Sen. Cruz reacts to calling former VP Biden as impeachment witness
Senator Ted Cruz weighs in on the battle over impeachment witnesses on ‘Sunday Morning Futures.’
This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," January 19, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Good Sunday morning, everyone. Thanks so much for joining us. I'm Maria Bartiromo, Joining me straight ahead right here on "Sunday Morning Futures," let the oral arguments begin. Coming up this morning, an exclusive interview with Senator Ted Cruz ahead of the Senate impeachment trial beginning this Tuesday. Also, one of the newest members of President Trump's legal team, former federal prosecutor Robert Ray, is here to discuss the president's case. Then, Donald Trump Jr. here on the trial, the attempts to take down his father and the election year ahead. Plus, breaking news this morning into John Durham's criminal investigation into the FBI with Congressman Jim Jordan, ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee. Joining me ahead to look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures." So, the week has arrived. The Senate trial will begin this Tuesday. How long will this impeachment trial last? Here is Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham on this program two weeks ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Well, I hope to have the trial over by the end of January. We would use the Clinton model, where you take the record established in the House, let the House managers appointed by Pelosi make the argument. Let the president make his arguments of why the two articles are flawed. And then we will decide whether or not we want witnesses. But this should be done in a couple weeks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Joining me right now, in an exclusive interview, is Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution. Senator, it's always a pleasure to see you. Thanks so much for being here.
SEN. TED CRUZ (R), TEXAS: Thank you, Maria. Good morning.
BARTIROMO: So, this is the first time we will hear from the president. Of course, the president and the White House coming out with a statement last night ahead of the trial. Would you agree that this could be as shore as two weeks? What is your expectation?
CRUZ: I think it is certainly possible that this trial could last one to two weeks. On the other hand, if the Senate makes decision to go down the road of additional witnesses, that could extend it six, eight weeks, or even longer. So I think there are really two paths here. But what you just noted there is important. This week is going to be the first time in a year that the president has had the opportunity to defend himself, to lay out the facts, to lay out the law, to lay out the actual substance. We have seen months and months and months of a one-sided show trial from House Democrats, where they didn't want to hear from the defense, where they shut out the White House, where they shut out the minority. The good news is, in the Senate, what I'm confident of is, we're going to have a fair trial. We're not going to give in to the kind of games that House Democrats have played. Instead, we're going to give both sides a full and fair opportunity to present their case. The House managers will have every opportunity to stand up and to present their arguments, to put forth whatever evidence they have. But for the first time, the president and the White House defense team is going to be able to walk through the facts and substance. And I think that's a very, very important development.
BARTIROMO: Let's talk about your reciprocity resolution. So if you were to go down the road of witnesses, you want it to be reciprocal. Tell us about that.
CRUZ: Well, that's right. It's kind of strange how we got here. So Democrats have been having hearings, have been doing impeachment for months in the House. They brought in all sorts of witnesses. They blocked the minority from having any witnesses. And then, as soon as we get to the Senate, the Democratic talking point is, we want more witnesses. Never mind all the witnesses they called before. They want yet more. And they're trying to delay this. They're trying to drag this out. They want this trial to go on forever, because they have a political objective of attacking the president. What I have said and what I have urged the conference is, is, listen, if we go down the road of witnesses, we're not going to do what the House did. We're not going to have a one-sided kangaroo court. Instead, we're going to respect reciprocity. What does that mean? That means, if the prosecution gets a witness, the defense gets a witness. If the prosecution gets two, the defense gets two. That means, if the prosecution gets to call John Bolton, then the president gets to call Hunter Biden. And I got to tell you, the Democrats are terrified about seeing a witness like Hunter Biden testify, because they don't want to hear evidence of actual corruption, of corruption, potentially, of Joe Biden, corruption that occurred during the Obama administration. They blocked all those witnesses in the House. They're not going to succeed in blocking them in the Senate. If they want to go down the road of witnesses, that means the president enjoys the rights to due process, which means he can call witnesses and lay out his defense.
BARTIROMO: What would that open up a whole 'nother can of worms? I mean, obviously, this whole focus on the president and this impeachment trial has put Hunter Biden and Joe Biden to the backseat. No one is actually talking about what went wrong there and why he accepted this money from foreign countries, leadership of foreign countries, while his father was sitting vice president.
CRUZ: Well, Maria, you're right. And the Democrats desperately want to keep that topic off the news. And, sadly, an awful lot of folks in the media are very compliant with that. But that's why I said this week the president having the opportunity to defend himself is so important, because I think one of the fundamental defenses that I expect to hear from the White House this week is that the president has inherent authority and, in fact, a responsibility to investigate corruption. And when you look at what happened with Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, there is, at a minimum, prima facie evidence of corruption. You have got Hunter Biden getting paid $83,000 a month by Burisma, the largest natural gas company in Ukraine; $83,000 a month is a million dollars a year.
