>> but he was replaced, and his successor ken starr was far more aggressive. >> our job is to gather and get at the truth. >> expanding the inquiry way beyond whitewater. >> the investigation kind of leads in all these different directions. >> this is truly a wildly historic night. >> no one could have been happier with starr's aggressive approach than newt gingrich and the republicans. >> there's been a sea change in american politics. >> they had swept into congress in 1994. >> this is an earthquake. >> preaching the new gospel of strict orthodox conservatives. >> newt gingrich reshapes the republican party. our base wants this, we do this. we do not compromise with democrats. >> president clinton became the democrat the republicans despised the most. he was morally corrupt, thety said. >> he experimented with t. >> i experimented with marijuana a few times and didn't inhale. >> the law is the law. the law is sacred. >> meanwhile, ken starr had been digging into the clintons for more than two years, to no avail. >> are you going to be working for congress or the courts or the publi

he later based on the relationship if judge starr, then solicitor general starr, went to work for starr when he was investigating the clinton's impeachment and this was another u.ing point in brett kavanaugh's life, huge surprise to his friends because they thought it was quite a partisan choice for him. and they were even more surprised when they couldn't find the right page of their book of their speech. they were even more surprised when he win to clock for starr where he really developed this an animus towards the clintons emerge at the hearings where he talk about the desire for revenge on behalf of the clintons and that was a really amazing moment but wasn't that amazing to some of the people who had heard brett kavanaugh talk put the clintons and how corrupt they were and how much he dislike and disrespected them, back during the starr hearings, and so -- i'm missing the great piece here. so, there was brett kavanaugh, clerking for starr, and there was me, working for in the "washington post." that's how we first started speaking to each other and in the course of researching the

starr, was never out knowledge by mr. starr , nor was it acknowledge by mr. schiffer's. of them, and i am not suggesting it is intentional, affirmatively led the committee to believe the call was for the purpose of arranging for ms. currie to pick up the gifts. now we are preparing to vote on thatticle of impeachment is substantially based on that telephone call. what was the purpose of the call? we don't know. it appears that the investigators never asked. we have never had the opportunity to ask the coast we have not heard from the witnesses themselves. conduct anway to inquiry, mr. chairman. it's a disgrace and insult to the rule of law. >> with the gentleman yield to what the citation was on that? on page 1300 something. >> page 1396. >> i yield. chairman hyde: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. chairman, witnesses and defendants, witnesses who were targets of investigations and defendants in cases frequently have very clear motive to take that to either ensure adverse witnesses don't appear in cou

starr, was never acknowledged by mar. starr,nor unfortunately was acknowledged by mr. schippers. and i'm not suggesting it was intentional, affirmatively left the committee to believe the call was for the purpose of arranging for miss lewinsky to pick up the gift. now we are preparing to vote on an article of impeachment that is substantially based on that telephone call. what was the purpose of the call? we don't know. it appears that the investigators never asked and we have never had the opportunity to ask because we have not heard from the witnesses themselves. and this is no way to conduct an inquiry, mr. chairman. it's a disgrace and it's an insult to the rule of law. >> with the gentleman yield for a question of what the citation was on that? on page 1,300 something, as i recall. 1,396. i yield. >> thank you. >> gentlemen's time has again expired. gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. witnesses and defendants, witnesses who were targets of investigations and defendants in cases frequently have very clear motive to take steps to either ensure

when the starr report came out in 1998, kevin starr presented to the committee, he took questions from both sides. of that has happened here today. we should have had adam schiff here. we didn't get that opportunity. what i said in my closing is , we we are worried about are eroding the trust of people in our institutions. the people there are deeply concerned. they're not trusting the congress, the system of justice, they certainly don't trust this impeachment. we set a very dangerous precedent with this. you said at the end of the hearing you don't know what is next, what the course of action will be. would you encourage intelligence committee members on your side --that was the inclination of what nadler said they would have some sort of hearing? you bring a great question. is --here right now, there is a myth coming out. nobody knows what is going on. we are hearing there will be a judiciary presentation. we hear there is going to be an intel presentation. when adam schiff got in front of the mic and said i'm not testifying. if he's comparing himself to ken ther, why would he not b

