What to expect as impeachment inquiry moves into public phase

close

Video

What to expect as impeachment inquiry moves into public phase

Washington awaits high-stakes public hearings in impeachment inquiry; reaction and analysis from the 'Special Report' All-Stars.

This is a rush transcript from "Special Report," Novemeber 12, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM SENSENBRENNER, R-WIS.: The Republicans asked for a bunch of witnesses. Schiff turned them all down. The Republicans asked for the participation of the president's lawyer. Schiff said no. This is kind of like the way Stalin ran his courts, and it's not something that Americans ought to be proud of.

BRET BAIER, HOST: Congressman, a little aggressive to call it Stalin-esque, isn't it?

SENSENBRENNER: No, I don't think so.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: He didn't think so.

Let's bring in our panel, Charles Hurt, opinion editor for "The Washington Times," Charles Lane, opinion writer for "The Washington Post," and Steve Hayes, editor of "The Dispatch." You were chuckling over there, Charles.

CHARLES HURT, OPINION EDITOR, "WASHINGTON TIMES": He's sticking with Stalin-esque. I like that.

BAIER: Yes, he's sticking with it. Set the table for us. It's going to be a surreal week at time, I think.

HURT: I think it's going to be truly surreal week. And Democrats have really hyped this thing, and tomorrow is show time. Tomorrow is the time that matters where they are going to be able to make the case, people are going to be able to watch it live on TV, and either they make the case or they don't make the case.

I have to be wondering, is there some bombshell that we don't know about? For their sake politically, you would hope that they would have something, some sort of grand smoking gun that is going to make their case for them. But when you hear them talk about abuse of power and not following the rule of law, they are these vagaries that don't go to an actual law that has been broken. And so it's a high wire act tomorrow, and we are going to see, and we are going to watch it.

BAIER: Chuck, the president's keeps on saying, look at the transcript of the call. We've explained it's not an exact transcript, but he says see the call, the transcript of the call. And I heard somebody the other day say that it's like the Internet blue dress this past year, that some people look at it and see a blue dress and other people look at it and see a gold dress. And it's just not going to change. And is this public hearing going to change their perception?

CHARLES LANE, OPINION WRITER, "WASHINGTON POST": I admit I have my doubts. And partly that's based on experience. When Bob Mueller came out and that was going to be a watershed moment, and it ended up just leaving everyone with their opinions right where they were before. But I expect these witnesses, in fairness, to be much stronger and more compelling, better prepared, and with a more specific and new story to talk about.

Having said that, America is divided. Opinions -- what have we been doing for the last three years? The number I keep focusing on, the breakthrough number here, is President Trump's job approval. It has basically held in the neighborhood of 43 percent in the RCP average through all the scandals and all the uproars and everything else that we've had. And the Democrats, if they want Republicans to move, if they want Republicans to join, even in relatively small numbers, this impeachment in either the House or the Senate, they're going to have to do something that breaks through that number, and that means it's going to have to be something very different from what they've been doing for three years.

BAIER: In fact, it went to the other way for the inquiry vote in the House with two Democrats voting against the inquiry.

Interestingly, Steve Bannon, former administration official in the Trump administration, talking to CBS, said "I disagree with their ideologically, but I think Nancy Pelosi is a master of political warfare. I think strategically what she has done from their perspective is actually quite brilliant," talking about the impeachment process, essentially arguing that they are trying to bloody up the president in this process knowing that they are never going to get a conviction ahead of the election next year.

STEVE HAYES, CONTRIBUTOR: That is the question. What do Democrats do to try to make the process look more legitimate? I think Republicans have had a fair complaint that the process to this point has been problematic, and Adam Schiff has been a partisan. Many of the Democrats who have spoken publicly have been partisan. Republicans have a legitimate gripe.

But of course, two things can be true at the same. Just because Democrats ran a partisan process doesn't mean that there aren't very legitimate, concerning things with respect to the call and the context for the call. And I think that's what we are likely to see. I share the skepticism here at the table that this is unlikely to change a lot of minds. I've spoken to members of Congress who have said, in effect, we are not really looking for things to change our minds, on the Republican side.

But what people will see, I think tomorrow, that's different, is the testimony from these people that the White House has tried, I think, to make villains. And they will be able to determine whether that testimony is credible. Somebody like a Bill Taylor, the White House has portrayed him as a never-Trumper. He was in fact handpicked by the secretary of state to come in. He's not a never-Trumper. If you read the transcripts of his testimony before, even though much of it was second and thirdhand, he paints a pretty compelling case about what took place. If people pay attention to that, if people are persuaded by the facts, I think that is problematic for the White House.

BAIER: It goes 45 minutes to Adam Schiff for questioning, and then 45 minutes for Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, and they may defer to counsel to do some of that questioning, so it'll be a little different than we have seen in previous committee hearings.

OK, let's turn to 2020, this new poll out in Iowa, Monmouth poll. Monmouth is well-respected, and it now has Mayor Pete at the top, plus 14 since August. Not on this screen is Kamala Harris who is down nine at three percent in Iowa, where she was put, Charlie, all of her eggs in that basket.

HURT: Yes. And of course, this is why we are seeing people like Mike Bloomberg get into the race, and we are seeing other Democrats still talking about it, because it is sort of a mishmash right now, and it's hard to see Pete Buttigieg going the full distance. Obviously, you have all sorts of problems with a guy like Bernie or a guy like Warren. And the Biden campaign has been nothing but a disaster, even though I maintain that that lane that Biden supposedly occupies is the lane that Democrats can get around, and it's the only lane that could beat Trump.

