tv Americas Newsroom With Bill Hemmer and Sandra Smith FOX News September 25, 2019 6:00am-9:00am PDT
>> netflix for conservatives. >> you can say dam on television if it's the hoover dam, right? >> yes. >> the hoover dam. >> run to the radio. >> bill: thank you, guys. good morning. fox news alert where the battle has been joined. president trump firing back against an impeachment inquiry saying he will release the entire transcript of his phone call with ukraine's president. we expect now several developments today. many over the coming hours. let's get to it. i'm bill hemmer live in new york. sandra, good morning. >> sandra: i'm sandra smith. the white house saying it will release documents from the intel community showing the whistle-blower was politically biased and hear from ukraine's president at the united nations a short time from now. as speaker pelosi calls on her commits to push forward. >> i'm announcing that house of representatives moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry.
>> she cannot unilaterally decide for an impeachment inquiry. >> continues to obstruct congress. donald trump will leave congress no choice but to initiate impeachment. >> my democratic friends just can't accept the fact that the american people chose donald trump. fill out a hurt feelings report and let's move on. >> i think the party is now much more unified. >> president trump: this is why they say it's good for the election but it is bad for the country. how can you do this and you haven't even seen the phone call? >> bill: let us begin. chris wallace has analysis. mike emanuel has more. >> yesterday was a huge day nice-wise. today a big one as well. white house coverage we refer to it as wednesday. the president going on offense today in the face of impeachment investigations being launched in the house. the transcript of his call with
the ukrainian call coming out. target time for that is 10:00 this morning. so be watching carefully for that. the president insisting yesterday that he said nothing inappropriate in that phone call and that house speaker nancy pelosi is blindly going down the road to impeachment. listen here. >> president trump: she is talking impeachment. so i think that -- by the way, she hasn't even seen the phone call. the phone call was perfect. the call that wasn't perfect and the words that weren't perfect were joe biden with respect to his son. the son takes away millions of dollars out of ukraine and million else of dollars out of china. and you don't talk about that. it is a real disgrace. >> bill: a senior administration official tells fox news, you mentioned a little bit of this at the beginning of this bill and sandra, they'll likely release a document from the intelligence community inspector general that describes the whistle-blower as having a political bias in favor of another political candidate. there is no word on who that
candidate is at this point. we may find out as the morning goes on. one other point, the white house's general principle is they'll put out everything they can on this and working to see if legally they can give the whistle-blower complaint to congress. what do you mean legally? isn't it demanded? there was an opinion from the office of the director of national intelligence general counsel said there wasn't a statutory threshold to send the complaint to congress because it was about someone outside the intelligence community and therefore outside of the odni jurisdiction. the whistle-blower has also informed the director of national intelligence that he or she, we don't know who it is, plans to come before congress at some point. we do not yet know the forum or the format. outside of that the president has got a meeting with the ukrainian president zelenskiy today and a press conference afterwards. eat your wheaties. get ready to go. five hour energy, whatever your
choice is. >> bill: john roberts there. >> sandra: now over to capitol hill where reaction pouring in to speaker pelosi's big announcement yesterday evening. mike emanuel is live on capitol hill with more on that. mike. >> good morning. liberal members who have benhamering speaker nancy pelosi to move forward are already talking next steps. >> among others, i anticipate and i believe there will be discussion as to whether when we draft or judiciary examines the question on filing potential articles of impeachment what those articles will include. could articulate several different offenses and asking for assistance. it is possible that articles could be encompassing. >> in terms of next steps speaker pelosi is planning to have the house vote on a whistle-blower demanding to see the report today. tomorrow the acting director of national intelligence joe mcguire is due to testify in
front of the senate and house intelligence committees. expect him to get grilled by democrats wanting to see the whistle-blower complaints. moderate democrats are worried are a few saying they aren't on board with this impeachment move. >> i'm concerned about going into an impeachment because as i've also stated before, it could split the country apart. people feel strongly on both sides. it will cost a lot of money. it will be on issue with other countries internationally. it has the potential to make us look weaker when we have the internal turbulence. >> republican leaders say democrats are playing with fire. >> we have an election next year. the people will be able to speak out. i'm confident they will reelect this president because of the great job he is doing. filing articles of impeachment is one of those sacred responsibilities congress has. it shouldn't be used to try to go and usurp the results of an election in 2016. >> others say not much has
changed. the same investigations under the name impeachment. >> i don't know how many times house democrats can announce their impeachment inquiry for the first time. it was 12 days ago in the judiciary committee that democrats -- i think the boat burned and sank before it got out of the harbor. >> some suggest pelosi should have read the transcript of the call before taking this step. >> bill: the president of ukraine is now speaking. just want to show you a bit of an image of him at the united nations now. through go. we don't have the audio but we'll track that for you. he meets with president trump this afternoon. here is the "new york post" summing it up this way. the headline reads impeaching to the choir. chris wallace here in new york also. hello to you. we thought the headline would be your interview with the president of iran that we'll
get to. listening to alexandria ocasio-cortez saying. they could ask for assistance which seems to suggest this could go on beyond what we're talking about with ukraine and then chuck schumer said this late yesterday as well. watch here. >> simply to release the transcript is not going to come close to ending the need of the american public and the congress to see what actually happened. >> bill: the key phrase in there simply releasing the transcript doesn't end this. it appears that they are building for battle for some time starting now. >> well, they've been building for battle for some time starting about two years ago. but this is going to either be made or broken by what happened in the dealings with ukraine, the conversations and there was more than one between president trump and president elect zelenskiy. and in addition what rudy
giuliani did overthere. it's simple it seems to me. either the president and his aides tried to use the power they had with the $300 million in aid to ukraine to try to pressure zelenskiy and the ukrainians to try to find dirt on joe biden or they didn't. and the nice thing about this is we often have to speculate. we'll know a lot more supposedly at 10:00 today when the transcript comes out. either it will be troubling or not. it may not be the smoking gun. either people will look at it and say it seems like the president went a little too far or they'll say i don't know what the democrats are talking about. i suspect that it won't end there. that there will, as i say, be questions about what the whistle-blower saw, whether he or she was concerned about it. is there more evidence. what did giuliani do? the transcript is awfully important. if it seems like the president was putting a lot of pressure on president elect zelenskiy i
think the president trump not necessarily won't be impeached will be in some trouble. if it looks like it seemed like a normal conversation i think perhaps the democrats could have egg on their face. why did they go down this route before they waited 24 hours to see the transcript? >> bill: dueling headlines, "wall street journal" editorial board. their headline. the impeachment congress and you can see that today in the "wall street journal." meanwhile in the "new york times" they say congress steps up, trump blinks. we'll watch for more on that. kevin mccarthy last night with sean hannity characterized it the following way. >> if you want to know what speaker pelosi will do tomorrow, read what aoc tweets tonight. nancy pelosi is trying to appease the socialist wing of the party. they will be embarrassed when these transcripts come out. i hope the american public wakes up. have we not learned what we just went through the last two years? this stuff has to stop. it is making america weaker. >> bill: some of the points you
were just hitting on as well. what is the risk here for joe biden? what is the risk for nancy pelosi? when you think about newt gingrich at house speaker in 1997 when they impeached bill clinton, they gained seats in the mid-term. newt gingrich lost his job. bill clinton went on to finish his second term. >> well, i think there is a big difference here. i think a lot of andrew mccarthy not kevin mccarthy the former u.s. prosecutor made a good point. they aren't going down for impeachment. it is for an impeachment inquiry. an impeachment proceeding. some could argue that's what they've been doing the tlas two years and this is dramatic when nancy pelosi holds a news conference and said the president betrayed his oath of office and we'll have an impeachment proceedings. this is what the six committees have been doing for months.
conceivably it is a way for her to put old wine in new bottles to contain in a different way the -- it doesn't mean a lot practically. this is a lot different than voting articles of impeachment and it may well be in the end they investigate everything and decide to do nothing. i don't think there is a huge -- one can also argue there is as much of a political risk for nancy pelosi not doing anything. she was -- more than half of the democratic caucus wants impeachment from seedings. she may have felt she had to do this to give them a pressure release. >> bill: they need a simple majority. not there yet. it's around 195, 200 democrats in the house caucus. in the meantime you had major headlines yesterday. you interviewed the president of iran. i want to play a clip from that. ask you a specific question about what you learned with this conversation with iran.
>> mr. trump damaged the trust between the two countries. trust must be restored and the restoration of trust consists in taking away the pressure imposed upon the nation and the people of iran. there is animosity even towards our children, even have difficulty in obtaining basic medications and medical equipment. this is a type of terrorism. >> bill: i watched the entire interview. i think at times it was frustrating to get a clear direction as to where he was heading. you made the point that it was clear to you that you see the world in two very different ways. and i could sense that frustration through your questions and the redirect based on his answers. what do you think we learned? >> i think we learned that these two countries, these two leaders are miles apart. when rouhani talks about economic terrorism there and children, what he is basically saying is the u.s. sanctions have made life very difficult not just for the iranian
leaders but for the iranian people. there are a lot of things that they need, the populous, he was talking about medicine for children, that they aren't able to get because of u.s. sanctions. he even began the interview. i was talking to him about the president, president trump and what he said at the u.n. about no other country should support iran's blood lust? he said blood lust? every place the u.s. has gone they are the main sponsor of terror in the world. i saw no indication at all. i was looking and pressing for it, of any opening diplomatic opening at all. at this point i think rouhani and the iranian regime is very hard line and they aren't looking to make any kind of a deal and stuck firm to the idea no talks with the u.s. unless president trump lifts all sanctions and there is not a chance he will do that. >> bill: chris wallace, thank you, sir. talk again. >> sandra: washington awaiting the release of the transcript
of president trump's phone call with the ukraine president in july. when exactly will that happen? white house deputy press secretary hogan gidley will fill us in. an update from the white house just ahead. when you're not able to smile, you become closed off. i felt withdrawn, alone... having to live with bad teeth for so long was extremely depressing. now, i know how happy i am. there was all the feeling good about myself that i missed. i wish that i had gone to aspen dental on day one and not waited three years. at aspen dental, we're all about yes. like yes to flexible hours and payment options. yes to free exams and x-rays for new patients without insurance. and yes, whenever you're ready to get started, we are too. call now at 1-800-aspendental.
