mulvaney?iny -- mike >> that is all in the court. declared, in the case of richard nixon, congress has the right to subpoena and they should be coming before us. they keep taking it to court and we will not wait until the courts decide. that might be information available to the senate in terms of how far we go. that becauset for it is a technique. it is obstruction of justice. obstruction of congress. thank you.

>> house minority leader kevin mccarthy held his weekly briefing with reporters of the capital. he spoke about the ongoing hearings and trade issues and called on house speaker nancy pelosi to focus on approving the u.s.-mexico-canada trade legislation. this is 20 minutes. >> could afternoon. just a few short weeks away we will be at the one-year mark since democrats officially assumed the majority in the house. when she took over the gavel, speaker pelosi claimed they would be different. she promised the american public that they would work to get

things done. that they would politics aside for the good of the country, that they would be different. but we even found out the night of swearingen that the new freshman -- of swearing in, that the new freshman came in with one goal -- to a peach the president. -- to impeach the president. we soon found their goal, the only thing they have been working on. there are other things we should be working on. lowering drug prices is a goal that easily transcends politics. there was a moment in time that we could achieve that. hadgy and commerce, we three bills that would lower the drug prices. every republican and every democrat voted for it. sure thatsi made would not happen. putting a poison pill so it

would not become law. be thenine days, we will one-year anniversary when the three leaders came together to sign the united states-mexico-canada agreement. the speaker promised they were on a path to yes. how may times and we heard that? today, she thought it wasn't out they could get it done this year -- was in doubt that they could get it done this year. doubt towhy there is get it done this year. busy withey were too the only reason why they wanted to win the majority. and they cannot do anything else. they continue to fail legislatively. they have issued more subpoenas then signed into law. these newt something freshman can run for reelection upon.

let's talk about what they have been doing. let's talk about what we have been learning for the last two weeks. no longer the intelligence committee, but now the impeachment committee. advantage.eld you do not allow witnesses and you get to control the time and not even all members to share or first hour.the there are two things we have learned -- u.s. support to ukraine is stronger now than it was during the obama administration. ukraine is safer because of donald trump. out of hundreds of hours of depositions, there have not been one person who heard the president say there were conditions on the aide to ukraine. to see the weakness in their argument time after time, to look no further than how they have shifted their own accusations against the president. remember what this all started

with -- there was a quid pro quo. then we moved to extortion. now we move to bribery. bribery?e move to what was interesting when you listen to the hearings and you watch congressman john radcliffe, he pointed out on tuesday that in the 3000 500 pages of deposition from witnesses, the word bribery only came up once. it was not in reference to the president. it was in reference to the bidens. democrats might not be focused on facts. the republicans will continue to double down on the truth and expose those for what it is, a political hit job on the president. german adam schiff is playing by his rules -- chairman adam schiff is playing by his rules and will not provide the president of fair process. we have not had a witness we requested outside of those that

adam schiff has gone through his audition. we do not have a process where the president's own attorney can have a cross-examination. we do not have due process. despite all the advantage to adam schiff, he still cannot come up with a reason to impeach the president. i know it has been his goal and i know he has taken this country through a nightmare and i know he has continued to go -- to care for this so much that he is willing to lie on national television. do we all forget just a few short weeks ago that adam schiff went on national tv repeatedly making the claim that the intelligence committee would hear from the whistleblower, that he would stand up to the president to make sure the whistleblower came forward. we learned later that they met with the whistleblower and adam schiff decides the whistleblower should not come through. he claims not to know who this person is.

he will stop people from answering because a parent see -- apparently he knows the name of the whistleblower because he thinks they might say the name. i think there is more to get done. the democrats promised they would be different. he promised they would govern. we found out from the very first day of swearing in, that their true goal was to impeach the president. they kept that promise to themselves and broke the other promise to america. we can do better. open it up for questions? >> on monday, the president tweeted that he would strongly consider testifying on the ukraine controversy. democrats were quick to call this a deflection. have you spoken to the president about this? >> i did not talk about this. it would be odd that the democrats would allow the

republicans to have any witnesses. they would have to change their course. the president gave his transcript. what more would you need? adam schiff was very concerned that the president was going to withhold a whistleblower from coming to testify. a whistleblower that was not allowed -- we have the transcript of what happened on the phone call. we have witnesses. we have only been allowed to have witnesses that were adam schiff tas auditioned. only in the manner he can direct. we found that there is no impeachable offense, that the aide was given with ukraine doing nothing so why would you continue to put our country through this nightmare? i know adam schiff's goal is tried to impeach the president and he will lie or say whatever it takes to get to this point but i think we've had enough. i think it is time to shut it down.

