned to meta-first metaphors.-- they were pupils who needed teaching. s who needed cleaning. children who needed parenting spirit heathens who needed to convert. drunkards who needed to sober up. madmen who needed to them to their senses. prodigal sons who should return home. medicinee history of -- in an era in the history of medicine when it was thought you were not healing when you were not in pain, oftentimes these deliveringnvoked the nature of suffering itself. of theas the a

the most influential of these unionists, andrew johnson of tennessee. we will come back to him. andrew jackson hamilton of texas, edward gantt of arkansas, and a few others cast the emancipation proclamation for southern audiences as a seeming punishment that, in time, would do momentous good. for example, hamilton, in a january 1864 address to texans, promised that their sins would be pardoned if "like the prodigal son, they repent and ask to be forgiven." emancipation, he said, would deliver whites from their present bondage and put texas on a new career of prosperity predicated upon industry and intelligence, emancipation's broad benefits. here's the key point. as hamilton's reference to the prodigal son suggests, loyal americans turned to metaphors to conjure how the union would save the south. confederates were, in these metaphors, pupils who needed teaching. patients who needed curing. children who needed parenting. heathens who needed converting. drunkards who should sober up. madmen who needed to come to their senses. errant brethren who should return to the path of right

he was reading, i think he was reading about andrew johnson.hat he did is that he picked one part of that story where the deciding vote, which results in the acquittal of andrew johnson by senator ross. ross argues the president didn't commit a crime and therefore he shouldn't be removed. he is fascinated on that trying to explain why the house managers could be right and yet the impeachment is wrong. i am thinking to myself lamar alexander, you worked in the nixon administration. you saw the consequences of the nixon cover-up not just on the country but on your friends. how, how can you reach back in time and pull out a parallel that is not relevant when the one that is is staring you right in the face. >> thank you. appreciate it. we will be right back. when you take align, you have the support of a probiotic and the gastroenterologists who developed it. align helps to soothe your occasional digestive upsets, 24/7 with a strain of bacteria you can't get anywhere else. you could say align puts the pro in probiotic. so, where you go, the pro go

president to it be impeached by the house, and ke andrew johnson and bill clinton before him, he has not been removed from office. setor mitt romney broke with his party and voted to convict thef president oabusing his power to jon sopel has more. ief justice roberts: senators, how say you? is the respondent donald john trump guilty or not guilty? jon: process that started last november came to an end today. >> mr. alexander, not guilty. ms. baldwin. ms. baldwi guilty. jon: and then the verdict. juchieice roberts: it is therefore ordered and sjudged that td it donald john trump is hereby acquitted of the scharges in td articles. jon: for the wall of republican unity was broken by mitt romney, the former presidential candidate with a bom speech said he would vote to convict the president of abuse of office. sen. romney: the great question the constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the president committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor. yes, he did. process now behind him, donald trump is seeing his approval ratings

this is only the third time in history the president has faced a trial in the senate after andrew johnson was acquitted in 1868 and bill clinton in 1999. >>> the rallies are planned around the country including here in the bay area today by people who believe president trump should be convicted and removed from office. a rally is scheduled for 4:30 this afternoon outside the office of senator diane finestein. in emeriville there will be a rally at the corner of powell street and christy avenue. in oakland, a rally is scheduled outside of the grand lake theater beginning at 5:30 p.m. now, more bay area rallies will at hayward city hall plaza. and in mountain view at 5:30 p.m. at gateway park at castro street and el camino real. >>> president trump's state of the union address is drawing criticism from democrats most notably from house speaker nancy pelosi who ripped her copy of the president's speech in half. >> why did you rip the speech up, madam speaker? >> that was the courteous thing to do. >> now, for the first 20 minutes president trump tauted the nation's economy. he stuck to the s

if we look back at past impeachments, the impeachment of andrew johnson and bill clinton and the resignationd nixon, in no case did their party win the next presidential election. in fact the democrats lost in 2000 after the impeachment of clinton in an election they should have won easily at a time of peace and prosperity. trump did not get the acquittal he wanted. for the first time in the history of a presidential trial, a member of the president's own party voted to convicted him and remove him from office. this was not an obscure republican senator, this was mitt romney, the former republican presidential nominee, who gave just an extraordinary speech absolutely condemning the actions of the president. at the time when all this was going on, professor, it looked very bad to have the chaos in iowa and particularly forjoe biden? absolutely. look, the democrats looked like the gang that can't shoot straight but they have plenty of time to straighten that out and once they get a nominee, their hatred for president trump will unite the party but the real story is the decline and perhaps fall