>> the only reason they're trying to impeach the president is they don't believe they can beat him at the ballot box. they're trying to destroy him. it comes down to this. if there is no evidence that president trump tried to coerce the ukrainians into investigating biden and withholding aid to the ukraine unless they did trump's bidding against biden, then there is nothing here. >> bill: lindsey graham reacting last night. we should get a read-out of the transcript in the next hour. karl rove with me now. saw you a lot yesterday and last night. where do you think we are on this right now, karl, as you look at it 9:17 on the east
coast? >> well, we've got the democrats hell bent on impeachment regardless of what is in that transcript. they could have waited for the transcript to come out. i think they would have been on firmer ground had they done so. they are out there going. it is remarkable to me to have tone deaf they are. we have elizabeth warren this weekend saying that we have -- the president ought to be impeached because he tried to get a foreign government involved in influencing our election. what about hillary clinton? i don't remember you criticizing her for sending money to fusion gps and hiding it by laundering it through a law firm and then they hired christopher steele who calls up his buddies in moscow, former russian secret service agents and said got any dirt on donald trump? talk about elizabeth warren being critical of something her party already did in 2016. echoed by an email i got yesterday from adam schiff fundraising email saying send
me money. donald trump tried to get a foreign entity involved in our campaign. why weren't you upset two years ago or three years ago when we found out about the source of the russian dossier being hillary clinton's campaign? democrats are in a bad place on this. they're hoping they get rescued. >> bill: i just played with clip with chris wallace about chuck schumer saying releasing the transcript doesn't come close to ending the process. ocasio-cortez was talking about other matters that have already been talked about. other matters there, too. your main point, however, is they're hell bent on going forward. if she is -- >> they've been doing it for three years. >> what is to prevent her from getting 18 more? an easy hill to climb at the moment. >> it might not be. a lot of the difference between
where they are today, 195 and where they need to be 218, are primarily the 31 democrats who got elected in 2018 by flipping a seat, a red seat that voted for donald trump in 2016 and was occupied by republican congressmen in 2018. those people will be in places -- impeachment nationwide is unpopular. it's even less popular in those districts. nancy pelosi is sitting there saying my caucus wants to get there but she has two constraints. one is she wants to keep her majority and she knows that majority depends upon those 31 seats. and she knows that even if she doesn't lose all of those 31, every one of those centrists she loses is one less counter weight to the squad and left wingers. so she may think well, i can hold on with a smaller majority but that majority will consist of a larger share of people like aoc and the squad and is that good for the democratic
party and what nancy pelosi believes in? >> bill: i want to show this new national poll among democrats. elizabeth warren is now leading joe biden. just keep an eye on that. one of her main themes on the stump is about the corruption of the current administration. she is pushing it hard and this whole ukraine thing fits into the theme she is talking about on the stump. karl, come back soon. we have to roll. nice to see you. 21 past the hour now. >> sandra: a second parent has been sentenceed and receiving a harer sentence than felicity huffman. sanders rolls out his new tax plan. what exactly is in it and what is his plan next. >> the level of income and wealth inequality in america today. we should not have three people
owning more wealth than the bottom half of america. to present to you today. [son]: who are you talking to? [son]: that guy's scary. the first item on the list is selecting a chairman for the... for the advisory board what's this? as well as use the remaining... child care options run out. lifetime retirement income from tiaa doesn't. guaranteed monthly income for life.
beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
>> sandra: democratic presidential candidate bernie sanders unveiling a tax plan that would hit the richest americans the hardest. the vermont senator tweeting this, there should be no billion on airs. we'll tax their extreme well and invest in working people. peter doocy is live in new hampshire with with more from the campaign trail this morning. hey, peter. >> bernie sanders says he doesn't have anything against billionaires personally but targeting their accounts could be a way to fund his ambitious progressive agenda. >> i happen to think that when three people own more wealth than the bottom half of the american people it is an issue
worth talking about. and i happen to think when 1% of the population owns more wealth than the bottom 92% it is an issue worth talking about. >> the sanders plan starts by targeting households worth $32 million with a 1% tax and gradually increases that until they get to an 8% tax on households worth, $10 billion. he believes they could get 100 trillion dollars. twice as many millionaires as would see a wealth tax hike if elizabeth warren becomes president. she says 70,000 households could cough up a total of 2.6 trillion in a decade if people with a billion have to pay an extra 3% and with 50 million and 2%. 2% is something now that warren supporters chant. >> anybody here own a home or
grow up in a family that owned a home? you've been paying a wealth tax all these years. just called property tax. all i'm saying is for the richest in this country it is not just your real estate. how about we include your stock portfolio, diamonds, rembrandt, and yacht. let's call it for the whole thing, right? >> the one thing not clear when she starts talking about people's possessions is which government agency would go around appraiseing all of that and figuring out how much of a wealth tax is owed. >> sandra: peter doocy. thank you. >> bill: we're waiting now at 9:27 east coast time the release of this transcript of president trump's phone call with the president of ukraine that happened in july, a day after bob mueller finished his testimony on capitol hill. so what does the transcript tell us and what will it reveal? we'll ask hogan gidley traveling here in new york and he will be our guest in a
moment. do not miss this. we're back right after this. leading them to discover: we're woven together by the moments we share. everything you need, all in one place. expedia. m...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do? cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time. wow, that's clean! cascade platinum. >> vo: my car is more than four wheels.y? it's my after-work decompression zone. so when my windshield broke... >> woman: what?! >> vo: ...i searched for someone who really knew my car. i found the experts at safelite autoglass. >> woman: hi! >> vo: with their exclusive technology, they fixed my windshield... then recalibrated the camera attached to my glass so my safety systems still work. who knew that was a thing?! >> woman: safelite has service i can trust.
at aetna, we find that inspiring.ot game. but to stay on top of your game takes a plan. that's why aetna takes a total approach to health and wellness. with medicare solutions designed to help you age actively. aetna medicare solutions. mom you've got to [ get yourself a new car.g ] i wish i could save faster. you're making good choices. you'll get there. ♪ were you going to tell me about this? i know i can't afford to go. i still have this car so you can afford to go. i am so proud of you. thanks.
principal. we can help you plan for that. start today at principal.com. >> bill: 9:30 here in new york. 30 minutes away. we should get an idea what the transcript says. stay with us for that around the whistle-blower controversy. the last day or so. yesterday, september 24th, speaker pelosi announced the formal impeachment inquiry at 5:00 yesterday afternoon. that involves six committee investigations on the house side. now you have today pelosi will release the whistle-blower complaint. we'll get a transcript of the president's phone call with ukrainian president during which he mentioned his potential rival joe biden for 2020. at 2:15 this afternoon the president will meet with the ukrainian counterpart at the u.n. general assembly. after that we'll get a press conference on behalf of the president at 4:00 eastern time. tomorrow the acting director of national intelligence joseph
mcguire is set to testify before the senate and house intel committees to explain his role in withholding that whistle-blower complaint. then when do we hear from the whistle-blower? maybe it's this week or maybe not. talk yesterday they could be on capitol hill perhaps behind closed doors this week. we'll stay tuned for more on that. a lot of moving parts in this story. we'll follow it one at a time. the next big headline should be in about 30 minutes or less when we get a release of the transcript from the phone call that took place in july. so just this week alone, fast-moving story. if you miss an hour, you miss a lot. back across the room to sandra nou. >> sandra: more on this let's bring in hogan gidley. white house press secretary. when should we expect to see the full release of the transcript? >> i can't confirm we'll release the report sometime this morning. as the president said it will be unredacted, complete and total. the world will get to see that
the president has done nothing wrong in this instance very shortly. >> sandra: there will be any room for speculation or ambiguity? >> the president has done nothing wrong here. the media and the left have been pushing a russian lie on the american people for three years and they are falling for it all over again. they had no evidence then. they have no evidence now. in fact, nancy pelosi got time on television to come forward and say she had the facts now to move for an impeachment. however, she didn't even see the document yet. >> sandra: why do you think she did that? >> i have no idea. if i were nancy pelosi and looked at my caucus and said what do you guys want to work on in the coming days, weeks and months and they said green new deal, infanticide, open borders, raising taxes i would look for another out myself. they've chosen the route of impeachment and it will problematic not for this
president who has done nothing wrong but for the american people. every clip you've played at democrats this morning. they aren't talking about guns or infrastructure or lower drug prices or healthcare. they are talking about taking down and attacking a president. >> sandra: let's get to the nitty-gritty when it comes to the release of that transcript. how is it produced? >> it will be as i understand it, it will be sent out electronically and a link and possibly -- >> sandra: how was the actual transcript produced? from a phone call computer generated, was this notes that were taken from people in the room? how was the transcript generated? >> i don't want to get into exactly how they're -- hundreds of people listen to these calls at one given time and all those things are transcribed. it is coming out verbatim and unredacted at the president's request and as he said you will see plainly there is no quid pro quo and no pressure. >> sandra: biden is mentioned on that phone call.
>> the world will see the document coming up shortly. >> sandra: a.g. bill barr, rudy giuliani, what names can we expect to hear on that phone call? >> appreciate the tactic. i can't go down that road yet. when it is released you'll see for yourself and the world will see exactly how this call went. the president said it was pitch perfect, 10 out of 10. >> sandra: based on everything we saw, the actions on the part of democrats yesterday i have to plainly ask you the question has the president committed any impeachable offenses? >> the president has done nothing wrong. we have said that time and time again. the problem with this is you have a democrat party with accomplice it and compliant media. whatever they say the media will parrot without fact checking and going to multiple sources. they run with it and here is why. is sad part is they want it to be true so badly they'll manufacture a crisis and news story just to attack the president. >> sandra: we should expect the transcript momentarily and we
can go through it word for word. that being said the president has admitted to certain things and events that took place leading up to that phone call including the withholding of that $400 million in aid to ukraine. why did the president do that leading up to this call? >> the president ran on this very issue. he won on this very issue. now he is trying to implement the issues he ran an run on. the american people voted for this. every tax dollar that is spent, every dollar that american people send in to this government the president wants to make sure that is spent properly. we spend hundreds of billions of dollars across the globe and the president looks at it all the time. we want less foreign involvement. others should pay for their own way. up their share. there should be some burden sharing here. he did it with nato when everyone was supposed to give 2% to nato. they weren't doing it. the president said we're changing the way things work. >> sandra: this is concern over
the new ukraine leadership and corruption. >> they finished an election where the incoming president won on the platform of no more corruption. everyone knew it was corrupt. the president had a conversation with him. let's be clear, we actually did give aid to ukraine. the democrats never did. >> sandra: the aid was released after the call. >> of course not. the president wants to make sure are dollars are spent with. he did it with -- what are we getting spending these billion else of dollars. democrats have no problem spending taxpayer dollars on nonsense. they've done it for decades as have republicans. >> sandra: we'll get a transcript of the phone call. i've heard talk about code words being used on the phone call. again, is there a vagueness or ambiguity in the phone call they could run with a different narrative than the president is letting out what happened?
>> the democrats are already calling for impeachment when they didn't have the facts in the first place. they called for him to be run out of town, run out of office because of a russian lie they pushed on the american people without evidence for three years. so evidence doesn't matter to democrats at all. this is a political football and it is not the president that suffers here, it is the american people. >> sandra: the president has expressed his concern over the relationship with joe biden, his family, and ukraine. how does the president plan to proceed with those concerns? >> a lot of people expressed concerns over that. joe biden openly bragged about the fact he tried to strong arm the government of ukraine to do what he wanted. withheld $1.billion for the ukrainian government. there are a lot of questions on the joe biden side that need to be answered and finally the press is looking into it. they are using donald trump to do it. this should have been looked at a long time ago. not going to get into that and you can read it yourself. >> sandra: what is your
expectation when the president of ukraine and the president of the united states meet face the face i believe for the first time this afternoon in new york city? >> i think that's going to be probably the hottest ticket in town by far and we live in a town -- you live in a town where broadway is just around the corner here. everyone wants to see this conversation. it should be noted the president tweeted yesterday and he is right. i was in the room. secretary of state pompeo did talk to president zelenskiy of the ukraine and ukrainian president said he can release it. it's fine with me. he knows there is nothing wrong in his call. he issued a statement saying i got no pressure. >> sandra: how would you describe their relationship? >> good relationship. the president has good relationships with partners and allies across the globe and some folks that aren't the best actors across this planet. he wants to get deals done for the american people and that's what he is always focused on and has to build those relationships to do it. >> sandra: after we see that there is a question about accountability of the whistle-blower. and the report. i believe the house will vote
on a resolution demanding it. will the white house and president turn over that? >> i can tell you the president wants transparency in this matter and wants the american people to see how ridiculous the democrats have gotten here and he has done nothing wrong and has nothing to hide. we'll see what happens with with that part of the report. >> sandra: give us a little bit closer guidance next few minutes, next couple hours. when will we see it? >> very soon. >> sandra: hogan gidley, really appreciate your time this morning. >> bill: very rare event in american politics, two u.s. presidents have been impeached in american history, andrew johnson and bill clinton. richard nixon resigned before the house could vote on articles of impeachment and no american president has ever been removed from office. so we'll see which way this goes. i mentioned a moment ago you miss an hour, you missed a lot yesterday. it was something else. the twists and turns.
we expect today to be very much like that. but again the main event will be when this transcript comes out. >> sandra: really strong guidance there from hogan. the next few minutes. stay tuned and we should have breaking news for you shortly on that front. meanwhile we're expecting the full release of that transcript, the phone call, the transcript from that phone call with the president of ukraine and the president of the united states. it comes as support for impeachment grows from the democratic party including congresswoman abigail spang berger of virginia. she will join us live in "america's newsroom" next.