>> 51% of people in orange county and 52% of people in the central valley support impeachment, and historically republican area. can you talk about the impact this is having on republican voters? >> i do not know the poll you refer to. the number one thing my constituents asked me, aren't we less than a year wait from the election? why don't we trust the american public to make the decision? the other question i get, how much is this costing? the next question that gets asked, when are you going to pass the usmca to make the economy stronger? when are you going to lower drug

prices? every time we want to talk policy, the majority party only wants to deal with impeachment. i am not sure what poll you have. in congress, it is not about polls. it is about what we get done. there is one side that is bipartisan. decide that wants to and the impeachment. i have watched -- have not seen it. i lived there. i will be home there tomorrow. it is not what i see on the ground or what i hear. -- i go back input to what the speaker, who was also from california. she was very clear when people talked about impeachment. it was in march of this year. impeachment is so divisive to the nation.

it would have to be overwhelming , compelling, and bipartisan for us to move forward. the speaker of the house, who lives in california, laid out the three criteria for us to even move to impeachment. it has to be overwhelming, compelling, and bipartisan. vote but a bipartisan that was not to move forward. democrats going with republicans to say no. overwhelming, you have watched the witnesses and heard the hearings. the only overwhelming thing we know today is that ukraine is safer because we have a new administration. we also know that nowhere in there is anyone who spoke to the president that there was any prerequisite for aid going to ukraine. compelling? the only compelling thing i see is that adam schiff will do anything or say any to try to make the president impeach.

releasedd the aide get to the recurring -- to ukraine? it was held up for 55 days. >> a new leader inside ukraine. ukraine is listed as one of the most challenged countries when it comes to ethics. i have watched the administration. you can talk to senators who traveled there and you can watch votes taken place inside ukraine to have more rule of law. the president had those concerned. >> why was it released? because they it was --plaint >> it has to be adam schiff, right?

is that the same man he said he would do anything in his power to bring the whistleblower forward? is that the same man who said he does not know who the whistleblower is? clear.to be wassame man who said there quid pro quo. think it was released? >> i think the president had more confidence in the change of government inside ukraine. he wanted to be reassured there were changes made. he was also concerned about russia's movement to ukraine. he wanted to make sure they could defend themselves. this administration provided the javelin. obama provided them blankets. that is the defining difference. anytime you are dealing with

taxpayer money, i want to make sure it is going for the reasons congress passed in in the first place. >> [inaudible] did he acquit the president of these allegations? >> it is very clear there was no quid pro quo. the length of the interview -- i would summon up -- one individual asking him questions. he asked him, is anybody on the planet tell you in the process there had to be a quid pro quo? he said no. one question can sum up the entire interview. again, after that interview, you wonder why they continue forward. >> we have heard a lot of different defenses from the president, some of which have been undercut by the testimony. what will be the strongest

defense from republicans? >> same defense from the very beginning -- the facts hurt same defense from the very beginning -- same defense from the very beginning. the facts. it is not somebody who heard from a friend. the actual facts before you. you about all the witnesses, none but the republicans have been able to request, not the whistleblower. those who auditioned and made the cut. best.heir use all the questions. -- you saw the questions. did he talk to you and ask you? no. why continue to put the country through this? if you pause for one moment, this is different from any other

hearings. we are talking about impeaching. we are talking about removing the highest elected person and changing the fabric of democracy. you should not take that lightly. alexander hamilton warned us about this. exactly in a place that alexander hamilton was most afraid of. a party would use it for only there political gain, not for the rule of law. we have had so many better days in the house than what we have watched for the last two weeks. i do not think history will be kind to this moment in time. based upon what this majority has done and lack of doing. yes? >> [inaudible] do you generally believe

[inaudible] >> if you listen to the ambassador -- he was asked how many different times? , theg the testimony democrat allegations of quid pro quo, bribery, extortion. every single time it goes back to mike turner's question. did anybody on the planet? the answer is no. i think we have the facts before us. i do not know how anymore people they want to try to bring forward. every time they do, it goes right back to the case that the president did not make conditions. he released the money and ukraine did nothing for the money to be released. i know the moment they got sworn in, i know the parties in the basement when they had their own personal friends, when they told them what they really wanted to

accomplish, that they wanted to accomplish impeaching this president. nothing about drug pricing. nothing about making our economy stronger. i know when they sat in a conference, they voted on a new chair of oversight, when they had those votes before were normally any congress would take up impeachment, the platform for who they chose in that campaign, the one who won, his platform said he would be the very best chairman for impeachment. not to deal with all the other jurisdictions of the committee. that is why this is all they focused on for the entire year. the biggest losers in all of this are americans. we have lost because we were lied to. we were told they would be different, that they would work together. in the moments in times we had those opportunities, the speaker changed it. drug prices could be lower today. our economy could be stronger.

not only would our economy be stronger, we would be stronger as a nation when we negotiate with china, who has become our number three trader when mexico and canada, number one into. two.mber one and number the speaker will not bring this up because she is too busy with impeachment. we are waiting on us senate -- on the senate to continue to pass another resolution, the funding of government. we have not got that done but we have more hearings on impeachment. we haven't estimate -- we have a deficit. almost on a one year anniversary, name me one problem that the democrat majority has solved. they have created a few more but they have not solved anything. i wish you all a very happy thanksgiving.

>> tomorrow, a discussion on the upcoming supreme court term and what the major cases will be. the council on foreign relations host the event and it starts live friday at 12:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. right after that, campaign 2020 coverage continues with democratic president a candidate amy klobuchar in a townhall meeting in new hampshire. she will speak to supporters and voters and that starts live at 2:00 p.m., also on c-span. >> the house will be in order. >> for 40 years, c-span has provided america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, and public policy events around the country, so you can

make up your own mind. 979.ted by cable in 1 c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ today, the house intelligence committee held its seventh open hearing into presidential. lawmakers heard testimony from fiona hill, a former national security council senior director, and david holmes, an diplomat intop u.s. ukraine. we will show you that hearing in its entirety.