tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News September 30, 2019 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
♪ >> neil: welcome, everyone. glad to have you. i'm neil cavuto. glad to have you as we show off our brand-new look. even as we report the impeachment fight, we are on that. forget about how long it drags out. what's remarkable is how quickly it's moving forward. we've got you covered with a guy who's been there and done that when he was guiding bill clinton through the last impeachment. that's right. but former president's chief of staff, leon panetta is here and so is billionaire mark cuban. why he says president trump might have dodged a controversy
in the past but this time it's different and cubans as the president knows it and fears it. to kristin fisher at the white house on how team trump is dealing with it. >> hey, neil. president trump is that he believes he has a right to know who his accuser is, who this was a glorious. about an hour ago he was asked point blank inside the white house, do you know the identity of the whistle-blower? here is what president trump said. >> we are trying to find out about a whistle-blower. you have a whistle-blower who reports things that are incorrect, as you know you're probably not have figured out. the statement i made to the president of ukraine, a good man, a nice man, new. it was perfect. it was perfect. the whistle-blower reported a totally different statement. >> that effort to find out who the whistle-blower is is exactly what the whistle-blower's attorneys are so worried about. they wrote a letter to the acting director of national intelligence saying they are concerned that "our client's
identity will be disclosed publicly in that as a result, or client will be put in harm's way. moreover, certain individuals have issued a $50,000 bounty for any information relating to our client's identity." congressman adam schiff says his committee was already reached an agreement with the whistle-blower that he or she will testify. attorneys for the whistle-blower say the discussions are still ongoing and that no date or time has been set. democrats are moving forward very fast, as for how the white house has responding, so far there has been no effort to set up a formal war room like what was used during the last time there was impeachment drive during the clinton investigation. what we are seeing is really a coordinated messaging campaign but neil, the question is how formal is at the counter messaging strategy and who is in charge of it other than the president himself? speak to kristin fisher at the white house, thank you. "new york times" initially have my next guest supporting the impeachment probe but has since
taken it down. nevada republican congressman joining us. cognizant, thanks for taking the time. they had you supporting this maneuver. that's not the case, right? >> that's correct. >> neil: so what are you doing? you want the hearings to continue or how would you explain it? >> fair question, neil. what am i doing? what i thought i was doing was having a press conference via the telephone with nevada outlets on impeachment. obviously it's a news item. at the conclusion of the 40 minutes, i talked to my counselors and i said i think that went well and then a few hours later we found out that we are for impeaching the president and obviously the weekend has been kind of an exciting one for a guy from nevada. so the fact of the matter is, we voted along with everybody else in the house and senate, to follow regular order to send the whistle-blower thing to the intelligence committees and then basically said listen, let's see
what the committees find out. things that a lot of republicans and democrats instead. there aren't articles running about the democrats saying that they are going to back the president because they want to see with the facts are. or republican saying that. quite frankly, i guess it was just time for you and i met and i got to see your new digs in the first day. >> neil: there you go. it's a funny way of meeting but i appreciate it. let me get your take. it's a part of a process and i'm glad you use the distinction because it's one thing to push impeachment at another thing to allow for hearings to take place where the set up for the hearings to take place. just curious what you think is the direction this is all going. i get a sense in you or they are, you know better than i, that there's a rush to it, almost unprecedented. what do you think? >> i think quite frankly from the earlier attempts from the speaker that waiting didn't do them any good. there was this build up for
comey stuff and the special console and it's like we're not doing that anymore. we are going to go fast. we'll see a fast does any better. if you don't let the facts get in the way, there's a lot of democrats and republicans were instead we are process people. let's see what it says. i don't think it makes them pro or con anything but quite frankly you got a culture of instant gratification among some where it's like they want to declare victory now. they don't want to see the process run and quite frankly if we let go of the process, then i don't know what that leaves. >> neil: republican callings of yours in the senate, mitch mcconnell, susan collins come to mind. they are very concerned by this transcript that's been released by the president, what he had to say to the leader of the ukraine. forget about the impeachment, whether it warrants a high crime or misdemeanor. you know about the subject's, more than i. do you share their concern? >> first of all let me say he
released it, it's not like the old days, watergate, you've got to fight and whatever. it tells you something that i guess head of -- his advisors t. i've read it and it's like well, i'd like to put that in contacts. if it doesn't need any context, then it's like those things standing by themselves aren't a great way to start but it isn't the whole ball game so that's why i think we need the process here. take a look at everything that was going on, if there was a quid pro quo, then show me how and connect those dots and then like i said, i guess unfortunately for me, then you know we'll see where it leads and let the chips fall where they may. >> neil: i understand, that makes sense. thank you very, very much. good seeing you. >> neil: senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has said he i will would have no choice but to hold on impeachment trial of the house moves forward with articles of impeachment. former clinton chief of staff leon panetta with us. he was chief of staff i believe through the impeachment process, were you not?