>> president trump: it's just a continuation of the witch hunt. the worst rich hunt in political history. the strongest country in the world. the best economy we've ever had and she is talking impeachment. she hasn't even seen the phone call. the phone call was perfect. >> bill: that from yesterday at the u.n.
president trump on impeachment push. we'll show you a live look from trump tower along fifth avenue. he is moving from mid town manhattan down to the u.n. later today he will be with the ukrainian president. several freshmen democrats from swing districts are joining the effort that np pushed yesterday. one of those is democratic congresswoman abigail spanberger, flipped a sheet in virginia in 2018. good morning to you. you have kept your powder dry until now. so what changed? >> this is a different specific set of circumstances and those of us who wrote this op-ed we wanted to assert is these allegations against the president, allegations that he may have sought to use his power to influence and pressure a foreign country to provide
dirt and information on his political -- potential political opponent and tried to use taxpayer dollars in efforts to pressure them. those allegations are so substantial the american people need to know if they're true or false. so what we -- >> bill: you said a lot there. have you seen the whistle-blower report? >> i have not seen it. that is a challenge because that is the report has not been provided to congress yet. >> bill: have you seen a transcript of the conversation? >> i haven't seen a transcript and why it is that i have said we need to better understand what happened. we need to be able to say that these allegations are true or false. and >> bill: you haven't seen either but i go back to your first answer. you are very conclusive in the deck shun you are headed. >> no, no, no, i am not conclusive.
i am a former cia case officer, a former federal agent. my perspective is we need to fully understand what happened. the american people regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum should want to know whether the allegations are true or false. i think the president should want to insure he is vindicated if he asserts he is innocent and if he is not, that's a dire circumstance and one of great national security. >> bill: last night on cnn you said this, the circumstance is cut and dry. the president allegedly sought to influence a foreign leader. how can cut and dry and alleged by be used in the same sentence based on the limited information we have at the moment, congresswoman? >> the cut and dry i think in the larger discussion that we were having is i am -- it is cut and dry what it is we're looking at. i am not looking to talk about any other allegations against the president when i'm saying these offenses are deeply concerning and if true
represent impeachable offenses. i'm speaking only of these newest allegations. i think that's an important thing to discuss for those of us who are talking about the seriousness of these allegations, the need for further investigations, the need to understand if these allegations are true or false. it is specific to this threat because this is a national security priority. if these allegations are true, this is a grave moment for our country. if they are not true, we want to insure that every person in this country and around the world know that. >> bill: i'm hearing a lot of ifs in that. republicans would allege ever since the morning after the election the democrats have wanted to get this president out of office. i know you are well aware of that. but in may of 2017, this is just one. congressman from louisiana, roll this. >> i rise today, mr. speaker,
to call for the impeachment of the president of the united states of america. for obstruction of justice. we are talking about a president who fired the f.b.i. director who was investigating the president for his connections to russian involvement in the president's election. >> bill: here we go way down the road from that statement there and whether it was bob mueller -- whether it was bob mueller and the russia connections and the election, whether it was stormy daniels, pick the controversy du jour, is it true that democrats in your caucus are just waiting for an opportunity to find something to pin it on this white house at this point? >> i can't speak for every democrat in the caucus. we fall across a very broad spectrum. what i can speak to is the fact there have been allegations after allegations and i have previously said i support the
system, the committees of jurisdiction doing what they need to development i was not going to call for an impeachment inquiry or investigation. the process was working. but these specific allegations represent a tremendous national security threat and that is why i think it is important that we talk about them separately. that we recognize the threat that they pose, and that i want to be honest with the american people that my concerns about these particular allegations are so great that they do, in fact, if true, and only if true, represent impeachable offenses. every member of congress, regardless of how they feel about this president, regardless of whether they were happy or sad in november of 2016 has a responsibility to be thoughtful and very, very measured in our efforts to actually pull out the facts because it is our duty to uphold the constitution, to protect this country, and to insure that we are doing it in a thoughtful way with the trust
>> sandra: busy morning on "america's newsroom." we're awaiting the full transcript released in its entirety from the white house on the conversation with president trump and the president of ukraine back in july that led to the many events that we saw from democrats yesterday formally launching an impeachment process. >> bill: big debate whether or not you should release the transcript. these conversations are considered private. also foreign leaders have a certain level of expectation
that their comments will remain private. however, in this case the president ruled yesterday afternoon he wants it out so we'll see what's in it together and develop it as it happens together in moments. >> sandra: fascinating part of it all is meanwhile the u.n. continues today here in new york city. the president is going to a short time from now after the release of that transcript be meeting face-to-face with the president of ukraine and as hogan gidley, white house spokesperson told us, he thinks it will be the hottest ticket in town. you can count on that. >> bill: i wonder if the question will be answered in the next hour. does the transcript give democrats on the house more ammunition or less? does the transcript give the white house and republicans more ammunition or less? that's pretty much what lies in the balance at the moment. >> sandra: the timing of everything is what is being called into question as well because the $400 million in aid to ukraine that was already approved by congress was
withheld and frozen by the president in the days leading up to this phone call and was released after that phone call. but the question is, is there any direct quid pro quo on that call? we'll learn that a short time from now as we read the transcripts. >> bill: leading democrats say they think it is an issue to easy understood and can be sold if they sense wrongdoing, can be sold to the american people in a more understandable way rather than the mueller report and everything we went through. in a moment bret baier, john roberts, andy mccarthy. cast of thousands. >> sandra: we'll take you through it. we'll be right back. the mobile app makes it easy to manage your policy, even way out here. your marshmallow's... get digital id cards, emergency roadside service, even file a... whoa. whoa. whoa. whoa. whoa. whoa! oops, that cheeky little thing got away from me.
my bad. geico. it's easy to manage your policy whenever, wherever. can i trouble you for another marshmallow? when you have nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea. try new pepto liquicaps for fast relief and ultra-coating. nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea. get powerful relief with new pepto bismol liquicaps. idle equipment costs you time and money. that's why united rentals is combining equipment, data, safety, and expertise to help your worksite perform better. united rentals. let's get down to business. the business of atlanta on monday... ... cincinnati on tuesday. ...philly on wednesday. ...and thursday back to cincinnati . modernized comfort inns and suites have been refreshed
because when your business keeps going, our business is you. get the lowest price guaranteed on all choice hotels when you book direct at choicehotels.com. and let me tell you something, rodeo... i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. it's just a loan designed for older homeowners, and, it's helped over a million americans. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. eliminate monthly mortgage payments, pay bills, medical costs, and more. call now and get your free info kit.
other mortgages are paid each month, but with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. >> sandra: the white house just now releasing the full unredacted transcript of the president trump's phone call with the president of ukraine. welcome to a brand-new hour of "america's newsroom." the news is moving fast. i'm sandra smith. >> bill: i'm bill hemmer. major bombshell one day after democrats advance their push for impeachment. the white house claims the transcript shows there were no promises made to ukraine in return for releasing military aid. there is no quid pro quo, no pressure at all. the justice department today pushing back on the claim that the whistle-blower complaint was an urgent concern requiring the attention of congress. that is the back drop. here is the news, catherine herridge is live at the department of justice. catherine, you have seen it.
what's in it? >> thank you, bill. good morning. we have reviewed the transcript and let's just walk folks at home through the events. the call took place on july 25th. a half hour call between 9:03 and 9:33 a.m. a transcript is approximately five pages in length. it begins with the president congratulating the ukrainian president on his election victory. then they have a very specific discussion about foreign aid. the president says the u.s. is a strong supporter of ukraine and then he complaints that the europeans are not doing enough to support that country. and then this is the key part of the transcript. there is an ask from the president to the ukrainian counterpart and it reads i would like to you do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it. i would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. they say crowd strike. that appears to be a reference to the hacking of the clinton emails in 2016.
i guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server, they seau ay -- say ukraine has it. this is the most full some discussion of joe biden and hunter biden. that biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that. whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. attorney general william barr. biden bragged he stopped the prosecution. if you can look into it. it sounds horrible to me. the ukrainian president responds talking about the prosecutor he will have in place to look specifically at this issue that relates to the natural gas company burisma. he states he or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. the issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue to restore the honesty. seems to be a reference to integrity, anti-corruption. we will take care of that and we will work on the investigation of the case. mr. trump then responds i will
have mr. giuliani give you a call and i'm also going to have attorney general barr call and we'll get to the bottom of it. i'm sure you'll figure it out. the key thing from the initial reading of this transcript there are not multiple references as widely reported to the former vice president and his son based on our count there is a key reference and then some follow on references, a handful approximately three. then i would also emphasize that there is no clear link in the transcript between this withheld aid and the promise of a prosecution in this particular case, bill. >> bill: okay. so what do we know about how all this unfolded there? you go to d.o.j. this morning and what happened after that, catherine? >> well, we've learned more from justice department officials about the events. what we now know through our briefing is that it was white house officials who told the whistle-blower about this call
between the president and the ukrainian president. they also confirm that the whistle-blower did not have firsthand or direct knowledge of the complaint and the phone call. and then there is a very important quote i hope you can bring up from what is called an office of legal counsel opinion. a legal opinion from the justice department on the whistle-blower. it says although the icig, the intelligence community inspector general's preliminary review found, quote, some indication of an argue able political bias on the part of the complainant, complainant in the whistle-blower in favor of a rival political candidate the watchdog concluded that the whistle-blower's allegations nonetheless appeared to be credible. so what we learned is that white house officials who were familiar with the call, they passed that information to the whistle-blower, the inspector general for the intelligence community recognized it was
hearsay or second hand information and also the whistle-blower had some kind of political bias but he still felt the allegations were credible enough to investigate. that set into motion a series of events over the last month. there was a referral to the justice department. also a referral to the f.b.i. over whether the president's ask on that phone call amounted to a campaign finance violation. so what they had to show legally is that the president's ask for information related to the bideens was a, quote, thing of value. what justice department officials have told us is that this ask did not reach that threshold. so a criminal investigation was not opened and they consider the campaign finance violation element to be closed, bill. >> bill: thank you. stand by. we won't leave you for long. catherine herridge with us. john roberts in studio with us. emily compagno with us and
former u.s. assistant attorney andy mccarthy. good morning to all of you. andy, let's begin with you. how much are you read and what do you take from it now? >> well, i've read through it once, bill. and what strikes me is that the crowd strike portion of it is the most confusing. there are -- if the president is speaking in incomplete sentences that are run together or if there are words missing which would be important. the crowd strike piece is interesting because i hadn't heard anything about the idea that the server of any important kind was in ukraine. there was an issue with crowd strike in ukraine sometime back, crowd strike is the outfit that the dnc used to analyze its servers when they said that they were hacked by
the russians. crowd strike also said that ukrainian military was hacked by the russians and that report turned out to be discredited. i thought it was interesting that came up so early in the conversation attributed to the president. >> sandra: john roberts. >> i don't think this is going to put to rest the democratic calls for impeachment. one of the reasons is, too, as he was just pointing out the idea that there are dashes there. the memorandum of the telephone conversation is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. the text in the document records the notes and wrecklations and policy staff to memorial eyes the conversation as it takes place. these are contemporaneous notes. the democrats will argue it is not an exact transcript of a recording. so what is it in this that we're not seeing.
