Ken Starr: House has the power to define an impeachable offense

This is a rush transcript from "Your World," November 6, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

NEIL CAVUTO, ANCHOR: Well, thank you, Shannon.

We are monitoring the president right now. Later on, he's going to be heading for a big old rally in Louisiana tonight. In case you're counting, it is his third trip to a Southern Republican stronghold in little more than a week.

But Democrats are saying he's the one who's looking weak, unable to put Kentucky Republican Governor Matt Bevin over the top in a race that is still too close to call or to stop Democrats from now controlling all three levers of government of Virginia, as Shannon just pointed out, for the first time in more than a quarter-of-a-century.

Moderate Democrats made the difference last night, a message a moderate Democrat has the best chance of winning it all next year? We're on that.

Welcome to "Your World," everybody. I'm Neil Cavuto.

And President Trump wasting little time saying that, well, his own Trump effect is alive and well, thank you. He rallies, Republicans win, mostly.

He helped keep Mississippi very red and made five of six top Kentucky Republicans very victorious, just not, as I said, the top Republican there. But since that Matt Bevin hasn't conceded, it is not over there, which is also why the president is upping the campaigning everywhere.

John Roberts keeping pace of all these fast and furious developments.

Hey, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Neil, we have got a big bucket of stuff here at the White House to talk about this afternoon, so let's just step it up.

First of all, the president will be leaving in just a few minutes for Monroe, Louisiana. He's got a rally tonight, where he is going to be backing Eddie Rispone, who is the Republican going up trying to unseat the current Democratic governor of Louisiana, John Bel Edwards, in a runoff race coming up on the 16th of November.

The president, meantime, playing down Matt Bevin's loss in Kentucky, as you mentioned at the top here, the president saying that he helped narrow the gap and also helped a lot of down-ballot races. The president tweeting: "Our big Kentucky rally on Monday night had a massive impact on all of the races. The increase in the governor's race was at least 15 points and maybe 20."

A poll seven days ago, which is the latest that we saw, has John Bel Edwards ahead of Rispone, by about four points. So the president hoping to give Rispone a big boost to propel him to victory a week from Saturday.

On the impeachment front, the president so far unconcerned with anything that has come out in any of these transcripts, pointing to the transcript released yesterday from Ambassador Kurt Volker, the president saying: "Thank you, Kurt Volker, U.S. envoy to Ukraine, who said in his congressional testimony just released, 'You asked what conversations did I have about that quid pro quo, et cetera. None, because I didn't know there was a quid pro quo."

The president adding: "witch-hunt."

The White House also dismissing Gordon Sondland's testimony, where he says he presumed there was a quid pro quo. The White House keying in on that word presumed.

The vice president earlier today telling FOX Business' Trish Regan there was nothing of the sort, no quid pro quo. Listen here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT: President Zelensky had an extraordinary victory in his campaign, because he ran on an anti-corruption theme.

And President Trump made it clear from early on that we wanted to support him in that effort. We wanted to see him make progress in that effort. And we wanted to see the European community come forward.

TRISH REGAN, ANCHOR: Did Joe Biden come up? Did Hunter Biden come up in the conversation?

PENCE: No, he didn't at all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTS: So Bill Taylor's deposition that was released today, he was the guy who, in that text message exchange with Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the E.U., said he thought it was crazy to be predicating U.S. aid on a political investigation.

But he admits that he only knows about all of that from talking to Gordon Sondland, who -- quote -- "presumed" what was going on. So the White House believes it's got some defense there.

Couple of other things to go through. Rudy Giuliani just tweeted out that he is lawyering up, saying: "The evidence, when fully revealed, will show that this presidential -- this present farce is as much a frame-up and hoax as Russia collusion, maybe worse, and will prove that the president is innocent."

And Democrats on the three committees looking into the impeachment inquiry, in a surprise move, pulling a subpoena for the former Deputy National Security Adviser Charles Kupperman. Kupperman was going to go to court, federal court, seeking an opinion whether or not he should comply with that subpoena. That's when the Democrats suddenly yanked it.

So we're wondering here, Neil, if maybe the Democrats thought that they were going to lose that court battle. That's why they yanked it, which now calls into question whether or not the Democrats will issue a subpoena between now and tomorrow morning for John Bolton to appear.

A lot going on here -- Neil.

CAVUTO: It didn't seem like much to me, but I guess.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: Holy cow. Thank you, John, as always.

ROBERTS: Around here, we call that Wednesday.

CAVUTO: Yes, you're right. All right, John Roberts at the White House.