But going back to what Steve Bannon said, Nancy Pelosi is a brilliant tactician, but this is not what Nancy Pelosi wants to be doing. She got dragged kicking and screaming into this impeachment fight, and she knows it is bad for them. She knows the last thing her party wants to be talking about in Iowa come January and February is this nonsense.

BAIER: So Mayor Pete rising in this one poll, he's also been rising in other polls lately, Chuck. When somebody gets to the top, it's like whack- a-mole, not only for their opponents but for the Republicans to look at them. Likely his turn in the barrel will come if it hasn't already started.

LANE: I think the interesting thing Mayor Pete has done in this period where he has risen to the polls is gently reposition himself into the moderate lane. He has done things like mock, in his usual polite way, Elizabeth Warren's pay-fors for Medicare for all. He's come out with a student loan plan that cancels -- or a college tuition plan that cuts off at a much lower level in income scales so it's more targeted. He's done a number of things that say hey, I'm a moderate, because he doesn't have much of a record and he can fill in a lot of blanks.

BAIER: The big question is African-American with Mayor Pete. We're going to talk more about this, obviously.

Next up, some of the nation's top journalism schools may be changing the rules for the next generation of reporters.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CABOT PHILLIPS, CAMPUSREFORM.ORG: It's an outrage mob that's demanding that the university paper act differently. When they can come out and say our feelings are more important than your freedom of press, they're more important than people getting information about what we are doing, then it's a dangerous precedent they're setting.

ADAM GOLDSTEIN, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS IN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: Journalism is about serving the community. So it's not un-journalistic to be sensitive to your readers. What's different in Northwestern and what makes it troubling is what they are being asked to be sensitive to.

MIRANDA DEVINE, "NEW YORK POST": The best lesson would have been to tell them to grow up and not to pander to them and not to coddle them. If you don't want anyone to notice you protesting, then stay home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: This is an interesting story our of Northwestern. It comes from "The Daily Northwestern" statement, this is "The Daily Northwestern" paper, this statement came out Sunday after coverage of Jeff Sessions there, a speech. "One area of our reporting that harmed many students was our photo coverage of the event. Some protesters found photos posted to reporters Twitter accounts retraumatizing and invasive. Some students also voiced concern about the methods that "Daily" staffer used to reach out to them. Some of our staff members who were covering the event used Northwestern's directory to obtain phone numbers for students beforehand and texted them to ask if they'd be willing to be interviewed. We recognized being contacted like this is an invasion of privacy, and we have spoken to those reporters along with our entire staff about the correct way to reach out to students for stories." Which is what? The phone or the text or --

HAYES: What is the proper way? If that is invasive, what is the proper way to reach out? Look, I think what we are seeing is a fundamental exposition of the problems with both journalism as it is practiced on campus but also the campus environment more broadly. The editor of the paper said nothing is more important than making fellow students feel safe. We want to show marginalized students more than anything that "The Daily" is really listening. That's not what journalism is about.

The subjects of your reporting are going to be frustrated with you sometimes. That's part of the job. The audience that you are reporting for is sometimes going to be frustrated with what you do and how you do your job. But your job isn't to make people feel comfortable. It's not to make people feel safe. It's not to coddle anyone in the whole process. It's to tell the truth.

BAIER: We have seen a few of these -- Harvard, Columbia. We've seen a couple of these moments where there is this battle between journalism and making people feel OK.

LANE: Well, I can't defend this apology.

BAIER: Nor am I asking you to.

LANE: And I wouldn't even try. I would call for a little tiny bit of sympathy based on the youth of the offender in this case, who, according to this dean's letter, were subjected to what seems like an incredible sort of Twitter mob attack on their campus. And this isn't really a defense of what they said. It's trying to be a defense of what they were up against.

I think what I would like to focus on right now is how "The Harvard Crimson" responded when it came under similar kind of pressure. And they - - I think this is very important, they listened to all of the complaints, they met with the students were completing about them, and then they issued a statement defending the coverage that they had engaged in and what they had done.

So while this is a very depressing moment for those of us who believe in in the free press, I would sort of like to switch the attention over to the good news, which was at least "The Harvard Crimson" stood up, and by the way, in the face of even a vote by the student council there against them.

HURT: Let's remember Joseph Pulitzer's line about afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted. Look, what these people did is no worse than what "The New York Times" did. They folded like a cheap suit under pressure about the headline, a perfectly factually accurate headline they had in their newspapers, and it's supposed to be the greatest newspaper in the United States, they completely folded and changed their headline. So I don't know why -- that's where they learned it.

Kiddos, life is retraumatizing. It's a sad fact about life, and I am reminded, as I am almost every day, of Charles Krauthammer and what he admonished many times. The moment conservatives walked off college campuses, they gave up the fight. And until that gets reversed or people just start getting common sense, we are in trouble.

BAIER: There you go. Strong letter to follow. Thank you, panel.

When we come back, a question that is more important than the answer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BAIER: Finally tonight, what is a heartwarming moment. On last night's episode of "Jeopardy!" contestant Dhruv Gaur his heart on the screen with this final "Jeopardy!" question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY!": Dhruv, you are smiling. I like that. Let's take a look at your response. Did you come up with the right one? No. What is we love you Alex. That's very kind of you. Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

TREBEK: It cost you $1,995. You are left with five bucks. OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: The gesture caught host Alex Trebek, who currently is battling stage four pancreatic cancer, by surprise. You can see he choked there. Gaur and other contestants sported purple ribbons to support pancreatic cancer awareness, a great moment caught on "Jeopardy!"

Thanks for inviting us into your home tonight. That's it for the “Special Report,” fair, balanced, and unafraid. "The Story" hosted by Martha MacCallum up in New York starts right now.

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.