>> sandra: hogan gidley said there would be dozens of people on that call and heard the conversations who could identify if there was something missing, left out or changed. >> potentially. i think part of it, too, it's an electronic transcription service. we use those here at fox news. not everything is accurate. you go back and compare notes and try to get it as accurate as possible. i think the fact that it's not a verbatim transcription of an actual recording will be seen to be problematic by the democrats and probably enough in here in terms of conversations about joe biden and asking ukraine to look into certain things that they will continue going down the road they're going down. >> bill: chuck schumer was all over it. he said if you think the transcript is the end of it it's not. emily, your review is what? >> as an attorney i the end to see the holes in it. the number of factors that affect the accuracy of the record is a tool of defense for the president at this point and
point to two other things in his defense he could utilize. the thing of value, did not rise to that level initially. that's a big deal. that's something that this will go toward. i also point to the fact the democrats were looking -- remember, they had subpoenaed this and also the director -- acting director of the national intelligence to testify on thursday. this came out prior to that. points to the fact they were looking at two balls essentially and moved forward with pelosi's announcement before receiving one. final point. don't forget in may 2018 three democratic senators wrote a letter to the ukraine prosecutor general essentially implying that support for ukraine was at stake if they did not resume cooperation. >> sandra: a double standard when it comes to democrats dealing with ukraine. bret baier joins us on set. >> getting across town in new york during u.n. week. better to walk. >> bill: your observation so
far? >> a couple things. one is i don't see a tie to the money, the funding, the aid. specifically. and i don't see eight times joe biden being mentioned. i count three. so some of the early reporting may have been something different. i do see that democrats will jump on it because he mentions joe biden and hunter biden and the investigations. but to the president's point, you don't see a direct quid pro quo in the language tying this to that. i also think that the ukrainian president appears to acknowledge that he wants to go into these investigations and our reporting is that he may, in fact, say something about that today that they are going to continue these investigations that were dropped after that prosecutor -- >> sandra: they will be meeting
face-to-face this afternoon at the intercontinental here in new york city. you say there is no direct mention of the money that we have found in this transcript. i know we've all had a chance to dig through it. was there any pressure applied to ukraine at all considering, bret, democrats will be quick to point out it was days before this phone call happened that the aid that was approved by congress, $400 million was frozen by the president. >> the democrats will say it's implied because of the phone call and the timing. as far as a mention specifically you don't see it in the transcript. it is interesting that the president, he operates like this. people are talking about -- a lot of people are saying and are concerned about x, y, and z and that's how he often talks about things he wants to get investigated. >> bill: hang on right here. back to catherine herridge with more at the department of justice. what do you have now? >> i just want to lay out something in the sequencing of this phone call. while there is no quid pro quo
or direct tie to the money, the way the conversation flows is that the president and his ukrainian counterpart have a full some discussion of foreign aid. i want to read from this section. the president said i will say we do a lot for ukraine. we spend a lot of effort and time. much more than the europeans do and continuing. they should be helping you more than they are. the ukrainian president responds i would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. we are ready to continue to cooperate for the next step specifically we're ready to buy more javelins. defense department asset from your government. so you can see in the flow of the conversation they talk about foreign assistance and then the president makes his ask. now to the issue of the integrity of the transcript, a former white house official told me that the way that it works is that when these calls happen, they are handled in the situation room and they are four or five intelligence
officers typing as the phone call unfolds and at the end of the phone call, they take their transcript or their typing of the conversation and they cross reference it and they cross check it and that's how they reach the final transcript. i've been told there is no audio recording of these presidential phone calls but there are four typed copies from intelligence officers about how it went down and the justice department considers this a solid piece of rendition or memorialization of that phone call. they don't consider it a summary or notes of that phone call, bill. >> bill: thank you. stand by yet again. go to quote number four. we mentioned this a moment ago to go back to this for emily and bret and john to think about. a lot of talk about biden's son. this is what, page 3 of the five-page transcript. a lot of talk about biden's son. biden stopped the prosecution, a lot of people want to find out about that.
whatever you can do with the attorney general, bill barr, would be great. biden went about bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you look into it, it sounds horrible to me. that is a reference, john, to apparently a trip in ukraine in march of 2016 that was talked about publicly by joe biden in january of 2018 suggesting that he set down the marker he was going to leave the country unless they did the deal and apparently within six hours they did. mitch mcconnell now. he is before camera. >> federal code when he established his daca policy, president trump's decision was squarely within existing law. nevertheless, our democratic colleagues made the senate vote to undo the president's declaration back in march. their resolution fell far short of earning a veto-proof majority. now still unwilling to work with the president and
republicans on a long-term bipartisan solution for border security, senate democrats are making us repeat the same showboat again. so i would urge all colleagues to once again vote for border security and vote against democrats' resolution when it comes up later today. now understand that democratic leadership would like to invent a false choice between border security and other important military construction projects. they want to tell the american people that we can either have border security or these other important projects. but for some reason we can't have both. there are two problems to that argument. >> sandra: mcconnell addressing the fact that all of this is taking away from the president's ability to legislate. >> bill: probably kicked to the curb. >> let's wind the clock back earlier than the moment you were talking about. hunter biden had been on the board of a ukrainian natural
gas company burisma holdings and investigated by the prosecutor show kin. his office was under scrutiny for not prosecuting oligarchs and reiff with corruption. the united states and other western nations wanted shokin removed. biden said i'll withhold loan guarantees to ukraine unless you fire this guy. they balked at doing it. he gave them an ultimatum saying i'm on a plane in six hours. if he have is not fired by then you will not getting the money. you could say that joe biden was acting at the beheft of the united states and others. even the president said he was a good guy in the transcript. there is this troubling connection between joe biden, hunter biden, shokin and
burisma. you can make, i think, the argument there was a potential conflict of interest there in what joe biden was doing because of his son's involvement with the company that shokin was investigating. >> sandra: this is president meeting with western hemisphere leaders about venezuela. secretary of state pompeo there at the intercontinental in new york city. >> "the new york times" did a big write-up of this burisma issue and hunter biden. just recently they repriseed everything, what we know and what we don't know. one of the things that they came out with was that the owner of burisma, the ukraine oligarch, was pleased that shokin was taken off the case because that prosecutor was using essentially bribing burisma and essentially pressuring them. so there was a benefit to that
oligarch for that prosecutor to be gone to put it in context. >> bill: we'll ping-pong in and out for a while today. drop in here with the president and see if we pick up something. >> president trump: administrator mark green, thank you for being here. thank you very much. i want to extend my profound appreciation to every representative with us from across the western hemisphere. each of you is part of a historic coalition of 55 countries that recognize the legitimate constitutional government of venezuela. we are especially grateful to be joined by representatives of the people of argentina, brazil, columbia, chile, ecuador and peru for their leadership and assistance in the face of an unprecedented political, economic and humanitarian disaster which has been going on for a long time and we're helping a lot. we are helping a lot.
let me also recognize two leaders from the government of venezuela's legitimate interim government, presidential commissioner for foreign affairs. please stand up julio. thank you very much. thank you. [applause] and venezuela's ambassador to the united states. carlos. thank you, carlos, please. thank you for being here. as everyone in this room knows the situation in venezuela is a tragedy of historic proportions. the maduro regime does not care about the welfare of their own people. they care about their own power. it's what they want is power and money. they want the money, too, not just power. socialism has destroyed what was once among the most
prosperous countries anywhere in the world. you go back 20 years ago and you look, one of the wealthiest countries in the world relatively speaking. and now they don't have water, they don't have food, they don't have medicine. they don't have anything. today venezuelans are starving and they are dying from lack of medicine, doctors, help. according to u.n. human rights commissioner, maduro's cuban trained death squads have murdered up to 10,000 venezuelans and they think that number is extremely low. citizens all since 2018. that's over a very short period of time. these atrocities are an outrage to all and everything that we hold dear. as president of the united states, i am committed to the future of stability, prosperity and liberty for venezuela. we will stand with the venezuelan people every single day until they are finally free
from this horrible and brutal oppression. they will be freed. it will happen. our first objective is to insure a peaceful and constitutional transition paving the way for free and fair elections and why we at the united states and in the united states are doing everything we can to isolate maduro and his cronies. over the past year the u.s. treasury department has imposed very tough sanctions to prevent maduro and his enablers from accessing the u.s. financial system. last month i issued an executive order to completely freeze the assets of the maduro regime in the united states. our sanctions have been tightly focused on closing down every avenue by which maduro sustains his criminal and totalitarian rule and he has been vicious
and corrupt 57bd e and as bad as you get. we've undertaken significant efforts to insure the venezuelan people have access to food, medicine, and other humanitarian supplies despite the regime's efforts to stop aid from coming into venezuela. they are making it very, very hard to get aid into venezuela. we're getting aid into venezuela but a very difficult thing. you would think it would be to their benefit to let aid get in instead of letting people die from lack of medicine or food. they don't make it easy. we get it in anyway. we call on maduro to immediately allow his lifesaving humanitarian aid. this has to be allowed to come into venezuela for the long suffering venezuelan people. unfortunately a few countries outside of this hemisphere continue to enable this depraved regime with military
and technological support. the most significant factor propping up the venezuelan regime is the communist dictatorship in cuba. maduro allows cuba to plunder venezuelans oil, raid its wealth and rob its people. venezuela's oil is at a low point. not much is being taken out. not many people are in there because of the dangers involved. but nevertheless there is some money coming out and it goes into cuba. he has allowed thousands of cuban agents to infiltrate venezuelan security forces and other institutions. maduro has sold out his nation to a foreign dictatorship and it has been that way a long time. the civilized world must pressure the cuban regime to leave venezuela immediately. the united states is ready to support a democratic transition government and we know that our partners around the world, of which we have many already as
well, venezuela's rebuilding can begin the moment a peaceful transition occurs. this is a critical moment for the world. we must not allow the destructive forces of socialism and communism to repeat the horrors of the last century. can't allow it to happen. there have been horrors like nobody would believe. we can't allow it to happen today in venezuela. we resolve that the future of the western hemisphere will not be written by socialists and tyrants. our great destiny is to become the first fully free hemisphere in human history. we have a very, very good chance of doing that. we work and we pray for the hour when every person across the region and every suffering soul in cuba, nicaragua, and venezuela will finally know the blessings of democracy and the full glory of freedom.
