victorylater, the officially went to rick santorum by 34.hat happens and what has the state done to fortify itself against this happening again? mr. yepsen: rick santorum was cheated. he won and did not get credit for. a caucus victory is media attention, money raised off the momentum and to be denied that on opening night, you cannot come back two weeks later and take back the time magazine cover you got. so he was really cheated and that was a sad episode. caucuses have always been criticized for the convoluted counting system, it is complicated and not a primary, which is very clean. you go in and vote and the numbers are counted. these are straw votes on the republican side. a slip of paper in a box and then count it. the democratic side is initial preferences. it is confusing. there are a few thousand precincts and all kinds of opportunities for counting to go wrong. that is one of the criticisms that has been made from both parties. they have both tried to get it right and accurate and verifiable. there is not much tolerance for error

guest: what happened is rick santorum was really jaded.e won and he did not get the credit for it. it is media attention, it is money that you raise off that momentum. and to be denied that on opening night, you can't come back two weeks later and take back the time magazine cover that you got. cheated and that was a sad episode. the caucuses have always been criticized for being convoluted in the accounting system. it is complicated, it is not a primary which is very clean. votes ones are straw the republican side, they put a slip of paper in a box and then count it. the democratic side, it is this initial preference. it is very confusing. there are a couple thousand precincts. there are all kinds of opportunities for counting to go wrong. that is one of the criticisms that has been made. both parties of the state have tried to get it right and accurate and verifiable. there is not much tolerance for error in the way that we calculate elections in america after the year 2000. and so, the standards are a little different than they were in

rick santorum agrees with that also. and when you say alan dershowitz says it wasn't an abuse of power. he was on the defense team that said dershowitz wasn't guilty. >> that was not an issue of constitutional law, john. >> just because alan dershowitz says it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. >> i think he made a compelling case. >> that's different than saying just because alan dershowitz said it -- which is what some republican senators are saying. >> i agree with that. do we have the rudy giuliani sound? i want to address something happening to john bolton here right now. john bolton who has given his life for the republican cause and is a conservative that was a star of fox news for ten years is now very much in the crosshairs. listen to what rudy giuliani said about him overnight. >> here's the only conclusion i can come to and it's a harsh one, and i feel very bad about it. he's a back stabber. he never said to me, i've got a problem with what you're doing in ukraine. never once. never winked. never sent me a no

and that senator, let me make sure i have it right, was named rick santorum.s. >> i think that there will be a call and there will be a vote on witnesses. >> there will be witnesses? >> i think there thereby witnesses. i don't think a lot of witnesses. but there's a lot of fangt questions out there that i think we need to get to the bottom of. the house says they have additional information they'd like to bring forward. they'd like to -- >> that they didn't bring forward? >> they'd like to clarify some of the testimony that's on the record. >> senator, back then you wanted to know the whole story and the house said they had additional information to bring forward. what's changed? >> yeah, again, i don't have any problem with calling witnesses. what i hear, i hear paul said, all these analysts talk about what we don't know. to anyone who believes that john bolton is going to go out there and throw some bombshell or that rick perry is going to throw a bam sche bombshell, the reality is there are legitimate questions about the president's behavior on that phone c

rick santorum at that point was and the low single digits. on caucus night, santorum seemed to lose to romney by eight votes , a couple weeks later, a missing box came in from somewhere in iowa from one of the precincts that put santorum up by 34 votes. of the iowahair republican party to deal with that and he was in a tough situation, but you have to are internalcuses party events one by the parties themselves, not by the state electoral machinery. these things can happen at times. santorum complained that that cost him momentum, but my argument was -- it at qs what that echoes what people said -- because he exceeded expectations by finishing in a virtual tie with mitt romney, he already in effect one the caucuses. >> the republicans screwed up the count. things,d been other counts that had been question, argued about. 2016, we had an argument between the bernie sanders people and hillary clinton people. >> there is always error and counting. when it is close, it can matter. 2016. that in 2012 and the other thing to recognize, we also need t