BARTIROMO: Wow.
CRUZ: Hunter Biden had zero experience in oil and gas. It's not like he was a geologist or geophysicist. He was getting that money, the obvious inference is, because his daddy was vice president. And Joe Biden is on video at the Council of Foreign Relations bragging that he blocked a billion dollars in foreign loans and foreign aid to Ukraine until they fired the prosecutor who was potentially investigating Burisma, the company on which Hunter Biden sat on the board. When -- if the Biden family is profiting to the tunes of millions of dollars, the president is entirely justified to say, let's investigate and find out what happened. That's why Hunter Biden is such an important witness and why the Democrats don't want to focus on, what was the evidence of actual corruption? I expect to hear a lot from that -- from the White House defense team this week.
BARTIROMO: You have got a 51-vote threshold in terms of getting that vote to hear witnesses. Do you want to hear from witnesses? Then I want to get your take on the White House's letter sent last night, basically calling the articles of impeachment violations of the Constitution.
CRUZ: Well, starting with the second part first, I do think what we have seen coming out of the House is an abuse of the Constitution. And the reason is that they're using this for political purposes. This is the first time in history any president is alleged -- has been impeached without the articles alleging any criminal conduct at all, without alleging any federal crime was violated. They don't allege any federal law was violated. They don't even allege as much as that the president has a speeding ticket, and that has never happened in our country's history. And to use impeachment, like the House Democrats are doing, to express their political disagreement with the president, to try to overturn an election they're unhappy with, that is an abuse of the Constitution. Now, the first question you asked about process and witnesses, let me tell you what we can -- what we can expect to see in the next week or two going forward. On Tuesday, when we come back, the Senate will convene at 1:00 p.m. And we will start with pretrial motions. We will start with probably battling motions. What I expect the Senate to do is adopt a scheduling order laying out the next couple of weeks. That scheduling order is modeled after the scheduling order for the Bill Clinton impeachment. It's very, very similar. So it provides that we start with the House managers getting 24 hours spread over two days to present their case. They can argue evidence. They can argue law and argue whatever they want. After that, the president and the White House, they get 24 hours spread over two days to present their case. Then we shift questions from senators. Senators get 16 hours. Our questions have to be in writing, and the chief justice asks them for us. All of that, I would anticipate, takes about a week -- a week to a week-and-a-half. At that point, what the scheduling order provides is, the Senate is going to vote on whether or not additional witnesses are necessary. That's a 51- vote threshold. I don't know how that vote is going to come out. I think all 47 Democrats will vote yes. The open question is whether there will be four Republicans to join with those 47 Democrats. And, look, I think some of that depends on what happens in the first week- and-a-half, what arguments the House managers put forward, what arguments the White House puts forward, what questions comes out. I hope, at the end of the week-and-a-half, where Republican senators are is -- is, we have heard enough. The evidence they have put forward doesn't satisfy the constitutional standards. The Constitution says, impeachment lies for high crimes and misdemeanors.
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: This wasn't a high crime or misdemeanor. They didn't allege any crime at all. And so I hope, at the end of this process, that we will get at least 51 votes to say, let's move to final judgment. And when we move to final judgment...
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: ... the outcome of this is going to be, the president will be acquitted. The Senate will vote not guilty. And the reason I can say that with confidence is because, on their face, the articles of impeachment, they don't allege high crimes and misdemeanors. They fail on their face. And so I hope we get 51 votes in a week-and-a-half to say, this is over. If not, if not, if there are at least four Republicans who joined the Democrats for witnesses, then we're looking at a trial that will probably last six, eight weeks or longer...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: ... because you have to assume there's going to be litigation over the witnesses, there's going to be delay. But if we go down the road of witnesses, all of the Democrats, envisioning only prosecution witnesses and no defense witnesses, they're in a fantasyland. The Senate is not going to do like the House and play political games.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: We're going to be fair, and we're going to give the president a full opportunity to defend himself.
BARTIROMO: Real quick, how likely is it that we see a motion to dismiss in the first -- after the first 48 hours, after you actually look at those articles?
CRUZ: You know, I don't think it is that likely.
BARTIROMO: OK.
CRUZ: And the reason is, I think dismissing this cases is a much less attractive option than rendering final judgment and acquitting the president.
BARTIROMO: Sure.
CRUZ: And the reason is twofold. Number one, if you do a dismissal, a dismissal doesn't reach the merits. An acquittal, a verdict of not guilty, that verdict stands for all time. Nancy Pelosi is going out on TV crowing that the president has been impeached forever.
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: Well, when will we get to final judgment, the president will have been acquitted forever of these bogus impeachment charges.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: That's a much better outcome for the president and for the country.
BARTIROMO: And we're going to speak with...
