QUESTIONS.
ALL RIGHT, DAVID SPUNT,
THANK YOU.
>> YOU BET.
>> Shannon: HILLARY CLINTON
TELLING CONGRESS TONIGHT HOW IT
SHOULD PROCEED WITH ITS
INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE
PRESIDENT.
SHE WRITES, "IN 1998, THE
REPUBLICAN-LIGHTHOUSE RUSH TO
JUDGMENT.
THAT WAS A MISTAKE THEN ANDREW
BE A MISTAKE NOW.
WATERGATE OFFERS A BETTER
PRESIDENT.
THEN, AS NOW, THERE WAS AN
INVESTIGATION THAT FOUND
EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION AND A
COVER UP."
A FORMER POSTER FOR
PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON IS SAYING
THE OPPOSITE.
"TRUMP IS NO NIXON."
FOX NEWS' SENIOR POLITICAL
ANALYST BRIT HUME, GREAT TO HAVE
YOU WITH US.
>> THANK YOU, SHANNON, GREAT TO
BE HERE.
>> Shannon: BRIT, YOUR MEMBER
THE COVERAGE OF WATERGATE AND
PRESIDENT NIXON.
WHAT YOU MAKE OF HILLARY CLINTON
DRAWING --
>> IT CERTAINLY TRUE THAT
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT WERE
DRAWN UP AGAINST PRESIDENT NIXON
BUT HE RESIGNED BEFORE THEY
COULD BE VOTED ON BY THE HOUSE.
HE WAS NEVER ACTUALLY IMPEACHED
ALTHOUGH IT LOOKED FAIRLY CLEAR
THAT HE WAS GOING TO BE.
CLINTON, OF COURSE, WAS
IMPEACHED.
HE WAS NOT CONVICTED BY THE
SENATE SO HE STAYED IN OFFICE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT HER ARGUMENT
THAT THE WATERGATE IMPEACHMENT
WAS BETTER HANDLED THAN THAT
CLINTON ONE WAS BECAUSE IF YOU
ARE TALKING ONLY ABOUT THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES, ONE OF THEM
SUCCEEDED AND THE OTHER ONE WAS
SHORT-CIRCUITED BY RESIGNATION.
THAT LIST OF CHARGES AND THAT
GIANT VOLUME THAT KENNETH STARR,
THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL IN THE
CLINTON CASE SENT OVER TO THE
HOUSE, IT'S PRETTY
CONFERENCE AVENUE.
THE FACT THAT THEY DID NOT SEE
THE NEED TO COMPLETELY REINVENT
THE WHEEL SEEMS TO ME IS QUITE
UNDERSTANDABLE.
>> Shannon: NOW, THE HOUSE
ACCEPTED THESE INVESTIGATIONS,
THE DEMOCRATS LEADING OTHER
COMMITTEES THERE, THEY SAY THAT
THEY HAVE A DUTY TO PROTECT THIS
COUNTRY.
HERE IS WHAT CONGRESSMAN ERIC
SWALWELL, A DEMOCRAT ALSO
RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2020,
HERE IS HOW HE DESCRIBES WHERE
THEY GO FROM HERE.
>> I WAS A PROSECUTOR.
I WENT TO COURT.
MY PENCILS WERE SHARPER AND FOR
MY SUBPOENAS ARE READY, MY
WITNESSES WERE IN THE WAITING
ROOM AND THE EXHIBITS WERE
WAITING TO BE PRESENTED BECAUSE
I ONLY GOT ONE SHOT.
IT'S NOT A ROAD WE WANT TO GO
DOWN BUT IT'S A ROLE THAT WE MAY
HAVE TO GO DOWN TO SAVE      SAH
HAVE TO GO DOWN TO SAVE      SAE
DEMOCRACY.
>> Shannon: BRIT, HAVE A
SNEAKING SUSPICION THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS SAYING, GO FOR IT.
HE VERY MUCH LIKES TO FIGHT, HE
LIKES TO FOIL, GOING INTO 2020,
IT SEEMS LIKE HE'S DARING THEM
TO DO THIS AND TRY TO IMPEACH
HIM.
>> I'M NOT QUITE SURE ABOUT
THAT, SHANNON.
HE WANTS TO FIGHT THEM ON THE
SUBPOENAS THAT SEEM TO BE FLYING
IN HIS DIRECTION RIGHT NOW.
HE HAS A CASE ON THAT.
CONGRESS DOES HAVE SWEEPING
POWERS TO ACQUIRE INFORMATION
FOR ITS INVESTIGATIONS AND
ESPECIALLY FOR IMPEACHMENT PRAY
THAT ALL REMAINS TO BE WORKED
OUT.
AS FOR WHAT ERIC'S WALLS ARE
THERE, WE
KEEP HEARING THIS OVER AND OVER
AGAIN.
