word "truths" or "truth." and it's certainly important for us in the 21st century to try to understand what america's founding fathers meant by the concept truth. and i would argue that in many ways, it's hard for us to understand what they meant by the concept truth because in our world today, in our post modern 21st century academic world, we have discarded the concept of truth. the oxford dictionary recently said that -- that the word "post-truth" as we live in a post-truth society was i believe it's 2016 word of the year. so for us, we live in a post-truth world apparently. but that was not true for america's founding fathers. they believed that the concept truth meant that there are in fact capital t truths which means truths that first and most importantly in terms of a definition connect to reality. a truth is a concept that has to connect in some fundamental objective way to reality. and these truths, the characteristics of the concept truth would be that they are absolute, certain, universal and timel

in order to find out the truth. same thing true with the other witnesses that were not permitted to testify in the house. mr. mulvaney has direct knowledge of the president's participation, he has made some statements in the public that seem to cooperate the house manager's case. but let's hear him under oath subject to cross-examination to find out the truth. under the constitution, the senate is the body that conducts the trial. we have some guidance from the supreme court in the nixon case as to what we need to do to carry out the constitutional responsibly. but to have a trial, you need to hear from witnesses, you need to see the documents. under senate presidents, the senate is not bound by the record established in the house to the contrary the senate has its own responsibility to develop its own record and not with the house has presented to it. so under all of the circumstances, in order to be able to have a fair trial to reach a conclusion, it is absolutely essential that we allow the witnesses to testify i

the question is do they want to hear the truth or do they want to hide the truth? >> thank you, leader schumer. to me the bottom line is the president's allies have run out of real estate for putting up there we do not we need witnesses sign. if you look at what we heard yesterday, for example, one of the president's lawyers early on, miss raskin, said the president had been done in by hearsay. there was nobody with firsthand information. evidently the president's lawyers believe that senators are incapable of reading a newspaper or watching the news about mister bolton's book which apparently says the president made very clear the link between security assistance and investigating biden in the 2016 election interference. the president has been tweeting these news reports that bolton is wrong. i say there is some good news in that. it can all be cleared up by hearing from the witnesses directly. by this raskin's logic, senators need to hear from people who talked directly to the president, the answer is to get testimony, testimony from people who know firsthand and

we believe in the truth. the truth matters, right matters, the plain truth. it takes the case further for witnesses and documents, granular discussion of the white house meeting. the infamous meeting where bolton said to fiona hill, and the chief cook and bottle washer in this whole horrible scheme, this whole evil scheme, mick mullaney -- mulvaney. he said you and sondland are part of it, i'm not part of it. why can't we hear from mulvaney? he knew exactly what trump did, exactly what trump's motivations were, and who else was in on the deal. there seem to be many of them. it was incredible. one more thing stood out. the managers were anticipating the counterarguments from the president's council. they wanted to go forward. they did an excellent job showing how the president doesn't need to have committed a criminal offense to be impeached and removed from office reflecting on what impeachment meant to our founding fathers. representative garcia explained how the president's insinuations about the bidens are baseless, anticipating the president's lawyers wil

institutions, because the truth, not the president, the truth is on trial here.er you believe the president should or shouldn't be impeached is dependent on what you believe the truth of the underlying facts are. and about that, we have heard many lies this week. jay sekulow, trump's other tv lawyer, said while standing feet from the chief justice of the supreme court, he said that republican members of congress were not allowed into the sensitive compartmentalized area, where the documents were reviewed by members of congress. that was a lie. they were allowed in. several of them went in and reviewed the documents. a lie that is yet more to the point was issued by the white house counsel, pat cipollone who said trump's legal team was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses. it took house judiciary committee jerry nadler, who is an impeachment manager, just seconds to lie that waste, pointing out a fact that we all know that he sent a letter to cipollone in november inviting trump or his representative to participate in the proceedings. an invitation that was

you want to get the truth? presidents lawyers proved today if you really want the truth, you want witnesses, you want documents. we help our republican colleagues will agree with that. >> what is your of off confidence at this time? that you will find them to be conjoined and introduced with evidence? what you say people like the delay that would be caused -- >> i say to my colleagues that this is the truth. we want truth. that's what we are pursuing. we don't know what the outcome will be but we want truth. it's a hard road to get republicans because of the enormous pressure they might feel. but if you keep from what i have learned through all my years in politics in all my years in life, if you are right you keep fighting for the truth, you will prevail. we would be derelict in our responsibility if we didn't. do i think it's easy to get for republicans? absolutely not. do i think we have a chance if we keep pushing and pushing and after today, maybe even a little more so? because of the case was made inadver