of this they've never understood it this is the 3rd time in history we've had an impeachment andrew johnson i'm not going to bore you with that bill clinton involved lying under oath granted it was a sexual matter but people understood it they said ok maybe richard nixon wasn't impeached he resigned but what he did was clearly wrong nobody understood what this president did nobody could understand it nobody what did he do he abused power for what does that mean is it a crime no he obstructed congress here is the best part he obstructed congress by implementing by using affirmatively using a constitutional provision called executive privilege it defies logic the payback is going to be severe and it's going to be serious in november when he wins reelection perhaps and a landslide then hell will pay i fear on democrats once they get anywhere in this election do you think they really need to take a 2nd look at that general strategy. they are too and their strategy it's comprehensible they have no vision no platform no world view they have this this this this good choice detached group of the ex

y si hay nacionalidad su principio, valor y lucha, en 1868 el 17 presidente de estados unidos andrew johnsons paraplÉjicos vuelvan a caminar. en esta misma fecha y desde el 2009 fue lanzado whatsapp. en argentina es elegido como presidente juan domingo perÓn. para el 2008 el actor javier bardem ganÓ el oscar como mejor actor secundario por no es paÍs para viejos". los machos son aperitivos que siempre se han considerado de la comida mexicana, pero en 1940 fue rebeca raza quien nos produjo por primera vez en masa en los Ángeles, california y desde entonces comemos machos y los celebramos en esta misma fecha. >> tÚ sabÍas eso? >> yo sÍ sabía que era dÍa de la bandera. feliz dÍa de la bandera a todos nuestros hermanos mexicanos. mucha gente cree que son mexicanos, pero son ubicados en este paÍs. miren lo que estamos recibiendo, estas son imÁgenes de Último momento. estamos viendo en el homenaje a kobe bryant y obviamente muy conmovida estÁ llorando, estoy seguro que habrÁ decenas de gentes en esa misma situaciÓn famosas y de todo tipo llorando la pÉrdida de kobe bryant, pero ahÍ la vemos muy se

the main thing that drove andrew johnson impeachment, they did not like him. sound familiar? that is the kind of thing that the founders did not want to happen. that we would get into a routine of doing this all the time because we had a policy difference or personality difference. i am glad it ended the way we did and i hope the message to the house of representatives, don't do this again. >> how long will senator romney be in the doghouse. [laughter] >> we don't have dog houses here. the most important vote is the next vote. >> can you talk about what is on the senate agenda going forward and given the animosity between the speaker and the president at last night's state of the union speech. do you think the congress can accomplish anything legislatively with the white house. >> my biggest problem is with the house of representatives. we were pretty different approaches to america's problems between the house and senate. i think we have a chance to do more business. i certainly hope so, looking at infrastructure, land and water conservation, in the midst of the election the

the clinton impeachment trial in 1999, 37 days in the impeachment trial of president andrew johnson, 83 days. again president trump acquitted the third president of the tried and acquitted by the u.s. senate in an impeachment trial. we showed you news conferences from senator schumer and also from mitch mcconnell. we also heard from the president's personal attorney jay sekulow and here's some of what he had to say. >> let me make a quick statement. obviously we are pleased. the real victor today was the american people but also the constitution, the office of the president and the president himself so we are pleased with results and we are glad this is behind us. we are glad it's behind the country and it's time to turn attention to other things. >> how damaging is it that does is not a bipartisan acquittal? >> it wasn't bipartisan. it was a bipartisan opposition to the impeachment articles themselves. there was on one count one republican that voted guilty. the house you had 53 democrats that did not support the articles of impeachment. the founders were very smart that he understo