CRUZ: Secondly, if we dismissed at the outset, the president would never get a chance to defend himself. The president -- the White House lawyers would never get the opportunity to put on the affirmative case.
BARTIROMO: That's true.
CRUZ: Think about it. In the months and months of House hearings, what I said on Hunter Biden, you didn't hear any of the witnesses say that, because the House Democrats didn't want those facts and evidence.
BARTIROMO: Sure.
CRUZ: They didn't want to explore the evidence of corruption.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: The president is entitled to have his case laid out, laid out persuasively, to be able to point out, as the brief the president filed this weekend points out, that these House Democrats have wanted to impeach the president since November of 2016.
BARTIROMO: That's right.
CRUZ: Since Election Day, they have been saying, we're going to impeach the president, which means this has nothing to do with Ukraine. It was long before anything had happened with Ukraine.
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: This was before the president had been sworn in. House Democrats were saying they wanted to impeach him. This is pure politics, and it's abusing the Constitution.
BARTIROMO: Right. What a week this will be. I want to take a break. When we come back, there are some areas where you agree with your colleagues on the left. One of them is about big technology and how powerful technology companies have come. There were worries that the big tech companies cheated in the 2016 election. I want to ask you if you expect them to cheat in 2020.
Senator Ted Cruz, stay with us. Back in a moment with more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: And I am back with Texas Senator Ted Cruz ahead of a historic week, with the impeachment trial starting. Real quick, before we get to technology, Senator, in terms of that resolution, is there any concern that you have got, the senators, basically having allegiance to Joe Biden? He's served 36 years in the Senate. There are some senators who will be -- quote, unquote -- "jurors" who are running for president. Of course they have a -- they have their motive. And then there are others who perhaps have an allegiance to Joe Biden.
CRUZ: Well, look, there's no doubt Joe Biden served with an awful lot of senators. There are a number of senators who consider him a personal friend. I am hopeful and I believe that senators will do their constitutional duty, which means that they're not going to decide this case based on friendship, but, rather -- there was a reason that the framers of the Constitution gave the responsibility of conducting an impeachment trial to the Senate. They debated quite a bit where to do the impeachment, particularly of a president.
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: And one of the options they considered was the U.S. Supreme Court. They also considered the Senate. They also considered a third option of sort of a combination of the two, combining the two.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: And that's sort of what they did by bringing the chief justice the United States in to preside over the Senate. But if you look at the Federalist Paper -- Papers...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: ... Alexander Hamilton explains, the reason they chose the Senate was two things. Number one, they wanted an institution with the credibility to resolve issues.
BARTIROMO: Right.
CRUZ: The impeachment of the president is a big deal. They knew it would be politically contentious. They wanted an institution that could have the credibility with the American people to be fair.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: Secondly, they wanted an institution that could withstand the buffeting of politics, that wouldn't be like the House. The House is designed to respond to momentary political surges. The Senate is designed to be more stable, more consistent.
BARTIROMO: Sure.
CRUZ: That's why the framers gave it to the Senate. And I'm hopeful that my colleagues will fulfill that responsibility.
BARTIROMO: Senator, let me switch gears and ask you about a testimony in front of your committee by Robert Epstein as it relates to Google and big tech.
CRUZ: Yes.
BARTIROMO: Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. ROBERT EPSTEIN, AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY: In 2020, if all these companies are supporting the same candidate, there are 15 million votes on the line that can be shifted without people's knowledge and without leaving a paper trail for authorities to trace.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Fifteen million votes. Go back for us. What happened in 2016? And are you worried that big tech wants to put its finger on the scale in the upcoming 2020 election?
CRUZ: So, I'm very worried. That testimony that you just showed is Dr. Robert Epstein, who's a very respected academic. He's a psychologist, used to be the editor of Psychology Today. And he did an empirical study on Google in 2016 and on the search results they came back -- and he was astonished by the results. He found that, based on manipulated search outcomes, biased search outcomes, that Google in 2016 shifted 2.6 million votes towards Hillary Clinton. Now, here's the interesting thing, Maria. Dr. Epstein is not a Republican. He is a liberal Democrat. He voted for Hillary Clinton. So, politically, he was happy to see more votes for Hillary. But he was horrified to see big tech have that kind of power. And he went on to testify what you just played, which is, if they do the same thing in 2020, which all indications are that they're going to, they could shift up to 15 million votes. It is terrifying that a handful of Silicon Valley billionaires that now control over $5 trillion of the American economy have no accountability and the ability to censor, to deceive and to manipulate votes.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: And I think that's a threat to our democracy we need to take very seriously.
BARTIROMO: Well, let's not forget Michael Bloomberg, who is running for president, said that he's willing to spend...
CRUZ: Yes.
BARTIROMO: ... up to a billion dollars, even if he's not the nominee. He's already spent $217 million.