we will live with the fact, with the truth and let the chips fall where they may. it is certainly in their interest and the president's interest that we have a fair trial. a trial without truth, without evidence, without witnesses and documents would render the president's acquittal meaningless. because the trial was so rigged in his favor. >> i don't know if there is such a thing as a grunt old former employee but donald trump has plenty of disgruntled former employees. it seems to be the genesis of a lot of tweets. john kelly, john bolton, listen to what they said yesterday when they talked about the john bolton manuscript which they never ever really conceded they received at a certain date. it will contain top-secret information and couldn't be released to the american public. excuse me if i am suspicious, the john bolton manuscript is in the same desk drawer as the president's tax returns. and 7 irs audit, he is going through security audit that i'm sure will not be completed until after this trial is over. now we have john bolton's professed decision the pres

they talk about speaking truth to power but they don't want to speak truth to the present power. there is nothing wrong with the accommodation if you are honest about it don't lie to yourself. when you are a cheerleader and a bootlegger. >> but i do want to ask you first of all already defining the radical king. with the actual records to pull out obscure passages. >> when my dear's sister who is legendary's coretta scott king. and they brought in the statue of brother martin. before the king holiday and informing members of congress. and sit on the first date and said i bet you never met a black socialist have you? >> and to teach sociology at morehouse. but also norman thomas. the bravest man i have ever met. and in 19 oh five. and you turn down the big church. and to become socialist and so many offices and in the history of john brown. and fundamentally committed that's not as much as benjamin mae was. that he is a part of who i am. >> you allude to this but i find it fascinating that when they are dating and said passage that my sources gave me a little bit more detail. but

i say that this is truth. we want to truth. that is what we are pursuing.e don't know what the outcome will be but we want truth. and it is hard to get for republicans because of the unknown especially my pill. but if you keep what i have learned through all my years in politics, and in life, if you keep fighting for the truth, and you are right you will prevail. we would be derelict in our responsibility if we did it. we do not fight for the truth. do i think it is easy to get for republicans, absolutely not. do i think we have a chance if we keep pushing and pushing and after today maybe even a little more so, because of the case that was made inadvertently by the presence of managers. yes, i do. in terms of length of time, i think a red herring when you have a subpoena, signed by the chief justice, recorded by both parties and in the constitution, i don't think that any court is either going to not honor that subpoena and i think it will happen very fast. >> why did the house fight for this. what were there concerns. >> they made it very clear. they cite

the truth. never before has a president been put himself above the law and hid the facts of his offenses from the american people like this one. we cannot let this president the difference. quite simply, the stakes are too high. second, as this bill on what we have been arguing, the senate requires and should want a complete evidentiary record before you go and vote on the most sacred task the constitution entrusts in every single one of you. i can respect that some of you have the police that the removal of this president would be divisive. others, you may believe that allowing this president to remain in the oval office would be catastrophic to our republic and our democracy but regardless of where you are , regardless of where you land on the spectrum, you should want a full and complete record before you make a final decision and to understand the full story, it should not be about party affiliation, it should be about seeing all the evidence and voting your conscience, based on all the rele

truth? at this point how can senate republicans not vote for the witnesses and documents we are seeking? the president flatly denies ambassador bolton's account. maybe my republican colleagues will grasp that the president's denial is a reason we don't need to hear from bolton, let me repeat, president trump and ambassador bolton diametrically opposed things. only one of them is willing to testify under oath. who do you believe? went only bolton is willing to testify under oath and trump isn't, who is right? who do we think is right? who do most republicans think is right in their minds? another response we've heard is that senate republicans and the president's lawyers may respond to our requests for relevant witnesses with the request for hunter biden to testify. of course, what can hunter biden tell us about the president's conduct with ukraine? what can hunter biden tell us about the president's obstruction of congress? nothing obviously. the bottom line is very simple. they are always l

