EVIDENCE.

>> Bret: ONE, THANKS.

LET'S BRING IN JIM JORDAN,

RANKING MEMBER OF THE HOUSE

OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND A MEMBER

OF THE PRESIDENT'S IMPEACHMENT

DEFENSE TEAM.

YOU HEARD JUAN THERE AT GOING

CHUCK SCHUMER ON THE FLOOR WHERE

HE SAID TRIAL WITHOUT EVIDENCE

IS NOT A TRIAL BUT A COVER-UP.

YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?

>> CHUCK SCHUMER SAID THE DARK

OF THE NIGHT BECAUSE SENATORS

MIGHT HAVE TO PAST DINNERTIME.

ADAM SHIFTED 17 DEPOSITIONS IN A

BUNKER IN THE BASEMENT OF THE

CAPITAL AND NOW THEY'RE TALKING

ABOUT, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE

DONE IN PRIME TIME, SO TO SPEAK.

I THOUGHT SENATOR SCHUMER'S

ARGUMENTS WERE WEAK, I THINK

THIS CASE IS STRONG ON PROCESS

GROUNDS, HE WAS DENIED DUE

PROCESS IN THE HOUSE AND MOST

IMPORTANT OF THE FACTS ARE ON

THE PRESIDENT'S SIDE.

THEY ALL SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT'S

POSITION, THAT'S WHY I THINK

HE'S GOING TO PREVAIL IN THIS IS

ALL DONE.

>> Bret: WHAT EXACTLY IS YOUR

ROLE AS PART OF THE PRESIDENT'S

TEAM?

>> WE ARE GOING TO DO WHATEVER

PAT INSTRUCTS US TO DO TO BE

HELPFUL, THEY'VE GOT GREAT

LAWYERS, THEY ARE GOING TO

PRESENT AN EXCELLENT CASE

BECAUSE THE FACTS ARE ON THEIR

SIDE, A TOP-NOTCH LEGAL TEAM AND

WE WILL DO WHATEVER THEY ASKED

US TO DO BECAUSE WE WANT TO HELP

THE PRESIDENT IN ANY WAY

POSSIBLE.

THIS IS SO RIDICULOUS ENTITIES

FOR KOUFAX, THE IDEA THAT WE

HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT, THERE WAS

NO QUID PRO QUO IN THE

TRANSCRIPT, TWO INDIVIDUALS ON

THE CALL HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID

THAT THERE WAS NO PUSHING, NO

PRESSURE, NO LEAKAGE BETWEEN THE

SECURITY ASSISTANCE DOLLARS AND

ANY TYPE OF INVESTIGATION IN

UKRAINE, UKRAINE DIDN'T EVEN

KNOW AT THE TIME OF THE CALL

THAT EIGHT HAD BEEN HELD AND

THEY TOOK NO ACTION, NEVER

STARTED AN INVESTIGATION, NEVER

PROMISED TO START AN

INVESTIGATION, NEVER ANNOUNCED

AN INVESTIGATION.

THOSE FOUR FACTS WILL NEVER

CHANGE NO MATTER HOW LONG JERRY

NADLER AND ADAM SCHIFF TALK.

>> Martha: CONGRESSMAN JORDAN,

NO DOUBT, THE DEMOCRATS IN THE

SENATE WILL BRING UP A LOT OF

THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS HEARD

FROM THOSE 17 WITNESSES, OVER

100 HOURS OF TESTIMONY OF PEOPLE

WHO SAY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT

YOU'RE SAYING, THERE'S CLEAR

SIGNS OF THE WAS BEING WITHHELD

AND THAT IT WAS FOR POLITICAL

REASONS, THAT'S A DEMOCRAT

ARGUMENTS HERE.

ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE ARE

GOING TO HEAR THAT DRIFTED OUT

THIS MORNING IS THIS QUESTION OF

WHETHER OR NOT THE WHITE HOUSE

ATTORNEY PAT CIPOLLONE YOU JUST

MENTIONED HAS FIRST-HAND

EVIDENCE OF ANY OF THESE THINGS

AND CAN HE BE PRESSED TO DIVULGE

IT?

OBVIOUSLY THAT GOES STRAIGHT TO

AN EXECUTIVE POWERS QUESTION

THAT I WOULD IMAGINE WOULD BE

TIED UP FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

>> THAT'S RIDICULOUS, THE

PRESIDENT'S LAWYER?

THAT IS JUST RIDICULOUS.

I DON'T SEE THAT EVER HAPPENING,

THERE IS NO REASON FOR THAT TO

HAPPEN, NO BASIS FOR THAT TO

HAPPEN.

