From an old times, are Michael above our daily. Today, once the special council report has been released, it's up to Congress and its oversight to determine what happens next. As head of the Judiciary Committee, much of that war fought to Representative Jerry Nap Part three of what to expect from the Mulder report. It in March twelve good evening. I Marin Burnett out front tonight the biggest threat to President tromp, his name and it's a person is Jerry, Nobbler

during that are doing that large area network of New York, the democratic hand of a House Judiciary Committee, the committee with the power to lead impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States is investigating, quote allegations of obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power. Democrats led by house, judiciary, chairman, Jerry Nebular, are carpet bombing the White House with document requests, as he is now facing a brand new investigation. The widest sense, the launch the Mahler inquiry. This again folks at the White House, an idea of what their end for for the next two years, or so as democratic lay the groundwork for twenty twenty and a possible impeachment twisting two, four six twisting three: six: nine thirsting for eight twelve into five.

Hello, congressmen, hi hi? How are you ok, how you good thank you again for making some high pressure us to really appreciate so cumbersome over the last couple of weeks on that I explained to listeners how the Mulder report will be released. It goes to the attorney general. The for general, then releases a report on the report that goes to Congress we ve explained that it will either say we have evidence the president committed a crime or we don't have. We wanted to talk to you about what happens when that report gets to you. We investigate further. The fact that he committed a crime is of great interest is not new. Early guaranteed impeachment. Those are two different tests. As you know, we have a responsibility. Well, beyond the Mulder report, we have an obligation to our own work. The Mulder report is only for what happened with respect to rush into fiercely election and with

publicity by Americans in that interference and what crimes were committed and by whom we have to be considerably broader mean as part of our work, but our basic work is to provide for the rule of law. They show that the rule of law protected. That means that we have to look into obstruction of justice into corruption, into abuses of power and certainly what model is looking into is part of that. But we have to be much better You said that a more report that says the President committed a crime is not necessarily grounds for impeachment. Can you help me understand what you mean by that It is an hour on which the Mulder Report says the present committed a crime, but wouldn't equal impeachment. Necessarily in your mind, will you have to understand that not every crime is to impeach will offence and in future events, needn't be a crime. Does it there two different tests, so, for example, if the Mulder report it were to show that the present committed per with respect to.

Money laundering, Enerve five years ago in some scheme in New York to cheat the type that would not be not be because impeachment is a an abusive presidential power for the purpose or with the effect of teen dies in power to the executive of damaging liberty of the structure and function of government, the separation of powers- that's what's impeachable, also corruptly obtaining an election we be impeachable Crimes that don't baron that would not be feasible, so we, I said twenty years ago that the present perjury about a privacy there was not an Peterborough and, if present trumpeted be shown to have purging himself about some business deal. That would not be feasible, but if he were shown to commit perjury or add to do something else that effective destruction functioning govern

into a democratic rights or or the integrity of elections? That would be impossible So what do you do if the Mulder Report says that the President committed a crime? like money laundering five years ago, but did not commit what you see as an impeachable offence. Well, if the president, shown to have committed a crime of money laundering five years ago. I would hope that the EU should be prosecuted for that any Arkwright yeah in New York by the southern district of New York about a new authorities or both period. That's the criminal justice it now, the justice, department maintains wrongly, in my opinion, there is sitting president cannot be, guided while in office, so they were I'd, indict a president for committing some crime. I think it's the wrong policy. I think they should be able to dine at present while is in office, but that's not the real function of what we do in our committee. Our committee's job is not a criminal justice. Job. That's up to the deployment of justice is up to the new state authorities,