the truth. so as i said, weeks ago, i said democrats want an agreement on witnesses and documents up front because of republicans punted the decision to the end of the trial they will claim it would take too long and democrats are trying to drag it out and that is just what is happening. but the republican argument is wrong. it won't take too long. if my republican colleagues vote with us to subpoena relevant witnesses and documents there is no reason for a protracted trial. the four sets of documents we requested have already been collected. they are sitting in boxes at the white house, the state department, omb and the pentagon. mister bolton has already said he would testify. there is no reason for delays if the senate summons bolton, mick mulvaney, blair and duffey. they were each deposing one day in the clinton trial. of the u.s. senate issues a bipartisan subpoena signed by the chief justice, any lawyer would advise the client to comply. of someone like mick mulvaney refuse we would make a

the truth matters the manner in which what i described was fabricated truth has taken over and that's become part of today's contemporary international political debate what i mean by fabricated truth is that people decide for strategic or selfish reasons to tell lies the lies are repeated and they gain so much public credibility that anyone who tries to challenge untruths themselves end up being targeted and vilified never more relevant than today arguably with all the accusations flying around about boris johnson and of course donald trump president the country where you are right now but when you talk about the media and the media frenzy what does it say about the idea of balance in the media given that some may find it disturbing that your vindication in multiple inquiries only came much later when you were in the middle of it you seemed utterly powerless wrote the difficulty was journalists became so excited and attached to scandal stories that they lost the interest in archie investigation the truth they became personally invested in simply promoting the now shift that they thou

we are seeking the truth, the american people want the truth. we would be derelict in our responsibility that we didn't ask for these votes. this is the only time we are guaranteed a vote on witnesses and documents. we would not be doing our job if we didn't try to make this trial fair and we will continue to do it and it will determine in my judgment how people vote, their conscience and knowledge if the american people realize we are right. >> are you concerned the managers are too partisan like brett nadler saying the gop was involved in a cover-up? >> what i said here i believe, that the arguments of the house managers were overwhelmingly on the merits, on the fact. the argument of the president's lawyers were like fox news, a lot of finger-pointing at nothing to do with the actual facts. i thought about this as i was listening. of this was an actual trial after those arguments i would be certain that the president's managers would prevail in the president would be convicted because when you sit in a jury box your hearing the actual facts an

he loved the truth. he loved justice. i love truth. i love justice and truth . in selecting great james baldwin. he went to church but he almost had to leave the church in order to bring the gospel. because the churches were just too narrow and cowardly. to accommodating. and then he said, and we know history is something which is always the history of the present prince of the best in the present are always intertwined. the third dimension of the future is always is the object of our vision mediated through our understanding. in our actions. that is a great speech that martin k. thank god he had the courage to give it. host: because of the speech with a refrain about being dissatisfied. so the ark of the speech itself, is to get to devoid is what he calls divine dissatisfaction. cornel west: yes. host: but then a refrain let us not be satisfied, let us be dissatisfied until every man can happen in freedom and have human dignity for his. cornel west: you can see how that in and of itself, is a message in the age of obama, where you have intellectuals who have be

the exact reverse of the truth. as manager schiff started this out, the truth continues to come out. again, in an article today, more information. the truth will come out. and it's continuing to. the question here before this body, is what do you want your do you want your place in history to be let's hear the truth, or that we don't want to hear it? >> given our time constraints we will now summarize the reasons why mr.mulvey, mr. duffey and mr. blair are also important. let's turn first to mr. mulvaney. to begin with, mr. mulvaney participated in meetings and discussions with president trump at every single stage of this scheme. we just talked about motive and intent. well if you want further insight into the president's motives or intent, further direct evidence of why he withheld the military aid in the white house meeting, you should call his acting chief of staff, who had more access than anyone. mr. mulvaney is important because the president's counsel continues to argue just hearsay and speculation. faced wi

the truth, the truth will eventually come out. we could vote to see the truth in this trial or it could come out in a few weeks or a few months and on that day every republican who voted to hide the truth in an impeachment trial of the president will have to answer for it. >> since the news first broke about the call to pressure the ukrainian president to investigate his political rival democrats have made very clear we need to approach this fairly, transparently and in a way that allows all the facts to come out. we didn't want to be in this position, no one does but the severity of the potential violations became clear, we insisted the investigation and trial uphold american values that we and our constituents hold dear. trials should have evidence and witnesses, no one is above the law and every public servant's first loyalty should be to the people of this country, not a political party or figure. what we have seen from our republican colleagues has strayed dangerously far from these very basic principles. they stuck their hea

