nadler. mr. nadler: thank you, very much. no person, republican or democrat, president or anyone else should be permitted to jeopardize america's security and reputation for self-serving political purposes. no president, no official can demand that an ally of the united states do anything in particular to help his or her political ambitions as a condition of receiving help from our country. if after a fair and thorough inquiry, the allegations against president trump are found to be would represent a profound offense against the constitution and against the people of this country. it is the duty of the house to vindicate the constitution and to make it crystal clear to future presidents that this kind of conduct if proven is an affront to the great public that placed their trust in him or her. this resolution that we passed today lays the groundwork for open hearings in both the intelligence committee and the judiciary committee. the house and the american public must see all the evidence for themselves. the resolution makes

nadler set the first deadline for tomorrow. the second deadline is friday. the campaign trail is not on holiday today. joe biden rolls out his campaign bus which begins an 18-county tour of iowa today, and the president's upcoming trip to the nato summit. how his surprise announcement about afghanistan adds questions to international security policy. first up, though, for you this hour, impeachment phase two, and that begins today or so it would seem. the chairman of the judiciary committee, congressman jerry nadler tells the president he has 24 hours to meet a deadline and six days to meet a second deadline. in a letter, nadler asked president trump to let his committee know by sunday, tomorrow, if he plans to attend the hearings or to bring counsel. he also set a deadline for friday, december 6th for the president to decide if he wants to call his own witnesses. in addition, nadler laid out in this letter the hearing's agenda. it will have historical and constitutional basis of impeachment, that will be in the agenda, the framework through which the house

the white house has said they're still reviewing those letters from jerry nadler. of course, much of the focus the past few weeks has been in the intelligence committee. the last time that the judiciary committee was in the spotlight was really during the mueller probe. and speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, was critical of how the proceedings went under jerry nadler including moments like this one -- >> could you read the exact language of the report? i don't have it available to me. >> i don't think i need do that, and i have limited time. did you meet alone with the president on that date? >> congressman, i'd like you to refresh my messagery by providing a copy of the report so i can follow along. >> president trump was hounding you about when you are going deliver that message. correct? >> completely inaccurate, congressman. >> well, he asked you about it a few times, didn't he? >> no, he did not. the white house has said -- >> let me ask -- >> it's not my privilege to waive. >> i don't think it's anyone's privilege to waive because i don't think it exists, mr

is it then up to nadler to say yes or no? >> yeah. i think nadler doesn't want to make it look too partisan. this is already a pretty partisan process. and so it depends on what kind of witnesses the president would want to send up. i don't think he's going to send too many up because that would legitimize this inquiry in the first place. i think his strategy for his defense is to stick to tweeting and chopper talk for the next few weeks. and he's probably going to be distracted from the nato summit because he's going to want to watch some of those hearings and respond via twitter. and so world leaders better kind of keep his attention before, you know, he has to respond back home. >> carol, the rubber's hitting the road here, right? this letter going over to the president. he now has to, you know, put out his decisions. if -- if you're in the white house, if you're the president, are these scary deadlines? or are they just matter of process? >> well, i think it's matter of process. they have to know what the hearings are fundamentall

eastern on c-span chairman nadler extended -- on c-span. extended anler invitation to the president and his attorneys. follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span3, online at c-span.org or listen live on the free c-span radio app. first lady milani at trump welcomes the white house christmas tree. welcomes theump white house christmas tree, a douglas further from pennsylvania. it will stand in the blue room. ♪ ["oh christmas tree" being performed] ♪ ] ♪h christmas tree" ["oh come, all ye faithful"] ♪ "]hark, the herald angels sing ♪ the impeachment inquiry hearings continue next week, when house judiciary committee jerrold nadler holds the committee's first impeachment inquiry into president trump, focusing on the constitution at the history is impeachment -- history of impeachment. watch live coverage on december 4 at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. extended anler invitation to the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. read the letter the president on our website, c-span.org/impeachment. follow the inquiry li