ken starr joins us tonight.ery much for coming on. >> my pleasure, tucker. >> tucker: we thought about this more than any living american. what qualifies as a high crime or misdemeanor sufficient to impeach? how i would you rate the charges against the president now? >> i would rate the current charges as not meeting, not even coming near the term high crimes and misdemeanors. those terms are tied to treason and bribery and other high crimes, not low crimes, not a low misdemeanors.es something profoundly serious. and also something, i think history is a great teacher here, tucker, read the nixon impeachment articles. they are so powerful. he read those articles and you understand why 400 members of te house of representatives said, we've got to go through with impeachment here. read the glint in articles, muce more divisive, to be sure. when you read the articles, this is serious stuff. we don't know what the articles are going to say but what we do know is, there will be no republican support whatsoever. they w

your response on that, judge judge starr? >> i'm not surprised because the narrative was essentially baked in months ago at the beginning of the fall. you either take this with the kind of seriousness our democrat brothers and sisters are or you are saying, do i think it's the wise thing to do? is this really an abuse of pow power? as i encouraged to do, read abuse of power article in the richard nixon impeachment and you will shake your head and s say, my word, what president trump did whether you approve or disapprove with it, doesn't come close. it's not even in the ballpark. it's not in the parking lot. let me just say one word about christianity dell that "christianity today." it's a very venerable magazine. i agree with the governor that this is not going to have an impact. fears the other thing i would add to in terms of evangelical support. judges. course course such and kavanaugh.judgef sins. >> trace: i want to play this out by talking about the economy because they have to run against the economy and it's going to

let's bring in harry that men and fox news contributor ken starr.elcome to you both and i want your reaction to the news, they appear to be two impeachment articles coming out tomorrow, abuse of power and obstruction of congress. you first. >> is not unexpected. we have been on this impeachment march since late september. seems to be a 4-day and conclusion. it is very unfortunate there have not been fact hearings at all in the house judiciary committee. it really has been an intelligence committee show and the point was fair, mueller showed up, starr showed up, others who have been charged, supposedly adam should was designated to carry on this role so i think it is a fair rhetorical point. where is the author of this report? we want to talk to him but the train has left the station and it is unfortunate for the country. shannon: chairman nadler says you are not going schiff for the was alone. response to that and the prepared articles for tomorrow. >> the whistleblower you are not supposed to get the whistleblower's role is to produce information y

for ken starr to say it, well, it's ken starr. >> on that note, joe, thank you very much.ank you. >>> now to this. this massive 69-car pileup in virginia has left dozens of people hurt. miraculously when you look at your screen, no one died. that story and what you need to know if you are traveling this holiday week. next. without the lactose. so you can enjoy it even if you're sensitive. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit! a president who abuses power. and obstructs justice. the impeachment of donald j. trump. he was supposed to protect our constitution. not trample on it by asking foreign countries to undermine our democracy for his personal political gain. trump broke his oath to america. members of the house and senate must now do their constitutional duty. if you agree, sign our petition at need to impeach.com need to impeach is responsible for the content of this advertising. male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to fin

since when did he have the right when he believes as a prepared himself to ken starr. why would he not be the one and testify instead of sending one of their staffers who is getting airtime right now to do that. the chairman wouldn't even commit to i don't know it >> chad, what he is saying is that he thinks we should have intel people come in and give us their impression of all the hearsay evidence. that is insane, bring us the fact witnesses. >> he wrote the report, next. >> congressman, democrats they are arguing about the process because you can't dispute the fact that were laid out by these witnesses. what's the reaction to? that >> they do listen to my closing? i laid it out every time they're saying what was amazing to me, is that they set up and in their opening statement and most every clip they gave us were opening statements. sondland, who is there and said in the very room that i presume it was and i guess it was. the problem was, it's okay and that's going at their side and will present our side but when you talk about facts being undisputed, these are und

. >>> coming up next, my interview with ken starr himself. we talk impeachment and whether a sitting president can be indicted. >>> later, what elizabeth warren is saying about her vision for 2020 and breaking up big tech. >>> then, when we get to the ending of this hour, we're going to have some of our very favorite moments from lee daniels, annie lennox and more. plus some lighter moments from "the beat" coming up. e lighter m "the beat" coming up with this key to the city. [ applause ] it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. and now we need to get back to work. [ applause and band playing ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ $12.99 all you can eat ♪ now with boneless wings. only at applebee's. in america, the zip code you're born in can determine your future. but no matter what neighborhood you grow up in, the y creates opportunities for all. for a better us, donate to your local y today. for a better us, actions speak louder than words.