they need to know the truth, they deserve the truth. accountability in a democracy is fundamental. >> jim clapper, john brennan, two names that appear throughout the book. we had to read and watch their roles in all of this. can they be prosecuted? is that a live wire? should they be cute you >> guest: it is possible and that is white is very significant and important that william barr several months ago launched an official department of justice investigation and appointed us attorney from connecticut john durham who is well-versed in corruption at the fbi and cia, prosecuted and put behind bars people who have engaged in lawless acts in those agencies. as i write in the book, inventing ally is easy, spreading ally is easier, uncovering the truth is hard because the truth has its end and it will take time to unravel all of the lawlessness and corrupt acts involved in the witchhunt. but i have confidence in william barr and john durham. the inspector general's report will be very important but they are not waiting for the ig report. the

truth. to come out of the trial. if you want the truth, you have ten witnesses. you have to have documents, who asked ever heard of a trial without witnesses and documents. i am pleased that some of my republican colleagues are now beginning to come around to our position. and when i first wrote to leader mcconnell, three weeks ago and asked him for witnesses and documents, hitting paint much attention. his goal my judgment at the.was to sing would bring about resolution to dismiss all of the proceedings. but he couldn't doll it, because not only when nipsey pelosi get the weight of american had a dismissal without any documents or witnesses. i would not sit well with them. sourcing going to happen opportunity to see where my republican colleagues really stand on the questionre of witnesses and testifying and documents being added. the president and the american people, deserve nothing less than a fearful and honest process. >> thank you very much senator schumer. i might just touch on both

they'd so you go right ahead get at the truth get witnesses get documents in fact over the at the no point over the last few months have i heard a single solitary argument on the merits of why witnesses and documents should not be part of the trial. no republicans explained why less evidence is better than more evidence nevertheless leader mcconnell is poised to ask the senate to begin the 1st impeachment trial of a president in history without witnesses that rushes through the arguments as quickly as possible that in ways both shameless and subtle will conceal the truth the truth from the american people leader mcconnell claim that the house has run had ran the most rushed least storrow and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history the truth is leader mcconnell is plotting the most rushed least storrow and most unfair impeachment trial in modern history and it begins today the senate has before a very straightforward question the president is accused of coercing a foreign power to interfere in our elections to help himself it's the job of the senate to determine if these ver

that in ways both shameless and subtle will conceal the truth, the truth from the american people. leader mcconnell claimed the house had ran the most rush, patient inquiry in modern history. the truth is leader mcconnell is plotting the most rushed, lease thorough and most unfair impeachment trial in modern history. and it begins today. the senate has before it very straightforward questions. the president is accused of the coercing a foreign power to interfere in our elections, to help himself. it's the job of the senate to determine if these very serious charges are true. the very least we can do is examine the facts, review the documents, here the witnesses, try the case, not run from it, not hide it, try it. because if the president commits high crimes and misdemeanors and congress refuses to act, refuses even to conduct a fair trial of its conduct, then residents, this president and future presidents can commit impeachable crimes with impunity, and the order and rigor of our democracy will dramatically decline. the final failsafe of our democracy will be rendered moot. the mo

the line between truth and lies has become blurred. us president donald trump is one of the most famous and generators of fake news just about every day he posts and lives on the internet. there's one thing that's absolutely fascinating about trump's case. unequivocally backs what he said. i know that he rejects every bit of expert knowledge or system of extra no verification such as archives facts images in the. rest. he's human and he just says he knows it because he feels that there is something. i think we have something very very important politics is a liars game a dishonest business. i do not care for sexual relations. of their old honest. members of the public condemning the lying but they don't behave any better themselves. is an average guy and certainly less than honest. he fears every day. troubling your beautiful. johnny said my dress oh no of course. it's really i know it's time i know what fits is if it will make for you because. unlike the lies the politicians mueller's dishonest compliments are not intentional deceptio