rick santorum at that point was in the low single digits. on caucus night, santorum seemed to lose to romney by eight votes. a couple weeks later, a missing box came in from somewhere in iowa from one of the precincts that put santorum up by 34 votes. the former chair of the iowa republican party had to deal with that, and he was in a tough situation, but you have to remember, caucuses are internal party events run by the parties themselves, not by the state electoral machinery. these things can happen at times. santorum complained that that cost him momentum, but my argument was because he exceeded expectations by finishing in a virtual tie with mitt romney, he already in fact won the caucuses. david: but the republicans screwed up the count. there have been other things -- counts that have been questioned, argued about throughout the history of the caucus. in 2016, between the -- we had an argument between the bernie sanders people and hillary clinton people. >> there is always error in counting. when it is close, it can matter. we saw tha

joining me now is rick santorum who has sat through an impeachment trial. i will quote from rick santorum on december 26th, 2019, who said i think you have to be open to where senators feel they have more information. now that we have heard from lev parnas, now that we have seen this evidence which includes documents, letters from rudy giuliani. how does that increase the pressure on senators who are considering whether to hear new evidence? >> yeah, i think you have to look at the framework that most republicans maybe all republicans look at this impeachment. and even compare it to clinton. when i said that, i actually was open to witnesses. and i think there are senators who will be open to witnesses too. but the witnesses are going to be about the record that came from the house. it's not going to be, for example, as you know with the clinton investigation, there are a whole bunch of other things that were investigated by bill clinton. that many members of the senate were still convinced that clinton had done wrong. saying we need to call this witness an

joining us now paul begala and rick santorum. friends, i think we need to read what lamar alexander wrote last night. it was an interesting statement. it came at 11:00 p.m. where almost everyone was sleeping. hoors one part. there is no need for more evidence to prove that the president asked ukraine to investigate joe biden and his son. he said this on television on october 3rd and during his july 25th telephone call with the president of ukraine. there is no need for more evidence to conclude the president withheld the united states aid to pressure ukraine to investigate the bidens. the house managers have proved this with what they call a mountain of overwhelming evidence. paul, first to you. lamar alexander says, you know what? the house managers proved it. not only do i think it's not worth removing the president over it. that's a high bar. but i don't think we should hear any more witnesses in the case. >> history will not remember he was the governor of tennessee, he was the president of the university of tennessee, he was

i tweet about rick santorum quote, i think it's over on impeachment trial. josh marshall talking points memo said increasing signs republican senators have steadied themselves after the bolton news ready a can to shut the child and without witnesses or evidence. center mark warner of virginia missing this in a in a briefine just showed a few minutes ago on the impeachment trial court if this was a secret vote we absolutely have a full set of witnesses. olivia deaver summerhill impeachment manager jerry nadler tells us that when asked if they will subpoena bone if the senate does not quote that might be and when asked going to court for his testimony he replied, we will see. ryan rally from the "huffington post" with a photo outside today of one of the protesters day two of questions at the impeachment trial and the sign saying respect for the divine right of the president and a president trump imitator outside of the u.s. capitol. this is a look at the "politico" with her headline, senate and john roberts face possibility of at the time on witnesses. the spo

on to secure the democratic nomination i was also always throws up a surprise you'll remember rick santorum beat mitt romney and that was surprising donald trump just 4 years ago came 2nd when many people thought that there would be a lucky to finish. and so we're looking for someone who can stop last minute momentum at the moment looking at the polls it looks like it's going to be bernie sanders joe biden at the top with elizabeth warren props coming in and then you look to see who comes forward well if you are both if it be to judge what is true is the number of people who believe that they would be competing for the democratic party in the presidential election in november while their campaigns are going to finish here in iowa in the snow some time in the next 3 or 4 days of course you did touch on the subject all the impeachment that's going in washington d.c. and we want to president trump supporters there actually think about proceedings that are going on several 1000 miles away. but you have to remember the people that are here are diehard trump supporters 4 years ago when i was on t