Well, Democrats certainly salivating over their gains yesterday, particularly one Joe Biden. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Do you have any response to the elections last night?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOSEPH BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Yes. The Democrats are back.

QUESTION: The Democrats are back.

BIDEN: Virginia led the way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: All right, so with moderates gaining, should the far left be worrying?

We have got Democratic strategist Michael Starr Hopkins with us, Republican strategist Deneen Borelli, and, last but not least, The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Melchior.

Michael, let me get to you on that. The moderate wins, the moderate takes the torch all the way to the White House?

MICHAEL STARR HOPKINS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Yes, I mean, I think look, when you are talking about regional races, moderates work a lot better in areas like the South and the Midwest, whereas AOC and more liberal candidates work well on the coasts.

CAVUTO: What would that help with Joe Biden, presumably? That's, I think, what he was winking and nodding at.

HOPKINS: I think Joe Biden has some own issues -- his own issues that he has to deal with. But I do think moderates are going to be around until the end of this race, because, at the end of the day, Democrats need somebody who can unite the left and the right in their ability to take on Trump.

And that's not something that a far left Sanders type is going to be able to do.

CAVUTO: Got it.

Deneen, one of the things that we did notice when Democrats took over the House, while a lot of attention to the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezes and what have you, the fact of the matter was it was moderates who helped make that possible and contribute mightily to the 40-net-seat gain.

What do you think yesterday told us?

DENEEN BORELLI, CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, well, listen, there's nothing moderate about today's Democrats.

And you just mentioned the House, for example, and how radical they are, what their policies. They want to raise taxes, the Green New Deal, the war on coal. They want to end fossil fuels. I mean, come on, way too radical.

And when you look at Joe Biden, you mentioned Joe Biden, for example, blunders Joe Biden, 3033, whatever it is. Sometimes, he doesn't know what state he's in. His top donors are very concerned about his message. They're concerned about how he's delivering his message.

And he's also having trouble fund-raising last quarter. He -- I think he came in third place. So he clearly has his own issues.

CAVUTO: Well, let me, Jillian, ask just about whether it's Joe Biden or not who is the beneficiary, but if Democrats are seizing, to Michael's point, on how they did what they did in Virginia, even though this wasn't across the board -- they lost a couple seats in the New Jersey Assembly and what have you -- I get that.

But the trend seems to me to the moderate candidate goes the prize, usually, usually.

What are we to glean from that and the impact on the presidential race?

JILLIAN MELCHIOR, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, it's an interesting dynamic here.

So I think, last night, a lot of what you saw is suburban voters moving left. Now, it's not the far left AOC shift. But it's...

CAVUTO: But particularly women.

MELCHIOR: Particularly women, left of where they were before. So I think that's showing a kind of weakness on the Trump GOP.

But, again, he's really good at pitting himself up against a challenger, and I think it will be really important who ends up getting the nomination. And Democrats have a real problem here.

I mean, if you look at Elizabeth Warren, some of the Medicare for all stuff, doubling down on it, going further left, it's going to be pretty difficult to get from that stance to a more moderate position after the primaries.

I think they're kind of locking themselves into radical positions. It's a base plan, both ends. But that leaves a lot of voters in the middle.

CAVUTO: What are Democrats tell you? When they talk about strategizing now from here, you can't glean a lot from four different states, different types of races, I grant you, but that it would be much tougher for an extremely liberal nominee to run back to the middle enough to secure the votes they would need to win a general election.

That would seem to be problematic for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, less so for Pete Buttigieg or, for that matter, Joe Biden. Polls are one thing, but that seems to be borne out in a lot of contests.

HOPKINS: Absolutely, which is why I think it's interesting that you're starting to hear the Biden camp go after Warren and talk about how she used to be a Republican, but now she's a Democrat, because that almost helps her prepare for the general election.

It takes off that kind of label as this radical.

CAVUTO: But it's really the battleground states, right?

Deneen, when I look at the battleground states, that's a different beast. I mean, the national polls are one thing, but in these battleground states where the president's narrowed the gap considerably, he does generally face his toughest fight against Joe Biden, again, in this party, a moderate.

BORELLI: Well, when you look at President Trump and his accomplishments, the battleground states, they're looking at the economy, they're looking at jobs, more jobs, and there are people to fill them.

And they also don't like this impeachment inquiry and talk of impeachment. They're not in favor of that. And so looking at, again, their progressive policies...

CAVUTO: The Monmouth poll is among many that seemed to confirm that, that it's looking more like a political cabal.