gary: but not andrew johnson. toard: andrew johnson went elementary school but nobody knew who he was or -- but there was a lincoln school, a jackson school, and a johnson school. so really, it seems that the civil war -- i cannot think of the nearest civil war monument or memorial in the tri-cities. maybe people know of one, but i did not. >> [indiscernible] edward: excuse me. cumberland gap, which is pretty far away, so -- gary: and a place that people do not immediately associate with the civil war. they associate with other things, cumberland gap, sort of letting people get on other western areas. edward: so this is my excuse for not being interested in the civil war earlier. i did not really have any of these kind of rides about this, and i had to create my own sort of matrix of connection, and it came from trying to be a citizen. you know, what would it mean -- what we do to actually help virginia and richmond. we saw -- who would have ever thought that charlottesville would bear the burden that it did. how

the main thing that drove andrew johnson to impeachment is they just didn't like him. sound familiar? that's the kind of thing that seems to me the founders did not want to happen. that we get in a routine of doing this all the time because we had a policy difference or a personality difference . >> .. can you talk a little bit about the senate agenda going forward and if there's animosity between the speaker and the president at last night state of the union speech. you think this congress can really accomplish anything legislatively with this white house? >> my biggest problem is with this house of representatives. as you all know we are pretty different in approach is to america's problems between the house and the senate. i think we have a chance to do some more business. i certainly hope so. we are looking at infrastructure. we are looking at land and water conservation. barry even in the midst of the election some things that i think we can do together and even though several of you have completely bought into the notion that we are somehow totally dysfunctional,

mark: andrew johnson was a pretty awful guy, but he shouldn't have been impeached.ynn coin -- lincoln is assassi, the war is over. he was a democrat from the south, but supportive of the union. >> he was called a war democrat. mark: but the house kinds of set him up. they passed a law that said you can't fire your own cabinet, you have to get our permission. and he vetoed it. then he fired his secretary of war who he inherited from lincoln. and for that reason among others they impeached him. there were 11 charges. they lost on three and the other 8 they dropped. was the house trying to set up the president with all these subpoenas? >> i think they were. i think it was a setup. getting back to your earlier point. all presidents have misbehaved. it's hard to think of a president who hasn't misbehaved in a serious way. think of fdr and what he did during the second world war with respect to the japanese-americans or others things he did. refusing to take jews who were trying to flee europe. mark: presidents used the fbi and the ira. rd and the irs. >> but they had not

. >> you know, the andrew johnson case, he was a pretty awful guy. >> he was quite awful. >> but he shouldn't have been impeached, at least, i don't think. in this tenure of office, they passed purposely the so called radical republicans, lincoln's assassinated, the civil war is over, you have reconstruction period. there wasn't all that much in the reconstruction. a democrat from the south, but he was supportive of the union versus the confederacy. >> he was what was called a war democrat. >> but the house kind of set him up and so did the senate. that is, they passed a law and said you can't fire your own cabinet, you have to get our permission, which is absurd, separation of power -- but that was the position. he vetoed it, and then he fired his secretary of war, who he inherited from lincoln. and for that reason, among other things, impeached him. there were 11 charges brought. they lost on three, and then they took a reassessment and the other eight they dropped. were the house democrats trying to set up the president with all these subpoenas? >> i think they were. i think it was a set-u

they did it to andrew johnson for essentially the same thing. in the movie network there was a famous call to outrage against the politicians and the systems doing you dirty. go to your windows. scream you are mad as hell and you are not going to take it anymore. i hope your voices echo all over this country. denying you due process was wrong. let them know that you know what they did and you are mad as hell. that's the argument. all right. there is another big story going on tonight. the l.a. lakers are playing their first game since the death of kobe bryant, his daughter and seven others. the king, lebron james has just offered an emotional tribute. you will see it next. beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your b

in 1868 the chief justice presiding over the impeachment trial of andrew johnson. he voted twice on three tie votes, could you do this? the vice president is supposed to be able to break a tie, not the case in the senate impeachment trial, listen to what john roberts said tonight. >> it would be inappropriate for me, and an elected official from a different branch of government to assert the power to change the results so the motion would succeed. >> the senate works on president, there is a book of presidents they turned to every day and with this ruling by john roberts, if there is another senate trial involving the impeachment of the president we know the answer can the chief justice vote or not, he can't. shannon: back at it on monday, thanks a lot. the president was pleased the impeachment trial will wrap up with no more witnesses or evidence. now he is turning his attention to the state of the union address. kevin cork is calling the latest reaction. >> white house sources telling fox news twos expect the president to strike an optimistic tone in his final st

