Skip to main content

tv   House Minority Leader Mc Carthy News Conference  CSPAN  November 14, 2019 11:34am-11:56am EST

11:34 am
acquitted. also, our last -- my last comment is my husband and i love c-span to invite and ijudy onto your show, would love to hear her comments ridiculous smear campaign is being carried out jokingly laugh, what would judge judy say? hings like, i don't care what your opinion is. it doesn't matter what you think or don't tell me what they said. that's hearsay. mr. mccarthy: close, close? i'd like to start this monday veterans day. i was able to be home. i was able to be grand marshall 100th veterans day parade. i want to thank those veterans for the freedom they provided the service they have given. it would have been nice this week we would pass appropriation our troops, for their pay raise, for the funding to
11:35 am
make sure they're safe and the job that they have to do, but unfortunately, this week is just about impeachment. was able to see what this democrat majority has been working on for the last three years, just impeachment. i want to recognize the republican members and staff of the intelligence committee. i thought they did a great job yesterday. with poise and purpose, they the truth out to the public after weeks of adam dark.f keeping them in the we didn't walk out of yesterday's hearing with any new information than we already walked in. so let me quickly recap what we do know. is still the ry most important piece of evidence we have. pressure or even mention of conditionality between the two leaders. ukrainians did not know that security assistance was under eview until over a month after the call. the full assistance was provided opened.nvestigation was we did hear from the witnesses
11:36 am
spoken they had never to president trump, they had not met with the chief of staff, is r understanding, which the foundation of the case for the democrats, was based on information. remember what yesterday was. the democrats had homefield advantage. they got to change the course of the rules of how to handle a itself. they got to pick the witnesses they wanted. opportunity for a whistleblower to come forward and even protect that person's presented toe they the committee. with all of that, we found out nothing new. one of the witnesses actually you ted, what i can do for here today is what i heard from people. this lacks basic explanation of witnesses. those witnesses did rely on heir expertise, though, to underscore how much safer ukraine is today under this dministration with president trump. after russia invaded ukraine, the previous administration sent
11:37 am
blankets. the trump administration sent tank-busting bombs. to what efer back speaker pelosi said earlier this year just in march about impeachment. you all recall that. that this is so divisive to our country that it has to be so overwhelming, and bipartisan. otherwise, we should not put our through it. think speaker pelosi should hold to her own words. there's nothing compelling. there's nothing overwhelming. and the only bipartisan vote we impeachment.d but apparently she doesn't stick with her words. what was most ironic was the setting, the ways and means committee room. that dias tried to spend their entire day to this president's and this administration's foreign policy and success. not only were they wrong, they hijacking a committee where we decide on our
11:38 am
trade policy. they did it while having ways nd means, where the usmca, united states-mexcio-canada trade agreement can only make our top two traders stronger as with china.tiations it only emphasized, again, what congress ng done in and what should be being done in congress. overtaken every single committee. we're less than a year away from the election, but these democrats do not trust the american public. will continue to try to make something up when we have the facts of the phone call. know there was no pressure to either leader, and the money was released. and ukraine is actually stronger administration leading america. ith that, let me open up to questions. yes, sir. reporter: james rosen. to nder if you can explain the american people why they
11:39 am
houldn't see -- on the part of house republicans to hear you assert on the one hand that credibilityses lack because they are only offering thirdhand information at the same time you support the white house blocking testimony witnesses, like john bolton, and mick mulvaney, who firsthand information, whether you want firsthand information or you don't? mr. mccarthy: we have firsthand information. we have something i believe the peaker of the house, if she waited 48 hours, would not put the american people through this. it's a transcript. not what someone was told fourthhand. we have the two people on the call that a whistleblower who was not that started this process. we know exactly what words were said to one another. and we can walk all the way that.h we have all the information that adam schiff at believed it was something
11:40 am
different. he schiff read something wished had transposed inside that transcript that didn't. and f america can read it, that's why if you take speaker pelosi's words, has to be has to be so it compelling and has to be bipartisan. he doesn't meet one of her three criteria to move forward. reporter: just to be clear -- is the etting in which republicans now find themselves, which is an impeachment proceeding, you are against witnesses who have firsthand knowledge of the president? am not adversed to hearing from any witness. i am from the standpoint, if we adam k to the moment when schiff first came forward that he was so concerned that the going to tion was withhold a whistleblower from presenting to congress, that for.s what he was fighting the only reason why adam schiff stopping and moving to able that motion is because we found out that adam schiff and his staff met with the
11:41 am
whistleblower. his staff met with the whistleblower before this whistleblower had an attorney, before the the leblower went to inspector general. he's the only person and staff who knows what the whistleblower has said. but we have all the facts we of the ide a transcript phone call itself. yes. reporter: you just asserted that several republicans -- adam schiff either personally met the whistleblower or knows the whistleblower which he denies. do you think he's lying? mr. mccarthy: yes. reporter: you say there should be -- mr. mccarthy: this is not the lied to us either. reporter: you say that you and your fellow republicans that the ssue should be focused on the president's words on that call. read the transcript. and yet, you have this growing department ate officials, career public servants who say what they saw as highly irregular, even crazy. are they all wrong? mr. mccarthy: you know, congressman john radcliffe left a question to