CRUZ: He's already spent -- Bloomberg has already spent more than every other candidate combined. And it is kind of striking. With all the rhetoric, it's fairly interesting...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: ... that the two top spenders on the Democratic side are two gazillionaires, billionaires, who are just writing massive checks. And that often is the case when you see people with socialist rhetoric, is, they often are doing so from position of great wealth themselves. And so they're happy to redistribute other people's wealth, not so much themselves.
BARTIROMO: Wow.
CRUZ: I think we ought to be the sort of economy where everyone has a fair opportunity, where people -- people like my dad, when he came from Cuba in '57, with nothing...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: ... washing dishes...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: ... have an opportunity to achieve the American dream.
BARTIROMO: Well, that's...
CRUZ: And big government socialists, which the 2020 Democrats are advocating, it doesn't give that economic mobility. It freezes the billionaires in place.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: And it freezes everyone else in place also.
BARTIROMO: Senator...
CRUZ: That -- that's not America.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
CRUZ: And that's not the freedom that this country was built on.
BARTIROMO: You're going to have some week ahead. We will be watching. Senator, good to see you. Thank you so much.
CRUZ: Thanks.
BARTIROMO: Coming up, a member of the president's defense team right here on set.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. With opening statements in President Trump's impeachment trial set for this Tuesday, he's added several high-profile names to his defense team, including Ken Starr, the former independent counsel whose investigation led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz, not a full-time fledged member of the team, but he will present constitutional arguments against impeachment. Former federal prosecutor Robert Ray is a new full-fledged member of the team. And he joins me right now on set. Good to see you, Robert. Thanks so much for being here.
ROBERT RAY, MEMBER OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEFENSE TEAM: Thanks. Thanks for emphasizing that. And, on a personal note, thank you very much for all the appearances going back now many, many months. I'm not sure -- if not for you, I don't know that I would have come to the president's attention.
BARTIROMO: Thank you.
RAY: So, I very much appreciate it.
BARTIROMO: Well, congratulations. This is a big deal. Tell me what the president..
RAY: Of course it is.
BARTIROMO: What the defense is.
RAY: Well, it's a big deal because, ultimately, in the eyes of history, we are all going to be judged about whether or not we acted in the best interests of the country. I think the president's principal defense -- and you saw it in the answer that was interposed over the weekend -- is very simple. This is an entirely partisan and, therefore, illegitimate effort by House Democrats to remove a president from office. And the remedy for that is the United States Senate, as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. In order to overturn the will of the electorate in the 2016 election, and particularly given the fact that we are now in the middle of a presidential campaign for 2020, ultimately, that will can only be overturned with a bipartisan effort and overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, with a two-thirds majority, in order to remove a president and overturn the will of that electorate. It's very simple.
BARTIROMO: Do you expect any Republicans to vote for impeachment?
RAY: I don't, no.
BARTIROMO: Well, let's look at the letter that the White House, your team, sent last night, because the conclusion of that letter from the White House, says: "The articles of impeachment violate the Constitution. They are defective in their entirety. They are a product of invalid proceedings that flagrantly deny the president any due process." Ted Cruz just said the first 48 hours will determine a lot. What are you expecting?
RAY: Well, I think he's right about that. But I think you have also saw from the speaker, Pelosi, about essentially celebrating the notion that the stain of impeachment exists and exists forever. And the only rejoinder to that -- and that's the rejoinder that it is my job, and together with the rest of the defense team, to place before the United States Senate for their consideration -- is the question about the rejoinder being that there will be an acquittal forever as well. And that's what we expect. That's the -- that's the task ahead during the next several weeks.
BARTIROMO: Do you think you would like to see witnesses? I mean, witnesses can go either way. I know that. But they could also open up this can of worms around Hunter Biden, which seems to have been forgotten at this point.
RAY: Well, that's a -- that's a relevant issue to consider, obviously, because, if you get into the question, as the Democrats have alleged, that anything having to do with the Bidens was completely, in their words, a sham, obviously, your views about that are affected by whether or not you think there was merit to a Biden investigation. But before we ever get to that, I think the core issue -- and Senator Cruz alluded to this -- well-founded -- and I have said this many times -- many times on your show -- well-founded articles of impeachment both allege that crimes were committed and that those are the type of crimes that constitute abuse of the public trust. Abuse of power alone -- and history has shown this -- similar to also obstruction of Congress, those types of articles of impeachment have been tried on for size before, but they have not fared well. The core of the impeachment parameters allege that crimes have been committed, treason, bribery, and things like that, in other words, other high crimes and misdemeanors.
BARTIROMO: Right. Unbelievable. Robert, thanks very much.
RAY: Thanks very much.