jerry nadler is the chairman of the judiciary committee. this is the man that pelosi initially removed from the impeachment inquiry because he bungled the mueller hearing. pov do you remember that? >> the judiciary committee will come to order. i do not intend to summarize the work. i will not comment on the actions of the attorney general nor of congress. >> pelosi was not confident that nadler had the ability to make the case. the judiciary committee must draft the articles of impeachment. it falls to nadler to convince americans there are grounds to impeach the president. next week's hearing will involve constitutional scholars musing on what the founders many by high crimes and misdemeanors. at the height of the christmas holidays are americans going to be focussed on nadler or santa? i took to the streets for a answers. we will get back to that. there are some good bites there. some people we interviewed on the street. a grand total of two said they will be focussed on impeachment. democrats have a high political bar to leap over. faci

to jerrold nadler. we'll have to see what nadler's response would be. collins sites as a predicate here, the clinton impeachment where there were extensive academics who have differing views. some who might believe different things about how the constitution looks at impeachment. so this would be a way for conservatives to have voices that might be more supportive of their point of view versus those only invited by democrats. so we'll have to wait to see what happens there. we're in a holding period kind of, kendis, looking for how will this hearing take shape? the biggest decisions come on behalf of the president and his legal team and what republicans are saying to try to work something out with democrats, also an open question. it's important to remember, because democrats have the gavel, they have control and jerrold nadler could refuse to allow republican witnesses, for example, we've heard the president and republican allies wanting to call hunter biden or the whistle-blower or chairman schiff from the intelligence committee. unlikely democrats wi

nadler reiterating the claim that we've heard from shift and other democrats. all they want to do is get the facts. >> thank you both for being fact witnesses. >> ed: republicans are still, well, skeptical. nadler raised the possibility of drafting articles of impeachment stemming from allegations in the mueller report. believe it or not, they are still pushing the mueller report. get to that shortly. but first, republicans fired up about the fact that most of the early witnesses lack first-hand knowledge, leaving several of them to lie on assumption, presumption, and speculation. >> my assumption is he did it in a closed-door speculation. it was a presumption. so pressure was brought to bear on them, correct? >> i believe so. >> they are a number of events you are investigating that i cannot bring first-hand knowledge. these include president trump's july 25th 20 tightening 202019 call withpresident zelen. >> my first dad wrote a new op-ed saying "alleged bad thoughts" are not crimes, outside of george orwell's dystopian novel "1984." it's victor david hanson,

david: how did it slip out of the hand of jerry nadler. how did schiff get it when jerry nadler should have it? >> that's a great question. it has a lot to do with the democrats being embarrassed of jerry nadler. there has been and lot of chatter on capitol hill that nancy pelosi had a lot more faith in adam schiff to do her bidding and move the process forward in the way we want it to go, and we know it's to march toward the drum beast impeachment. the chatter about impeachment, nadler, schiff, pelosi all said they would not put our country through the impeachment process until it was done with bipartisan support. the vote today shows there is only bipartisan support to not move forward. david: not a single republican voted with the speaker for this process. two democrats voted against the speaker. just the opposite of bipartisan support. it's so strange, is it not, that the speaker would have more faith in adam schiff, a man who has been prove on lie about several dee key incidents in this whole process than she would in jerry nadler. >>

it's not like nadler is going to get some u.s. marshals to go over to the white house and slapped manacles on the president and his counsel, it's the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard. do they not know anything about the separation of powers? i'm beginning to wonder. >> when you look at the remedies, what is he talking about? in any event, the executive branch has a much bigger police force in the capitol police serving the united states congress. i don't understand. that's a pretty outrageous threat against the president. >> laura: i'm glad you said that. >> there was a line in the district court opinion that talked about inherent congressional power to jail people in a jail cell in the capital if they don't show up to testify. perhaps that's what he's thinking about. it would be fun to see them try that against the president of the united states. >> laura: the obama judge throw that one out there, i must've missed that. thank you, that's why your professor. great to see you tonight, happy thanksgiving. i hear this stuff, a

it means don't hold your breath. >> any response to jerry nadler? >> leaving the white house to spend thanksgiving in florida, president trump ignored questions about what's waiting for him after his break. jerry nadler's plans for new hearings in the impeachment inquiry. while acknowledge iing he stall the president indicates he's not ready to allow top officials to testify in front of house democrats tweeting his former national security adviser john bolton is a patriot and may know that i held back the money from ukraine because it's considered a corrupt country. like to have poch owe, rick perry and mull vvaney testify at the phoney hoax, but president said he doesn't want future presidents to be compromised. pompeo refused to be pinned down on whether he would testify. >> the president tweeted a short while ago that he would encourage you to testify in the investigation. is that something you'consideri? >> when the time is right, all good things happen. >> bolton tweeted it probably goes without saying that our country's commitment to our natio