>> we are looking for the truth. the impeachment, the ability to impeach and try that impeachment is one of the most fundamental, solemn, and sacred rights given to the congress to deal with a president who might abuse his power, might overreach, might break the law. we feel that is our obligation. we have asked the witnesses. we didn't ask for democratic witnesses who might be talking on our side. these are the president's appointees, the documents are all written by the president. we want the truth. maybe that evidence will be exculpatory. helpful to trump. maybe it will be further, further incriminating but we want the truth and the political chips will fall where they may. i will tell you this. the american people, another new poll by reuters, showed the overwhelming number of people, the overwhelming majority of americans want the witnesses and documents, want the truth, want the new evidence, was asked that way and one of them. and in most of the polls, a majority of republicans, more republicans than not want

truth prevails. our caucus is so strong and so united, because frankly we believe we have proof and right on our side, and after four weeks of talk about this the american people are strong on our side. the overwhelming majority, 75% including a significant majority of republicans, are for witnesses and documents. it's rare and a public poll that you get republican rank-and-file disagreeing with president trump. trump. but in this case they do. we are continuing to make the argument and make the fight, and we think that truth can prevail and we can get the four votes. mr. cnn. >> so gop leaders seem confident they can block witnesses and documents. they said they want to vote on acquittal tomorrow night. i would like to know is anything you can do to delay or stall -- >> i don't want to -- the bottom right is our focus is on the boat, on witnesses and documents. as you know the leaders resolution doesn't go past that. the minority has rights and we will exercise those rights. >> more specific on the

let them know that you still care about the truth. that the truth still matters.much divides us, on this we should agree, a trial stripped of all of its trappings should be a search for the truth. and that requires witnesses and testimony. you may have seen just this afternoon the president's former chief of staff general kelly said that a senate trial without witnesses is a job only half done. a trial without witnesses is only half a trial. well, i have to say that i can't agree. a trial without witnesses is no trial at all. you either have a trial or you don't. and if you are going to have a real trial, you need to hear from the people who have firsthand information. we presented some of them to you, but you know as well as me that there are others that you should hear from. let me close this portion with words that are more powerful than general kelly's and they come from john adams. who in 1776 wrote "together with the right to vote, those who wrote our constitution considered the right to trial by jury the heart and lungs, the mainspring and to the center whe

, that they are afraid of the truth, that they know the president is hiding the truth. i think the case for wendy's and document is also evident that many of my republican colleagues are desperate to talk about anything else. there's a eager to change conversation from witnesses and documents from over the question of fairness of the trial that they are inventing shiny objects and so-called outrage. we don't know with the next one will be but it will surely be something irrelevant to a fair trial that they don't want to debate the issue so they tried to turn you, the press and the american people a way to look at something else that has nothing to do with the trial. make no mistake about it. the issue of relevance evidence document of witnesses is going to come back up and senate republicans will have the power to bring that evidence into the trial here you saw how leader mcconnell was forced to modify its resolution on tuesday after certain republicans raised objections. republican senators can make this trial more fair if they want to. the question is, will they use t

anyone with power and can be in a position to tell the truth and the whole truth honestly about the issues facing our country. >> a native of savannah georgia we have covered you in the past at the conference. give our audience of where your background, where did you go to college and what shape your views today? >> i was blessed to be raised by a loving mother and father, mother didn't graduate high school and my dad didn't finish college but he served his country proudly in the army and seeing my parents being dedicated actually help me when i graduated high school in savanna 2004 and spent two years i went to florida state university it was my time in college that i sort of had a political awakening in 2008. ironically i met a man and professor who became a mentor but he simply gave me books by great authors like thomas soul and shall be still and in those books there were simple truths and facts about the history of this country about our economic system and free enterprise and capitalism and honestly, that i had not been introduced to in the years and being educated and growing up i r

the truth. my question, steve, are you there? host: i am. caller: steve, if c-span viewers would do their research, go online and get on their smartphone, and i know you guys are nonbiased as best you can be, but you and everybody, greta , all you guys on c-span, all you guys are democrats. that is just the fact. pedro, greta, john, especially john, and you, steve, are all on record on video over the years, you guys are all democrats. how are we supposed to trust anybody now? host: what do you mean we are on video? caller: you have given interviews in the past, and it is all democrat. the questions you guys give people, it is so one-sided sometimes. most mornings i cannot even watch it. i have to turn it off and walk away because it is soaking with obvious bias. is trump bashing. can't we talk about anything positive? out of three years, can we have one segment of trump doing something positive with taxes, anything? i don't care what it is. host: if you take out donald trump and insert barack ob