our job is to protect the structure of democratic government and the liberties of the people. If the present committed a crime. There's nothing to do with this. Well, you oughta be prosecuted, but this has not Business and we then alone for a while, let's flipped us around and say the Mulder Report finds that the president committed a crime that is absolutely grounds for impeachment. What do you do that? Well, we have two further investigate it has put this week. We have to do all these investigations. Now there was going to do focused on obstruction, corruption, abuse of power structure does better. If we find that the president is guilty of that, then we have to decide what we can do about it. Impeachment is one option. But impeachment is the decision to be made further down the road and has a very high bar, but it certainly be on the table if we were to find that. Do you know what the bar is in your mind? Yes, I said it many times only. I think this is a threefold testing

patient really number one has the present commission peaceable fences number two are those serious and if the answer to the first, who is yes, I think there's one further tests, and that is in happy partisan? Would you don't want to do is divide the countries that have the country thinks the next thirty years we won the election, you stole it from a bit of a country. The situation is to be such that you believe, when you start the impeachment proceedings that the evidence you have a persuasive of such terrible deeds, that, once the This is laid out an appreciable fraction of of the voters who voted for trouble. Reluctantly, say you had to do it here, just trying to steal the election, but the first two conditions you laid out is Adam. Peaceable is serious those feel quite subject, and so I wonder if any argument to impeach will inevitably feel partisan and therefore my

Your thirty eyes marring, which are just as it is gonna, be political teach me as a political task is intended to be by the constitution. Yes, it's gonna be subject. Is all political decisions are subjective? I should say that almost all political decisions are subjected but if this occurs, people going to be on both sides and some people think you're faring some won't. But you know he have to really depend on the facts that you have at that point. You have to have very strong proof, a very die that's it and by the way we didn't just back. I am a little concerned that we're talking too much better impeachment. Our goal is not impede. Our goal is what I said a few minutes ago to protect the rule of law and attract destruction. Functioning government to protect our liberal, that's the bicycle, and if we can do that without impatient find it, we have to do impeachment, and if we meet the requirements that we think we can do it also. I understand I want to ask you about, Some of the comments you have made ahead of the release of the mother report, you are

the question in your response. You said that you believed the president obstructed justice, and I wonder why you would let me say the following think there's a lot of evidence. The present obstructed justice, but we have to go a lot further. We have to know a lot more, but I wonder why you would say that publicly for the release of the Mulder report? What's the value in doing that does not come inherently portrayed, whatever investigations areas requires his honest means, is the question, volunteering resists, the question, and I said yes, I think certain things which at Why does my leg asking questions, but why not say why not say wait until the Mulder report comes out. Maybe you should have put. The fact is, I think, certain things that are in the public record make a strong case instruction and other people said the same thing, but a strong case is not proof. I should exercise truncated allowed. Evidence is a better way to do this.

Necessarily proof and certainly not enough to convince the country. At this point we have to have a lot more evidence that a lot more facts and we need to know my report- said I mean you know a lot more than his mother boys is so we asking the same question now that I think your asked about ten days or so ago. Do you believe the present obstructed justice? I think this out of evidence that he obstruct the justice in the mother, will tell us a lot more about that and is one of the things we have enough are concerned, and I appreciate you saying that maybe but are you concerned that people will see this as a preconceived judgment? I know that some of your colleagues, like Jim Jordan, do see it that way heading interviews and other measures No matter what I say I do, they gonna say that it's the republican strategy to say I decided to increase the present day ass. They liked him. It's just that intend to distract. We haven't decide. I haven't decides on page, as some people have said that when I say especially that third, the required

it's a very high bar and sub. You said it may be an impossible why it may be the three tests that I said I didn't. Then we had the Clinton impeachment and I was a junior member, the committee, the first thing did was to try to get my hands on, everything has been written from Blackstone onward as to what's an with us, but the second thing I didn't twenties. Ago was. I demanded that before we held hearings of the committee on the fact that we first hold a hearing on what's individuals, and even though has emerged, remember the committee, I persuaded people and we did that, and so what I ve been talking about. Is basically what I got from that is number I didn't make up this test or, conversely, I do it