nadler wrote this in there. the judiciary committee has been engaged in an investigation concerning allegations that you may have engaged in acts of obstruction of justice as detailed in special counsel robert mueller's report in the 2016 election. jon, i thought this impeachment inquiry was about ukraine? that's what's before us. and here'sly nadler -- in the middle of this letter to the president -- sneaking in the idea that, well, we're still looking at obstruction. didn't we already look at that? >> well, we did. but despite the constitutional scholars who are going to talk about what's impeachable, i think jelled ford had it right on the money. he said an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the house of representatives says it is. they're going to do it before christmas. so they can then go home and move on to the senate. ed: we'll see what kind of reception they get back home at some of their town hall meetings, particularly democrats who move forward as to whether or not the people are for it. i

nadler also invited president trump to participate in the process or in his words stop complaining. i'll discuss that with congressman jamie raskin of the judiciary and oversight committee and we'll have full coverage of the day's top stories. first to capitol hill. our congressional correspondent phil mattingly is watching the developments. the impeachment inquiry is about to enter a critically important new phase. will the president participate in this new round of hearings? >> reporter: if past is any precedent, that seems unlikely but that doesn't mean a representative from the president won't come in and testify. look, this is an interesting element because that is a new phase. they're moving into the now nuts and bolts of impeachment starting in the judiciary committee. the first hearing is about precedence and the history of impeachment and have a number of constitutional scholars come in and testify and also invited the president or his counsel. now this was long expected to be the case. based on the a resolution house democrats passed that the president or a representative

and jarrod nadler can't even find witnesses. they scheduled a hearing with just scholars and some such. >> i think it's more of the same. we listened to weeks of testimony from so-called star witnesses who said they had a feeling, a presumption that something was illegitimate or illegal. you can't charge somebody with somebody else's presumption. we are going to see more circus and theater. all of this impeachment was about one thing. donald trump committed a crime. and they will never forgive him for it. >> we talk about forgive him, they don't like him. they can't get over it. the american people, poll after poll showing they don't care what the radical di dimm daffods can get over or not. the president said he's work hard web's an historic president, he's accomplishing more than any other president in three years' time and the democrats are doing nothing but trying to overthrow the president. >> it's un-american. steve bannon popularized the nullification process. this is not just nullifying 2016. this is about stealing the n

1998, this is the same jerry nadler. that guy right there, railing against impeachment saying, it was in undoing of a national election. and votes were being ripped away from the american people. nadler did not even want the starr report, which the independent counsel statute required to be released to be released. maybe because it listed 11 specific grounds for impeachment including real felonies against his fellow democrats bill clinton. remember this. >> mr. starr is transmitting, transmitting a letter to the speaker in the minority leader, made it clear that much of this material is federal material, material by law, unless contravened by vote of the house must be kept secret. it's grand jury material. it represents statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses, salacious material. all kinds of material that would be unfair to release. >> sean: now nadler is in a spearhead, impeachment proceeding against donald trump, whether they are no specific grounds for impeachment whatsoever. he paid a hell of a

erald nadler holds the first wednesday december 4 at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. chairman nadler extended an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. follow the inquiry live on c-span 3 online at c-span dworg c-span live on the radio app. announcer: next kamala harris on the campaign trail in iowa. this stop at a brewing company is just over an hour. >> hello muscatine. a special thanks and hello tonight. we have folks from kentucky washington d.c. in the house. and we have

chairman nadler writing to doug collins of georgia. he is the ranking member of the judiciary committee. nadler gave him the same deadline as the president. he would like to know by friday if he would like to issue any subpoenas or seek any written testimony from witnesses. where do things stand? according to the wall street journal, a full house vote on articles of impeachment could come before christmas which would set the stage for a possible senate in january. we have annette lopez, a columnist for "business insider" and philippe is a former deputy secretary assistant of state. and we have a white house correspondent for the "new york times." andy, let's start with a letter to the president. what's written tliherein. it seems like there will be obstruction of justice charges against the president. >> yeah, three potential charges. one is abuse of power, using his position and second is obstruction not letting witnesses from the white house to testify and holding back documents and the third potential is to look at potential obstruc