schumer asked roberts a parliamentary inquiry which regarded the impeachment trial of president andrew johnson in which chief justice -- >> the senate willcy come to order, the majority leader is recognized. >> mr. chief justice, i send a resolution to the desk and ask the clerk to report. >> the clerk will report. >> senate resolution 488 to provide related procedures concerning the articles of impeachment against donald john trump, president of the united states. resolved that the record inn ths case shall be closed and no motion with respect to reopening the record shall be in order for the duration of these proceedings. the senate shall proceed the final argument as

in fact, andrew johnson was impeached in 1868 for offenses that were not crimes in the sense that they were something defined by statute, something that's already been codified. wasn't required then, isn't required now. andrew johnson was impeached in article 10 of the articles of the -- against him for acts ooted in his bigotry, in his hatred. he was impeached because in the root of it was, he did not want the freed slaves to enjoy the same rights as other people in this country. he fought the freedmen's bureau. he did everything that he could to prevent them from having the same rights as others in this country. and the radical republicans impeached andrew johnson in 1868 for having utterances and statements that were harmful. he demeaned the house of representatives. but it was all rooted in his hate, in his racism, and as a result, no crime, but he was impeached. we now know that this can be done and this president has done some things that are dreadful. some things that i would not want to see a president do and that in my opinion are in violation of the constitution. you don't ha

andrew johnson --? jackson. >> johnson was impeached, jackson was not.wrestled with that his entire life. if you recall, he tried to get rid of it. it was a real mark on his career. i don't know that anything affects trump. he doesn't show shame. he doesn't show empathy and he doesn't show any of those traits and it would give him a guideline. you don't do this. >> i also think the censure option is interesting because so many senators last night when it was basically all over in terms of the witnesses started saying that they did think that what he did was wrong. they weren't comfortable with it. we've been talking all morning about how they made a decision, that it was better for them not to get rid of him on every level. let me just read to you what lamar alexander said about this. the senate reflects the country and the country is as divided as it has been for a long time. for the senate to tear up the ballots and said president trump couldn't be on it, the country probably wouldn't accept that. it would pour gasoline on cultural fires that are burni

this is only the third time in history that a president has faced a trial in the senate after andrew johnson was acquitted in 1868 and bill clinton in 1999. rallies are scheduled around the country including right here in the bay area. today, people who believe president trump should be convicted and removed from office will be taking part in rallies. in san francisco a rally is set for 4:30 this afternoon outside of senator diane finestein's office at 1 post street. in emeriville, a rally at the corner of powell street and christy avenue beginning at 5:30 p.m. and in oakland beginning at 5:30 p.m. there are more bay area rallies. one in san rafael at 5: the san rafael city plaza. in hayward alternate 5:30 p.m. at hayward city hall plaza and in mountain view at 5:30 p.m. in gateway park at castro street in el camino real . you can watch the impeachment on ktvu plus. >>> democrats most notably house speaker nansly pelosi ripped her copy of the president's script in half after his speech. >> why did you rip the speech up, madam speaker? >> because that was the courteous thing to do. >> for the

and he was reading i think he was reading about andrew johnson. and picked one part of the story where the deciding vote which resulted in the acquittal is by a senator named ross. he argues the president didn't commit a crime and shouldn't be removed. he is fastening on that. as a way of trying to explain why the house managers could be right and yet the impeachment is wrong. i think to myself, you worked in the nixon administration. you saw the consequences of the cover up on the the country and your friends. how, how could you reach back in time and pull out a parallel that is not relevant when the one that is relevant is staring you in the face. the nixon parallel. >> thank you. appreciate it. we'll be right back. americans come to lendingtree.com to compare and save on loans, credit cards and more! but with the new lending tree app you can see your full financial health, monitor your credit score, see your cash flow and find out how you can cut your monthly bills. download it now to see how much you can save. like you, my hands are everything

have an impeachment inquiry for almost 100 years until 1868 with the partisan impeachment of andrew johnson. another impeachment was conducted for over 100 years after that when a house they they get ain formal impeachment inquiry into president nixon with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 410-four. just a little too tech -- over two decades later there was another partisan impeachment process, president clinton, when he o was impeached on an almost straight partisan vote. tomorrow, ioi will join many others to vote to acquit the president of the united states. his actions certainly do not rise to the level of removal from office. this is clearly another one of our partisan impeachment, now the third in our history. for the past three years the house of representatives has voted four times to open an impeachment20 inquiry. once in 2017, once in 2018, and twice in 2019. only the second vote in 2019 actually - passed and turned it into an actual impeachment inquiry. for four months the country has been consumed with an impeachment hearings and investigations. first rumors of issue with ukrai