I mean, the Democrats overwhelmingly for it, Republicans against it, but, by and large, it's not resonating with folks.

BORELLI: It's not resonating.

CAVUTO: So far.

BORELLI: Right.

CAVUTO: Jillian, playing all of this out in the economy, it is your sense that the president will just keep pounding that?

I think one ad that ran during the World Series, the one the Nationals won...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Anyway, but wasn't one of the key points, not perfect, but better?

In other words, you might not like the messenger, you might not flip over the president, but you have to flip over what he's delivered, and that will be their central theme.

MELCHIOR: Well, I think it's very unusual to have a president with an economy this is good and an approval rating this relatively low.

But I don't think we can ignore the cultural issues. And I think that's one area in which he really thrives, pointing out how progressives' agenda is not only totally remaining huge spheres of our economy, but also taking away which pronouns you can use, policing your speech, some of the crazy stuff we have seen on campus.

And I do think it's a vulnerability for Democrats that they have doubled down on some of this far left intersectional social progressive...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Not all of them. Not all of them. So that could make the difference. We will see you.

Guys, thank you very, very much.

MELCHIOR: Thank you.

CAVUTO: By the way, never mind the impeachment hearings that begin next week, growing concern right now that a China deal might not be had until at least next month.

Ed Lawrence what's going on?

EDWARD LAWRENCE, BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's a report out from Reuters, saying a senior administration official told them that it could be delayed, this phase one signing of the trade deal, until December, because they're still working out a venue, also some terms in the agreement there.

Now, there's -- on selecting a venue, the trade sources are telling me that the U.S. has asked for President Xi Jinping's calendar to try and figure out where a trade signing would fit into his travel schedule.

The president would like to see the Chinese president come to Iowa. He's mentioned that. However, Reuters is reporting the senior administration official saying that, no, Iowa might lot likely be the spot. They're saying maybe it would happen in Europe, like Switzerland or Sweden.

Now, the White House has been completely silent about where the possible signing could be. They did release this statement, though.

In the statement, they're saying -- quote -- "Negotiations are continuing and progress is being made on the text of the next phase one -- of the phase one agreement."

And the two signs are supposed to sign or were supposed to sign it next week at the APEC summit in Chile. However, that was canceled due to unrest in the country.

Now, on tariffs, the Chinese sources -- or people familiar with the negotiations are saying the Chinese will roll back their tariffs on U.S. products for a trade deal. Chinese trade sources also telling us that the U.S. told them that the December 15 tariffs will not be imposed going forward.

So, China right now trying to get the tariffs already in place rolled back or repealed. The administration believing that tariffs are the reason China's at the table -- Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, thank you, my friend, very, very much, Ed Lawrence.

We're learning more from still another transcript that's been released in the impeachment inquiry, this one from the former top diplomat Bill Taylor, saying that he had a clear understanding of a quid pro quo and some thoughts on one Rudy Giuliani -- after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff announcing the first public hearings in the impeachment inquiry next week.

Until then, all we have to go on are a lot of transcripts of those who already testified, and, today, a big one.

Gillian Turner on Capitol Hill with the latest on that and much more.

Hey, Gillian.

GILLIAN TURNER, CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Neil.

So much transcript, so little time. We're still digging through Bill Taylor's testimony. Now, he testified here at the Intel Committee last month. He's the acting ambassador to Ukraine and also one of the first officials to ring alarm bells about what he described as two separate foreign policy channels for Ukraine.

Taylor testifies he himself was -- quote -- "clearly in the regular channel," which was led by National Security Adviser John Bolton. But what he calls the -- quote -- "highly irregular policy channel" was led by Rudy Giuliani. And he says it included Ambassadors Kurt Volker, Gordon Sondland and Energy Secretary Rick Perry.

Taylor says, in this channel, people -- quote -- "wanted to talk about the connection between a White House meeting and Ukraine investigations."

He also draws a direct connection between President Trump's desire for Ukraine to investigate Burisma and his reelection to a second term.

Taylor says: "I understand the reason for investigating Burisma was to cast Vice President Biden in a bad light."

Taylor goes on to note it would benefit a -- quote -- "political campaign for the reelection of President Trump."

Now, Neil, the other big story breaking today is Chairman Adam Schiff's announcement that soon we're going to open a whole new effort here with the public hearings. They're going to happen next week, Wednesday, November 13, and Friday, November 15.

Take a listen to what he has to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: So those open hearings will be an opportunity for the American people to evaluate the witnesses for themselves, to make their own determinations about the credibility of the witnesses, but also to learn firsthand about the facts of the president's misconduct.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TURNER: Now, Neil, some key Republicans already have a major beef with the way Democrats are handling this public testimony.