democrats are preparing for their next big chance to embarrass their party on impeachment when nadler starts his version of the inquiry next week. left, the left media bias on full display when they try to shame trump for tweeting on thanksgiving. what he was really doing had them with egg on their faces. and democrat martin o'malley verbally assaults a top trump official at a pub on thanksgiving eve. we have a hot debate on that. also, an msnbc analyst compares trump supporters to -- wait for it -- isis fighters. the worst in media is back tonight. raymond arroyo is back. and first, democrats are gearing up for another round of hearings in the impeachment inquiry wednesday as another opportunity will present themselves to further themselves with desperation. what can we expect? where doesn't trump stand on more testifying? we go to washington with kevin corke. >> it's effectively a race against the clock for the white house with a number of deadlines quickly approaching for them to tell the committee how they wish to proceed. let me take you inside the numbers, if you will, as we lay

>> well, it is now time for jerry nadler to make chicken salad out of the schiff show. i don't know if that will happen, what they would have to do is take presumption, they would have to take hearsay, they would have to take nothing of quid pro quo, nothing the president did wrong, you make it into a viable article of impeachment to show the american people that he has done something wrong. buthihi you know how i know they don't have anything? the b next hearing they are goig to bring academics in to tell us what an impeachable offenses. i will tell you what an impeachable offense is not everything that we have seen from adam schiff and the democrats for the past year as they have attacked a very successful president who is wsimply doing the best job he n for america. and that's what we are going to start. next week, get ready. i've said this before, judiciary show, the lights are going to come on, get the popcorn ready. it's now time to get down to business to show what the schiff show looks like in person. >> i know some people, maybe they don't like the president's

how judiciary chairman jerry nadler is giving the white house until friday at 5:00 p.m. to make their decision, but there is a second more pressing deadline. tomorrow evening at 6:00 p.m. that's when the president has to decide whether he'll send white house lawyers to the judiciary committee's first impeachment session, which will take place on wednesday. cnn white house correspondent jeremy diamond joins me from where the president is spending his thanksgiving holiday weekend in west palm beach. jeremy, the white house says they're reviewing the white house invitation letters from jerry nadler -- we just lost the connection there with jeremy and will try to get that back up. i want to see if we have our league team that has been standing by -- all right. we'll get back to them. while the judiciary committee takes the lead on impeachment this coming week, the house intelligence committee is finishing a report detailing allegations that could become the basis for articles of impeachment. cnn's tom foreman shows us some of the evidence that they have to work with. >> repo

house judicial committee chairman jerry nadler set a new deadline for the white house to decide whether or not to participate in the proceeding. let's begin with today's deadly terror attacks. cnn's nina dos santos is tracking this from london. what are you hearing at this hour? >> reporter: well, things are looking calm outside of the london bridge station but it was a different picture about seb hours ago. when the specter of another deadly terror attack made its presence felt on the capital streets. [ sirens ] >> reporter: terror once again in the heart of london. passengers on this bus became witness to a shocking scene. >> it looked like members of the public were fighting with a man. it looked like he was trying to be pinned down on the pavement. it looked like a shine of light from the man on the floor and we realized it was a knife and then the police ran over with guns and it ended with the man being shot. >> reporter: police say they were called to the area just before 2:00 p.m. following reports of a stabbing. after being apprehended by ordinary londoners, a suspect wearing a

the impeachment inquiry hearings continue next week when house judiciary committee chairman jerrold nadler holds the committee's first impeachment inquiry hearing into president trump focusing on the constitution in the history of impeachment. watch our live coverage wednesday, to summer fourth, at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. chairman nadler extended and end up -- an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. read the letter to the president on our website, c-span.org/impeachment. and follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. former house speaker john boehner was honored at the u.s. capitol during a portrait unveiling ceremony. the ohio republican served in congress from 1991 to 2015 and was elected speaker in 2011. at the ceremony, we will hear from current house speaker nancy pelosi and other congressional leaders. >> ladies and gentlemen, the honorable nancy pelosi, speaker of the united states house of representatives. speaker pelosi: good afternoon everyone. as speaker of