rick santorum won back in 2012. mike huckabee won back in 2008. we should note that barack obama, if you are looking at one of these democratic candidates, barack obama did win the caucus in iowa in 2008. that was huge in signaling to the rest of the country and voters from new hampshire to south carolina that this guy has got a shot and this guy is a for-real candidate. when you look at caucus history, iowa has played no small part in choosing the nominee, yet hasn't always necessarily been the predictor in choosing the eventual president of the united states. >> all right. vaughn hillyard holding it down in des moines, iowa, on the first day of 2020. what a long year ahead it is going to be, as you well know. good talking to you. >>> hundreds of u.s. soldiers are headed to the middle east after the attack on the u.s. embassy in bagdad. up next, we'll get reaction from representative adrianna espaillat. espaillat. oh, what a relief it is! so fast! yeah. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need with liberty mutual

many of them, i'll ask rick santorum, 30%, 40%, 50% of the publics in the senate despise donald trumphey think that he is corrupt and unfit to hold office. >> do you think that's true? >> yes. and i think it is time the press rae, that we rae start talking to the principal legislating assistants, to the senators, to find out what their bosses really think. >> who cares what they really think? let's look at what they vote. >> that's right. and mcconnell knows there are four or five are waivering on these procedural questions. if one of them. particularly susan collins who reveres margaret j. smith, who took on mccarthy. >> come on. >> she's been cowardly and we have no reason to think -- >> okay. we need to get a break in. when we come back, more new polling newspapers to look at how much republicans want witnesses at the trial. [sneeze and sniffles] are you ok? yah, it's just a cold. it's not just a cold if you have high blood pressure. most cold medicines may raise blood pressure. coricidin hbp is the... ...#1 brand that gives... powerful cold relief without raising your blood pressu

rick santorum i remember in 2012 was pulling where she is now and went on to win the iowa caucus. the iowa caucus. i think the chances are likely, but she is doing her best to try to get her name out there and create a search. >> melissa: field is shrinking. julian castro dropping out. your thoughts on that? >> he wasn't getting even the surge that tulsi gabbard's, which is impressive, considering she is just a congresswoman, and he had bigger offices behind his name. he failed to build momentum, and we will see what happens. >> melissa: the interesting one to watch will be michael bloomberg. he has so much money on hand. more than $100 million in the coffers, ready to spend. you know that he is going to spend a lot, firing back. you wonder if he is a serious candidate or if he is just looking to spend against president trump. thank you so much for coming out today. we appreciate your time. thank you for joining me. i am melissa francis. i will see you on the fox business network on "after the bell." but for now, let's get to "the daily briefing" with dana perino. >> dana: fox new

fifth candidate in iowa that a lot of us think could pull this off, do the slingshot, pull the rick santorumght, where they didn't campaign anywhere else but there, and that's amy klobuchar. if she pulls that off, finishes first or second, gets that momentum, give me a sense of her operation there. is it going to be too littles too late? or could it super charge her to at least get in the top three if she pulls off an iowa upset? >> i think an iowa upset could yield klobuchar dividends in new hampshire. she's been here quite a lot. she's up on the air right now which is not true of, say, joe biden. so she's got a decent separatop here which could translate, i think, especially among former hillary clinton voters from 2016, you know, women who are in their 40s, 50s, i think they could find -- they voted for jeanne shaheen, they voted for maggie hassan, the two incumbent senators. they would find amy klobuchar a very nice fit for what they would like to see in the white house. >> look, i don't have a lot of time, but we've barely mentioned biden. you've noted he's not even advertising in new h

joining me now is charlie dent and rick santorum. happy new year. >> happy new year. >> congressman dent, let me begin with you. i understand you know susan collins quite well. let me start with you because if you listen to her words, it sounds like she's in total agreement on the witnesses part of this with mitch mcconnell. because she's saying, wait until the middle of the trial and then see who you need to call. is that how you hear it? >> yeah. it seems to me that senator collins certainly supports bringing witnesses to this trial. the only question for her is the timing and who. so i think she wants to hear all the facts and see the evidentiary record before calling some of these witnesses. but i think we all know who those witnesses will likely be. people like the chief of staff mulvaney, perhaps pompeo, blair, duffey, others. it's clear who the witnesses will be. i think she's just quibbling about the timing. >> it sounds like you think the witnesses will be called. do you? >> well, i think they -- i think there should at leas