tonight ken starr said the president's right to refuse to participate in the next phase of impeachment. here is here to explain this moment, you left wing crazies going nuts about this all day long. plus disgraceful lisa page granted her first interview to the media. and she wants you to feel sorry for her. do you? john solomon here to explain why you shouldn't. and also respond to a breaking statement from the doj that just drop moments ago about michael horowitz's ig report coming out. plus joe biden's no more malarkey bus tour. famous thing? a few potholes hit along the way, and i'll grow we can governor mike huckabee walks us through some of the dips in the pavement, but first, impeaching to the choir. that is the focus of tonight's angle. now for as long as i can remember, democrats have claimed a vigorous support for international alliances. and since comp took field of office they warned his americans first approach would isolate them and do more irreparable harm to nato. >> for single consequential life or the united states. >> vladimir putin number one goal to divide the west

my interview with ken starr himself. later, what elizabeth warren is saying about her vision for 2020 and breaking up big tech. then when we get to the end of the hour we'll have some of our very favorite moments from our maverick series. plus, some lighter moments from "the beat" coming up. ne. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com if you have moderate to severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression.

starr and mr. gentleja had to do. they were prosecutors and had witnesses that were not in the public. and of course they had firsthand witnesses who heard the call and testified not on any secondhand knowledge but firsthand knowledge. it is clear that we're dealing with a question of a continuing threat which is why we have to respond. let me be very clear, i hold in my hands that unclassified transcript. i beg to differ with my friends. allow me just for a moment to tell you that in the call president zelensky said these sentences. i would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. we're trying to continue to cooperate for the next steps, specifically, we want to be ready to buy javelins. that's equipment, military equipment, from the united states for defense purposes. ukraine's in the midst of a war against a nation that shot down at least some of those alleged to be separatists using russian weapons a commercial airliner. this is a serious war where our men and women in the military are

justice rehnquist called up kenneth starr and said i have this young man, importantly do more government service before becoming a private practitioner and the rest is history. >> host: i was curious if you could describe what his chambers are like. the justice's chambers are often a reflection of who they are, what their interest has been and going to justice ginsburg's chambers, there is opera playing in the background, with southwestern roots. >> he has large chambers as chief, a couple different sitting rooms. there is a notre dame football, grow up in northern indiana and don't end up and harvard you end up in notre dame. he has always been a notre dame football fan, actually a couple different coaches at the time. landscaped from indiana and maine where they have a vacation home. he has pictures of himself with william rehnquist but also a picture of henry friendly who was us court of appeals for the second circuit judge he first worked with who he had high regard for, pictures of his children, bound law books are there. you can see different parts of his life play out, but the one

ken starr joins us tonight.hank you so much for coming on. >> my pleasure, tucker. >> tucker: this is a subject you thought about more than any living american, what qualifies as a high crime and misdemeanor sufficient to impeach? how would you rate the charges against the president now? >> i would rate the current charges as not even coming near the term high crimes and misdemeanors. those terms are tied to treason and bribery. other high crimes, not low crimes, low disk meters misdemeanors,something profound. history is a great teacher, read the nixon impeachment articles. they are so powerful. you read those articles and understand why 400 members of the house where preventatives said we've got to go through with impeachment here. read the clinton articles bit much more divisive for sure. when you read those articles, you go, this is serious stuff but we don't know what the articles are going to say but we do know that there'll be no republican support whatsoever. there'll be some democratic slippage as well,

ken starr showed up.o have been charged with the supposedly adam schiff loans designated to carry on this role. i think it's a fair rhetorical point. where is the author of this report? we want to talk to him. in any event, the train has left the station and it's very unfortunate for the country. >> shannon: chairman nadler says you're not getting schiff and the whistle-blower. your response to that? >> the whistle-blower you're not supposed to get. their role was to always produce information. in terms of schiff, i think you'll be the prosecutor in the senate. unlike the situation with judge darr where -- his evidence has been collected. i think the country all saw the actual witnesses testify over the last couple of weeks. in terms of the counts, it's interesting what is noteworthy is they have decided not to bring a specific grabber account. not to get in that argument. the abuse count sounds like will be broader and encompass some of the abuse that the mueller report can basically within a centimeter