Jim Jordan told us earlier this afternoon that he believes Kurt Volker should have been asked to testify first -- Neil.

Gillian, thank you very, very much.

TURNER: You bet.

CAVUTO: Let's get the read on all this from Mike Braun, the Indiana Republican senator.

Senator, always good having you.

It's been baptism by fire ever since you arrived in Washington.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: And now possibly an impeachment trial, if it ever gets to the Senate. It seems inevitable to me, whether it's justified or not. The House seems hell-bent, sir, on impeaching this president, or at least getting that process going.

The question is the timing of it all. Are you worried?

SEN. MIKE BRAUN, R-IND.: You know, there has not been a dull moment since I have been here in a little over 10 months.

So, I guess, for me, the fact that out of the gate, when he was elected in November of 2016, you have got frames that show where there was impeachment talk, when they didn't even know what the reason for it would be.

And the process itself has left a lot to be desired. So, as we navigate through the witnesses that are their witnesses that basically say the same thing, we need to see the entirety of it.

And I think Congressman Jordan is right, maybe some witnesses that would be giving a different point of view. Regardless of how this sorts out, if there's not something that goes beyond what the president himself released, I think most Republican senators are going to see that this has been a process that's got some really questionable foundation to it.

And, every day, we are hit with new this, new that. So far, I think it's just been a repetition that really doesn't add to the discussion. So it really hasn't moved me, because, like I say, I have been suspicious from the get-go, because it seems...

CAVUTO: But has it moved any of your other colleagues, Senator?

I mean, you said most. I mean, a couple of names come to mind that might think differently. What do you think?

BRAUN: I think, other than maybe a few that have mentioned it early in the process, I think, by and large, there has not been much of a shift.

CAVUTO: Right.

BRAUN: And I think, if it's a continuation of what we have seen, even if it comes over here with an impeachment indictment, that it's not going to change the point of view of what we do in the Senate, if nothing is added to it.

And, again, I think it begs the question, how did it get started? What's the motivation? Has the process been good? So it runs into a lot of discussion from here forward, regardless of what they do in the House.

CAVUTO: You know, I have noticed a change in some of your colleagues, Senator, saying at first there was no quid pro quo, in other words, no holding back of aid in order to get this investigation going of Joe Biden and his son and this energy concern.

But some have taken it to the next level. Even if there were, it's not impeachable. Are you in that camp?

BRAUN: I would say I would be in that camp now, if it's based upon the information I have got.

And the quid pro quo seems to be an interpretation, and not to where there actually was one. And I think that makes a difference. And it begs the question, with Biden, when you want to get back to fair play, I think there was a quid pro quo with him and his son, and that will be something I think everybody takes into consideration as well.

CAVUTO: All right, thank you very much, Senator. Good catching up with you.

The fiery baptism, I guess, continues for you, Mike Braun of Indiana.

All right, this whole quid pro quo thing, it's Latin for this for that, but, in English, it's, what the heck is going on with all of this?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, what gets you impeached?

As Ken Starr has reminded me many, many times, this is a political venture. It's sometimes not even based on anything remotely legal. But since a number of lawmakers on both sides are dancing around the issue of quid pro quo, whether something was held back in exchange for information the president of the United States wanted from the president of Ukraine, if there's proof of that, it's an impeachable offense.

Republicans saying, increasingly, even if there is, it is not. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. GREG STEUBE, R-FLA.: All you have to do is read the transcript has been released to the American people to decide for themselves. There wasn't anything in that transcript that was impeachable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would go as far as saying the president sometimes is very raw in these conversations. He can sometimes talk in terminology that's not always comfortable for me. But I think it's his job, as the commander in chief...

CAVUTO: But that wouldn't be impeachable to you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't believe it would be impeachable.

SEN. THOM TILLIS, R-N.C.: I just don't see, based on what -- what's transpired to this point, with their antics with impeachment, that it's going to rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: All right, Ken Starr with me right now on this, the former Whitewater independent counsel, much, much more.

Ken, what do you think? Is that -- is proof of that, if we even get it -- and it's always in the eye of the beholder, I understand, and some of the testimony that conflicts with others -- is that an impeachable offense, even if true?

KENNETH STARR, FORMER SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: It shouldn't be, but is it?

Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn't speak to the definition, and the definition is entrusted to the good judgment of the House of Representatives, informed by history and tradition.

Historically, in the 60-some-odd impeachment proceedings over the 230 years of our republic, there has been invariably an underlying crime. Somebody says, yes, that person has committed a criminal offense.