once again thank you all to so many of my friends in this room and to the nations that have helped us with respect to venezuela and many other things. i want to personally thank the president of mexico for the incredible work and spirit and everything that they've done on our southern border. our southern border has become secure with 27,000 mexican soldiers on the mexican side telling people sorry, you can't come in. so i want to thank the president of mexico. thank you very much. and for venezuela, it will all work. it will all come back. and good things will happen. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much, everybody. >> sandra: president trump meeting with world leaders during the united nations assembly here in new york city. we're going to keep an eye on the president and his ongoing this morning. he has a busy schedule throughout the morning and throughout the day. meanwhile, 24 minutes after the
official public release of that transcript, listen to the president here. >> president trump: i know that's what you want to hear. >> let me do the introductions. mr. president, let me say how proud i am to be part of everything that you have led in this effort to try to bring the venezuelan christs to a peaceful resolution. the work of the lima group has been important. a sign of a new era in latin america and like your nations, the united states is tired of the heartbreaking stories of venezuelans forced to dig through trash cans for food, hospital patients dying and children going to bed hungry. 94% of venezuelan household can't get their basic necessities. >> sandra: mike pompeo continuing with that meeting in new york city. nancy pelosi spoke moments ago saying she hasn't read the transcript from the meeting -- the phone call with the ukrainian president but she
just said this. >> i haven't seen it so i have just come from our own meeting. the transcript is -- the fact is that the president of the united states and his constitutional responsibilities has asked a foreign government to help in his political campaign at the expense of our national security, as well as undermining the integrity of our election. that cannot stand. he will be held accountable. no one is above the law. >> sandra: the speaker of the house a moment ago. john roberts. >> she said i haven't seen the transcript and proceeds to condemn the president on the transcript she hasn't read. the point of the transcript is, the big thing that everybody was talking about was that there was a quid pro quo. was the president withholding some $391 million in military and other aid to the ukraine
with the condition that zelenskiy had to open an investigation into biden. that language or even that suggestion exists nowhere in this document. and yet without having seen the document, nancy pelosi says that the president abdicated his constitutional duties and sought help for his election campaign and then there is the idea of the quid pro quo. if you look at this document and you believe that the people who were in the situation room who transcribed it, transcribed it accurately. >> sandra: it is public by the way. anyone can read it now. >> what democrats will say is that this paragraph as catherine mentioned talking about the purchase of javelin missiles, the aid that the u.s. has provided, the fact that the europeans have not stepped up. this is what democrats will say and the very next line saying i would like you to do us a favor. and saying there is a lot of
talk about biden's son. so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. they will say that is an implied -- that conversation that preceded it is implied. will that be the moment that gets a vote on an impeachment article? obviously nancy pelosi doesn't think so yet. she hasn't moved to vote to authorize an inquiry. >> bill: seems around 200. >> sandra: the quote you're talking about. number three. i would like to you do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it. this is president trump talking to the ukraine president. i would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. they say crowd strike. i guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server. they say ukraine has it. >> a rorschach test. a lot of things that democrats will say it's implied and the
gop will say it's not clear and that's your interpretation of it, right? the mention of javelin was by president zelenskiy. we had president trump saying i wouldn't say it's reciprocal. things are happening, not good. talking about other countries, united states has very good to ukraine. democrats will see that as him implying a form of pressure. i want to point out that same subject to interpretation we've seen with the hunter biden situation that was also covered in here which is that the argument by the democrats already is that the ukrainian probe was shelved before the actions by the vice president. that hunter was never accused of wrongdoing by ukrainian authorities and that prosecutor was widely criticized by the west as being and failing to tackle corruption. they're seeing all of this as the complete opposite the gop will. final point again we have not yet moved for articles. there has been no vote. and just like in august what chairman nadler said to cnn was we'll figure it out by the end of the year. this is still part of that
investigation. there has been no formal vote yet. it all goes into the pot. >> bill: the reason why they probably hasn't been that vote is because they don't have a simple majority to move forward. i believe the last count was 199 or even 200 in the democratic caucus. >> you saw a shift in the past 24, 48 hours of some moderates who won in trump districts that said i'm for an inquiry, not for impeachable offenses. one other point gibson from the d.o.j. saying the only criminal violation being considered a referral frr the i.g. at the intelligence community was the consideration of a campaign finance law. and the criminal division at d.o.j. concluded they did not and could not make a criminal finance violation under the statute. in other words, they didn't have value in what they saw in the evidence of this transcript. >> bill: significant point. andy mccarthy joins our conversation on bret's point. is that bill barr's call ultimately or how does it work
there? >> it is bill barr's call but i'm glad you mentioned bill barr. i think, you know, we had a certain context that we expected this to fit into, which is that the whole idea of a quid pro quo, trump supposedly was pressing on ukraine to help his political campaign. now that you read this transcript and you also see -- think about the timing of this right after mueller's testimony, but the mentions of attorney general barr in the transcript and the president wanting zelenskiy to speak to barr. he is asking ukraine to assist the ongoing investigation by barr into the origins of the trump/russia investigation which barr as early as march or
so stated that he was -- that it was underway, that he had assigned durham and that was ongoing. now, i realize that the democrats don't like that investigation and they see it as, you know, political and it is kind of a dichotomy here. we're also supposed to say the mueller investigation was totally on the up and up because it was trying to get to the bottom of whether trump was in a conspiracy with russia. whereas the barr investigation is the bad political thing that is supposed to undermine the integrity of the mueller investigation. but the fact of the matter is they are both investigations by the united states. this is not the trump campaign. this is an ongoing justice department investigation into how the f.b.i. and the justice department behaved in connection with the origins of the trump/russia investigation. that's a legitimate investigation of the united states. that's not the trump campaign.
>> bill: the reason why that's important, john durham is a prosecutor out of connecticut handpicked by bill barr to lead the investigation. he can impanel a grand jury and interview people not in the government now. that would be a deeper and longer investigation that mueller was involved, is that correct? >> that's right. there is nothing wrong with the president of the united states asking one of his counterparts to lend assistance to an investigation that the united states justice department thinks is important enough to conduct. >> sandra: john roberts, the reaction on capitol hill. want to get in how different people, different sides are interpreting what we're digging through and reading ourselves here since it came out at the top of the 10:00 hour. let me read you this just posted a minute ago from david axelrod from the obama administration. the transcript released today
devastating. you would have to bend yourself in extraordinary contortions to defend it and imply indicates the a.g. the in what is a wholely improper political. what further reaction are you seeing from both sides? >> my twitter feed is blowing up with democrats saying this is horrible for the president. this is more reason why we should go down this road of impeach: you have republicans saying the opposite thing. this political climate has become to polarized that there is no one looking at this and saying hum, let's take a look at both sides. either you are on one side or the other. on the issue of the javelins, too. the sale of those anti-tank missiles was approved in late 2017. so i asked and pinged him back to find out if the new sale of javelins was part of the $350 million in aid put on hold.
when he talks about the javelins, this was a sale approved back in late 2017. back to the politics of this. democrats are so deep into this that i would think only the most moderate of democrats might look at this and say hum, doesn't appear to be any obvious quid pro quo, maybe we should slow walk this. they are on the train and they are going for it. >> bill: abigail spanberger from virginia she flipped a seat with a c.i.a. background and was with us last hour. she was pretty head strong on going forward with this before she had heard from the whistle-blower, before she had seen the transcript. there was no equivocation in her voice as to the direction where she was headed. >> you know, in this d.o.j. analysis, too, of the whistle-blower complaint and whether or not there was a crime committed. the office of the director of
national intelligence said the reason they didn't give the complaint to congress was because it was about a person who was outside of the intelligence community. and that the inspector general deals with people who work for the intelligence community. but there is also here on page 6 beginning at the paragraph that says the complainant describes a here say report. so this whole thing began with third hand knowledge. now we have the transcript out so we're filling in a lot of the blanks. >> sandra: we just heard from nancy pelosi a short time ago saying she hadn't read it yet. we got reaction from kevin mccarthy. we have that for you. >> make no mistake, yesterday was a dark day for america. it was a dark day for the rule of law that the speaker of the house would claim a president violated the law without ever having any information to judge it on. it was a dark day for national security. but you were willing to
jeopardize the national security of our country today and in the future because of your own political bias. name me one world leader, regardless of who sits in the oval office, how honest a conversation they'll have if they're fearful that the transcripts will become public to the world? it was a dark day for the rule of law. that a president is going to be held guilty without any proof in the process. >> bill: that's andy mccarthy from the hill a moment ago. they had a press conference previously scheduled. the democrats come out in a moment and we'll share that with you. listen to andy mccarthy and emily and john and bret. you are all saying the same thing. that is this is open to interpretation. and how do you want to read it and measure the words of the president during a conversation that we're reading on paper?
>> i also think it's important on the d.o.j. analysis that we should also go through with a fine tooth comb. they say the president has not spoken to the attorney general about investigating biden. has not asked the a.g. to contact ukraine. and that barr has not communicated with ukraine on this or any subject. the president says this once in this phone call. >> sandra: it's number 6. might as well put it on the screen. this is the president talking about giuliani and their phone call will take place. i will have mr. giuliani give you a call to the ukraine president and i'm also going to have attorney general barr call and we'll get to the bottom of it. i'm sure you will figure it out. >> that's what i was referencing. zelenskiy is the person, the president of ukraine, who brings up giuliani first in this conversation and mentions that investigation. he brings him up.
the president then follows up and mentions biden and hunter biden. as far as i can see, only once. he references it twice in a 30-minute call. that's not to take away from the import of it and the fact that democrats are literally saying they are gobsmacked by the white house choosing to release this. they're saying this is horrific. but republicans are saying what are you looking at that gets you to that conclusion? >> sandra: can i squeeze this in? 10:04 was the time mccarthy started speaking. one of the producers said at the end of the gop press conference he was asked a question specifically about the transcript and he was unaware the transcript had already been released and made public. what you heard from leader mccarthy were his words before he saw the transcript. >> bill: you worked at the white house, bret and john that's your beat at the moment. when you consider the fact this transcript has been released i
believe the white house position is it's a one-shot deal and we won't do it again. i wonder if there is a new precedent here set and you wonder, too, what democrats -- what the next ask will be from those one of six committees. >> it is possible. for example, this is the second telephone call that president trump had with zelenskiy. this is after the parliament won the majority of seats. he also had a call previous to this. did that conversation begin back then? i'm told the way that the president released this call is it really limits the presidential nature of this because there was some as the it approval by ukraine. secretary pompeo got permission from ukraine to release it and told there was another conversation as well that i'm not at liberty to discuss. it would limit the ability to democrats to say you released this and let's release another.
>> bill: the meeting today that much more newsworthy. it will be fascinating. if ukraine said you can release the transcript the ukrainian will say his perception of that side of the call. >> sandra: the hottest ticket in town. lindsey graham is speaking right now. here is the senator. >> if he think he is corrupt and you think it's in the national interest of the united states. a lot of people felt the guy was corrupt. the one thing i think has to be dealt with here is that the son of the vice president was receiving a lot of money from the ukraine and some of the sources of the funds were under investigation by the prosecutor. i don't know what the right answer is. i just hope somebody will look at it and i don't mind the president bringing up the idea of maybe the giep was fired because of a conflict of interest. >> how is it not inappropriate the president asked the president of another country to look into a political rival running for election possibly against him in the primary next
year? >> i don't know what you looked at. i think it's appropriate for the president of the united states to suggest you had a corruption problem and the prosecutor that was fired maybe was because he was corrupt or maybe because he was looking at something close to america here. the vice president's son was receiving money from the ukraine. was on the board of a company that was the subject of investigation. the question that got me going was did the president of the united states suggest to the ukraine i will withhold money unless you go after my political rival. the answer is absolutely not. that is why i wanted the phone call to be released. i wanted mueller to do his job and phone calls released. now i want to know from the whistle-blower. who told you about the phone call if you were not on it yourself? who is it in the system that went to this person? why did they pick this person to tell about a phone call?
why did the whistle-blower file a complaint he had no direct knowledge of? >> do you want the senate committee to be involved at all? >> the senate sent it to the intel committee. >> they asked you to bring in attorney general bill barr to ask him about all this. will you invite him? >> it's my understanding the case has been referred to the intel committee. i will look at what happened here. before i knew what was in the phone call i said it's a privileged matter clearly. but the aria around the phone call was disturbing. did the president of the united states take money that was going to the ukraine and threat en to withhold it if he did not get help in his reelection? the answer is no. did joe biden threaten to withhold money if you don't fire somebody in the ukraine? yes. maybe there is a good reason to do that but here is the elephant in the room. the person he asked to be fired
was investigating companies your son was part of. i don't care to look at it. somebody outside of politics. from my point of view joe biden is a decent guy but there is a conflict here. it's okay to talk about an obvious conflict. >> [inaudible question] >> did any of them have a family member working in the ukraine. it may be justified this guy was corrupt. i know this. the person arguing for him to be fired had a conflict of interest. if you don't see that conflict you are blind. if you don't see that there is a double standard here when it comes to trump and everybody else, you are blind. you are willfully blind. if this had been a republican you would be asking what relationship did your son's involvement in the ukraine have to your decision to call for the guy to be fired? did "the new york times" tip off the vice president there was an investigation involving companies your son may be part
of? i'm not accusing them of anything but there is plenty of conflict that somebody should look at. >> whistleblowers complaint is not just about this -- >> bill: lindsey graham. we'll pop around a lot for several hours. here is chuck schumer on the senate floor now. >> where we can look at the facts, not the politics and come to conclusions. because without doubt, the white house and the president's congressional allies will rush to call this effort a partisan witch hunt. no matter how serious the allegations. or how even handed the inquiry. i would remind everyone that just yesterday every senate republican agreed that the white house's decision to block the whistle-blower complaint from congress was wrong. there was unanimous bipartisan agreement in the senate on that point. not a single senator objected. but let me be clear nonetheless, because i know
accusations of partisanship are already being written. this inquiry was not taken up for partisan reasons and it does not pre-judge an outcome. our framers in their wisdom assigned to one chamber of commerce the right to accuse and to the other the right to judge. the house of representatives will investigate and determine whether sufficient evidence exists to accuse the president of an impeachable offense or impeachable offenses. if it comes to that, the senate will be the scene of the trial. senators the jurors. we must take our responsibility with the utmost gravity. our framers, not trusting our liberty to one branch of government alone, afraid of the ever-present danger of tyranny of an overreaching executive, provided a remedy to congress
should the executive attempt to subvert or violate the constitution of the united states. we are not yet at the stage where any judgments can be made one way or the other. but i remind my colleagues today that if the day should come when we are called upon to carry out our constitutional duty, history will judge whether we did so faithfully or not. history will judge if each of us acted as a solemn juror of democracy who placed fidelity to the constitution and our system of government above the narrow considerations of partisan politics. now on another issue not directly related, but -- >> bill: there is chuck schumer's position. we'll pop around. when things become relevant we'll take you there. a couple things back with john
and emily and bret &y mccarthy is still riding shotgun at well. there is a lot to cover here and we'll try to digest it as best we can with our viewers. when mccarthy said based on this whole interpretation matter is that if you go back to the server comment and crowd strike, you could assume or interpret that the president was talking about the u.s. investigation as to how the whole russia matter began. that's one point. the second point with regard to transcripts that we were just discussing, if i'm a committee head on one of these six democratic committees, i'm pining for more transcripts. you talk to zelenskiy another day? what was the day? what was said? to that point this is going to go on. if anybody thought that today was going to remove the issue from washington, we've tumbled forward to a new era. >> it is supercharged.