♪ inquirympeachment hearings continue next week, the jerrold nadler holds first impeachment inquiry hearing into president trump,

here was, for comparison, joyce, chairman nadler of the judiciary committee. this was days before the ukraine stuff took flight. have a listen. >> investigation also extends beyond the four corners of the mueller report. we are looking at corruption and abuse of power more broadly, so we will inquire about other subjects as well. we will secure accountability for any wrong doing because no one is above the law, not even the president of the united states. >> what do you expect, joyce, in this nadler phase? >> so, it's really incredible to think about the gap of just a couple of months between the original nadler statement and what we heard from chairman schiff. and schiff queues in on the most important part of the process in the committee. that is that the president has had no substantive answer to this narrative of wrong doing by the president and those close to him and also schiff was able to lay it at the president's doorstep. so, that's the legal part of this process. now we know that chairman nadler and the judiciary committee will open with at least one

committee where they're allowing president trump to have his counsel there, but it's really up to chairman nadler what he's going to allow, if he's going to allow any republican witnesses, any witnesses at all, or what he's going to a how the president's -- allow the president's counsel to do or ask for. it's all up to the democratic control which is really quite biased. maria: in terms of timing, it will come to the judiciary next week. there's some speculation that the house will vote on an

"the white house is currently reviewing chairman nadler's letter. what is obvious to every american is that it comes at the end of an illegitimate sham partisan process. the president has done nothing wrong, and the democrats know it." meanwhile, as he pointed out last night, the rally was sort of what we have come to expect. campaign style rhetoric, at or near-capacity crowd. once again, about 20,000 people over here in south florida. a familiar refrain from the president is something else that we have heard, jon, in respect to ukraine. i have done nothing wrong. >> all i'm saying is that it's a terrible hoax. last week, he testified that i told him "what do you want from ukraine?" and i said i want nothing. i want no quid pro quo. >> part of a continued aggressive push back against the democrats narrative. jon. >> jon: "the new york times" is reporting that the president knew about the whistle-blower complaint at the time that he released that aid package to ukraine. what is the white house thing about that? >> yeah, very interesting. they are act

hearings continue this week when judiciary chairman jerrold nadler holds the committee's first inquiry hearing into president trump focusing on the constitution and the history of impeachment. watch our live coverage wednesday, december 4 at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. chairman nadler extended an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. read the letter to the president on our website. follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. bbc parliament profiled the life of former house of commons speaker john bercow. he served as speaker for 10 years and was elected as a member of parliament for buckingham in 1997. this is hosted by bbc parliamentary correspondent. >> order. order. ♪ >> order. order. david: the speaker who did it his way. >> i need help from the member of the third. perhaps you have no contribution to make whatsoever. david: on a long and colorful political journey. >> i am not interested in signing up to a policy that would put europe before britain. david: dispe

that is the expectation of jerry nadler. he says now that the court has ruled, time to come and testify. if you don't want to testify, that's your obligation. you can certainly not answer questions, claim privilege, as this judge said. what nadler is saying here, he needs to appear before his committee, a stark warning before the house judiciary committee and the question is whether or not they will delay their proceedings in any way to try to pursue this key witness, whether it's part of obstruction of justice to detail to include articles of impeachment against the president the leadership is going. they want to wrap this up. adam schiff from the house intelligence committee does not want this dragged into court, neither does nancy pelosi, house speaker. while they're calling him to testify no expectation it will happen some time soon. >> i want to bring in a congressman from the judiciary committee. what's your reaction to the decision? >> all of us on the judiciary committee voted for the subpoena and happy with what the

house judicial committee chairman jerry nadler set a new deadline for the white house to decide whether or not to participate in the proceeding. let's begin with today's deadly