Bill Clinton committed criminal offenses. Richard Nixon entered into a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

And all I have heard in terms of crime, Neil, is extortion. And then Jamie Raskin of Maryland yesterday said shakedown, which sounds in the nature of extortion.

But you know what? Extortion, shakedown is usually something that the victim complains about, right, to say, I'm being extorted. And, of course, we are not hearing that or anything close to it.

So I think what is being seen here is the expansive, capacious definition of high crimes and impeachment -- high crimes and misdemeanors. We disapprove of what the president did, of his style, of his putting pressure -- I'm just accepting that as the meta-narrative.

We think that result should justify is his removal from office.

I think that's an extravagant, anti-historical approach. But the House of Representatives has the raw power to define an impeachable offense. And that's what we're hearing. I don't think it's impeachable.

Someone says, I think it is impeachable.

CAVUTO: You know, Ken, when you were going and investigating Bill Clinton, you obviously found out the Monica Lewinsky thing, the president lying under oath, perjuring himself.

I mean, that's a big deal. But it wasn't deemed a big enough deal, given the economic environment and the market vibe -- that's just my opinion -- the backdrop for him was a lot of people on Wall Street didn't want to lose him, because, red or blue, they were making a lot of green. They liked that.

Fast-forward to today, same thing, very different potential impeachment cases here, but that it doesn't rise to the level, even a president lying under oath, that didn't, at least in the Senate's view, rise to the level that he should be thrown out of office.

And that I'm hearing similar things on this quid pro quo thing, that even if true, it doesn't rise to the level of throwing Donald Trump out of office. What do you think?

STARR: Yes, well, I think that's the wiser judgment.

There's too much of a rush toward impeachment. This is the pattern that we have gotten into since the Nixon years and the passage of the independent counsel law that actually called upon folks like me to go forward to Congress and say, guess what, here's information. You may want to impeach the president of the United States.

That's a horrible system of government. People say, well, why did you become an independent counsel if you thought it was a horrible system of government? But that's a -- you need to get me on another day about that.

But it is. It's a horrible regime. And we have this pro-impeachment engine that has been created. Robert Mueller, bless his heart, a good man, fueled this fire further by the way he approached his job and by the way he approached his report-writing responsibilities.

So we're living in impeachment land. And we need to get this in the rear- view mirror as a country, because, as everyone is thoughtfully saying, my word, if you're disagreeing with the president's style, unless there's some sort of truly corrupt bargain, Ukraine, unless you do this, right, and really corrupt, and here's what I need to do for me -- I need you to give me a tax break on a Trump Tower in Kiev.

We could all understand that and say, hey, wait a second. That's using the power of your office for personal gain.

CAVUTO: All right.

STARR: The argument now is, well, you're using it for political gain.

But, again, let's return to the transcript. The transcript lends itself to an unflattering interpretation. But it also lends itself to an interpretation of, I'm really serious about anti-corruption. And, by the way, here's the Joe Biden situation.

CAVUTO: All right.

STARR: But he doesn't say anything beyond, do me a favor, right?

I question that.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: It kind of cancels -- they each cancel each other out.

Ken, I'm sorry to jump on you, my friend, but that hard break is coming, as they say.

STARR: Yes. Yes.

CAVUTO: Thank you very, very much for weighing in on all of this.

It doesn't seem to have moved the needle a lot one way or the other on both sides. We shall see.

In the meantime, we're learning a little bit more about the murder of those nine Americans in Mexico. It wasn't an accident, and they were not mistaken targets. They were the targets.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, I better get this earnings report right.

FOX Corporation, our parent company, beating quarterly earnings and revenue estimates, buying back about $2 billion worth of its stock. And that stock is up 2.5 percent after-hours.

More after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, they're investigating still what was behind the murder of nine Americans in Mexico.

FOX's William La Jeunesse has the latest on what they're learning -- William.

WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE, CORRESPONDENT: Well, Neil, in a news conference today, President Obrador suggested the families may be victims in a battle between factions of the Juarez cartel in Chihuahua and another cartel in neighboring Sonora.

That doesn't mean this was random. Children and women used to be off- limits. Not anymore.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAFE LANGFORD, VICTIM'S FAMILY MEMBER: We know that, that night, fighters had been sent in on foot to combat a cartel in our state, to fight and try to take over our -- just some smuggling routes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LA JEUNESSE: Mexican police did arrest a man near the massacre, but they have not confirmed he was involved in the ambush.