it will now dominate much like russia dominated for some time before we saw the mueller report and bob mueller testifying, this moment will dominate and what is so striking is how the two sides look at it. the white house looking at this call as exculpatory. democrats looking at this saying how could you put this out? this is your fingerprints on what they see as a direct quid pro quo talking about the foreign money and asking for a favor about joe biden's son. >> bill: the other thing on lindsey graham. you will start hearing about china and rudy giuliani has been out there for a week. they went on offense trying to make sure they get these topics out there. they believe that hunter biden did something in china as well. back to the -- >> to cover it fairly you have to cover all those aspects of it. if any news organization is just covering one side you will want to say is there there on
the other side? >> bill: here is the president across town in new york. >> president trump: the single greatest witch hunt in american history. probably in history, but in american history. it is a disgraceful thing. the letter was a great letter meaning the letter revealing the call. that was done at the insistence of myself and other people that read it. it was a friendly letter. no pressure. the way you had that built up that call, it would be the call from hell. it turned out to be a nothing call other than a lot of people said i never knew you could be so nice. so part of the problem you have is you have the fake news, you have a lot of corrupt reporting, you have some very fine reporters and journalists but a lot of corrupt reporters and journalists. i would rate you right in there, by the way. excuse me, excuse me. so we're having -- if you notice the stock market went up when they saw the nonsense. all of a sudden, the stock
market went down substantially yesterday when they saw a charge. after they read the charge the stock market went up very substantially. we have created the greatest economy in the history of our country. the greatest economy in the world. had my opponent won, china would right now be the number one economy by far. and right now china is way behind us and they will never catch us if we have smart leadership, way behind. we picked up trillions of dollars and they've lost trillions of dollars. and they want to make a deal very badly. it could happen. could happen. it could happen. it could happen sooner than you think. our military is rebuilt, our military has never been stronger. when i came in it was depleted. our vets are happy. so many great things are happening and the democrats feel they are going to lose. we had the highest poll number rasmussen 53. a lot of people don't want the
talk about it but want to vote for trump. i just say this, we have the strongest country we've ever had. we have the best economy we've ever had. we have the best unemployment numbers we've ever had. we have the best employment numbers we've ever had. we have now almost 160 million people working. that's far more than we have ever had working in our country before. thank you very much, everybody. thank you. thank you very much. [shouted [inaudible question] >> bill: sounds like a new york bar in mid town manhattan. >> bill: the restaurant i went to last night. there is a series of events today with the president in new york city. owl -- you'll see a lot of this. i would imagine based on the
first step he took on the u.n. on monday morning he will talk to a camera every time. back to three of these major points about what democrats do in congress. i think we can forecast which way they're headed based on what we're seeing so far. the immediate reaction. i think with regard to the joe biden conversation, what is the peril for him as one of the frontrunners right now in a national campaign to win that nomination. >> the democrats have invited a lot more scrutiny of biden. the javelins were given in the spring of 2018 and were not part of this new package that was more to do with encrypted communications equipment and other things. >> sandra: let's not forget the last we heard from joe biden leading up to this and the demanding of this transcript. i read this directly from his twitter account. this is the last he posted on
that. desperate donald trump knows i can beat him and he is enlisting a foreign government again. that was days before now we have the official release of that transcript. bret, you were talking about the reporting on all this leading up to this moment and what we have heard from democrats so specifically remarking on what would appear in that transcript. and now. >> well, look at the evolution of the reporting. you had first that the president was going to withhold funds and demand an investigation. then you had that he mentioned eight times the bidens and biden investigation and pressure. and the quid pro quo would be clear. none of those things are in this transcript. as we mentioned, it is implied and democrats will say he is talking about foreign aid and the aid to ukraine and says i need a favor. he mentions biden once. he doesn't mention the word
investigate or investigation any time. he says look into. my point is that the reporting ahead of this was not right and now it is going to evolve and it will shift. >> bill: back to the biden issue here and i'll bring you back in as well. there is a debate in october. joe biden made a statement and took no questions. at what point is he under pressure to take questions or at what point do his democratic contenders take him on in this? is it before october or not? >> i think that remains to be seen. we know he has worked at the behest of his campaign manager. we talked earlier strategically and especially for viewers he could be the sacrificial lamb that el izeth warren's rise in the polls. there has been a shift in polls in iowa. the democrats see that and want
to put her as the frontrunner they will let him become the sacrificial lamb. >> the flip side he fights and the moment he gets his spotlight and pushes him up. the problem is that there are details here and don junior tweeted out i think if my business dealings looked like hunter biden's business dealings how big a story would this be? >> that's right. >> bill: allegations that he took a billion dollars plus from a chinese investment company. >> here is a quote from the transcript we haven't put up yet that could signal what the future is for joe biden. zelenskiy says the next prosecutor general -- this person has been appointed -- will be 100% my person, my candidate. will be approved by the parliament and start in september. he is on the job. here it is. he or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue.
now that can be crowd strike, it can also be burisma. if this new prosecutor is looking into burisma, we'll hear a lot more about joe and hunter biden in the next few months. >> what it highlights in anticipation of the meeting later. a lot of this eyebrow raising content came from president zelenskiy, not from the mouth of president trump. the word investigation, etc. that came from that president. birds eye view for viewers. what matters as we progress down this inevitable impeachment lane are the 31 votes of democrats who came from red states that took back the house in the latest election. it is them that the democrats would need to sway. final point, the democrats going into this as we know had two arguments against the president. one was the content and the second was the allegation that he was stonewalling the investigation. with him producing this transparently and saying here is the sunshine they don't have the second argument as we go down this route with them essentially or potentially going into the courts in terms
of their subpoena power. look for that argument to be made. >> unless they have a vote they do not have the power of the impeachment inquiry in court for subpoenas. the question is, is this high crimes and misdemeanors? is this transcript, this inference enough to get there? and that's what is being debated. >> bill: ultimately in the impeachment argument on the house side you don't have to prove a high crime or misdemeanor, you can just vote and say it is and the power that's given to congress. >> the senate has to vote to convict. >> one other point in all this, too. chuck schumer and other democrats are screaming to see the complaint from the whistle-blower. they may see about that. >> sandra: what are we hearing on that? >> the general council of the odni said it can't be transmitted to congress because it is not in the intelligence
community. the whistle-blower has indicated to the director of national intelligence they intend to go before congress may make the legality about releasing it a little bit squishy. the white house is looking into all of this now and i'm told by senior white house officials that if they can find a legal basis to release this to congress, they will get it out there. they want to get it out there. >> it highlights the tension between all the branches. the other side will disagree with the conclusions and heads to the court that drags it out unless one side caves or gives. >> the president had no reason to believe this phone call would be made public. if he really wanted to put the stiff arm to the ukrainian president, he could have. he didn't know that this would be made public. obviously he has since said he knew other people were on the call. but this transcript is what it is if we are to believe --
>> bill: back to your point is this a high crime or misdemeanor? >> sandra: we'll hear more from both sides. graham said what a nothing quid pro quo burger. reaction from both sides continues. the transcript of that phone call between the president of the united states and the president of ukraine released at the top of the 10:00 hour eastern time and reaction is pouring in from the president and both sides of the aisle. >> bill: it is 11:00 in new york. we begin a new hour here on "america's newsroom." with us john roberts from the white house, emily come pagno from the legal side of it. bret bare and andy mccarthy. we want to go back to catherine herridge. we spoke 45 minutes ago. let's begin anew with you. hello. >> good morning. just to recap we've had a chance to review this transcript. five pages in length.
and the focus is this july 25th phone call between the president and his european counterpart ukrainian counterpart. phone call that lasted between 9:03 and 9:33 a.m. after the president congratulates zelenskiy on his election victory they talk about foreign aid. the president feels the europeans ought to be doing more to carry their weight and the ukrainian president responds he is eager to work the united states and proceed with a deal to purchase defense equipment. and this is the key section of the transcript. it's when the president has a series of asks. the first one is a little confusing because of the language but the reference to crowd strike appears to be a reference to the forensic cybersecurity firm that did the review of the clinton email hack by the russians. and it reads quote, i would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has
been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it. i would like you the find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. they say crowd strike. that's the forensic cybersecurity firm that was active in 2016 when clinton's emails were hacked. i guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server, they say ukraine has it and then we have the section that relates to vice president joe biden and his son, hunter biden. i want to emphasize to folks at home. there are not a dozen references. there is a key section with a principal reference and two follow on references. the president says there is a lot of talk about biden's son the biden stopped the prosecution. a lot of people want to find out about that. whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. biden bragged that he stopped the prosecution so you can look into it. it sounds horrible to me. and then the ukrainian president responds he ran on
the anti-bribery, anti-corruption platform and says the next attorney general in his country will be 100% my person and he tells the president, quote, he or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. that's the hunter biden company. the issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue to restore the honesty. he ran on the anti-corruption platform. we'll take care of that and work on the investigation of the case. then the president follows on and responds i will have mr. giuliani give you a call and i'm also going to have attorney general barr call and we'll get to the bottom of it. i'm sure you will figure it out. one of the key takeaways from this section there is a discussion of the former vice president and his son but it is not sprinkled throughout the whole conversation or not repeated many, many times in what would be seen as an effort to pressure the ukrainian president. but then the president does say that he will get his attorney,
rudy giuliani and then the attorney general of the united states to engage with the ukrainians to try to resolve this matter. the justice department has been firm on this point telling reporters today that attorney general william barr was not made aware of the phone call until several weeks after it happened. so sometime in mid-august and that he has never been asked by the president to investigate joe biden and that he has never been asked to call the ukraine, bill. >> bill: catherine, that's a lot. we're hearing from the justice department when the whistle-blower came to them with the complaint, they consulted with the justice manual and i'm reading from their statement. based on the facts and applicable law there was no campaign finance violation. no further action was warranted. do we reach a point where bill barr goes before congress and explains how they make this decision or is this what the head of the dni is all about tomorrow on the hill?