. >> chairman jerry nadler has been given until sunday to let the committee know whether he will send one of his attorneys to the house judiciary's first hearing next wednesday. he has until friday to let them know if he'd like to call any of his own witnesses. >> the frez face as choice whether to participate in an inquiry that he's repeatedly attacked, or to sit it out. >> it's a test of the white house and test of their arguments that the democrats have not been fair to them in the process. it's a choice for president trump and for the white house counsel. pat sippoloni to see if they're going to put up or shut up, basically. >> a lot to get to. we'll go over this morning with our reporters and analysts, we begin though with the deadline for the president. the chair of the judiciary committee, giving the president until next friday to say if he will present evidence or call witnesses this would happen while the committee considers impeachment articles. but it's not the only deadline, the white house is facing. kevin cerelli. the white house has to deal with tomorrow's deadline to d

chairman nadler extended an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. read the letter to the president on our website, c-span.org/impeachment, and follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span3, online at the span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> next, a presentation from

i mean, jerry nadler doesn't seem keen to make this very dramatic. and yet there is a case that must be made to the american people. so how do you think democrats are going to fact these hearings? >> yeah, i think that's really important. what the democrats want to do right now i think is stick very much to what they know to the evidence. they don't want to go overboard. i think going back into the mueller report and sort of suppositions and sort of thirdhand information, i think they're very reluctant to do that. i think they know the outcome is probably along the lines of what mark is saying, and that then they go back on the campaign trail. you know, cnn polling, other polling has found that while there hasn't been a strong movement in -- in public opinion on this, you still have about two-thirds of women who are basically saying that trump should be impeached and removed from office. there are basically strong demographic interests that democrats have in -- in battleground states. voters that they can play to to say you know what, four years of t

stephanie grisham saying that they're reviewing nadler's request to do so. what do you make of that? does it underscore the fact there's not a real strategy that the white house is bringing to this, and should they send a representative? after all, they've been saying these proceedings are unfair because they haven't been allowed to send local counsel. >> this is a complicated decision for the white house. they've been complaining for weeks that they've been shut out of the process, but at the same time, they've been trying to delegitimize the process, call it a hoax and say it's a political employ to overturn the 2016 election. if they do send someone, they're lending legitimacy to the impeachment process. they are validating the process that democrats have laid out. however, if they don't send anyone, then it kind of undermines these arguments that they've been making and it would perhaps make them seem a little hypocritical before the american people. i personally think that they should send someone. if they have arguments that they want to make, if they

chairman nadler started an investigation and he didn't have legal standing to do so. you the president was dee need the due process the republican congress thought was essential for president clinton. as someone who constructed investigation. i'm not sure where we are here. the proseeding has been stacked. so everything is over. counsel comes in at last minute as window dressing. lou: and nadler as far as we know, doesn't have any material witnesses, that is, fact witnesses of any kind. it looks as if they are persisting because they are trying to say, i was going to i save face, but save lipstick on that pig. >> as someone who used to put these things together and plan out how we dock an investigation, i'm not quite sure where we are going. i think we'll have a few hearings. i don't think there will be witnesses. i think there will be a discussion of the law. but i think it only coherent theme will be a continuation of what we have seen is what we have seen out of alice and wonderland. sentence first, verdict afterwards. >> it's ironic that there would and hear being

nadler saying the president has until sunday to let the committee know whether he will send one of his attorneys to that wednesday hearing and then until friday to decide if he would like to call any of his own witnesses. nbc white house correspondent kelly o'donnell is traveling and following the president in florida for us. kelly, with a good saturday to you, and i hope that you had a good thanksgiving, my friend, i'd like to get to the white house's response to all these deadlines. >> reporter: well, we're waiting to get a sense of what they will say officially, and they may be using whatever time is available under these deadlines to sort of leave everyone in a bit of suspense. as you described it, tomorrow's deadline is for the wednesday hearing, which will be about the constitutional grounds of impeachment, so more of an academic exercise in the first public hearing within the house judiciary committee. their thinking is that it's been a generation or two since we've had previous impeachment hearings and to give people more of a context for what constitutes impeachment and what i

nadler to consider the matter. they say what happened in the adam schiff-led intel committee hearings could be replicated. they are complaining chairman nadler has the ability to approve or reject any requests for witnesses. there are concerns about that. however, democrats say they would like to wrap this whole process up, they would like to make a decision vis-a-vis censure or impeachment. if it's a former it means we'll be looking ahead to january for a possible senate trial. but the real rub about that, we have the iowa caucuses coming up. there are a number of people pushing back that maybe they wanted to extend this beyond christmas. we'll see how it plays out the next couple days. eric: a federal judge is granting a justice department request for a temporary pause of her own ruling. that ruling that don mcghan needs to appear before the house committee. what does it mean for the impeachment inquiry? what does the doj raise in terms of its opposing this for don mcghan. >> the justice department attorneys are