robert mueller testified that ken starr report ken starr testified. the author of the schiff report is not here. instead he is sending his staff to do his job for him. i guess that's what you get when you are making up impeachment as you go. there will be plenty of time to discuss the factual case for this and the statements that haven't been made. what is detrimental is this. this committee is not hearing from a factual witness or not doing anything past hearing past law school professors and staff. the chairman said something about the president not being able to come. show me where he would have a proper process in this not talking to law school professors and staff instead of witnesses called by both sides. i want to say this in the ending. i love this institution. i was here as a 19-year-old kid as an intern almost 32 years ago. this situation as we see it today is in danger. we see chairmen who are issuing subpoenas for personal vendettas. we see committees such as the judiciary committee that has held many substantive hearings and the center po

starr and mr. droowsky had to do, they were prosecutors, witnesses not in the public and then, of course, there were full public hearings, 17 witnesses, firsthand witnesses, who heard the call and testified not on any secondhand knowledge, but firsthand knowledge. it is clear that we're dealing with a question of a continuing threat, which is why we have to respond. let me be clear, i hold in my hands theol unclassified transcript. i beg to differ with my friends. lou for me a moment to tell you in the call, president zelensky said these sentences. i would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. we're trying to continue to cooperate for the next steps, specifically, we also want to be ready to buy javelins. that's equipment, military equipment from the united states for defense purposes. ukraine is in the midstrp of a war, against a nation that shot down at least some of those alleged to be separatists using commercial weapons, an airliner. this is w a serious war wher

report came out. >> there is no starr report.. after the schiff repor. a moment in time. it went so bad for doug collins, the ranking member today, that the governor made a movie about him donating to the seat that the president won, that is how badly they looked at the hearing. it's amazing. >> laura: nobody's going to follow that. let me tell you what some of those in the democratic party are saying about getting back to the look of this spectacle today. watch. >> what subliminal message are we sendingwa to the world when e have experts but not one person of color. are we saying that there are no people of color? >> laura: that is what al sharpton was saying about the next democratic debate. no person of color about the debate. he said, we played that last night on the show, now agreeing, saying this about the hearing today. >> let me first say this, the point about doug collins was idiotic for that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. but for me to give advice to democrats, identity politics, i warned them a long time ago o

kenneth starr did all of the grunt work in putting together the facts. he sent over 36 boxes which were put over into the ford building. that's not happened here. the independent counsel that was appointed to look into what president trump has done, mr. mueller came and testified and that ended up being a a big fizzle, you know, for what the democrats wanted to do. so, much of the mueller stuff after his testimony and the cross-examination by members on both sides of the aisle ended up disappearing into outer space. have to find something else. now let me say that everybody on both ends of the telephone call between president trump and president zelensky has said very clearly there was no quid pro quo offered. there was no pressure that was put on the ukrainians. i don't know how many times president zelensky has had to say that. apparently it's not enough because minds on the other side of the aisle are closed. but that's what the facts are. and the facts, you know, speak for themselves. there was no impeachable offense here. that's why article i of the

. >> well, in the clinton era, this day was the day that ken starr presented the evidence of the stare nixon period this didn't happen. in the nixon perioddoor, the counsel for the committee a republican, they had a bipartisan committee, he gave over six weeks, he laid out the evidence, did not argue for or against impeachment, the point was that the members of the judiciary committee, each was a juror and had to assess the material on their own, behind closed doors, the public did not hear the materials. they would learn the materials later. so in the nixon case this was done behind the scenes. in the clinton case this was very public, very much like what we're going to see today. lasted a whole day. and ken starr presented his evidence and then both sides of the committee had an opportunity to question him and then the president's attorney, david kendall, questioned ken starr and, of course, today the president will not be represented by his own choice. >> it's interesting, dana, you've covered capitol hill for a long time, the republicans complain that it's been totally unfair, the

in fact kevin starr referred to him as mr. everything. i can tell you one setback that ended up being reversed in the end is when he was nominated by george h. w. bush to the district of columbia u.s. appeals court, the u.s. court of appeals from the dc circuit as it is known back in 1992 when he was very young. only about 37 i believe and he didn't get on because the democrats controlled the senate at the time, but arguably if he had gotten on them in 1992, he wouldn't be sitting at the supreme court now because he would have had so much of a record that might have been detected and so those were the few instances folks mentioned. you situated us where he was one of four children, the only boy with three sisters. he had his father's name, john roberts junior. he looked up to his father who was a steal at industry executives that have high hopes for himself. the speech marcia referred to was filled with the idea you should have setbacks to continue to be persistent but his setbacks were not major. >> maybe it was kenneth starr in your boo