BARTIROMO: Robert Ray. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DONALD TRUMP JR., SON OF DONALD TRUMP: I think it's going to be a great team. I think you have people that have experience. We have seen that this has been a one-sided sham from moment number one. So, I guess a lot of it depends on what happens from this point on, right? I -- I would like to personally hear from everyone. I'd like to hear from Hunter Biden. I'd like to hear from Joe Biden, because, frankly, these are the reasons we're even having this conversation right now.
BARTIROMO: Would you rather see the Senate file a motion to dismiss right away, which is what Lindsey Graham came on this program and said he's going to do a couple of weeks ago, or do you want to hear from these people?
TRUMP: If we're hearing from all of those witnesses, then I want to sort of hear it, because I realize, again, having watched this thing transpire over the last few years and the nonsense perpetuate itself, I definitely want to hear from the other side. If the Republicans -- and some of them, the, let's call it weaker Republicans -- I sort of like the Rand Paul model -- make them vote on it. If some of those guys don't want to hear from the witnesses that we'd want to hear from, but we will hear from the others, I want to know about it, because they don't deserve to be in office. So it really depends. We have to play the game the way the Democrats have played the game. We have to play hard, but fair. Hearing from everyone is totally fair. That's not what we have seen so far, while the Democrats have controlled the process. It's not been fair in any way, shape or form.
BARTIROMO: We should have expected that Nancy Pelosi wanted the president out just from the State of the Union last year. She delayed it.
TRUMP: Of course. This has been their -- impeachment started November 9, 2016, OK? That's when it's been going on. The Washington Post wrote the first -- the case for impeachment 20 minutes after the inauguration. OK? This has been an ongoing saga forever. The other thing I think Nancy's trying to do with the delay is prevent other people, like Bernie, from actually being on the campaign trail.
BARTIROMO: Right.
TRUMP: In other words, to try to guarantee...
BARTIROMO: Once again, they're colluding against Bernie Sanders.
TRUMP: Yes. By the way, I love that they collude against themselves in this way, because the last time they colluded to rig the Democrat primary, it worked out perfectly for us because we got Hillary, and that was a godsend.
BARTIROMO: Well, it is pretty unbelievable. You mentioned Hunter Biden. When your president -- and when your father became president, you and your brother Eric, running the Trump Organization...
TRUMP: Right.
BARTIROMO: ... you stopped doing international deals.
TRUMP: We said we wouldn't do any new international deals going forward. And that's -- hey, a big part of why I'm so involved in politics right now is because that's what I did. I did our international deals. Unlike Hunter Biden, we were actually international businesspeople before daddy got into politics, OK? Hunter Biden magically becomes an international business the second his father's pulling the purse strings. OK? That's the difference. Now, people don't want to talk about that. They don't want to talk about that.
BARTIROMO: Well, he got $1.5 billion, his hedge fund, from China. He took that trip on Air Force Two.
TRUMP: Imagine Donald Trump Jr. took one-and-a-half-dollars from China, after traveling on Air Force One with his dad to go do -- imagine I took one-and-a-half dollars.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
TRUMP: It would be outrage. Hunter Biden comes back...
BARTIROMO: And then he was making, what, $50,000 or $60,000 a month from Burisma.
TRUMP: Eighty-three thousand dollars a month from Burisma.
BARTIROMO: Eighty-three thousand dollars a month.
TRUMP: More from Ukraine.
BARTIROMO: Let me ask you about this Lev Parnas news. Obviously, this is a guy who's indicted. He's also releasing a trove of documents to the House Intel Committee. Your name comes up in one of these text messages exchanged between Parnas and a GOP fund-raiser. How well do you know Parnas? There are pictures of, obviously, Lev Parnas with the president.
TRUMP: Met him at some fund-raising events. He was a donor to a super PAC, shows up at some of these things, like anything else. Like, I -- honestly, it was funny. I didn't even realize he was Ukrainian. I thought he was Israeli. The reality is, you don't know him that well. But that's the problem with how this world works, right? You take a couple pictures with somebody, if someone's a donor. They get in line. They sit at a dinner with 50 people. And that's how it works. The media then takes it, oh, they're buddies. I guarantee you, my father couldn't pick this guy out of a lineup. That doesn't mean he hasn't taken pictures with him.
BARTIROMO: Right.
TRUMP: But when you do the average click line of my father, and it's 200 people in an evening, and you do that a couple times a week, you know, this is how the game works. But, again, the media pretends that they don't know that that's how the game works.
(CROSSTALK)
BARTIROMO: ... handing over these pictures. I was reading a couple of posts and tweets of yours. And you accuse Yovanovitch of monitoring you. Tell me what happened.