he thinks she's telling the truth. if that's the case, he's not going to let the richest man in america off the hook. hush money paid, is not the answer? we will find out at the trial. they sued me for defamation which is this whole thing, deposition, discovery, too oath and we are going to find out whether hush money was paid or if it was extortion or he came to the conclusion there was mine and couldn't be believed, this was a woman with an extreme long history of lying. let me give you some examples. she writes and testifies and she says she met al gore jeffrey epstein's island. they were so lovey-dovey, they were sitting together and couldn't keep their eyes off each other. that's why i was surprised when they got divorced a little later. the only time she says that al gore left his wife's side was to take a walk with jeffrey epstein on the beach on this island. it's a great story. it's very detailed, she got paid $160,000 to tell that story. there's only one federal problem. al gore never met jeffrey epstein. they

he thinks she's telling the truth. if that's the case he is not going to let one of the richest men in off the hook. was hush money paid? that's the question. we don't know the answer to that but we are going to find it at that trial because she and her lawyer made a big mistake. sued me for defamation which opens this whole thing up the deposition, to discovery, to oath and we will find out whether there was hush money paid, whether the was extortion, whether he came to the conclusion she was lying and, therefore, couldn't be believed. this is a woman with an extremely long history of line. let me give his examples. from her own writing. she writes and testifies, she says she met tipper gore and al gore on jeffrey epstein island. they were so lovey-dovey. they were sitting together, they couldn't keep the ice off each other. she said that's what i was a surprise when they got divorced a little later. the only time she says that al gore left his wife's side was to take a walk with jeffrey epstein on the beach of his is

will we pursue the search for truth or dodge, weave and evade the truth.resident has engaged in a persistent pattern and obstruction of justice. the allegations are grave, the investigation is legitimate. >> i'm going to coordinate with the president's lawyers. so there won't be any difference between us on how to do this. you raise the issue what if you have witnesses. the president's counsel may or may not decide they want to have witnesses. there's no chance the president is going to be removed from office. >> it's a good thing we have videotape. how will this trial be perceived at the end through the lens of history? for that, let me bring in donald richie who retired in 2015. iumer ai'm so enjoying, sir, uctaiuct talking to historians because talking to people about the now and i'm worried the future is not going to think nwell of the now as it relates to this trial. >> we're still arguing about the previous trials. >> that's a good point. what is the issue here? when you look at those videos and you see that the same people are making the opposite ar

, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to come out of the trial. if you want the truth, you have to have witnesses. you have to have documents. who has ever heard of a trial without witnesses and documents. i'm pleased that some of my republican colleagues are now beginning to come around to our position. when i first wrote to leader mcconnell three weeks ago and asked him for witnesses and document he didn't pay much attention. he said his judgment was to bring up a motion to dismiss all proceedings but he couldn't do it not only because of what nancy pelosi did but the weight weight of american opinion that not having documents and witnesses would not sit well with them. we're soon going to have an opportunity to see where my republican colleagues really stand on the question of witnesses testifying and documents being added. the president and the american people deserve nothing less than a fair, full, and honest process. senator udall. senator udall: thank you very much, senator schumer. rhett me just touch on both of these subject -- let me jus

see the statement that sometimes covered up the truth. sometimes people forget the divide between the journalism eventually going out and really trying to honestly report what's going on without doing it in a way that is designed to popularize and publicize particular groups or organizations or individuals. sugar isn't very helpful either just because it switches and covers up the truth isn't good journalism. salt and taste and is also a preservative and that makes us unpopular in certain quarters. number three we try to avoid entangling the line. even when they scratch ours, yes i am i hope christian first conservative second, the world largely can be the same way that it's not part of the conservative movement. we are not part of the evangelical movement either. we can and do criticize other groups more than 23 years ago as a member of the evangelical press association, we learne let the epa code to become the franchise. people who get paid creates clipped bates and the distant hope for further consumers. we do have news that we try to