. >> i want to ask you about something that senator rick santorum said on our air a couple of hours agolly saying that these past four or five months have been probably so trying and so unpleasant. i'm paraphrasing right now, and i hope i'm representing him correctly, that the president, he sure will have learned a lesson from this experience and, you know, this won't happen again. i mean, that's what the logic if you follow it to its end would suggest. from your reporting inside the white house, is there a feeling of contrition and that this was wrong, what happened with ukraine and he wouldn't try something like this again? >> i think it depends on who you're asking. if you're asking the president's staff, they don't think that this was appropriate. they do not like the way that all of this went down. of course, you can point to his own former national security adviser and the book he's writing about this. but as far as the president himself, he truly has not, you know, said privately, i should have said that or oh, i shouldn't have done that. and i think that's evident in the fact he

we had a point in which rick santorum and trent lott came to talk to the managers and henry height askede argument among friends, but it was pretty intense. henry hyde asked the senators to leave. we had a vote, it was 13-0 to not do the precedent that is now set and which is, i think, now appropriate given the history and the context. so, yeah, precedent is there now and i think that -- remember, back then the precedent was set by both sides, by daschle and by watt, by all the senators. it was what they decided was a fair trial. >> because they were able to come to an agreement. let me play something that alan derrish wits told me at the top of the show. do you believe donald trump abused the power of his office? yes or no. >> it's irrelevant. abuse of power is not, is not a criteria for impeachment anymore than dishonesty would be a criteria for impeachment. >> you said you sort of praised the members of president trump's legal team. do you believe it's appropriate for one of those attorneys to be able to say whether or not they do believe president trump abused power. would you be com

alleged meeting, as rick santorum points out, but let's just say there is more coming out. >> this isg all along. there is a range of republicans in the republican office who really has a problem with the way donald trump conducts business, and i believe you'll hear from them. you'll hear more statements. this is not the last republican who is going to say -- because they're going to go out after they vote and they have to defend this vote. very few are announcing beforehand. they're going to get up here in the next -- how many hours is it, 17 hours, 16 hours if they take the whole time? they're going to have to defend their vote and you're not going to hear many say this was a perfect call. you'll hear some say this was a sham, but you'll hear a lot of folks saying, i'm really concerned about what the president did, but. >> here's what's going to energize democrats. marco rubio gave a carefully crafted statement, more than most republicans did. he's going to vote against having witnesses. he's going to say, i don't need to hear more. >> it doesn't rise to the level. >> that's not goi

instead he said things different to people inside the white house had he the most problem with, like rick santorum giuliani did, and that's why he said, i recommend him for the job. >> many. >> it goes back to the things that are on both sides of the issue. people say the president is so chaotic, he doesn't mean half the things he says. it might be fitting he says these things to john bolton. two points. number one, they didn't do it. ultimately the money was released and the relationship with ukraine has been very, v y verily. republicans don't care. i think senator lang f. the steam is out of the kettle here, there's like no smoking gun to be talked about. >> the last thing they need is rudy giuliani going to the floor of the senate and described him as a bit player, as a nobody, that the democrats are trying to -- >> shiny object. >> now rudy giuliani is once again raising his hand to prove he's in the middle of all this, because he was in the middle of all this. but to senator santorum's point, what senator langford is doing, he's going to try thod in little steps. what do i have to keep it an