TRUMP: I saw the reports that they were -- put -- assigned people in the Ukrainian Embassy, apparently, to monitor myself, other conservative figures, Sean Hannity, Dan Bongino, numerous others. So, of course, now it's -- now she's accusing people of doing the same to her, because that's what happens. When they do it, it's sort of the -- what -- the old liberal -- the Democrat politics, accuse them of doing all the things that you're doing. So, a year later, they come back to try to accuse us of it.
BARTIROMO: Well, throughout 2016 and 2017, we saw this hysteria in terms of collusion. And yet they just continue to look for more things to try to attack your father.
TRUMP: Yes.
BARTIROMO: It's...
TRUMP: They will double down, again, any opportunity to hurt Trump. And that's the reality. I have said it over and over. I mean, the Democrats and the media hate Trump much more than they love America, because you can't dispute the numbers. You can't dispute all-time low unemployment for every group in this country, every demographic.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
TRUMP: You can't...
BARTIROMO: Well, we're at a 50-year low in unemployment. And we have got a consumer that is obviously -- the sentiment and spending is very strong. Economic growth has moved.
TRUMP: Correct.
BARTIROMO: You're talking about close to 3 percent expectations in 2020.
TRUMP: But it's not by magic. It's because he's implemented policies that have allowed the markets to work, that have allowed small business to thrive, that have allowed people to actually invest in themselves. And that's lifted everyone. That affects a lot of people.
BARTIROMO: Well, you make a good point, because it looks like income inequality is narrowing. When you look at the bottom earners, their wages have gone up 4.5 percent.
TRUMP: Correct. And, I mean, isn't that the statistic that we want? Isn't that the way we want to lift, that rising tide that lifts all ships? Like, that's what we want to do. And that's what he said he was going to do. And he's done it.
BARTIROMO: So let's go to 2020 and the election. Who do you think is going to be the nominee?
TRUMP: I think you could see the media has got it in for -- to sort of doing the full press to make sure that Biden is the guy, which is great, in a way, because, I mean, I'd sort of like to see Trump go one-on-one with Biden. When I see Joe Biden talking to a group of 20 people with a teleprompter, because they're afraid of what he may say otherwise, that tells me all I need to know. And in a large and stacked Democrat field, I think it's fine. You can probably hide some of that. Get him on the trail for five, six months one- on-one with Donald Trump, it's going to be awesome.
BARTIROMO: What about the Bloomberg factor?
TRUMP: Honestly, he's going to spend money one way or the other. I mean, he doesn't have the personality for this. He doesn't -- he can't relate to people. He probably inherently dislikes people. So he just doesn't have the retail side of it, which is a big part of it. You can't -- he doesn't have a stage presence. He doesn't have that personality. So he will spend a lot of money, but what's he going to spend it against? And that's the reality.
BARTIROMO: Well, he also gave the Democrats $100 million-plus at the end of the year last year, and they -- in fact, that was effective. He...
TRUMP: I think it was for the House.
BARTIROMO: They won the majority in the House.
TRUMP: I don't think it helps him, because, again, he doesn't have what it takes to be a politician.
BARTIROMO: Let me ask you about the president and how he's doing here, in the face of all of these attacks, and getting ready for impeachment.
TRUMP: Listen, honestly, he's doing fine. You can see that through his actions. He's used to taking these punches. He's used to getting hit. And guess what? He's just going to keep working. He's actually more of a game time player than anything. So when the pressure is on, he gets things done. And what you're seeing is unprecedented success.
BARTIROMO: Don, it's great to have you on the show.
TRUMP: Great to be back.
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much.
TRUMP: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Donald Trump Jr. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Breaking news this morning. President Trump's Senate impeachment trial begins this Tuesday. What should we expect? Bringing in right now Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan. He's the ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee. And, Congressman, so it's always a pleasure to see you. Thanks very much for joining us.
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You bet. Good to be with you.
BARTIROMO: You have been helping the president in terms of his defense behind the scenes. What has been your role, sir?
JORDAN: Well, we have talked with the White House counsel's team, but they got a great team. And, look, you got great lawyers, and you got all the facts and the truth on your side. So I think this is going to go well for the president, because, again, when you got the facts, when you got the truth, you just go make the arguments. And they got a great group of folks they have put together who are going to do just that over the next couple weeks.
BARTIROMO: And you have made four points in terms of going back to the basic facts here. And this has to do, obviously, with the transcript, which the president released right after the -- right after this began.
JORDAN: Yes. No, I mean, look, they never expected him to do this. One of the great moves the president made is actually release the call transcript. The transcript itself shows no quid pro quo. The two individuals on the call, President Trump and President Zelensky, have repeatedly said there was no pressure, no pushing, no linkage of any type of investigation to the security assistance dollars. Third point, there Ukrainians didn't even know at the time of the call that the aid was on hold, that the aid have been paused. They didn't learn until about a month later from the Politico article. And the most important fact -- and this is one that the Democrats can never get past -- the most important fact is, the Ukrainians took no action, i.e., no announcement, no promise to start, no investigation, no announcement whatsoever about doing an investigation into the Bidens or Burisma to get the aid released. The aid was released because, over that pause time, that 55 days when the aid was paused, the president became convinced that Zelensky was a genuine reformer, and he decided to go ahead and release the hard-earned tax dollars of the American people to Ukraine.