Casualties include children taken to U.S. hospitals who survived the assault hiding in the weeds. They tell a chilling story from the scene, gunmen shooting a mother in the chest, a child in the back, a mother yelling, "Don't shoot," babies burning in a car.

President Trump offered U.S. help, but Mexico declined, even as that country sinks further into violence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCELO EBRARD, MEXICAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): That's why we are here. The objective is for this indignation to be backed up by the law, for there to be justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LA JEUNESSE: Mexico offers many things. Justice is not one of them.

The probability of a crime being reported, investigated and solved in Mexico is 1 percent -- Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, thank you very, very much, William.

All right, Lance Gooden is here, Republican of Texas, serves on the House Financial Services Committee. More to the point, as a Texas congressman, he is right in the neck of the woods that we're talking about.

Congressman, thanks for taking the time.

REP. LANCE GOODEN, R-TX: Thanks for having me.

CAVUTO: A lot of details we don't know, concerns now that this group might have in fact been the target, and that these three SUVs in which they were traveling, they were far apart. They weren't traveling together, where it could be easily mistaken, for example, as another cartel.

GOODEN: Right.

CAVUTO: What do you make of all this? What have you learned?

GOODEN: Well, first of all, violence at the border is no surprise, but of this magnitude just seems especially sickening.

And these are American lives that were lost. What's alarming to me is the lack of a national outrage. Normally, this would be the number one story in America, I would think, nine American lives brutally murdered in a heinous fashion.

But this country is talking about impeachment and election results last night in Kentucky, Virginia, wherever.

CAVUTO: Yes, a lot of this happened before all that.

GOODEN: And -- yes.

CAVUTO: But let me get your sense, though, that it might have been not an accidental type of thing, and then that the proof that was that one of the mothers -- three women were killed and six children -- actually came out of the car frantically waving her arms, stop, stop, stop. She was gunned down.

So it looks like they knew full well who they were targeting.

GOODEN: Yes.

And they, I believe, lived in that area in Northern Mexico.

CAVUTO: Right, not too far.

GOODEN: For viewers who haven't really followed this, there is a history of migration of Mormon communities in the northern part of Mexico, which I didn't know before this week.

And I...

CAVUTO: And this was an offshoot of it.

GOODEN: Right.

CAVUTO: Earlier on, advocates of polygamy and all that, even though they didn't practice it in this particular compound, for lack of a better term.

But it just raises a lot of questions here.

GOODEN: Yes.

CAVUTO: So, for Americans in that neck of the woods, whether they're part of this group or other groups, they're caught up in this now.

GOODEN: That's right.

And this isn't a place people go on vacation. But these are American lives. And it's -- it's alarming. I could go the political route and say this is yet another case for a border wall and for various security measures.

But I think this really...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: But the wall there would not -- they were there on the other side.

GOODEN: That's right.

This -- what this boils down to is, Mexico has been unable to secure their nation. They have been losing battles to the cartels. President Trump offered yesterday to help them in any way that they wanted.

And I believe he meant that. And the Mexican president turned him down. It seems like business as usual there.

CAVUTO: It is out of control, though.

GOODEN: Yes.

CAVUTO: I think of it like an early version of Colombia before Uribe came on to sort of crack down on the cartels and then the guerrillas and all of that, very different, I grant you.

But that violence is everywhere.

GOODEN: Yes.

CAVUTO: Crime in Mexico City itself has gone up more than 300 percent. Violent crime, at that, is at all-time highs in five of Mexico's top cities.

These types of incidents, while rare for Americans, are commonplace down -- what is going on?

GOODEN: You know, in -- before, women and children, you would assume would always be off-limits. But now, this seems to be more ISIS-style, for lack of a better term.

And anything goes with these cartels, which is why I feel like it seems foolish for the Mexican government to turn down help, whether it's from the U.S., which they seem for pride purposes don't want to do, but...

CAVUTO: And it could good trigger more of a wave of those trying to get out of there, right?

GOODEN: Right. Right.

It's alarming, but they have been unable to solve it. And they need help. I don't know if they will accept it. But to think that this should just be accepted is crazy to me.

CAVUTO: All right, but they have not apprehended anyone connected to this, outside of a couple of suspicious...

GOODEN: And I can't imagine anyone being surprised if this tragedy goes unsolved. It's Mexico.

CAVUTO: All right, Congressman, thank you very much for taking the time.

In the meantime, impeachment is on, whether Republicans like it or not, but it's going to drag on for a while, whether Democrats -- yes, Democrats -- like it or not.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: Impeach him, don't impeach him. Who do you really trust on this?