Where that you said that we were talking too much about impeachment. But now you are talking about ok, feared of a fifth the problem. To any say you don't really says we focused on right. We will take the facts with a red and will say I want to stay with the topic of Mahler. For a moment, you and your colleagues have held up robber Mahler as a kind of gold stand, of objectivity and fairness in all of this, as somebody who has the integrity, the ground to kind of handle this promise. You have a lot of faith in him. Do you agree that there is basically no path to impeach and sorry used? The word again if the Mulder report finds no crimes, not necessarily depends what else? find depends. What else is going on? There may be a lot of other things that we have to look into, and there may be very damning re end, and you said earlier, there is such a thing as unimpeachable offence. That is not a crime. Can you help us understand? I want everyone. What am I look like

Ok, unimpeachable affairs is not a crime. Well, the important power, for example, misuse of other powers. That is a lot of other people, have said that the present the absolute right to do this and therefore, if he does this it can you wrong. The president has the right to do so in things pardons. You mean, for example, the presidency absolute right to pardon anybody right, but if the present we shall departments absolute right to pardon anyway right, because the present we shown to pardon somebody in return for fifty thousand now check. That would be a crime. It will also be invisible events or to obstruct investigation or to shut me busy. In other words, if you had shown for corrupt motive, so the motive is what counts in a lot of these things, so in November of toys, sixteen right after President Tromp was elected. You called for then FBI director. James, call me to be forced out of his job because of how we handle the investigation of

Clinton and his decision not to charge her with a crime, yet still detail, you're wrong doing for the public. We all remember that news conference about work and you call that unforgivable. Yes, if from mother says no crime has been committed when it comes president. Would you, as head of the Judiciary Committee, still try to bring forward to the public the formation behind the Mahler investigation, and if you were to do that, I wonder what's different in your mind, between what Comey did and what year is a fundamental difference. The just department is very salutary journal. And that is, if you don't indict somebody you know, I dont indict. Somebody than of the evidence obviously have investigated the so so not indicting her or him. You don't come at negatively. You should, in the case of public notoriety. You should now we ve investigated, undying that's fine, but you have a policy which the just farming does

at the president cannot be indicted, no matter how much evidence just because you can visit. Therefore we can come then evidence against them. Anything else, converting a normally good policy into a cover up and you'd, depriving Congress of its ability to hold the present account you, the just the me- won't hold them accountable cause. You said you have no right to. You can't indict him that only Congress and are you gonna, deny Congress the right to the information that makes the present unaccountable and above the law, and that cannot be, but just to be clear if Mahler says no crimes, the public still needs to see the evidence regarding food, because the rules are different here. No, the public needs The average number one is so it can be confident that is true me we ve tried to protect Malo caused by all accounts is no he's a nice guy, so tat in the investigation supersede, but whatever he says you can't taken on faith. We don't operate that really we shouldn't take things on faith, and he says the present has committed crimes. We

no at the evidence, is, if says, a present hasn't committed crimes. We should know the evidences and if the present hasn't many crises, but done terrible things that he knows about. We should know that to the present there's nothing wrong. We should know that the public has a great interest in the present. Obviously, so it's gonna be a very clear and why the case of call me is different from the case of mauler in terms of you unduly, because he announced wasn't indicting Hilary. It was because he thought there wasn't enough. It is to indict here with an enormous reason. You dont indict somebody if Malo decides not to indict the present than the public to know that, and here that and see the evidence and which is based is so. I want

Do you caution about the politics of all this and what the path forward might mean for the Democratic Party, because, as you know, the Republican Party has stood solidly behind the president this entire time. You may have not budged at all if Robert Mahler says at the end of the day that no crimes have been committed by the president, but your committee and others continue to investigate the president? Are you concerned at this will inflict even more damaging partisanship on an already pretty divided and high part, is not an area into a responsible and may be hurt the Democratic Party in the process. Not if we do it responsibly, Congress must hold the executive accountable and that is with respect. Crimes is respected their deeds as respect to corruption and settle in respect of policy we have to provide,