>> no. >> neil: i apologize. >> i had left the chief of staff job. >> neil: it did start, though, in '97? when did you leave the job? >> i left prior to that. after the election, i think it was early '97 when i came back to california. >> neil: okay. so let me get your take on what's going on now. we are told that at the white house they have established the equivalent of a war room for this. there's no way that you can get a sense for what that means or even if it sounds nearly as foreboding as what was going on everyone bill clinton was being put through this process. did anything like that exist? obviously a white house would be on defense, as with bill clinton for a while, certainly richard nixon before that. it doesn't happen commonly or routinely. could you give me a sense of what happens in this process and how the white house prepares?
by the time everything was picking up steam, you were out of there. but how did this go? >> you would think that the president would care to have at least an organized effort within the white house that would focus totally on this impeachment inquiry and process. i think that would be the recommendation to any president, take the time to establish group of lawyers and trusted aides who can then focus on this issue and properly prepare the white house to respond to what i think is going to be a fairly intensive inquiry into this whole issue. >> neil: i know there is some division among democrats, particularly those who won districts, part of that group that took the house from republicans and winning in districts that the president won or flipping seats that had been
under republican control in their leery of making it look like the party is too zealous to go after this president. what do you think of that? >> well, look. this is a test for our democracy and it's a test frankly for both democrats and republicans. obviously we have seen an awful lot of politics and political attacks and gameplaying in gridlock and partisanship over these last few years. this is a moment in time where i think both democrats and republicans have to be serious about their responsibility under the constitution to be able to conduct this inquiry in a comprehensive way, look at all the facts, and then make a very difficult determination as to whether or not and impeachment is required. that's their responsibility. this is a serious allegation. let's not kid anybody.
it's serious, about a president who may have asked a foreign country to do him a political favor and also possibly withheld military aid in that process. those are serious allegations. for that reason, i hope both sides, democrats and republicans, don't make this just another political game of back-and-forth but seriously look at the issues that are going to be presented here and the facts and the truth. >> neil: much has been made of the environment in which an impeachment process begins, if it gets to that point here for this president. it's not all that different from what it was with bill clinton. strong market, strong economy.
and i wonder if that kind of backdrop certainly helped bill clinton then. the issue was lying under oath about a relationship with an intern. there are other issues that come to the floor now that are very different. again, in an environment that's pretty good, richard nixon didn't enjoy an environment like that when congress was going after him. there was more of a trail of issues and other far bigger matters that ultimately doomed him but does that backdrop and the fact that so many republicans ultimately when i got to the senate, didn't want to mess with it? does it make a difference. in other words, it looks like a cinch in the house and of course it's far more onerous to do it in the senate, that the back of the economic environment does make a difference. stocks are up, as they were throughout the whole bill clinton impeachment process as the markets were soaring and so was the economy. that makes a difference. >> you know, neil. this is in the end a political process. and our forefathers struggle with it because when they were dealing with the impeachment clause, one of their concerns, particularly madison and hamilton, were worried in particular about the issue
that's involved here about a president going to a foreign country and getting help from that foreign country in the politics of this country. that was really at the heart of the issue. but our forefathers also understood that it was going to be up to our elected members of congress to decide in the end what are high crimes and misdemeanors. that is going to be the issue here. a lot of that goes into the consideration, not only the facts that are presented by the inquiry but also kind of the political atmosphere that's out there. if the economy is doing well and people are doing well, obviously that's going to play into the consideration of members. on the other hand, if the facts are pretty obvious in the inquiry and a lot of people testify as to what took place in that phone call, it could be a heavier burden for the president. >> neil: how do you think adam schiff is handling it? a lot of republicans are angry at his unique interpretation
replay of what the president said in the phone call. >> i think adam schiff is handling it very responsibly. it's a tough job under any circumstances. but he is smart, he's a former prosecutor. he knows he has to handle it well and he has to handle it carefully. i don't think that the president makes a lot of points by calling him treasonous. i think that only hurts the president. i think this is the case where the president and the white house team are going to have to respond and be able to provide the information that the committee is asking so that the white house presents its case to the congress and to the country. i think that's what the president ought to be focusing on, not personal attacks and the people that are involved, either mr. schiff, or for that matter, the whistle-blower. >> neil: but everyone sticks to the script, right? >> [laughs] one of the problems is that ultimately people are stuck in
i'm still going for my best... even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin, i'll go for that. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? sharing my roots. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding,
>> neil: all right, little earlier we got word that rudy giuliani has been subpoenaed. the house panels involved, what they want is what will become familiar theme, any documents related to the ukraine. judge andrew napolitano on this and other fast-moving developments. >> i saw your last interview with leon panetta. it's moving far faster than the clinton one was and if memory serves, it's a long time ago, far faster than the nixon ones. the house wants to have a full vote come up or down on impeachment, before christmas. that's two and half months. >> neil: you think they could solve the debt problem that quickly? holy toledo.