he was a smart young lawyer working for ken starr. i was less young writer whose legal analyses of the star report ends up in the impeachment proceedings and the star moment was another one of those real turning point for brett kavanaugh. law school his friends had this understanding that he was a guy that was conservative and probably republican but he wasn't a standout conservative on the campus. in fact he was a first year law student that fall when the bork nomination was being debate -- debated and no one could remember him discussing a view on that. after all judge bork was a professor at yale law school and so he was a good solid law student, not a law student that any of us thought was going to end up on the supreme court wednesday. then an amazing piece of luck came his way. been clerking that the republican pointed judge in delaware the third circuit and an opportunity arose that changed his life. there are some judges who are feeder judges who regularly send clerks to the supreme court. judge stapleton was not a feeder judg

straight to our pentagon correspondent barbara starr. what are you hearing? >> reporter: good afternoon, brooke. pentagon is seriously considering sending thousands of additional troops to the middle east as further additional deterrence against potential iranian provocations. the range they're looking at an additional 4,000 to 7,000 u.s. troops mostly devoted to air defense. that is because iran recently has moved a number of ballistic missiles into iraq, could pose a threat to u.s. troops in iraq and to saudi arabia, iran moving all of this into iraq and iran also stepping up its rocket attacks. the pentagon has pushed back since last night against several reports that it's looking at sending up to 14,000 troops to the region. we're told that is not what they're looking at. it's much more in the range, 4,000 to 7,000 troops to the middle east. further deterrence against iran. no firm decision has been made yet. brooke? >> got it. barbara, thank you very much. >>> from the pentagon to the halls of congress and the west. anticipation and speculation what happ

barbara starr has more information. barbara, what are we learning?john, we are being told by several officials that the suspected shooter in the incident in pensacola was a member of the saudi military. this is a person who was at pensacola most likely for training, because that is what happens there, but several u.s. officials are now saying it was a member of the saudi military that was the suspected shooter. law enforcement and the u.s. military continuing the investigation, trying to get as much as they can about all of this. one investigator telling our david shortell they just don't know if it was terrorist related at this point. they're looking into, obviously, all motives as they would in any investigation like this. cnn has reached out to the saudi embassy here in washington but has not yet heard back from them. obviously this will be -- besides being a terrible tragedy for the families involved in all of this, it will be a very sensitive diplomatic issue between the united states and the saudis for any number of reasons, the least of which

as he had to and didn't say this is illegitimate but he certainly thought kenneth starr investigatingthat matter was illegitimate a bit but he didn't feel he had the constitutional ability or public ability to just say, well i think it's a fraud and a hoax and i'm not going to do i . maybe privately, but not publicly. >> so much of our constitution is built on some monochrome of good faith by the president and the actors in congress. not this level of constitutional shamelessness we are seeing. he doesn't care about the legacy he's creating. all he cares about is right now and himself. >> one of the things that both nixon and clinton had was they were worried about their own party. that you know people would turn on them to cause astampede . obviously, one of the things that's been a game but is playing out is how with those impeachments have played out in fox news and internet and twitter and everything that creates the environment we have now. even before they knew what the mother report with a and has been reluctant up until then. but when this came down, it was very little hesitat

>> adam schiff did not act as a special counsel as ken starr did. >> there was no special counsel in in case. >> there was no special counsel. that is right. that is the key distinction. but here is the important point. what matters here is not the debate back and forth about whether adam schiff should testify or whether the republicans were somehow surprised by the witnesses. what matters here are the facts and the law. and again, as a prosecutor, what i'm going to argue to the jury is facts and law. the testimony over the past couple of weeks corroborates what the president himself said in the july 25th conversation. those dedicated patriots and professionals like tailer and hill who came before the committee. the american people should base their judgment on what they saw. >> very quickly, if it does come down to a trial and the senate and impeached in the house, do you see any evidence at this point that would lead you to acquit? >> i want to see what the president has to say. if they -- if there is any evidence to acquit. so far he has refused -- absolutely refused to come forwa

