Doug Collins brushes off concerns over Bolton report

Channel: Fox News
Published: 01/27/2020

Rep. Doug Collins, member of the Trump impeachment team, says the leaked report on former National Security John Bolton's book manuscript on Ukraine aid does not change the basic facts of the impeachment trial. FOX News operates the FOX News Channel (FNC), FOX Business Network (FBN), FOX News Radi

Brand-New reaction, this morning from a bombshell new new york times report on john bolton's upcoming book, the newspaper reporting, the president told his former national security adviser that military aid to ukraine was tied to an investigation of the biden's. Let'S bring in georgia, congressman doug collins, a trump impeachment team member congressman good morning to you. Thank you for being he ...
e good morning, i'll. Ask you the same question. I just used a saw weisenberger at the top of the hour. How does this change things it? Doesn'T it really doesn't change anything i mean the issue here is: is how do we go about this this process and taking the facts that the democratic managers present in the senate? Did they make their case, or did they not make their case? It'S amazing to me again how we're having selective leaks at this point in time. I think it should be interesting to anyone how this happened. Remember just right before the articles were voted out of the house. We had the democratic colleagues in the house actually talked about the left, harness issue. It'S always coming up at a moment in which, frankly, this seemingly their case is the weakest, but here's the bottom line, nothing in the that what we've seen so far and it simply just leaked parts of this transcript - has changed the basic facts of what we're talking About there was no conditionality, the ukrainians did nothing for the eight and they got the aid. I think the discussions in internally on how that went about this really doesn't change anything except that goes back to show that if he is such a relevant witness now, why was he not such a relevant witness for the house and why did adam schiff have to Plead to the senate to call people now because he did was scared of them going to court. This is why this process is so there's been additional information that has been revealed since that time.

I will. I will ask you this now, based on the growing calls from members of your own party in the senate, to hear from additional witnesses and john bolton mit romney. It'S very likely i'll, be in favor of witnesses. Doug jones, the senate needs to hear from john bolton. We know lisa murkowski, susan collins and others have said that they are open to witnesses. So do you see some of those more moderate members of your party, leaning towards witnesses? I think you see mitt romney, possibly leading toward him by the way. Doug jones is a democrat. So that wouldn't surprise me if he asked for an in a fiddle. You see how jones actually votes on removing this president and telling that to the voters of alabama. So i think which you've got to look at this going forward. The question really becomes, this is: is it new information not really adam schiff could have actually subpoenaed. John bolton went through this process in the house.

He chose not to let's remember this. This is because the calendar and clock were against them. The calendar and the clock were wanting to do this before the end of the year. They had no desire and a chef actually admitted on the floor of the senate. He said: well, we could have done that, but then he would've said we had to go to court. That'S an amazing coming from a lawyer not wanting to follow the processes that have already been set forth. So again, there's a lot to be made about this. There'S a lot of headlines today, but at the end of the day, i'm not sure it changed. It doesn't change the factual pattern and i'm not sure how much it actually changes with this growing concern. As you said, i've heard one person mitt romney, i'm not the others have always just said, we'll see how the case goes for in the case of susan collins, lisa, murkowski and others. They have said that they are going to be listening throughout this trial and that they are open to witnesses, for republicans would be needed, of course, to to join democrats in those call for witnesses. The new york times this morning says john roberts can call witnesses to trump's trial.

Will he if the press, if this were to eventually happen and we did go to see the senate go down the path of witnesses? John roberts obviously could come into play if the president were to claim executive privilege. What do you see potentially happening there congressman? Well, i think it's what was just discussed, i breathed by your previous guests. I think once this goes forward, there has to be these areas in the white house, especially with the ones closest to the president. The president is simply doing what every other president has done, and that is to fight for the integrity all the way back to george washington on this issue of executive privilege. Those who counsel the president closely have a inherent right for the president to keep those conversations within themselves. Remember, if not john dean was a witness in our judiciary committee several months ago, when we were discussing muller and discussing the role of those coming forward and testifying about conversations with the president and john dean made an interesting comment. He said you need to be very careful how you go down this road. He said you may want it now. He said you may want them to tell everything, but are you actually taking away from the president the very tools that he needs to do the job? So i think this is an interesting conversation as we go forward, but he will just simply stand this trial, not shorten, and i think you're gon na see it. I get it with fairly quickly all right a lot to keep in mind there. Collins. Thank you for your time.

Watch Next