what do you make of this? >> the subpoena? >> neil: yeah. >> well, if rudy giuliani is the president's lawyer, and he says he is, he has certain privileges. the attorney-client privilege which prevents the house from interfering with the issues directly from the president to rudy and from rudy to the president. he also hasn't been called he worked product privilege. that means work that he does, documents he prepares, notes that he made to himself or to the president in furtherance of his work for the president cannot be turned over. but that's not the bottom line of what they're looking for. they are looking for emails and text and communications with all the people in ukraine that he's dealt with in the past three or four years and they are trying to find out if chris wallace is correct, if the husband-wife team of lawyers in washington, d.c., that chris's reporting, saying that we are working with rudy. if that's the case, they want to subpoenaed them. or if as they say they were not
involved in any way with this, that it would be a waste of time to subpoena them. >> neil: does it matter in what capacity? if you are a personal lawyer. >> there's nothing wrong with being a personal lawyer for the president but the problem comes when you have foreign policy at two different levels, one from the state department and one from the president's personal lawyer's. who does the foreign company deal with? the great fear, as leon panetta told you, is the president of the united states -- they've had this fear since george washington -- the president of the united states using foreign governments to influence domestic politics. that was the fear of the framers when they put that impeachment clause. >> neil: going after mike pompeo to get similar documents. the theme here is what? >> the theme is, with the secretary of state, did you know what rudy was doing it is it consistent with foreign policy? >> neil: rudy giuliani says he
did. >> it's not an academic question. we know from documents that the director of national security release that the secretary of defense, secretary of state, director of national intelligence, head of the cia and all the voting members of the national security council unanimously said release the funds in the military equipment to ukraine. there are tanks on the crimean-ukraine border. don't hold it out. the president rejected all of their advice, advice rudy giuliani gave him to reject, according to what rudy said over the weekend. there obviously was some split between what the state department and defense department that was in the best interest of our allies and what rudy and the president was that was in the best interests of whatever they were trying to accomplish. that's what the committee is looking for. did donald trump use rudy, superb lawyer, as an instrument of foreign policy -- for donald trump's personal benefit as opposed to the benefit of our allies and ourselves.
>> neil: wow. that's amazing. we will know in rapid fashion. judge andrew napolitano. house democrats are still dancing around the i word commit the impeachment thing, because they know could backfire on them. how many of them are there? after this. it's been a long time since andrew dusted off his dancing shoes. luckily denture breath will be the least of his worries. because he uses polident 4 in 1 cleaning system to kill 99.99% of odor causing bacteria.