>> the dni would not address the legal question of whether there was a campaign finance violation. i just kind of want to rewind a second. one of the big revelations for me this morning is that after the inspector general in the intelligence community, the watchdog. he did not see evidence connected to foreign aid. what he saw here was a possible violation of campaign finance laws. if that makes you say whoa, how would that work? the way it would work is the premise that the president's ask to the ukrainian president to look into an individual who might ultimately be his opponent was a campaign finance violation. so it was a thing of value. but what justice department officials said to us today is that after they got the referral and then there was a referral to the f.b.i. and they looked at the manual, they said it did not meet the standard.
this legal standard for a thing of value. so it did not warrant prosecution. and i emphasize that because this is sort of a long distance away from the earlier reporting that was anonymously sourced that it was a quid pro quo over u.s. aid to the ukraine. just one final point here, we also learned and it backed up our earlier reporting at fox news the whistle-blower did not have firsthand knowledge of the phone call. the question is how did they know about it in the first place? what justice department officials told us is that white house officials relayed the information to the whistle-blower and then they also indicated that the whistle-blower had indications of a political bias in this case. the icig said we'll put that one-to-one side. we think there is something here and we'll pursue it. that's when it went to the nation's top spy, the director of national intelligence. >> bill: simple and
straightforward question. will we hear from bill barr again today? would you expect that? yes or no. >> i don't want speculate on that. i just don't know. >> bill: catherine, thank you. >> sandra: joining us now martha maccallum joining our all-star lineup. john roberts on set as well. good morning. your take on things so far, martha? >> i go back to something in terms of the timeline and what was happening around this. we talked yesterday about the fact it was one day after the mueller investigation had sort of been lifted off of the president's shoulders and it raised the question. why in god's name would the president talk about anything along the lines of could you help me out with my next election and joe biden the very day after he finally has this lifted off of him? what is so interesting in this transcript you get a sense of where the president is on that issue at that moment and he wants to keep digging.
he wants full exoneration. he wants the origin of the russia examination to be looked at. the thrust of the talk of the transcript is please let us know what you can about what was going on in ukraine with regard to the server. he doesn't say manafort but that's the indication. some of the people in his campaign were being dug into and the new president assuring him. before the question of biden. he said i can send bill barr and rudy giuliani. bill barr is overseeing the john durham investigation and we haven't heard from the i.g. there is a lot here that goes to what i'm calling issue one in the transcript which i think is the origins of the russia investigation. then it takes the turn and he says the president says good, because i heard you had a prosecutor who was very good who got fired and that is when it turns to joe biden. but zelenskiy says i want to tell you more about that
prosecutor because the person that we have coming in is going to be someone who supports my side of looking at the future in ukraine. so clearly the president does say so whatever you can do with the attorney general, that would be great. biden went around bragging he had stopped the prosecution. if you can look into it. it sounds horrible to me. democrats will say gives them substance. >> sandra: that's the reaction on capitol hill from democrats, bret. democrats are running -- taking this transcript to show that the president on that phone call pushed the ukrainian president to investigate or look into matters of joe biden days after he froze the aid to ukraine. >> yeah. they are frankly astonished that the white house would put out this transcript. it is how you look at it. the prism from which you look through it. i will just note to follow on catherine's point earlier. we now have more than the
whistle-blower had. we have seen more and know more than the whistle-blower had. we have the transcript to the call, we have the d.o.j. response, and it is just interesting in that context at how this all was launched. >> sandra: we could hear from the whistle-blower this week, right? >> maybe not publicly. the house and senate intel committee will hear from him or her. >> not likely they would testify but martha makes a very good point here because the one thing that has driven president trump nuts through this whole thing is the idea that he did not win the election by himself. that he needed russia's help to win the election. or that he needed somebody else's help. the idea he still wants to get to the bottom of that is an idea that's very much alive. now, in terms of -- remember this all began with he had a conversation with the president
of ukraine and there was a promise made. a quid pro quo made. catherine herridge mentioned that. there doesn't appear to be any quid pro quo. the only mention of anything military in here is when zelenskiy says we're ready to by more javelins. javelins were not part of the lethal military aid promised and put on hold. that aid involved sniper rifls, counter artillery, command and control. electronic warfare and night vision and military and medical treatment. >> bill: the reason that's important is because? >> it's not mentioned in this. >> bill: thank you. we'll get a quick break here. john ratcliffe, the republican from texas, is on and waiting next. we'll speak to him about how he interprets this and a lot more. stay tuned. the news continues in a moment as we roll on.
our dad was in the hospital. because of smoking. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how. i need all the breaks as athat i can get.or, at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.
mortgage rates are down! t news for veterans with va loans. and you could lower your monthly payments right away by calling newday now. you can refinance at newday usa with no income verification, no appraisal, and no points and save over 1,000 dollars a year. lower rates means lower payments. get the most of your va mortgage benefits. refi now at newday usa. refinance now and save. >> president trump: just so you understand, it is the single greatest witch hunt in american history, probably in history. but in american history. it's a disgraceful thing. the letter was a great letter meaning the letter revealing the call. that was done at the insistence of myself and other people that read it. it was a friendly letter. no pressure. the way you had that built up,
that call, it was going to be the call from hell. it turned out to be a nothing call other than a lot of people said i never knew you could be so nice. >> sandra: that was the president a few moments ago here in new york city. texas congressman john ratcliffe a republican who serves on the judiciary and intelligence committees. good morning. that was the president reacting. to the release of that transcript. just over an hour ago. your reaction to that this morning, sir. >> the president knew what was on that transcript. the rest of us didn't. we were told by the democrats what it was going to be. yesterday nancy pelosi stood in front of the american people i talked about impeachment by collusion and conspiracy, impeachment by the president using a sharpy on a hurricane weather map. we had evidence of all of these crimes. this time i really mean it. we have a transcript and whistle-blower where the president had corrupt intent to influence the head of the ukrainian government to do something he didn't want to do.
we waited and got the transcript and the president was telling the truth and nancy pelosi wasn't. there is no quid pro quo. the president never mentioned military aid. there wasn't anything but admiration from president zelenskiy for president trump. it wasn't what the democrats promised and once again there is -- they came up empty. >> sandra: some democrats are making the case it's worse than what they expected and that it clearly shows the president was pushing a foreign leader, the president of the ukraine, to look into or investigate joe biden and his family. to that you say what? >> i say read the transcript. you know, what they told us was that there was a whistle-blower that would provide all the details. bret just made a good point there, the best evidence of what happened is this transcript and look for the things that the democrats promised. i didn't see joe biden's name mentioned eight times. i didn't say will withhold military aid unless you do this. what i heard was a conversation
that should take place outside of public view between two heads of state that is in the public view because the democrats were demanding the president conclusively prove his innocence. i think he has done that today. he has done so by harming national security through what the democrats were demanding. these are conversations that shouldn't be made public. but the president had to do that to conclusively determine his -- prove his innocence and prevent this impeachment search party from going any further. >> bill: ocasio-cortez tweeted her first message. she puts in quotes, i would like you to do us a favor which seems to be the line she has focused in from the transcript. and then she adds folks, i'm surprised the white house released this. it's worse than we thought. the president sought to use the powers of the united states government to investigate a political opponent. we have no choice but to impeach. i don't think that comment
would necessarily be a surprise to you coming from the democratic congresswoman from new york. she staked her position several months ago on that. it appears that they're at 200. do you think they're higher than that? can they get to 218 to proceed? >> i don't know and frankly it doesn't matter. those folks in the american public that read this transcript know that they have been searching for a reason to impeach the president. they keep coming up empty. this transcript doesn't give them impeachable evidence. there is nothing untoward or any corrupt influence exerted in the words in these transcripts. i think it's clear to anyone that will look at this objectively. alexandria ocasio-cortez and nancy pelosi and everyone else went way out on a limb promised something that wasn't in the transcript and now they don't want to back up on that because they know their political lives are at stake. >> sandra: we are just getting
a message now. the d.o.j. concluding the president was not asking for a thing of value. at issue here was the criminal violation being considered, the campaign finance law was being looked at. the d.o.j. is concluding that whatever this was, it was not a thing of value. i'm reading that directly from a statement from the d.o.j. if you want to jump in as we get the news, congressman. >> what we heard yesterday was speaker pelosi declared there was a violation of law with respect to this procedure. that there was a requirement that this be turned over to congress. d.o.j. is also weighing in on that. very clearly this fell without -- outside of the whistle-blower statute. so the democrats continue to make false accusations about crimes that didn't occur, promise evidence that don't exist, and they can never deliver and in this case they have harmed our national security. do you think that mr. zelenskiy is happy about having his
conversations about macron and merck will out there for a world to see and don't you think it will influence any conversation that president trump or any president that follows him? the democrats have harmed our national security today trying to harm president trump. >> bill: the left are suggesting it isn't a complete transcript. that's what the allegations are. d.o.j. says they interviewed people knowledgeable with the process for creating the transcript and confident the document is adequate. >> i hear a lot of excuses for why it doesn't say what they thought it would say. we know we promised it, now it is not an accurate transcript. that's a bunch of garbage. democrats will keep making excuses and keep coming up empty. >> bill: we're out of time and we appreciate yours. we'll get cut off by the computer. john ratcliffe. thank you for coming here today >> sandra: just over an hour after the official transcript
was released on the conversation between the president and the president of ukraine. reaction is pouring in and you can read it at fox news.com. we'll have breaking news continuing. thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free ♪ not owing anyone anything is the best feeling in the world, i cannot stop smiling about it ♪ it's what gives audible there'smembers an edge.ening; it opens our minds, changes our perspective, connects us, and pushes us further. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories: audible.
>> president trump: no pressure whatsoever. if you take a look at the democrats, they went down to see the president of ukraine and they asked him for all sorts of things and don't go with the republicans and stay with us and like it's a political war. they shouldn't have done that. that should be an impeachable event i guess based on what you are saying. the democrats just came out and went down there, a group of people. some of whom i was dealing with on the gun issue and put tremendous pressure on ukraine. the president himself came out with a statement saying there was no pressure put on him. >> sandra: the president
reacting to the full release of that unredacted transcript of the phone call with the president of ukraine back in july. guy lewis, former u.s. attorney who serves with william barr in the justice department under george w. bush. your reaction to what we've seen unfold? >> i don't think the transcript is going to change anybody's mind, democrats or republicans. it is just going to -- they'll pick and choose and enhance their ability. what i find interesting is the sort of see how both sides have gone through and looked at this. the democrats yesterday have really investigated, tried, convicted, and sentenced the president without ever talking to a witness, without even seeing the transcript or reviewing the conversation. and frankly, i think you are going to see the president of the ukraine come out probably today maybe and say look, there
was no pressure, there was no quid pro quo, nothing. you compare that, bill, with the republicans. they got the whistle-blower complaint. they sent it forward to the i.g. and to the department of justice, barr and his team of professionals have looked at it. look what they have not done which i find fascinating. they have not opened a grand jury. they have not said this is a criminal violation. they looked at it and they've seen it for what it is, which is a lot of nothing. >> bill: so bill barr gets the complaint. he looks at it and says there is no campaign finance violation here. how high is the legal bar to determine that, guy? >> that's a great question. you have to have some evidence of an offense to really open up a case and start looking at it. when i was a prosecutor, if we got something that it looked right, it sort of smelled right you look at the whistle-blower here even. he or she whoever it was,
wasn't present, didn't participate, has no firsthand knowledge and then we find out is a partisan. that's not the kind of evidence, credible evidence that i open up an impeachment inquiry on and certainly go forward at trial. this is not a convictable offense. >> sandra: where do things go next? obviously, guy, right now you look at some of the reaction out there who says there is a case to be made that the president was clearly trying to push a foreign leader to act after freezing funds days beforehand. legally speaking, looking at what is exactly in this transcript, can anything further be made from that? that's the question. >> here is my fear. i hate to mention it because i haven't heard it over the past hour and a half. listen, you've got the house democrats who control schiff, nadler, the question is are they really going to be able to
investigate? if the american people are the jury here, if they are fair-minded jurors. i believe they are, can they conclude that nadler and schiff and pelosi are going to investigate this thing fairly and objectively? or does somebody call for -- and i don't even want to say it. but does somebody call for a special prosecutor come in and start looking at this. >> bill: here we go again. >> exactly. i hate to even say it. >> bill: thank you for your time and watching for the past hour and a half. guy lewis in miami. back to bret here. >> the reaction is all over the board. interesting reaction coming in. senator mitt romney, former g.o.p. nominee asked if speaker pelosi should move forward with impeachment inquiry he doesn't want to advise her what to do but deeply troubled by what he sees in the transcript from
mitt romney senator from utah. charlie cook, nonpartisan political analyst, well respected tweeted this. i don't tweet very much but reading transcript has moved me to comment. i was totally underwhelmed by the transcript. after the build-up it was not much more inappropriate said than we hear from the president in a typical week. this will not move malleable voters. the question is will it move votes in the house to impeachment? that is the bar. is this an impeachable offense? and you have different perspectives on this. right now that's the debate. i said earlier that there is no -- as you read the transcript no direct quid pro quo that hits you over the head. i also said the democrats will see an implied quid pro quo by talking about funding and say i need a favor.