Apparently, not the people running the impeachment probe. A new Monmouth poll shows that 73 percent of adults have little or no faith in the process, regardless of whether they think the president should stay or go.

This has lifelong Democrat Cathy Areu very, very worried for her party, right? You're frantic now.

(LAUGHTER)

CATHY AREU, PUBLISHER, CATALINA: Very, very -- frantic. I'm nuts, yes. Yes.

CAVUTO: So what's going on here? I mean, when you see polls like this -- and some are outliers, some aren't -- but there does seem to be a comfortable amount of cynicism in the process.

What do you make of that?

AREU: Yes, people don't believe. This poll is showing that the majority of people just believe in the government, in the process anymore.

And this is a big risk to the Democrats, because if they're seen as exploiting the system, if they're making something not about justice, but about politics, then they are -- they're risking losing this election. They're risking losing and upsetting the middle, the middle and the moderates, just to appease the left and the extremists in their party.

And both sides are guilty of trying to appease the extremes of their parties. And I don't know if Democrats can really afford to do that right now.

CAVUTO: Now, when you look at what's going on here, though, Cathy, they have got the Mueller probe stuff that they promised would be sort of the epicenter of this probe and latched onto Ukraine.

AREU: Right.

CAVUTO: And that looks very transparent right there.

And I'm just wondering why they're not even feigning Mueller-related stuff, instead all of this stuff.

AREU: Right, because we talked about it. The Mueller report gave enough to do investigations.

And investigation after investigation lets you control the messaging and the megaphone. And that's what Democrats needed to do.

But then, when they overreached, which parties are guilty of overreaching, they got very excited with the Ukraine, and they felt that they could take a gamble. That's when they lost the trust of the public and probably their own party, and instead of just sticking with the Mueller report.

CAVUTO: But do you worry that it gets delayed enough now?

AREU: Yes.

CAVUTO: They still have this timetable to try to get hearings and votes done in committees and then out of committees by Thanksgiving and then by Christmas. And now it's pushed back to, I don't know, Saint Patrick's Day.

It's out of control, right? Because then you're competing with own presidential selection process.

(CROSSTALK)

AREU: Exactly.

Well, if what he did, the president -- the question -- the question is, if he did -- was it wrong? Did he do something wrong? And if he did something wrong, can he be impeached?

If the answers are no, then where are the Democrats then? The party doesn't look so good. And they have lost their middle, their moderate and they have lost 2020, because they're not seen as caring about justice. They're exploiting a system. And that doesn't look good for any party.

CAVUTO: So you're voting for President Trump?

AREU: No, no. I'm hoping that the Democrats focus on the right things, not the wrong things.

CAVUTO: OK. I got you.

All right, Cathy, always a pleasure. Thank you very, very much.

AREU: Thank you.

CAVUTO: All right, to tweet or not to tweet, that is the question for future leaders after this president. Who will follow his lead?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: Twitter might be ending all political ads, but that doesn't mean it is abandoning all political tweets or one particular guy who sends out lots of tweets, because President Trump is still tweeting, by the thousands since taking office, and likely a reminder presidential tweets will continue, no matter who has that office, that he started something here, and it isn't going to end here with him or anyone else.

To The Federalist's Emily Jashinsky, Democratic strategist Kevin Chavous, and Turning Point USA's Charlie Kirk.

Charlie, end it with you, begin with you.

Then what do you make of that, what he has started, no future president will ever stop?

CHARLIE KIRK, FOUNDER, TURNING POINT USA: Well, look, I think he's changed the game in the modern social media era for the better.

Franklin Roosevelt used radio. JFK used TV. And President Trump has used Twitter to get his message out. Traveling the country, I hear from a lot of people that they believe politicians are not transparent. I think one of the positives of President Trump's uses of social media is, he's able to transparently get his thoughts out and able to communicate without having his thoughts be misrepresented by a media that has been proven to be tilted in one direction and determined to try to destroy this presidency.

CAVUTO: If you think about it, Kevin, the future Democratic presidents or even Republicans down the road looking years ahead, they probably would appreciate just bypassing the media, because every president, left or right, has had some problems with the media that I can recall.

So they might appreciate the strategy of just going over the media's head. What do you think?

KEVIN CHAVOUS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, that's true.

But I think that President Trump is really an example of how not to use Twitter. It's amazing that people act like he's some progenitor of political tweeting, when, in fact, Barack Obama...

CAVUTO: Don't use big words on this show, young man. Go ahead.

(LAUGHTER)

CHAVOUS: Well, I will just say the creator, like he's the starter.