>> what concerns me about impeachment now, let's break it down, the odds are very high that it's not going to bear any fruit. the odds are very high that this president will continue to be the president. the odds are very high that this president will be the nominee for the republican party. >> there is something -- if there is something really there, obviously we need to investigate and we have been investigating but to go into a full-blown impeachment is going to
accomplish unfortunately certain goals that i don't think are desirable. >> neil: that was in the new jersey democratic congressman. doesn't think and impeachment inquiry is productive. what does his democratic colleague think about? stephen lynch. congressman, good to have you. >> it's good to be here. >> neil: i guess you get the gist of some of these are among the more moderate numbers. most of them including in the congressman's case, winning republican districts and one that the president had won. he won it outright. and those type of democrats are in a bit of a pickle here. they don't want to look to do -- they don't want to look too zealous. >> i myself was not on the impeachment bandwagon.
this comes down to a situation where you remember the oath you took to protect and defend the constitution. if it turns out that the president was soliciting help from foreign nations to put a political hit on his democratic opponent in this presidential election, i don't think we have a choice. if you took that oath and you meant it, i think you have to protect and defend the constitution. >> neil: just to understand, the hearing process. you not say he is guilty or that they are going to charge him, right? >> no. it's an inquiry right now. we have a lot of questions. there are a lot of people on the call. we have the president's own rough transcript from the white house that seems to be in harmony with what the whistle-blower alleged. there is not really a difference of opinion at this point but of course we need to go much
deeper. my committee, the oversight committee just subpoenaed esther giuliani at a couple of his associates. we have further questions for them as well. >> neil: when you say further questions, congressman. what would be a quid pro quo? legal analysts and lawyers say it's going to be important. if there was no delay or canceling of aid and the quid pro quo was actually him getting information on joe biden -- what is the offense? >> it's a red herring. there is no need for a quid pro quo. there's no need. >> neil: so the conversation alone -- i just want to be clear, sir. the conversation alone. okay. >> if you are reaching out to a foreign government to put a political hit on your opponent in a democratic election, that's enough. that's enough to violate the law. and so that's the threshold question here and it appears based on the president's
statement, not anybody else's, but the president's statement, that there is probable cause that he may have done that. so let's look at it further. i think that's where we need to go. >> neil: constitutional attorneys, they are all over the map on this but they disagree. they would have to prove that, that it was an extracted favor and that -- hear me out. i have no horse in this race. that all of a sudden, the deeper going to start that as your litmus test, then you're going to have to go through a lot of presidents moved on a lot of things and said a lot of things on the phone and elsewhere that would warrant an investigation. >> we're talking about this president. we're talking about the current state of the law today. based on the president's own statements. this call started out as a congratulations called to the president of ukraine and now it ends up in secret, sequestered
database that they are trying to conceal the transcripts. >> neil: i understand where you're coming from, congressman. do you know whether your colleagues share that deal that the president crossed the line in requesting information on a prospective opponent, foreign power doing so in another election and that to them would be deemed an impeachable offense. it sounds like it's that way with you. is it that way with 217 of your colleagues? >> we're getting there. this is the process and it's a real process. it's not something where you say okay, i have a sense of it. let's get into the facts. let's look at what really happened. i think we need to learn a lot more about this before we make that final decision. >> neil: congressman, we'll watch closely. thank you for taking the time. in the meantime, who knew congress could move so quickly? when it comes to the impeachment
matter, faster than me at a ponderosa buffet when it comes to things like dealing with the debt, let's say more like me at the salad bar. the doctor's office might mejust for a shot.o but why go back there when you can stay home with neulasta® onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta® reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1% a 94% decrease. neulasta® onpro is designed to deliver neulasta® the day after chemo
and is used by most patients today. neulasta® is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta® if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. if you'd rather be home ask your doctor about neulasta® onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. at humana, we believe your healthcare should evolve with you. and part of that evolution means choosing the right medicare plan for you. humana can help. with original medicare, you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you'll have to pay a deductible for each. a medicare supplement plan can cover your deductibles and co-insurance, but you may pay higher premiums
and still not get prescription drug coverage. but with an all-in-one humana medicare advantage plan, you could get all that coverage plus part d prescription drug benefits. you get all this coverage for as low as a $0 monthly plan premium in most areas. and humana has a large network of doctors and hospitals, so call or go online today. find out if your doctor is part of the humana network and get your free decision guide. discover how an all-in-one humana medicare advantage plan could save you money. there's no obligation, so call or go online right now. >> neil: mark cuban, billionaire investor in basketball team owner, he's had a hot and cold relationship with the president. a few months ago he was saying the guys probably going to be reelected. now he's not. he's coming up. the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage.
ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira.