>> bill: the president called nancy pelosi to talk about the gun violence legislation. you think about the trade deal with mexico, canada, any action on gun control. my suggestion is that none of it goes anywhere. >> let's look at where we are with the transcript. the democrats are clearly saying this is bad, this is really, really bad and they are even anthony scaramucci is saying this is much worse than i thought it was. >> is that surprising to you that he turned? >> not at all. >> but initially people were breathlessly saying the president promised something to zelenskiy and then it came down to the president is withholding military aid and none of that exists in this transcript. and the investigation seems to be centered around crowd strike and then there is this -- in the 2016 election as martha was pointing out. and then there is this quote here. there is a lot of talk about biden's son.
not biden. there is a lot of talk about biden's son. that biden stopped the prosecution. a lot of people want to find out about that. he is not asking to investigate biden. he is talking about biden's son. so is he asking for zelenskiy to dig up dirt on biden or is he looking for information about biden's son? the one thing it does say in here biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. he bragged about getting rid of the prosecutor suspected of corruption. >> bill: crowd strike is a technology company based out of california. let's get a break here. donna brazile has reaction. >> sandra: john roberts will stay with us. >> bill: to our viewers at home -- the entire transcript right now can be read at fox news.com. check out the website. we're back in a moment right after this.
>> bill: more reaction we're hearing now jerry nadler is demanding that bill barr, the a.g., at a minimum in quotes recuse himself from the ukraine investigation. we'll see where that goes. >> sandra: so it continues this morning. let's bring in donna brazile. former democratic chair and fox news contributor. have you read the transcript? >> oh yeah, i got it here with me and let me just say i find it disturbing. i would find it disturbing. page 3 the president is asking the president of another country about crowd strike. hell, my phone is listed. call me. i was office of the dnc and later became the chair of the democratic committee. we hired crowd strike to detect the type of aggression we were experiencing from the russian government. crowd strike was able to take a replica of our server and turn it over to federal authorities because we needed help in combating what was happening to
us. the information that he is also requesting about mr. biden and mr. biden's son as well as the call mr. giuliani who is not an employee of the united states government. i find it troubling. i also believe that the congress and especially the house should act accordingly, look at the facts. bring in the whistle-blower, bring in more transcripts. let's to get to the bottom of it. >> bill: do you think this meets high crimes and misdemeanors, this five-page transcript? >> that's what we'll learn in the investigation that they are now opening with the inquiry. i'm not one to rush to judgment. i stood behind nancy pelosi from day one when many others said impeach, impeach, impeach. that was before the 2018 election. i stand with nancy pelosi today who believes that it's important that the congressional committees honor the constitution, their oath of office. the framers gave the house and
senate, especially the house, the right to take this step. >> bill: i'm not hearing a yes or no to the question. how many more transcripts will you want now? >> well you know, i'm not an investigator or the lawyer. i would hope the white house turn over the whistle-blower. they never should have stopped this complaint from going directly to congress. maybe that's the yes and no. should they have done that. >> bill: the whistle-blower will be possibly on the hill this week. >> bill, i put this above my partisanship. i put this right where it should go which is the protection of our democracy. that is where this -- >> sandra: your party launched official impeachment proceedings yesterday or launched into impeachment proceedings. did nancy pelosi rush to judgment? was this hinged on the whistle-blower complaint? >> i don't think she rushed to judgment at all. and i hope that people stop rushing to lie and mislead us
so we can find the truth and get to the bottom of it. i support what she did yesterday. again, i was reluctant to come out here. look, sandra, i was a hill staffer during the impeachment of bill clinton back in 1998 and 1999. i was there. i later went over to the dccc as a congressional staffer. took a leave of absence to stench the blowback. i know how it ends and i understand ms. pelosi took this up after consulting with all her lts. >> sandra: allegations of a quid pro quo and assumption it would be revealed once the transcript was released by the white house. did you find it in the five-page transcript? >> the media has given us all kinds of expectations what to expect. i'm looking at the facts. >> bill: 24 hours ago that's what the story was. doesn't appear to be the case a day later. how come? >> i remember when bill barr came out and said things that i took to be the truth and later
i read the mueller report all of those hundreds of pages of mueller report and it was a lot to think about. this is about the protection of our country and the president of the united states is asking another president from a foreign country. what has he learned over the last three years? what is he doing to protect us from foreign meddling in our current election season? that's what i'm focused on. >> bill: what question do you think joe biden needs to answer to with regard to dealings in ukraine for china as it relates to him or his son? >> bill, i recognize everybody wants to switch the subject and divert attention from the president of the united states. i think the president needs to answer all the questions. but as it relates to mr. -- it is a -- look, bill, i've been in this game longer than i care to tell you. joe biden has answered these questions. the fact is that many people do not wish to hear the answer.
he has answered a lot of these questions. >> bill: allow me, please. he made a statement yesterday and left the stage without taking questions. so when does he clarify it? who calls him out potentially at the next debate in october? >> well let me just say this. i recognize that reading the facts don't always make the news. i'm not out here supporting, biden, harris, or anybody. joe biden has answered these questions. the fact that the media now wants to take these questions up. it is once again going back to what happened in 2016. we're back on the same page. we haven't learned a thing from 2016. and yes, if some of the other democrats would like to take this up, take it up. but for now the president of the united states, the president of the united states needs to answer why he called upon a president of a foreign country to interfere and look into our elections.
that is the issue at hand right now. >> bill: all right. donna brazile. thank you for your time today. appreciate your commentary. talk very soon. we mentioned andy mccarthy. he has been listening and watching. he is very keen on the first part of this conversation. he will tell us why in a moment coming up next. you can read it online right now, too. >> sandra: fox news.com. we'll be right back.
>> it's worse than we thought. so the part that really is coming out at me was the ukrainian president saying i would like to buy more missiles to defend ours against russia and the president says yeah, well, can you do me two favors? two political favors? >> sandra: andy mccarthy is standing by. good morning. here we are two hours out from the official release of that
transcript. we looked at the reaction on both sides. where does it go next? >> well, you know, i think that a lot of this, sandra, really comes down to what you think of barr's investigation of the origins of the trump/russia investigation. the democrats i think are determined to portray that as simply a political exercise. and i was listening to donna brazile's comments where she basically says that what she reads this transcript as is trump asking another country to help basically interfere in our election. when i read it, i see trump asking the president of another country, who is looking to be helpful, for help in an ongoing u.s. government investigation into the origins of the
trump/russia investigation to the extent the president believes and the attorney has suggested there were irregularities and evidence there may have been irregularities. if you think that the barr investigation is a political exercise you will have one view of this transcript. and if you think it's a legitimate u.s. government investigation, as i do, then you'll have a different view. >> bill: a lot of these stories, when they are digested and marinate for a while, andy, they change form. we were speaking with john roberts a half hour ago about how different the story was yesterday based on the expectation based on the reporting and expectations we had and how somewhat different they are today. and the other aspect of the story could be, andy, is ukraine is in the middle of a lot of this american political activity. and you think about the story today in the "washington post" by marc thiessen points out
about the democrats' double standard. in the spring three democratic senators wrote a letter to the prosecutor general in ukraine. what was that all about? and then with the question about joe biden from 2016, what was that all about? and your observation about the president being curious what ukraine was doing, because it is clear from this transcript that he thinks the mueller matter may have originated in ukraine if you just read the words on the paper. so where is that? >> that's a big part of it, bill. i think there is not only a ukraine piece. there are a lot of pieces that deal with europe and in particular streams of intelligence from european countries alarmed about some of trump's rhetoric about nato and about russia. streams of intelligence from
those countries coming into the c.i.a. and c.i.a., brennan, director brennan packaging them acting as a clear house to get information to the f.b.i. so i think that's all some of the stuff that barr and john durham, the u.s. attorney from connecticut, are looking at. one of the things that strikes me as you point out and john pointed out, how different things are yesterday than they are today, this seems so very different from other similar investigations that we've had where impeachment was kind of in the air that we've had in recent modern history. as we've often pointed out, you don't need a crime to have impeachment but generally speaking impeachment is at least triggered by a strong or strong suspicion of a crime. it occurs to me whether you are talking about nixon and watergate or iran contra or
clinton/lewinsky. when those investigations were launched and congress started to look at those in a serious way it was against a back drop where everybody had already made up their mind about what offenses had occurred and the investigation had the kind of discipline that a prosecutor wants in an investigation. i never wanted to go into an investigation not knowing what i was looking to prove. i needed to have a good idea of what crime i had reason to believe had been committed so i could organize my thoughts and figure out what witnesses i needed to call and what evidence i needed. what we have here is this sort of loosey goosey thing well maybe this could be possibly a high crime, misdemeanor. maybe not. we'll investigate and find out. that's not usually how you trigger an impeachment investigation. >> bill: so much of this goes back to ukraine. the relationship to russia and vladimir putin. the con trails are obvious. thank you for your time and
>> bill: so we are finding our way through this story while there is other news breaking at the united nations. we had thought this would be a big week for u.s./iran relations and it is. the iranian president giving an interview to chris wallace yesterday. today he is talking about rising tensions between iran and washington the gulf region is quote on the edge of collapse as a single blunder can fuel a big fire, end quote. i bring that to your attention because there is so much focus now right now on the release of this transcript and what comes next in the house.
back to john roberts on this. >> sandra: what could be the hottest ticket in town is the face-to-face meeting with the president and the president of ukraine. >> you have the two players in the room and the president is having a press conference afterward. a legitimate question to ask the president this afternoon why did you ask zelenskiy to look into crowd strike? why were you asking him to look into hunter biden? why is that in the presidential purview to do. at the same time let's look. where we are today compared to where we were yesterday. the lead story all day yesterday was president trump putting a hold on $391 million in military aid to ukraine. that was suspected to be the great quid pro quo that he dangled in front of zelenskiy in exchange for information. we find out the morning that doesn't exist. now there is another direction that everybody is going in. then there is this idea of joe biden. should there be an investigation of joe and hunter
biden? over the weekend in iowa peter doocy said to joe biden have you ever discussed your son's overseas business dealings with him? he said no, i've never discussed it. he had the finger wag going. we believe from everything we know that statement is false. so what did they talk about? what was hunter biden's involvement in ukraine? what was his involvement in china? how did he come out of china with money for a private equity firm. john solomon has a treasure trove of documents that he got from rudy giuliani and his team and will be writing about this. we may know a lot more about it. >> sandra: we'll stay tuned on the fox news channel. adam schiff will hold a news conference moments from now as washington gets a look at the unredacted transcript of that phone call. we'll have more when we return.
what??? no, no no no no. battery power runs out. lifetime retirement income from tiaa doesn't. guaranteed monthly income for life. nooooo! guaranteed monthly income for life. ♪ ♪ around here, the only predictable thing about the weather is it's unpredictable. so we make the most of it when the sun does shine. that's why bp is partnering with lightsource, europe's largest solar company. and should the weather change, yet again, our natural gas can step in. to keep the power flowing and the lights shining. no matter the forecast. at bp, we see possibilities everywhere. to help the world keep advancing.
it's just the way things are. when you're under pressure to get the job done, it seems you have to accept the fact that some equipment will sit idle, or underutilized. but it doesn't have to be that way. that's why united rentals is combining equipment, data, safety and expertise to help your worksite perform better. united rentals. a better worksite is here.
>> bill: so, that happen. >> sandra: just another wednesday. >> bill: yes indeed. more to come, right? >> sandra: [laughs] it was big three hours. more to come through out the day. >> bill: "outnumbered" starts now. we will see you manana on "america's newsroom." >> harris: special d. fox news alert, we are waiting to hear from the president of the united nations. he is set to meet with the japanese prime minister, just hours after the white house released a transcript of the president's call with the ukrainian president, and one day after, speaker nancy pelosi formally announced in in the bh and angry. you're watching "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. with me, melissa francis. host a fox to kennedy , kennedy. but marshall is with us, anchor and executive