there's only one case you can look towards, and that's andrew johnson's impeachment. the chief justice at the time, he did vote to break ties on certain issues. but they were procedural issues, adjournments, scheduling conflicts, things of that and-a-half. it's not appropriate for the judge here to impinge on the jury's role by adding his vote on substantive issues. the senators are the jurors. they are the ones who have heard the arguments thus r far. they are the ones that render the final verdict. >> i know you said you were against having witnesses as well. if the democrats could go back and rewind the clock about 45 days, do you think they would take a do-over and actually call witnesses that they wanted while they had the chance? >> no, i don't think so. i don't think this has ever been about getting to the truth because the truth is, the articles of impeachment they brought forward are deeply flawed. they don't rise to the constitutional burden of treason, bribery or other high crimes misdemeanors. abuse of power, not a crime, obstruction of congress, technical

that of course was the impeachment of andrew johnson. ty different then than they are now. johnson was a democrat. when they voted to impeach him in the house, it was mostly a party line vote. 1868, right? mostly a party line vote. a few crossovers for the impeachment vote against him in the house. when johnson's impeachment went over to the u.s. senate for them

that of course was the impeachment of andrew johnson. pretty different then than they are now. johnson was a democrat. when they voted to impeach him in the house, it was mostly a party line vote. this was 1868, right? mostly a party line vote. just a few crossovers for the impeachment vote against him in the house. but then when johnson's impeachment went over to the u.s. senate for them to decide whether they wer

we should note that andrew johnson and certainly bill clinton to a certain extent weren't unshackled afterwards. in fact, it hung over them afterwards. senator chris murphy, thanks very much. joining me now for more on the ramifications of the today's vote to acquit, katie hill, congresswoman of california. and jim manly. jim, i was thinking about you as i was thinking about what mitch mcconnell was thinking and what martha mcsally and corey gardner and others were thinking as they watched mitt romney deliver this speech. what do you think? >> and susan collins, to add another. i think he was commending himself on a job well done. working with the president, trying to rip up article i of the constitution that sets the parameters of the role of congress, and he is now going back to doing what he does best, and he's going to start passing -- go back to nominations. i mean, democracy took a pretty big hit today. i mean, i appreciate your pep talk and the senator's rose-colored glasses, but, you know, i for one, for instance, i don't know how we're ever going to set the limits of impeach

been a senate vote on whether or not a president should be removed from office, and unlike the andrew johnson impeachment removal vote, unlike the bill clinton removal vote, because of mitt romney, it will be a bipartisan vote to remove him from office. it will not succeed. it will not be a super majority vote of 67 votes, but it will be bipartisan for the first too many ever. >> and on this sad day, senator romney's speech, senator romney's position, his vote is nothing short of inspiring to me. his eloquence in defending his compliance with his oath is truly remarkable because standing alone among 53 republican senators, he's facing it all by himself, and he -- they have two oaths the senators, one is their regular oath of office to abide by the constitution and preserve, and protect and defend it. the second oath is to do impartial justice. what does that mean? impartial justice means it shouldn't matter who is in the dock. you do the same thing if it's a republican that you'd do if it was a democrat, and i can't believe for a moment that those 53 republican senators wouldn't vote to convi

and we even once changed it to prevent andrew johnson from appointing the supreme court justice ts.ss. >> you of course advise president obama. one of the longest serving white house advisers. do you think hees goi's going t out the entire primary process? >> i think barack obama knows to help t-- it would make that tas much harder. because every candidate who is running right now, the leading candidates can win this election. but they can only do it with a unified party behind them. and i think if barack obama was in the primary, i expect him to be enganled in the general to do everything he can to elect the next president as a democrat. >> scale of one to ten, how comfortable do you think he is with bernie sanders being the nominee? >> i haven't talked to him so i don't know. he understands as someone who came from outside the democrat establishment that the most electable candidate is the one that does the best of navigating the process. and if bernie sanders is the one who emerges from the process, then he is our best shot to beat trump. >> we like to have you here. thank you so