BARTIROMO: I want to switch gears ,ask you about what's taking place at the FBI investigation. Obviously, you have done an incredible amount of work in terms of exposing the wrongdoing in 2016 and possibly early 2015, actually. We know now that General Michael Flynn is going to be reversing his plea.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: Sidney Powell, his lawyer, says documents show prosecutors knew they pressed him to lie. Take a listen to this sound bite of Jim Comey on another network talking about the way he decided to send a few FBI agents over to the White House to question General Michael Flynn.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I thought, it's early enough. Let's just send a couple guys over. We placed a call to Flynn, said, hey, we're sending a couple guys over. Hope you will talk to them. He said sure. Nobody else was there. They interviewed him in a conference room at the White House Situation Room, and he lied to them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: Sidney Powell says that this is strong inference that the prosecutors themselves conspired to cause Mr. Flynn to make false statements, basically encouraging him not to have a lawyer present. Don't - - we're just going to send a few guys over, as if it's a casual meeting.
JORDAN: Yes. And one of them even -- one of the FBI agents even said they didn't think he was lying at the time. But they later then said that he -- that he did. Yes, they tried to set him up. They did set him up. But this is not unusual, because -- well, it should be unusual, but the FBI did it another time as well. They did it on January 6 at Trump Tower, when it was president-elect Trump. They went up there and briefed president-elect Trump on the dossier, the dossier they already knew was false. They went and briefed the president on it, so they could go then leak it to the press, and the press could write about it. And they tried to set up the president-elect of the United States in the same manner. So this is how they operate. And they got caught. Think about what Mr. Horowitz told us last month, Maria. He told us that the FBI, when they went to get the Carter Page warrant to spy on the Trump campaign, they lied to the court 17 times in the initial application and the three renewals; 17 times, they lied to the court. And now what's interesting, is Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, the two individuals who were in charge of that investigation, got in a little spat now with Rod Rosenstein, who was also involved. I find that kind of interesting, that the people who were running this all are now fighting amongst themselves.
BARTIROMO: Yes, they got caught, but will they actually face accountability, Congressman? You mentioned Rod Rosenstein. And now the story going viral this weekend is that Rosenstein said that he authorized the release of the Page-Strzok texts.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: And some of them are just extraordinary. We have got some of those texts here on screen to show our audience, but, of course, our audience knows that there was an insurance policy and saying that she was going to be the next president, so be careful, the tone that you take with her. "One more thing. She might be our next president," wrote Lisa Page.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: "Be careful as you go in there."
Peter Strzok says: "I saw Trump won. Figured it would be a bit. Now the pressure really starts to finish the investigation into Hillary Clinton."
JORDAN: Yes. They were out to get the president. You had on Don Trump Jr. I thought it was a great interview. He said in impeachment started on Election Day. I actually think it started even sooner. I think it started on July 31, 2016, when they opened the Trump-Russia investigation, as I said, went and spied on four American citizens associated with the Trump campaign. And who was heading that investigation? Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, who said in one of those text messages, just went to a Southern Virginia Walmart. I can smell the Trump support. The disdain they have for the president and, just as importantly, the disdain they have for folks like you and me, Maria, who support the president, who voted for the president, that is what is so wrong. And then they get caught with these text messages. And now they're going to sue? This is ridiculous. The American people -- it's great that we -- those text messages were released, because the American can people can see the bias, the animus that these folks, who ran the two biggest investigations probably of our lifetime, the Clinton e-mail investigation and the Trump-Russia investigation, they can see the bias and the animus they had against President Donald Trump.
BARTIROMO: Yes. And it's important to bring it up in terms of what took place in '16, because here we are on the doorstep of an impeachment trial of President Trump. Meanwhile, you know that there was collusion the Democrat side, Hillary Clinton paying for the dossier. That dossier partly came from Russia and came from Ukraine.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: If that's not collusion with the Russians, what is? And then there's obstruction that they also said that the president did, and yet Hillary Clinton destroyed documents, e-mails. She used a hammer and beach -- bleach to destroy her devices.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: It's just extraordinary to me that this continues and goes unchecked.