so they've got -- the deadline is sunday that nadler has given them. so to make a decision whether or not they'll appear on wednesday, let's be clear the white house has blown through a lot of deadlines, whether or not that's with congress or courts, i wouldn't look at that sunday deadline as firm and fast. as everyone is watching those, there are probably 18 million news cycles to get through before we get to an actual decision. i only exaggerate by a slight factor. >> any idea who they might send, who the attorney might be? >> reporter: we know they've distanced themselves from rudy giuliani. the president last night in the interview with bill o'reilly, he was putting space between him and his personal attorney. he always talks about what a great crime fighter rudy giuliani is and how he's anti corruption. but whether or not you'd actually have giuliani or pat sip own any, they haven't given an indication yet. the white house has not blessed this process with legitimacy. should they send any representative from the white house down to the hearing, th

great timing, jerry nadler. this is yet another instance of tone-deaf democrats trying to undermine the president while he is abroad. in july of 2017, you may recall president trump was at a bus steel day when democrats introduced articles of impeachment against him. february 2019, the president attended a summit with president kim jong un, and in july of 2019, the president attended a dj celebration in france and that is when congressman jerry nadler chose to pursue more russia which foud hearings. joining us now for reaction is senior legal advisor to the trump 2020 campaign, jenna ellis. house freedom caucus chairman, congressman andy biggs. and fox news contributor roy murdock. congressman bigs, let me start with you. is it your sense that democrats are catching an ear full back home among their constituents and that they may suddenly get a case of the 4-real or less and reconsider their drive to impeach? >> in some districts they are. if you are in a swing district like the state you just showed a clip of,

press secretary stephanie grisham had first responded to the invitation saying nadler's offer is being reviewed but the president has done nothing wrong and the democrats know it. >> when you complain and complain and complain and you have an opportunity to put your story to the american public and you don't want to do it, and you don't want to be subject to cross-examination yourself, it shows you don't have a very good defense. >> reporter: this week, the house intelligence communiittee to submit information. >> there is a mountain of evidence that has come to light through public testimony and private depositions that i've had an opportunity to listen to. >> reporter: nadler will use the report as a guide to help write the articles of impeachment on those ukraine related charges. the allegation being that the president trades a white house meeting with military aid in exchange for dirt on the bidens. democrat are considering other articles including obstruction of justice on the mueller probe. >> this will be the first partisan impeachment in the history of our country. i think chai

your counterpart, there, is congressman jerry nadler, chairman jerry nadler, democrat of new york. take a listen to what he had to say just before he took over the chairman, laying out his standard for impeachment. >> you don't want half the country to say to the other half for the next 30 years, we won the election, you stole it from us. you have to be able to think before -- at the beginning of the impeachment process, that the evidence is so clear of offenses, so grave, that once you've laid out all the evidence, a good fraction of the opposition voters will say, will reluctantly admit to themselves, they had to do it. otherwise, off partisan impeachment, which will tear the country apart. >> i understand you think the evidence is there, but do you think you have reached that level of a good fraction of the opposition, reluctantly admitting that you have to proceed with impeachment? >> you know, there's certainly a number of leading republican voices outside the congress that are saying that this is impeachable conduct. and you can now add former senator and former secretary chu

the impeachment inquiry hearings continue next week, when house judiciary committee chairman nadler holds presidentinquiry into trump, focusing on the constitution and the history of impeachment. our live coverage on c-span3. chairman nadler extended an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear for the committee. read the letter to the president on our website, c-span.org/impeachment, and follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span 3, online at c-span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. last week, former house speaker john boehner wasn't honored at the u.s. -- john boehner was honored at u.s. capitol. at the ceremony, we will hear from current house speaker nancy pelosi and other congressional leaders. >> ladies and gentlemen, the honorable nancy pelosi, speaker of the united states house of representatives. speaker pelosi: good afternoon, everyone. as the speaker of the house, it is my official and personal honor to welcome friends of speaker john boehner to the u.s. capitol on this historic day. the presence of members from both sides of the aisle, from both