even rick santorum is agreeing with me shaking his head. is is about rick scott saying look at me, recognize me, i'm on the trump train. here i am, i'm a natural heir. and remember me for the next cycle. >> but should he be doing this, john, while he's a juror in the u.s. senate and we're waiting for his decision? >> in a civics or good government textbook, no. in the age we live in, not just the trump age, this is the -- i don't remember ads like this during the clinton impeachment trial but it was very political in what was said in the discourse there. no, but it's not surprising. no in the sense does it fit for a sitting senator from another state right before the caucuses. no. but because the answer is so strong no, it makes perfect sense in the age we live in where you have -- look, we talked about this yesterday. secretary pompeo attacking journalists. and then issuing statements celebrating his attack on journalists instead of saying maybe we both had a bad day, let's move on. the vice president of the united states is thinking about

"rick santorum is surging, we need to stop them and stop them now."een slow and steady but bernie is coming at the right time. >> ed: the also often say in iowa it's about peeking at the right time. john kerry did we back when. we will see who does it. i appreciate you both coming end. >> thanks, ed. >> sandra: opening arguments in the president trump impeachment trial set to begin an hour from now. we'll take you there live when it all happens.r their mortgage at these near record low rates. one call can save you $2000 every year. that's ensure max protein, t0jl0505qd with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. nexthi. oh, susan what a surprise, you're here early! you know life line screening assesses your risk of stroke and cardiovascular disease. looks like somebody should have gotten screened. life line screening is the easy and affordable way to make you aware of undetected health problems befor

it was rick santorum in 2016. that is why i voted for donald trump. endorsements matter to me.peak for those who have no --ce here and i always point vote pro-life. host: wade, you are next. caller: good morning. host: do endorsements affect you? farmer,as a endorsements from our they wille group and have an influence. you can't just consider your own business. you have to look at the country overall and what things are important to the entire nation. some endorsements have some influence. the ones in the newspaper are one persons own ideas. they don't really have an influence. mayors do. host: will you caucus on fedora third? caller: yes. host: thank you for the call. this is from kamala harris. we were with the former vice president in new hampshire on friday. he talked about the impeachment trial. --as has been written pointed out repeatedly, he is telling lies about me. i understand it better than anybody. me, been trying to smear he's can -- colluded with foreign powers to make sure -- if you're seen a president try so hard to keep someone from being the nominee? you saw i

senator rick santorum currently has the candy desk, and there is a well-known chocolate company and his state that perhaps provide some kisses for that drawer. candy for the candy desk and pat toomey currently occupying that desk. if you want to see the entire interview with richard baker, brian lamb interviewed him into thousand six, you can do it at 2006, youe at -- in can do it at our website at c-span.org. one more video clip from senator ted cruz. you can hear more about his thoughts on the trial, he announced yesterday a new podcast where he will be discussing the latest from the impeachment trial, and more as soon as he leaves the senate floor each evening, and asking his twitter subscribers to subscribe to the new podcast, "the verdict." host: that is john mcardle giving us information throughout the morning. one more, this is bobby off of twitter saying, i am lactose intolerant, hopefully the offer nondairy milk. suzanne, new hampshire on the democrats line. caller: good morning. my question to all of the republican colleagues supporting president trump and saying he is an inno

santorum. they talk about the wrangling. >> these important meetings that rick and i had, in the old senate chamberno staff or family. just 100 of us in the room. several days before the trial began in the senate. we decided we were on trial. we needed to conduct ourselves well. the world was watching how we do this. >> i feel very proud of the fact that we found a middle ground. not everything the house wanted in a trial or everything the democratic base wanted, to just not give any recognition of the house, vote it down. people say it is so contentious now. it was contentious then. but leaders were able to lead and get their caucus to go along. host: we are hearing this time it might be a partyline vote. what is the difference. mr. ritchie: there was a great sense of relief when the senate voted and the senators came up unanimously with a set of rules. they returned the dignity of the senate. the appearance of what they were doing. if you voted the party voted to remind people it is a partisan institution. senator byrd was the most concerned of any senator about the image of the u.s. senate. he s