wants to be known as a human rights advocate mentor and entrepreneur so we're pleased to welcome rob starr also known as robin shah to the stream it's good to have you here thank you for having me i want to dip right into headlines about the neighborhood you grew up in because this is how they're often portrayed i'll share a few this. 21000 this is november several people were in the sheltered villa and. another person this from 2018 this is a tweet of an independent article visited some of the worst areas including momos rose the guard where children as young as 14 roam the streets with kalashnikovs and one other this from the local sweden man injured in a shooting there was likely shot in the leg police have said so this is how it's portrayed this is how another resident of malmo the city where that neighborhood is located in least someone who worked with a musician himself says bad things happen all around the world it's no different here but blaming it all on one neighborhood that's where the media gets it wrong so tell us about the place you grew up in and what would you like to see w

joining me now former independent counsel ken starr, harvard law professor alan dershowitz.ood to see you both. professor -- by the way, i read the book. i don't want to go up against you in court. either one of you, i will be very blunt. great read. here's what i want to ask you, they didn't call ken starr and alan dershowitz up there to be ivory tower trump haters, one of which actually wanted to impeach trump because he tweeted out the words "fake" and "news." they want to impeach him for that. there is only one fact witness that i saw in his testimony was exculpatory. i want nothing, no quid pro quo. >> look, the most important development happened today. the supreme court of the united states absolutely pulled the rug out of part two of the impeachment referral by granting review in a case where trump challenged a congressional subpoena, and the supreme court said, we are going to hear this case. all three cases, by the way. but think of what that message is. it's trump was right. you don't have to comply with a subpoena of congress unless the court tells you you have t

the ken starr report, ken starr testified. the author of the schiff report is not here. >> has s any committee heard frm the whistle-blower? either in closed-door hearings or open hearings? chairman schiff states he called the whistle-blower to testify. >> he did. he hase not. >> laura: we know the whistle-blower's political motivation is obvious, but the very fact that he went to schiff, initially, that first decision. but today, schiff put on the big act, channeling the founders, and pretending to be the great protector of the constitution. >> the framers of the constitution recognized that some day, a president might come to office who would abuse their office, and they prescribed a remedy, and that remedy is impeachment. the argument, why don't you just wait? amounts to this. why don't you just let him cheat and one more election? >> laura: by the way, look at the faces, those are the faces of defeat, morning, noon, and night. it's also easy to argue, i think, that speaker pelosi is also guilty of abuse of power. this sham

. >> any shoe worn byringo starr -- >> good by you >> tony romo. >> he has a good brand thing. >> joetana, any of the other spokespeople they've had. >> i like my skechers. they feel like skateborder shoes. >> you wear them >> i have a pair of black and bhiet o white ones. >> i bought these for my dad because of the ringo starr ad. they look cool what they're doing is going for value. they're not going for some big athletic sponsorship you mentioned tony romo, of course it is not like lebron is wearing skechers, which would cost them a lot of money they don't need to because kids are buying them and older people wear them, as well two sweet spots right there. >> shoes, by far, are the most interesting fashion accessory right now. >> i don't tell just right now but for years they've been that way. >> i think we're witnessing this explosion in the interest of fashionable shoes, both on the high end and the low end. >> one of the hottest stores in my town is a store called 908. not a plug for them, but they have these collectible sneakers. they're jump man jordans, nikes, skechers, so on

ken starr had begun to investigate the whitewater investment deal back in 1994.

he thought that was okay that starr did that. the fbi's were a sham. >> i think our nation was turned on its head for three years, i think, based on a completely bonus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by an irresponsible press. >> bogus narrative. can it be that the ag actually doesn't think russia should be singled out? the answer? yup. keep in mind, of the four people investigated by the fbi, pop p papadopoulos, carter page, paul manafort, michael flynn, three now convicted fellens. the ag seems to argue that foreign money is just fine, the new normal. >> and in today's world, presidential campaigns are frequently in contact with foreign persons. and indeed in most campaigns there are signs of illegal foreign money coming in. >> first of all, if it's illegal, it's wrong, it's not okay. and then his agency successfully prosecuted paul manafort for his foreign money. right now they're actively investigating rudy giuliani for his potential contact with wrong foreign money and connection to the trump campaign in the same

the fact situation, leading up situation with ken starr, totally different than now. >> how long, in addition to asking for these four witnesses and documents, you lay out a timeline. how long do you envision this lasting total? >> the bottom line, i'm not going to set an amount of time. we don't want it dilatory. we want it fair and speedy. we should have the facts come out. it shouldn't be rushed sort of truncated to avoid facts from coming out but it shouldn't be prolonged any longer than it has to be. >> you have five democratic senators running for president. how do you intend to protect them? >> what i've said. this is a solemn and serious obligation that the constitution imposes on us. their schedules are of much less importance. we should do what's right for the trial and they should be there. >> even if it means missing a debate in iowa. >> one isn't close to the other. >> tough cookies. >> one isn't close to the others. >> the white house has responded this morning in real time to your letter, an official hang on, an official involved in the matter says, they will review yo