TELL ME WHEN THE ANNOUNCEMENT

HAPPEN -- THIS IS THE DEMOCRATS

CASE, ONE OF THEIR WITNESSES --

WENT TO THE ANNOUNCEMENT

HAPPENED, THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT

THEY WERE GOING TO INVESTIGATE?

IT NEVER HAPPENED.

THOSE FOUR KEY FACTS I JUST

TALKED ABOUT ARE NEVER GOING TO

CHANGE, THE FACTS ARE SOLELY ON

THE PRESIDENT SIDE, I THINK

THAT'S WHY THEY UNDERSTAND THAT

THIS

IS WERE RIDICULOUS AND

THAT'S WHY THE PRESIDENT WILL

PREVAIL IN AS SHORT A TRIAL IS

POSSIBLE BECAUSE ALL THE FACTS

SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT.

>> Bret: SENATOR McCONNELL

IS ESSENTIALLY SAYING, WHAT'S

THE FOCUS OF THE HOUSE

IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, IF THEY ARE

GOING TO REOPEN THE CASE ON THE

SENATE SIDE.

HOW LONG IF YOU HAD TO GUESS DO

YOU THINK THIS GOES?

AND DO YOU THINK THAT THE SENATE

WILL HEAR FROM WITNESSES?

>> I DON'T.

THE FACTS ARE SO STRONG, AS I'VE

WHEN PAT CIPOLLONE'S TEAM

PRESENTED, THOSE OF THE FACTS,

THEY SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT'S

NARRATIVE, UKRAINE GOT THE MONEY

BEFORE THE END OF THE

FISCAL YEAR, THE WHOLE THING

DOESN'T MEAN MUCH SO I THINK

IT'S A STRONG CASE.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS THING

DISMISSED RIGHT AWAY, THAT'S NOT

GOING TO HAPPEN, THEY WILL HAVE

THE MOTIONS TODAY, THEN THEY'RE

GOING TO HAVE THE PRESENTATION

FROM THE HOUSE MANAGER ON THE

DEMOCRAT SIDE AND THE

WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TEAM AND THE

NEGATIVE QUESTIONS.

I ASSUME THE PRESIDENT WILL BE

ACQUITTED SOMETIME NEXT WEEK.

>> Martha: CONGRESSMAN JORDAN,

YOU ARE A ARGUED VOCIFEROUSLY

FOR MINORITY WITNESSES ON THE

HOUSE SIDE WOULDN'T THAT

PRINCIPLE BE IN PLAY ON THE

SENATE SIDE?

>> WE DIDN'T GET ANY WITNESSES,

WE JUST ARGUED FOR A FAIR

PROCESS.

EVERY SINGLE WITNESS CALLED WAS

ADAM SCHIFF'S, IN THE BUNKER OF

THE BASEMENT OF THE CAPITAL,

THERE WERE TIMES, MARTHA, WHERE

WE ASKED THE WITNESS QUESTIONS

AND ADAM SCHIFF PREVENTED THE

WITNESS FROM ANSWERING HER

QUESTION.

HE WASN'T JUST CHAIRMAN OF THE

COMMITTEE AT THE MOMENT, HE TOOK

ON THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER FOR

THE WITNESS.

THEY WERE PAYING A LOT OF MONEY,

THE LAWYER CAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT

IF THERE IS SOME PRIVILEGE HE

WANTS TO ASSERT AND PREVENT THE

WITNESS FROM ANSWERING A

QUESTION, NOT ADAM SCHIFF.

NO DUE PROCESS FOR THE

PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDENT WASN'T

ALLOWED TO BE THERE TO SEE WHAT

WAS GOING ON, WASN'T ALLOWED TO

CROSS-EXAMINE, WE WEREN'T

ALLOWED TO CALL ANY WITNESSES

AND NOW THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT

PROCESS WHEN SENATOR McCONNELL

IS SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE

PRECEDENT SET 21 YEARS AGO

DURING THE CLINTON IMPEACHMENT

PROCESS.

>> Martha: YOU THINK THERE

WILL BE NO WITNESSES, PERIOD?

>> I DO, I THINK THEY HAVE THE

VOTES FOR THAT AND I THINK

THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO,

WHERE ALL THE EVIDENCE SHOULD B

BE.

FRANKLY, IF YOU GOT A STRONG

CASE, LET THE WITNESSES COME.

THAT'S THE TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT

WE MADE ON THE HOUSE SIDE.

IF YOU HAVE A GOOD CASE, A

STRONG CASE, YOU WOULDN'T DENY