's speed to the house is certainly moving fast on this impeachment inquiry so what can we expect? let's go to chad pergram. i think he knows. >> we are going to have a series of closed-door depositions this week. kurt vogel, former special envoy, will come in. friday, we are expecting a closed-door hearing with the inspector general for the intelligence community, mike atkinson. that will be a closed session. in the past 35 minutes, we have learned they are subpoenaing information from rudolph giuliani and also closed-door depositions before the 15th of october from some of his associates. one of the most important thing this week as we are going to hear from house speaker nancy pelosi note press conference in the middle of the week, wednesday. she usually doesn't have a press conference in the middle of a recess but that will be different. the other big thing goes on away from capitol hill where some of these freshman democrats in districts that favor president trump are going to start having town hall meetings. kendra horn in oklahoma.
susan wilde tomorrow in pennsylvania. max rose in new york city. he has a series of those coming up over the next couple days and that's where we are really going to start to learn how some of these freshman democrats in swing districts feel about impeachment and what their constituents were telling them. >> neil: you are amazing, thank you. chad pergram. congress is moving full speed ahead on this. not so much when it comes other issues that are rather time urgent, like debt. why bother? a republican strategist, attorney, "wall street journal" reporter, optimal capital. i will begin with you. mike pompeo took part in this trump-zelensky phone call, yet another reason i'm sure for them to say all right, this is our focus. and nothing else. >> it's the interpretation of what occurred. if you listen to some people, he
was investigating corruption and you listen to other people and to clear a bribe. i don't know what direction it's going to take and i think that depositions and the testimony this week, it will start to take on a trend because initially it looked like you know, i'm not sure which way it's going to go. i think as things go on, it will tilt a direction and markets will react. >> neil: leaves the bill clinton example where the expectation was that he would probably have a tough time in the house. he did. it didn't go anywhere in the senate. almost the same expectations here. but faster. >> i think also i like to look at this on the fund-raising sid side. >> neil: money, money, money. >> some of the numbers, there's been an uptick in fund-raising in the g.o.p. and growing. which tells me that they are looking at this pretty seriously to do a fund-raising pitch on it as well.
>> rapidity is not a constitutional virtue. i have big questions about this. mrs. pelosi proceeded without a vote. it's an incredible precedent and it shouldn't be a combing one. i would like to know about the whistle-blower. apparently the complaint was amended a month or so ago to say you didn't need firsthand information. i think there's a lot of questions about this process, very different from the nixon and bill clinton vote where there was a vote to proceed, also where the minority -- >> neil: what do you need? you need a vote to start the process. >> the constitution doesn't require one to that's been the president. what this looks like is, the speaker looks like the queen of hearts, verdict first we will find a trial and whatever charges we need. >> neil: i look to things, the markets. they are worried. they're not showing it. they might have to later on but what you think? they don't think anything's going to come of it? >> i agree we are in
bill clinton territory. a friendly senate so it might go to the house but the senate might not impeach. the markets like the rest of america, i agree with bill. i don't think speed should be the way the democrats proceed here. the the -- federal court decisin and we will see whether absolute immunity -- >> neil: it gets rushed. >> it's a trial at the end of the day, the documents. they need the federal courts behind them. >> meanwhile they're going to have a difficult task to keep the focus on trump and not let it be the main focus where it's biden so it hurts biden in his primary. >> neil: but it might have already done that. >> it may have but if they keep it front and center with trump, maybe they can let it go by the wayside. >> if it hurts biden, markets are going to go down.
markets do not like the wealth tax conversation. markets do not like the wall street tax conversation. markets don't like the socialism conversation. if you knock biden out, he's the most moderate. >> neil: if that means elizabeth warren emerges as the front runner, a lot of people say she could never win in the general election. so it might work to their advantage anyway. >> to whose advantage? >> neil: republicans. >> i think it may work to the president's advantage. no president wants to be impeached. i don't think bill clinton wanted to be impeached but i think he actually gathered support after it. the political messages -- >> neil: they won the midterm that year. >> if you're going to go after the king, you've got to kill the king. if the president survives this, mrs. pelosi has declared her congress is the impeachment congress. >> neil: final word on the subject.
remember when mark cuban was telling me a few months ago that nothing could stop donald trump from being reelected and he didn't slip over the guide. the billionaire investor and mavericks owner is bouncing a different ball right now. what we come back. it was easy. folks, can it get any better than this? is that what i think it is? that is an armada of tiny sushi boats. awesome! i forgot to pack lunch. you had one job... chopsticks wasabi and soy! comin' in a little hot. it only gets better when you switch and save with geico.