she goes into the impeachment of president andrew johnson. she wrote an opinion piece for "the new york times" in november headlined "donald trump, meet your precursor." we will link to that at democracynow.org. iowawe come back, we go to . stay with us. ♪ [music break] amy: this is democracy now!, i'm amy goodman with nermeen shaikh. nermeen: democratic officials in iowa are continuing to release official results from monday's caucus. senator bernie sanders and former south bend mayor pete buttigieg are now in a virtual tie with 97% of precincts reporting. sanders maintains a lead in the popular vote, but buttigieg has a slight advantage in what's known as the "state delegate equivalent" race. buttigieg has 26.2% of state delegate equivalents. sanders has 26.1%. "the new york times" is now predicting sanders has a greater chance of winning overall in part of the vermont senator's overwhelming strength in satellite caucuses in iowa andd around the country. amy: and world. democratic officials have attributed the chaos in iowa to a newly creat

that is not something you could say about andrew johnson or bill clinton or any other presidential impeachment. when you look back at i think adam schiff's closing argument when he was making the point almost to romney directly, you don't have to remove this president to send a message, make a point, lay a marker for future presidents, he was looking for one vote to send that signal. mitt romney has now given him, democrats and history with that one vote. >> we talked about he's at the end of the career, doesn't need the job, has a lot of money. there are many republicans who come on air, many current, many former, never-trumpers. does mitt romney fit that that world, in which republicans say if mitt romney would lead this party one day, republicans might be republicans again? >> reporter: yeah. i mean i think that's wishful thinking. i think first of all mitt romney did leave this party eight years ago. i think mitt romney himself would say his time has passed as far as being a standard bearer for what the republican party has become. he is already getting a great deal of praise on social med

president trump andrew johnson's trial in 1868 had 41 witnesses. president bill clinton's trial in 1999 had a special prosecutor with a lot of evidence and three witnesses. president trump's had none. as for the federal judges, some of these trials had a large number of witnesses. 55 witnesses were at judge hastings' 1989 trial. 26 witnesses at judge portia's trial in 2010. and 21 at judge claiborne's trial in 1986. and 10 witnesses at judge walter nixon's trial in 1989. some republicans have suggested that the senate has no duty to go beyond the testimony that was obtained by the house. but according to the "washington post," seven witnesses who testified in judge nixon's trial in 1989 had not testified before that in the house. 17 witnesses for judge portia's trial in 2010 had not testified before that in the house. 17 of the 53 current republican senators serving today took part in this trial and heard from these 17 witnesses who hadn't testified before that in the house. at the beginning of this trial, all 100 senators took an oath in which the

historically in 1860 it would chief justice chase did break some ties when he presided over andrew johnson'simpeachment, i don't think john roberts is a chief justice in that model. i think he is going to very very much do everything he can not to be involved. if it comes to this question of do you cast the tie-breaking vote, i think you will say, i'm out, and leave it to the senate, in which case there is no conviction. a tie would mean that president trump is acquitted. but wouldn't that be chief justice weighing in and very big way because he knows this? >> it is such a fundamental question. is neutrality neutral? of course it is not neutral. he would be throwing in his lot with republicans. but i think he would also be able to have a kind of plausible deniability, amy. he would be able to say, i did nothing. i did not insert myself. i let the procedure go as it needed to go. i think he would claim that he really only had ceremonial role. there has been a lot of good op-ed this week i law professor saying, look, the constitution says he shall preside. that means when the vice president pr

unlike the impeachs of andrew johnson and bill clinton, it was about something the founding fathers feard it was wrong at one point. >> if the president said i'll give you the money but you have to investigate joe biden, that is really off the rails wrong. >> while the president and his legal team argued he did nothing wrong, at least a half dozen republicans now admit the evidence does not exonerate him. they've settled on saying his conduct was improper but not impeachable. it's definitively both. george washington warned foreign influence is one of the most bainful foes of republican government. james madison argued for impeachment at the constitutional convention saying a president might betray his trust to foreign powers. this isn't subtle but what about trump's argument that abuse of power isn't a legitimate cause? alexander hamilton put the kibosh on that saying it was for the misconduct of public men from the abuse of some public trust. republicans also argued that obstruction of congress was an absurd charge citing george washington's executive fight with congress. but they wrot