the accountability and we have to let the american people know what is being done in their names and let them judge. But how do you explain to the american people who are pretty exhausted by all this? Why you're gonna keep pursuing an investigation? after mother? Well, it their hands what he says and how much he covers, and that will Determine how much we have left to do, and the answer is that we can't rely and others to do the work for us. We have location do our own work, that's why we were elected the end of the day. The american people decide not the week after Mahler releases report, but election day next year, whether we that could responsibly responsibly in a partisan or a reasonable way? What would you put your belief in the need to pursue the facts over the floor

time well being of the democratic Party. If those two things seem to turn out to be at odds with one another and in conflict, I think is my constitutional duty to do so this sound a little corny, but in this moment, with everyone waiting for what's next, what message do you want to give to Americans what we can see. As kind of the eve of the mother report, my message at one we have a ministration that is Tat, the institutions of government and of labelling, which we depend on fundamental ways- and we have to didn't. We have to make sure that the separation of powers detained in the liberties and the rule of law is maintained, that the Mulder report will give us, hopefully a lot of information, but that Congress

do the job we were elected to do and that the administration has to understand that the american people a congress that once told administration accountable, and we will do that and the Mulder report will help doing that to a greater or lesser extent, but is fundamental. Our job cartoon. Thank you for your time here and appreciate. However, pictures we'll back. Hi, I'm Kristen minds are, and I'm the co host of innovation uncovered anew pod the world changing in real time, often in ways we don't notice an can't, protect innovation.

And covered explores the breakthroughs that our driving our culture now from how we play to what we consume to how we can act, more about the ideas that are reshaping. Our reality in extraordinary way is innovation, uncovered is upon cast from invest, go cute, you too, and t brand at the New York Times listened today in basque or distributors ink yours what else You need to know we're very, very sudden, ahead this programme for this tragic accident. On Monday, at least twenty two areas stopped flying the version of Boeing, seven, thirty, seven, gentlemen, that crashed anything you'll, be on Sunday out of fear. There may be a connection to a similar crash of the same model in Indonesia six months ago, but it

twelve other carriers, including American Airlines and Southwest Airlines, said they would continue to fly the plans as the await the conclusion of an investigation into the ethiopian crash. Both crashes occurred moments after take off in clear conditions and resulted in the death of everyone on board. At this stage. We cannot do anything. We cannot also tribute that caused to anything, because we will have to comply with the international regulation to wait for the investigation to review the cause of the accident. The cause of the ethiopian Airlines crash remains unknown, but investigators have retrieved the planes, flight data and cockpit voice report which are expected to provide clubs. I wish to express my deepest condolences and press the great measure of utopia,

and to the families of the passengers and crew members who lost their lives in this tragedy in Kenya on Monday or the plane was had a week. Long United Nations summit began with a moment of silence The twenty two you and workers who died in the crash, all of whom were scheduled to attend the summit and good afternoon after forty two days without a press briefing, the longest stretch of that from presents press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders returned the White House podium on Monday to take questions from a porters the press is really very democratic: choose what the President's ban and unwavering and committed ally to Israel and the jewish people-

and frankly the remarks that have been made by a number of Democrats and failed to be called out by democratic leadership is frankly abhorrent and sad. During the briefing reporters repeatedly press Santos on why Trump recently said that the Democratic Party is Anti jewish and reportedly told campaigned on over the weekend that Democrats quoth, he jewish people, say astronaut, doesnt, really democratic ages undertaken any that's why she had asked the Democrats. That's it. I'm, like a bomb

Cinema news laws and regulations are changing by the day. Eighty be knows it's hard to stay. On top of it all. That's. Why they're here to guide you with up to the minute compliance expertise to help you navigate these complex times, so you can pay your pay accurately and on time, regardless of changing legislation. When you rely on eighty four payroll and hr your trusting them to help you take care of your people, it's what they ve been doing for were seventy years and that's not about to change. Eighty hr talent, time benefits in payroll, informed by data and design for people.