carl, can you remind me what you've invested my money in? it's complicated. are you asking enough questions about the way your wealth is being managed? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. speak to the market ending the month of quarter on an up note but uncertainty over the impeachment thing. lauren has been going to the numbers. >> investors closing out the third quarter with a bang. dow up 96 points. the best performing dow stocks this quarter, consumer place. apple, home depot. the dow was higher in september, so was the s&p 500 as well as the nasdaq. as for the year, i want you to look at this chart. s&p 500, so close to record highs, biggest annual gain in over 20 years. up about 19%.
the pace of the gains could be slowing down. but a host of distractions, impeachment inquiry of president trump, trade war with china, and may be european union as well. investors may decide it's time to take some money off the table or not. if history is any clue, the impeachment of bill clinton in the late '90s showing some parallels today. booming economy, federal reserve that was cutting interest rates, and a stock market that ignore the noise and was able to push higher. will it do the same this time around? here's something else to consider. we were very strong u.s. dollar. hit a two and half your height today. that could cut into the profitability of some of our big multinational companies that do business abroad. neil. >> neil: thank you very, very much. billionaire investor and team owner mark cuban telling me on my fox business show "coast-to-coast," that the political uncertainty is not a problem in the long run but do not ignore it in the short run. >> over the long-term, companies
are going to do -- stocks are going to react to the company's performance but obviously when there's a lot of uncertainty, companies have to pay attention and play accordingly -- that affects prices in the short shot term. >> neil: in technology called buying companies and key moments, it's going to be a tougher call in this environmen. do you buy it? >> it depends on the company. if you are selling equipment that you want to sell to china, you want to sell globally in your supply chain is at risk, then it makes a big difference. if you're developing software, you have an app in the united states, it's just noise. >> neil: you and the president, would you call it a testy relationship? >> some days we are friends and some days we are not. >> neil: you had said a few months back that you still think
odds are he would get reelected. do you still feel that way? >> i think it's change considerably. i'm not trying to handicap it. if you were to ask three or four months ago, i said on that day he would've won. i think there is uncertainty. i think you see it now, how he responds to things. he doesn't seem to have that same confidence levels that he had in the past. calling the president of the ukraine. if you are completely confident, there's no reason to call and ask for a favor about a political opponent, whether or not it was a favor. there's no reason to call it that. >> neil: do you think he was a high crime or misdemeanor, impeachable offense? >> i don't know and we are i'mt going to make that judgment. >> neil: i love it when i guest says i don't know. the president, the notion... that they are nervous that they are feeling the pressure. should they be? what makes them different? >> if you're calling a foreign
leader and even discussing a political opponent, that reflects something. i don't know exactly what he was trying to accomplish. i don't -- only he does. why would you do it in the first place. that's a question that we don't have answers to. it may be a one-off, he was curious. happened to be submitted came into his mind at the time or maybe it was part of a bigger issue. maybe he is feeling, maybe he is concerned about the election in 2020. i don't know but over time, we'll find out. the real question is, if he is and he's calling because of the uncertainty, who else did he call? if you are uncertain about an election and if you're looking for help or not, he is someone to call others and ask questions. he wants to call people and get feedback. maybe he was doing that but who else is he calling? >> neil: do you have a horse in this race yourself? you are a democrat? >> far from being a democrat. >> neil: you didn't like the president. >> is not that i don't like him.
i don't think he was the best choice of the time. >> neil: did you vote for hillary? >> yes i did. >> neil: have you talked since then? >> we get along fine. we agree and disagree and the things we disagree on he doesn't bring up and i don't bring up so we talked about the things that we agree on. if it were up to me, i would get rid of all political parties. everybody plays for their team. everyone is a bandwagon fan and we don't just talk about issues and the president, future president, it's going to be more difficult for them to offer any type of leadership because we are so excited about our own team as opposed to doing what's right for the country. >> neil: when is the last time you talk to the president? you can whisper if you don't want to -- >> it was four or five weeks ago. >> neil: before this latest dustup. >> yeah. >> neil: but you think it's changed the complexion of the debate? >> it's change the calculus of the future elections and the general debate about politics,
yes. >> neil: mark cuban. speaking of the president, guess who's back to playing him on "saturday night live"? get ready. back to politics. i wish i could shake your hand. granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ what might seem like a small cough can be a big bad problem for your grandchildren. babies too young to be vaccinated against whooping cough are the most at risk for severe illness. help prevent this! talk to your doctor or pharmacist today about getting vaccinated against whooping cough.