11:42 am
these two witnesses who never president, were not on the phone call, has not talked asked chief of staff, and them, what do you see impeachable? item in one impeachable there? they could not answer one. remember what we're discussing here. talking about removing a duly elected president. lightly, we t so have the transcript. hamilton alexander warned of us this day may come. have the son may majority with inside of congress for their ownment personal political gains. e watched how many times they tried this in the last three years and failed. and we see adam schiff leading the charge. reporter: you say not impeachable. is it appropriate? r. mccarthy: are we having a hearing about inappropriate or impeachment inquiry? it goes to the core of the fabric of democracy. take it that lightly that you just have the u.s. congress vote about an impeachment
11:43 am
change the then rules of the house where you don't have due process, you move judiciary he committee to the intel committee and make it an impeachment ommittee, you have secret meetings inside the basement of the capitol, you have not released all the transcripts, audition who you want to bring forward and we just watched the two witnesses that pick, you deny the minority to bring witnesses forward, you deny the president, you're moving to impeach, to have an attorney in the room, to cross-examine. that me authority those were impeached had before. we should not be putting our country through this. year away from a an election. the worst part of all of this, veterans day. next week government funding stops. funding the troops. we're not giving them the pay raise that we believe we should. a negotiation with china, which is our number three trader, but our number one and
11:44 am
mexico wo traders are and canada. we would only be stronger as a our negotiations with passing the ere united states-mexcio-canada agreement, but none of that is taking place. spending this week taking -- talking about the funding that needs to go forward. no. word of mentioned a that, because everything has been taken over about impeachment. the same thing this majority has the last three years. and i leave you the question. this majority ng problem they have solved? those one thing witnesses said yesterday was impeachable? so why are we putting the why ry through this, and aren't we working on the things that the american public expects do?o reporter: you -- republicans, the president have been critical of some of the testimony yesterday, this is second-hand, third-hand. you'll hear from gordon sondland who president
11:45 am
position, n this supported the inauguration fund. your his testimony change calculation whether or not this is an impeachable offense, if he orroborates what these other witnesses said? yesterday, we heard there was a conversation overheard by president where the president asked about investigations. mr. mccarthy: ok. you have a phone call where the resident asked about an investigation. an investigation that's already going forward that i think most f america wants to know what transpired. an investigation that the attorney general is working on. none of that is impeachable. the answer is no. reporter: walking out of the yesterday, many epublicans thought [inaudible] said nothing is impeachable. learned nothing new. is it the republicans' position, regardless what is right or no g here, that there is vulnerability to republicans in overdefendings of the president or standing behind him as we move into an election?
11:46 am
are you confident this is not going to affect them in any dverse way standing behind the president as we move toward the 2020 election? mr. mccarthy: i think what republicans are doing is tanding up for the constitution. i think of the same thing of the two democrats who voted against inquiry.chment standing up for the constitution. this is the same thing that alexander hamilton warned us use it for we would politic political gain. what the republicans are are the ideas what they ran on. first thing i think a majority should do is pass a budget, hich the democrats have not done. we should make sure they fund the government, which we have not done. e're working to now have another continuing resolution. so our troops are not being provided the resources they need r the pay raise that they have earned. prescription drugs continue to rise. e have, again, a trade agreement that would only make america and our economy stronger, especially when dealing with mexico. the only person i saw yesterday doing the job that they were
11:47 am
was the president of the united states. meeting with another foreign leader. trying to end isis and others. being a part of nato. we watch inside ways and means? the same thing we've seen for years.t three what's so disappointing about ll of this, i watched what nancy pelosi said prior to the election. she said they would be different. hat they would govern different. but lo and behold, what did we find? decided who they to be chairman of the judiciary committee, they didn't pick an individual that said they would privacy of e individuals on the internet. they picked a campaign where the veryid he would be best for impeachment. we watched new freshmen being sworn in. the night ey say on after they were being sworn in? a -- ey is he bright celebrate a victory. they wanted to impeach the president. used different words than i used. they spent three years trying to
11:48 am
investigate this president. entire e spent their majority trying to impeach this president. walk.very single adam schiff has continued to lie he he american public when very first went on the camera and said he had proof beyond circumstantial evidence. he lied to the american public again when he stood at a intelon of a chair of the committee and misread what was transcript. on purpose. he was so compelling that the speaker of the house, nancy him on national television. he lied, again, when he told the american public he did not know whistleblower was. and how hard he wanted to fight to bring the whistleblower forward. opportunity that the whistleblower could come forward, just as we have been past with the he i.r.s. hearings in the 1990's and the others, this is the 21st century. we could protect the individual more to actually get the information. no, that's not the case. he's driven for one purpose. he's already written the script