is there any truth in theon dossier or just things that are embarrassing? >> all of the collusion allegations in the dossier turned out to be untrue you can read in volume one of the mueller report. the fbi created a spreadsheet of all the collusion alallegations it all turned out empty there is nothing on the spreadsheet they could not vet or corroborate anything and christopher steele the author of the dossier said the information he wrote is unverifiable. because it came from multiple anonymousbe hearsay. hearsay is generally not allowed in a court of law double hearsay is never allowed because it is a farce this was triple and quadruple hearsay we have the testimony with the e-mails that were passed along by these characters in the obama administration. >> and find one - - in fact he was fined by the fbi for lying. he was on the payroll not just the hillary clinton campaign or dnc but the campaign of the fbi since early 2016 the year of the election. but he lied to the fbi about talking to the media and feeding information to the media and too many peop

and the truth matters.wise we are lost. >> ed: house impeachment managers wrapping up their opening arguments today in the case against president trump. today focus on obstruction of congress after the defense team gets their say. here to talk less about that as a member of the president's defense team, ohio comes been jim jordan >> good to be with you. >> ed: what to be expecting from the president's team over the weekend? >> 24 hours of talk isn't going to change the facts. facts from the present side. they've got a strong argument on constitutional grounds, on process grounds, and a strong argument of fact because they are on president side. i think it's interesting that could be played as adam schiff talking about the truth. the same adam schiff who told us for two years that there was more than circumstantial evidence that there was collusion between the trump campaign in russia. the same adam schiff who told us the memo is not accurate. the similar told us the pfizer process was fine. we learned last

, truth, truth! that's all i could think when president trump's team started presenting their side. finally, things are being put into context. finally, the whole picture is being, being drawn. and all these pieces, bits and pieces that have been taken out of context, have been twisted, can be put in their proper place for people to objectively examine and determine for themselves, okay, what's really going on. one of the things that really bothers me most about all this is how divided we are as a country. everybody seems to be fully entrenched in their own take on this. you're either staunchly for or staunchly against. and no matter what the outcome of this is, it's not going to lead to healing. i don't know what will bring about healing for our country. that, i think, is the greatest toll that all this is taking on our populace. >> host: all right, trevor, that'll be it for this afternoon. thanks for calling in. thanks for all your calls and commentings. the president's defense team has used an hou

somewhere the truth exists. in. the sea was street blues didn't have the need the down was gone most things aren't seen the room when i 1st found out when the scene on the plane in the let me use to see explains shoes riding on scooter that independence did she find in them so this is she's very far away i'll give you 2 away just want to see you fees if you don't do them on a new you lou. please god need a machine just looking at a pick the best that's a good that's a curse but in reality you're blessed because you find through this kingdom in this life you pass it on time and now he's prozac it is not up to much says because you know we do not need to learn this in c.b. religion. i wish it was the name munich old school way but i'm forced to see reality every single day we're doing that stuff comes to killing spree is what heroes declan we see the gate we got that out of paris and watching got a pig that's palm radish plant his food and his ph all of this anger but i find it gives more range his much if you need to

and this will be the truth the whole truth and i'm going to through this case named on the record. how do you see the whole who was 6 can be seen for a guy you know leaders want to rule the 3 a 'd calendar i know it's a noble good morning it could have been so good i'm not impressed. with regard to kofi since i found the cd you were never able to read those showcases with any specific knowledge or. i don't know if a concert covers. of the 3 are possible. or very well as a listen if you could show the other your carpet but the evidence that we have. says you were there that's the problem that that's the problem so me personally i am but i'm not letting people sign my feet and needed their own opinions only when there is that that will that not what i want i want to know you get honest this will happen. around it's a legal appeal by act. it. as if it is a big if i don't know they're never when i have it i'm not i'm going to want to do no harm of this walk or meet. jack he so i think. you have a good morning there are more effective on who are whom we would see passion and vision to e

the only way to get the truth is witnesses and documents. and he's resisted constantly, but the american people have not. the overwhelming majority of americans believe that you need witnesses and documents. what kind of a trial is there without witnesses and documents? and, you know, frankly, rachel, we don't know what these witnesses and documents will say. they're hardly democratic appointees. they're trump appointees. and what they say may be exculpatory. it may be further incriminating. but the truth on something as weighty as this impeachment must come out. if you can't have a fair trial for impeachment, which is the ultimate power the founding fathers gave the congress to keep an overreaching, a law-breaking president in check, then our constitution is fundamentally flawed and -- well, not flawed. the constitution is not flawed, but the implementation is way out of balance. >> the last time you were here on this program and we talked about these matter, you said that you were involved in trying to essentially lobby republicans, speak