CAVUTO: Yes, there you go.

CHAVOUS: But it's really not true, because Barack Obama had an account before him. Barack Obama broke fund-raising records using Twitter and YouTube and other social media methods.

The fact is that Donald Trump's tweets have alienated him from his supporters and people who may be willing to support him. And it's also undermined his staff. It's undermined agencies. They're afraid to put out statements because they don't know if he will tweet something at 3:00 in the morning that will go against what they say.

It's a powerful tool. And I think he's used it effectively sometimes, but most of the time, I think it goes against what he's trying to do.

CAVUTO: All right, too much of a good thing can boomerang on you, I guess.

Emily, my biggest fear, as a result of what the president started, is that he has made it acceptable to fire someone via tweet. And I'm always checking then my boss' Twitter feed. Oh, my gosh, the key still works, but has he tweeted about me?

I'm just wondering, what has changed in our culture as a result?

EMILY JASHINSKY, THE FEDERALIST: Yes.

So I think Barack Obama is a good example, because Barack Obama, nobody was under the illusion that he wasn't -- that that was him behind the keyboard typing into the phone.

Those are press releases, and politicians in the past have largely tweeted press releases.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Not all the time.

JASHINSKY: No, maybe not Anthony Weiner.

CAVUTO: Not all the time, just like not all the president's are his, right? Not all of those are his, right?

JASHINSKY: Yes, right. No, no, no.

But, I mean, they were always like from the press office or the communications team was approving them. But someone who's doing this differently -- and it's in the Trump era -- is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

So I don't think we will ever see a politician tweeting again like Donald Trump does. That's very singular. It's very unique to his personality.

But I think what we will see is something more in the mold of how AOC is using Twitter, casually, in her own residence, clearly not being approved by a press team. That, I think, is the future.

CAVUTO: Charlie, you can talk about it's not the quantity, it's the quality or the surgical strike nature you can use of social media.

Does the president risk overdoing it? I understand the strategy for doing it. He feels he doesn't get a fair shake in the media, so he will be the intermediary. But what do you think?

KIRK: Look, his followers have grown dramatically even since Election Day and inauguration just on Twitter alone.

And going back to one of my previous points and agreeing with -- talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, other politicians are following in his footsteps now with using social media for breaking news, and actually going to social media by commanding the news cycle.

And, again, I think that people are growing distrustful of Washington, D.C., for good reason, over the last 30, 40 years. President Trump used Twitter the day before the election the same way he used Twitter the day after the election, the same way that he used Twitter today.

It's what the American people voted for, people might not be the biggest fan of, but I think he does deserve credit for consistency, something you don't always see when Washington -- when politicians go to Washington, D.C.

CAVUTO: All right, guys, we shall see. Thank you very, very much.

In the meantime, it is Wednesday, so it's got to be, what, Louisiana? For the third time in less than a week, a presidential rally where the crowd is already over the top.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, another big rally for the president of the United States tonight. It's going to be in Louisiana.

That's were you will find our Kristin Fisher -- Kristin.

KRISTIN FISHER, CORRESPONDENT: Well, Neil, this is the third rally in less than a week that President Trump has held in a deep red Southern state on behalf of the Republican candidate for governor.

The president just helped the Republican candidate in Mississippi win the governor's race. That race in Kentucky, of course, still too close to call.

And, tonight, President Trump is trying to help Baton Rouge businessmen Eddie Rispone beat the Democratic incumbent, John Bel Edwards, in a runoff election. Rispone has been trying to tie this race to what's happening in Washington and tie his opponent to the Democrats' impeachment inquiry using words very similar to what the president's been using, witch-hunts and whatnot.

So you can expect to hear a lot of that tonight. Remember, this is only the second rally that President Trump has held since all of those transcripts from those closed-door hearings on Capitol Hill have come out.

And this has been a lot of rallies in just the course of the last seven days. But the frequency of these rallies is only going to pick up, Neil. The president's campaign manager, Brad Parscale, told me that he'd love to see two to three rallies a day as we get closer and closer to Election Day 2020.

Now, whether or not the Secret Service would sign off on something like that is something else entirely -- Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, Kristin, thank you very much.

He certainly has no problems filling a room. And I mean much more than a room, a stadium, a venue of any sort, usually packed to the hilt.

All right, not much going on in the markets today, when all was said and done, kind of ending the day where we started the day, at or near record territory, again waiting to see if and when we get a China trade deal done and signed.

The hope was by next week, now by next month. We shall see.

Here comes "The Five."

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.