11:49 am
f where he wants to go on impeachment. he's now just trying to fill in the -- republicans in the -- vulnerability from the -- mr. mccarthy: look, you want to what you'red decide going to do based upon politics or do you want to stand up for the constitution? republicans, if this were in reverse order, this was a democrat in the white house, that they would stand for constitution the same way. i would hope at the same time they would never carry hemselves in the manner which i've seen these democrats, purely for political reasons, that these democrats have voted for impeachment. if you ask the democrats, and you can pick and choose who's the leader of the democrats, but i think there is a young freshman woman that leads most did she mocrat, what say on tv last night? if we don't impeach this resident -- and i'm parra phrasing -- we would not be successful in the next election. the same way al green, a on the man, a democrat other side, when he offered the mpeachment motion, what did he say? if we don't impeach this president, he's going to win
11:50 am
re-election. question we're -- you're asking me, are the democrats doing this for purposes? are they standing for the constitution? are.nk two of them reporter: how can you call schiff a liar? mr. mccarthy: he lied to us. have any you don't proof, or do you? what proof do you have that -- reporter: i have the mueller report. reporter: on the whistleblower -- time do you which want to talk about him lying? when he spoke on the transcript different words? reporter: that he knows who the his wloer is and that -- whistleblower is and he met with the whistleblower. did ter: he can claim he not. met with the whistleblower before the whistleblower had an attorney and before the the leblower went to inspector general. when the whistleblower went to the inspector general, you know hat the whistleblower did not say? that he met with the staff. think the only people in here -- reporter: he met with -- adam schiff met with the --
11:51 am
r. mccarthy: for the same reason that adam schiff said he had proof beyond circumstantial evidence, and we took america a nightmare, we spent millions of dollars, we took the we had in ndividuals law enforcement, we went to 13 what, we, and you know found out he lied. so then i watched adam schiff as that is of a committee the -- of a committee that gets o see items that other members do not, get to see the top secrets of things happening, american public when all eyes were watching on a transcript. it he lied about what was in then. so when he looks at me and i watched him on television that knew whooh, he wish he the whistleblower was, why didn't he say, well, my staff them?th i think that would have been appropriate, would it not? question us about not believing him? shame me once, shame on me -- on you. once, shame shame me twice, shame on me. that's exactly what he's done.
11:52 am
he's lied to the american public three different times. and you still put him in charge? if the whistleblower staff -- i mean, if the whistleblower has met with his staff and him, they are fact witnesses. we now put them in charge. and what do they do? hey wrote the rules that not only are they prosecutor, which system in our judicial would allow a whistleblower be a judge.tor, but he's a he was questioned by elise stefanik, was he going to interpret and direct the that he got to pick -- not the republican witnesses that he denied, not to answer likeepublicans' questions, he did down in the basement when the public could not see. we find? in less than 20 minutes, he exactly did that same i think this. the judgethinks he is and also the jury. owhere in america would we put someone like that in charge. nowhere would i believe in the would we conference allow someone that's continued
11:53 am
lie to the american public in charge of the intel committee. where we would take -- out of we would take it the intel committee and change their rules, that members of their own committee cannot ask until adam schiff gets his 45 minutes and then adam he ff can decide whether needs another 45. he was asked at the start, would e decide after the first 45 that the members of the committee could actually have their five members. no. he didn't say it. we'll wait and see. so, yes. i think adam schiff has lied numerous times. do not think adam schiff is fit to be in this position of running the intel committee, and by with ly a decision you person who could put them in there. yes-day believe adam schiff -- believe adam schiff has spent his entire time in congress, since the president as been in, trying to impeach him. i think he's already written the script. he auditioned the individuals in he's picking and and choosing them to come
11:54 am
forward. would he have lied when he came and said he's a so concerned the administration is withholding the whistleblower, that he will whistleblower to come forward, that they wanted to move legislation on the lie to us then? now he doesn't want to bring the forward, s blower would -- whether to bring the whistleblower forward, i think adam a question for schiff. thank you, all, very much. >> the u.s. house of representatives will be back in noon eastern to start work on legislation extending charterrt-import bank's for 10 years. the bill also renames the bank agency. export finance the rule for debate on the bill include several unrelated measures. allowing the house of representatives to hire private attorneys to work on the impeachment inquiry. allow ther would congresswoman tulsi gabbard to offer a motion to discharge a esolution from the house foreign affairs committee. that resolution would withdraw
11:55 am
u.s. troops from syria. session in turns to about five minutes. we'll have live coverage here on c-span. reminder that tomorrow the house intelligence committee will continue its public ongoing as part of the impeachment inquiry. former u.s. ambassador to marie yovanovitch, slated to testify. that starts at 9:00 a.m. eastern. watch on c-span2, justices online at, c-span, online at also on the free c-span radio app. lucie, florida. caller: good morning. i want to give a shout out to to my friend in fallon, illinois. i played soccer there. -- i was watching adam schiff. i was like, really? you have nothing. really? come on, man. we


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on