>> neil: >> get me rudy giuliane phone. >> mr. trump, what's new? >> what do you mean what's new? i'm being impeached. the greatest presidential harassment of all time. i am like the president of harassment. >> neil: "snl" taking some shots at the impeachment inquir inquiry. alec baldwin, why thought had given up the role. what do i know? former "snl" cast member and
radio host, big sensation, joe piscopo. i thought he wasn't interested. >> he's back and i sat and i went there going to go after the president again. but they were fair and balanced. they went after all the democrats. you know, it was hysterical. it was great to see. woody harrelson doing joe biden. it was hysterical. hi, how are you? i have no idea where i am. >> neil: politics is gold to that show. night are to have this whole thing. >> it was great. kamala harris. with great respect to ms. harris, she always reminded me, and i say this with great respect, like a lounge singer second show at the hair. maya did a great. >> neil: i probably won't win. [laughter]
this is going to be comedic gold. >> it is. >> neil: when you were there was a dust political? >> it was. >> neil: if you are for abraham lincoln. >> [laughs] god forgive me. i did and abe lincoln thing where i was eating popcorn in the theater and people started heckling me. i said what are you going to do, shoot me? i set it on screen. oh, no. you couldn't do stuff like that today. probably just as well. >> neil: i can remember back to the days of dan aykroyd and everyone else. the carter years. it was always ratings gold. >> it always was. i did ronald reagan and you know that story. it was fun. we always did it fun. this is good because they did elizabeth warren. when i see elizabeth warren run, she runs like a female jerry lewis. am i right? lady, lady! >> neil: she does not run like a female jerry.
>> vote for me! >> neil: is the fcc watching right now? >> kenan thompson did in and inside the beltway and i kept going after the president and kenan thompson said it's not going to happen, man. that was very funny, i thought. >> neil: they can offend a lot of people. those on the right say they take disproportionate bashing. the president doesn't think they're funny. >> well. >> neil: you did it with reagan. they ever get back and say -- >> frank sinatra said get that italian kid down there. i believe frank sinatra called the reagan's and said get him down there. once i met ronald reagan, change my whole political outlook. >> neil: he didn't seem to mind. >> no. nancy did. she did. hello, joe. i got back. that was my nancy reagan reception. two words: hello, joe.
you do that again... >> neil: why do you make her deville? barbara bush didn't like the portrayal of her husband. you have to roll with the punches. >> having fun in the morning, am 970. the audience is ready to laugh and have fun. >> neil: you are an equal opportunity fan. we are -- >> everyone has to settle down. i say in the radio, put aside the divide. greatest country on planet earth. united states of america. >> neil: i'm still thinking about elizabeth warren. look at that time. we'll have more right after thi this. they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. pine.
you may be at increased risk for pneumococcal pneumonia - a potentially serious bacterial lung disease that can disrupt your life for weeks. in severe cases, pneumococcal pneumonia can put you in the hospital. it can hit quickly, without warning, making you miss out on what matters most. just one dose of the prevnar 13® vaccine can help protect you from pneumococcal pneumonia. it's not a yearly shot. prevnar 13® is approved for adults to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. don't get prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. adults with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. ask about prevention. ask your doctor or pharmacist about prevnar 13®.
we did that for you to try to make things very simple, very clear. certainly when it comes to business graphics and all. it makes sense not to inundate you with a lot of stuff that doesn't. that will continue tomorrow my coast-to-coast show 12:00 p.m. eastern time on this fine channel. fbm. ♪ ♪ >> dana: hello, everyone i'm dana perino, along with emily compagno, donna brazile, jesse watters and greg gutfeld. it's 5:00 in new york city and this is the "the five" breaking news battle over impeachment. house democrats now demanding president trump's personal attorney rudy giuliani hand over documents about ukraine. this is the latest move from democrats as they move full speed ahead potential impeachment vote by the end of the year. president trump hammering the whistleblower and the white house trying to figure out who it is. >> well, we are trying to find out about a whistleblower. the call was perfect.