WHAT THIS IS ABOUT AS A FIGHT TO
SAVE DEMOCRACY.
AS OF DEMOCRACY IS UNDER SERIOUS
AND CONTINUING THREAT FROM
PRESIDENT TRUMP.
IT'S FUN FOR HIS CRITICS TO TALK
ABOUT THAT BUT I DON'T SEE IT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE
INSTITUTIONS OF OUR DEMOCRACY
ARE STILL FUNCTIONING.
PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES ALL KINDS
OF COMPLAINING AND BELLYACHING
BUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN, WE FIND
THAT HIS BARK IS FAR WORSE THAN
HIS BITE.
>> Shannon: YOU MENTIONED THIS
FIGHT WE WILL HAVE OVER
SUBPOENAS BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN
COMING FROM HOUSE DEMOCRATS TO
KEEP MEMBERS LIKE DONALD
McGAHN FOR, FORMER WHITE HOUSE
COUNSEL, OTHER WHITE HOUSE
PLAYERS ARE LIKELY TO FOLLOW.
I HEARD TODAY BOTH FROM CHAIRMAN
NADLER AND CHAIRMAN CUMMINGS
THAT IF THE WHITE HOUSE, AS THEY
ARE GOING TO BUY THESE THINGS,
IF THEY DO SO IN TELLING PEOPLE
NOT TO TESTIFY OR TO TURN THINGS
OVER, THAT IT'S YET ANOTHER --
THEY USED THE WORD ACT OF
OBSTRUCTION BY THE PRESIDENT.
IS IT MORE FOR THE DEMOCRATS
ABOUT GETTING THOSE PEOPLE AFTER
THE HILL OR THOSE DOCUMENTS TO
TESTIFY OR IS IT NOW BUILDING A
CASE OF OBSTRUCTION AGAINST THE
PRESIDENT OR BOTH?
>> I THINK IT IS KIND OF TWO
FOLD, SHANNON.
ON THE ONE HAND, IF THEY COULD
GET HIM OUT OF OFFICE BEFORE THE
ELECTION, THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO
THAT.
I DON'T SEE PRACTICALLY WITH THE
AMOUNT OF TIME THAT'S AVAILABLE
HOW THEY CAN BUT I THINK THEY
WOULD LIKE TO PARADE SHORT OF
THAT, THEY WOULD LIKE
TO USE THESE INVESTIGATIONS TO
SOW DAMAGE THEM IN THE
PUBLIC EYE THAT HE WOULD BE
EASILY DEFEATED.
I THINK FOR THEM IT IS WHEN WINW
I THINK FOR THEM IT IS WHEN WINN
I THINK FOR THEM IT IS WHEN WIN.
THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID THAT HE
IS PRIVILEGED THAT WOULD PREVENT
DON McGAHN FROM TESTIFYING.
THAT IS AN INTERESTING LEGAL
QUESTION THAT IS LIKELY, I THINK
COMING TO END UP IN THE COURTS.
I DON'T THINK THE LAW IS AT ALL
CLEAR.
>> Shannon: HE SAID, HE WAVES
PRIVILEGE WHEN HE DIDN'T STOP
McGAHN FROM TALKING TO THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL.
THIS IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE HE
SEES IT AS A PARTISAN ATTEMPT.
HE SAYS THEY WILL TAKE IT ALL
THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT AND
MAYBE THAT IS WHERE IT ENDS UP.
>> AS FOR THE LEGAL SIDE OF
THIS, IT IS ARGUED THAT BECAUSE
McGAHN WAS PERMITTED BY THE
PRESIDENT TO TESTIFY FOR WHAT
SOME 30 HOURS BEFORE
ROBERT MUELLER'S INVESTIGATORS,
THAT HIS PRIVILEGE, HIS
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE PERTAINING
TO ADVICE DIRECTLY TO THE
PRESIDENT IS THEREBY WAIVED.
HOWEVER, I KNOW THAT THE
PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS ARE GOING TO
SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, McGAHN WAS
TESTIFYING BEFORE A FELLOW
EMPLOYEE OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANC
BRANCH.
A SUBORDINATE OFFICIAL IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
THAT IS ONE THING.
HAVING HIM TESTIFY TO A
SECOND -- A DIFFERENT BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENT, TO WHIT, THE
CONGRESS, IS QUITE ANOTHER.
I DON'T THINK THE COURTS HAVE
EVER RESOLVED THAT IN ANY
AUTHORITATIVE WAY THAT YOU CAN
.2.
THEY HAVE RECOGNIZED SUCH A
THING AS AN EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.
THEY RECOGNIZED CONGRESS HAS
SWEEPING POWERS TO INVESTIGATE.
WE'LL SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT.