below our barbara starr you're watching al-jazeera live from london also coming up stock markets around the world take on not because president trump reimpose is tariffs on metal imports from brazil and argentina power wrongly makes vaccine helped cause a measles outbreak in samoa which has now killed more than 50 children and tens of thousands evacuated and business is boarded up as a powerful typhoon slams into the philippines. thank you for joining us police in the democratic republic of congo say 4 people were killed on monday during protests in the eastern town of benny 3 protesters and one policeman gunfire was heard as civilians marched on a un peacekeeping base in the area the congolese army has been deployed to block them from getting close but locals are protesting against what they feel is a lack of protection from the un after a recent spate of attacks by all and rebel groups at least 100 people were killed in november and the on the democratic forces militia has been blamed for much of the violence well the army has issued an appeal for locals to avoid protesting because it

alone barbara starr you're watching al-jazeera life from that also coming up. on police used pepper spray on protesters who stormed a shopping mall near mainland china mother is in turkey call for the return of their children who they say were forcibly recruited to fight for the p.k. k. and why america's growing appetite for avocados as made its growers a target for mexico's criminal gangs. hello thank you for joining us a massive truck bomb has exploded in a busy area of mogadishu killing at least 79 people in somalia as that latest attack in 2 years the somali information ministry says 149 others were injured and the death toll is expected to rise had him with us has more now from nairobi in neighboring kenya. the attack was carried out joining morning rush hour as many people going to work and university students heading to campus the bombs exploded at a security checkpoint used by many coming into mogadishu yet again that eyes were the ones who got a truck loaded with explosives was needed at a busy checkpoint the. explosion lead to many deaths and injuries

barbara starr is at the pentagon.if any of the wounded or killed are service members yet? i know the information is coming in slowly. >> we do not know that at this time. on these large military bases, a number -- large numbers of people go in and out of the gate every single day. contractors. people who perform services on board the base. thousands of family members perhaps. this is part of the problem for the u.s. military. thousands of people have legitimate access to military bases around the country. they have very strong security measures, but they are simply not able to search every vehicle, every person coming in and out. it can be tens of thousands at one base alone and search them for illegal weapons or contraband. the military has struggled with this problem for years. we saw the shooting several years ago at ft. hood in texas. 13 people were killed there. a mass shooting right near washington at the navy yard. chattanooga, tennessee, pearl harbor earlier this week. and now this. and so where are we? the gu

all done, it's over.ss >> sean: i agree, but ken starr, i will ask you because every other presidentas used the issue of executive privilege. i thought they would lose that hands down, and i think professor dershowitz is right, but when there is a conflict between the executive branch and the legislative branch, and one seeks remedy in the judicial branch, that would be our system of coequal branches of government, actually, they are o there to resolve such conflicts. are they not? >> exactly right. that is precisely what happened, sean, as you know, in the clinton impeachment. there were a number of instances when president clinton through his very able lawyers invoked executive privilege. that is fair, it is a constitutionally based privilege recognized by unanimous supreme court during the nixon impeachmentge process. or investigative process. so it's very important in our separation of power system, for the judiciary branch, the article three branch, to be able to do its work. when the article one branch, congress, is exercising its authority, and so is the article two branch, th

starr to have an independent process of investigation. the congress was not privy to any of that investigation. at all. they proceeded, they were not interfered with, as mr. mueller was by the d.o.j. because he was an employee of the department of justice and his employer, his boss, came out and characterized his report before he could even discuss it. in the instance of the proceedings of 1998, the congress received a report just as both our friends on the other side of the aisle and we in the majority received reports from the impeachment inquiry committees who were investigatory committees. they did their work, yes, in a classified setting as i imagine both mr. starr and mr. jere os key had to do. they were like prosecutors. had witnesses that were not in the public. and then, of course, there were full public hearings, 17 witnesses, firsthand witnesses who heard the call and testified not on any second hand knowledge but firsthand knowledge. it is clear we're dealing with a question of a continuing threat which is why we have to respo