JORDAN: The best -- the best evidence that there was bias is, look at the names they gave the two investigations. The Clinton investigation, the code name they gave it was the Midyear Exam. But when it came to the Trump-Russia investigation, the FBI came up with Crossfire Hurricane. You can almost like see them pounding their chest like Tarzan. We're going to go get this president. We're going to go after Donald Trump. And that's exactly what they did. And never forget what Bill Barr said. Bill Barr said there was a crisis of leadership at the upper echelon of the FBI. That's the biggest understatement ever. Of course there was. Comey was fired. McCabe was fired, lied three times under oath. Jim Baker, chief counsel, had to resign. Lisa Page had to step down and resign as well, was kicked off the Mueller team, Peter Strzok kicked off the Mueller team and fired. So, those were the five key people who ran these investigations.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
JORDAN: I have never seen an agency where that has happened before.
BARTIROMO: And it's absolutely extraordinary, the way Nancy Pelosi talks about the attorney general, by the way, A.G. Barr.
JORDAN: Yes. He's doing a good job.
BARTIROMO: She talks about him as if he is not the leading legal person of the country. And she says he's just fighting for Donald Trump. I mean, it's quite extraordinary.
JORDAN: Yes.
BARTIROMO: So you have to bring this up, because they don't -- they want to take Donald Trump out. They don't want another word about this FBI investigation. They don't want to -- they don't want any accountability for what took place.
JORDAN: Yes. And, remember, Bill Barr said not only that there was a failure of leadership at the upper echelon of the FBI. He then used the word that just drove the left crazy, drove the Democrats crazy. He said there was spying took place.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
JORDAN: There was a basis for my concern about the spying that happened. And then, third -- or, fourth, I should say, he used a term that should scare us all. He used the term political surveillance when he testified in front of the Senate Finance Committee. That's scary. And the fact that he is doing such a good job in getting to the bottom of this, that's what scares them. I look forward to the Durham report when it comes out later this year.
BARTIROMO: Congressman, it's good to you see this morning. Thanks so much.
JORDAN: You bet. Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Congressman Jim Jordan. Well, up next, Democrat-turned-Republican Congressman Jeff Van Drew breaking news this morning on the impeachment trial and the release of inmates under prison reform. Wait until you hear that. We're looking ahead this morning on "Sunday Morning Futures." We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ERIC SHAWN, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Well, Maria was here a minute ago. This is live television, folks. Maria is under the weather. She feels sick. I'm Eric Shawn, filling in for Maria for the rest of the program. You know, there's the flu going around. She's got it. And it's a testament to the dedication, perseverance and professionalism of Maria Bartiromo that she stayed with this program until now. This is what happens sometimes in live television news. Our best to Maria. I know she will feel much better, so I will take it for the rest of the program. And we have newly minted Republican Congressman from New Jersey Jeff Van Drew. You know that he switched parties soon after the House passed those two articles of impeachment against the president. He voted no amid growing frustration at the process among more moderate Democrats in Trump districts. He joins us now with the very latest. So, Congressman, what do you expect will happen this week? You voted no, yet it is going forward. Do you think that perhaps Nancy Pelosi is going to try and subpoena witnesses after the impeachment trial is over?
REP. JEFF VAN DREW (R-NJ): Well, first of all, let me just say I want to wish Maria best -- best wishes and that she gets better really quickly.
SHAWN: Absolutely.
VAN DREW: This flu has been going around everywhere. And she just doesn't deserve it. She's too good a lady.
(LAUGHTER)
SHAWN: Absolutely.
VAN DREW: But I want her to know that we're all thinking about her. Secondly, to answer your question, look, the House had its time. They have spent months and months and months of reports, of investigations, millions upon millions of dollars. And we finally, the House, came up with two articles of impeachment, both of which are very weak. I will say this, and I will say it over and over again, because I think people must understand how important it is. Impeachment is a tool that is not meant to be used anywhere near a regular basis. Our founding fathers almost disliked it. It was said even by de Tocqueville, who was a famous Frenchman who loved America, that, when impeachment was used too often, that it was a sign of the degeneration of the country and the breakdown of the United States of America.
SHAWN: Yes, democracy -- democracy in America.
VAN DREW: We can't have political impeachments.
SHAWN: Very quickly.
VAN DREW: I'm sorry.
SHAWN: We have about 30, 40 seconds left. The president's coming to your district. What's been the reaction in the Garden State since you switched? And what do you expect will happen?
VAN DREW: It's been exciting. And I'm proud to say, proud to say, for his event, of all the events he's done in all of the country, we have had the most ticket requests. He's coming to support me and my reelection. He's coming to support about his issues. And we are really proud to have him. There are going to be thousands upon thousands. And the last I have heard, I think there's been about 100,000 ticket requests for the president. We're proud to have him. We're proud to have the president. And it shows he cares about the big towns and the big cities, and he also cares about the little places.
SHAWN: Yes, sir. Congressman Jeff Van Drew, thank you so much. Of course, we wish Maria the very best. Send her flowers. Send Maria Bartiromo some flowers, because she's under the weather. But she will be back. Stay with us.
Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox