Full Cruz: House Impeachment Is 'Kangaroo Court' | Meet The Press | NBC News

Channel: NBC News
Published: 12 hours ago

Description
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas): "They are going to impeach, not because they have the evidence, but because they hate the president ... It's going to go to the Senate. It's going to go nowhere."» Subscribe to NBC News: http://nbcnews.to/SubscribeToNBC » Watch more NBC video: http://bit.ly/MoreNBCNews ...



Transcript
Me now from houston is republican, senator ted cruz of texas, who sits on the senate judiciary committee, senator senator cruz. Welcome back to meet the press, sir good morning, chuck good to be with you. Let me start with a larger sort of. I want to look at a forest here through all of these individual trees, and it was a busy week in this larger forest here. For the third time, the white house e ...
listed help of one of your republican colleagues to block a bipartisan resolution that you have been pushing to recognize armenian genocide that took place in turkey. You called out the administration for failing to block completion of that nord stream pipeline from russiato germany, 71 house republicans voted in a resolution that basically saying it would be fine. If russia came back into the g7, if they did before, they basically gave back crimea to ukraine, is it have you asked yourself? Why is it that this administration continues to publicly say tough things about russia, but in their actions they don't seem to get tough on russia? Listen chuck. I don't think it's shocking that their foreign policy disagreements in our government two of the things you mentioned right there, the armenian genocide resolution and nordstrom. I think we're likely to get both of those done in the coming weeks. We'Re likely to finally acknowledge the horrific armenian genocide whichi've been fighting for years to do. I think we're also likely in the national defense authorization act to pass my bipartisan legislation, stopping the nordstrom to do what that's going to do is stop a multi-billion dollar natural gas pipeline that goes from russia to germany, and it will cost putin billions of dollars, and So, and actually those questions illustrate part of the joke of what we're facing right. Now, if you look at substance, the substantive policy we are implementing has been tougher on russia by orders of magnitude than barack obama ever was, and yet the media is playing along with this show trial.

The democrats are putting on in the house. How is disgusted withit. Do you believe that what the president did with ukraine somehow was tough on russia or didn't the president by just introducing all of this delayed aid play into the hands of russia? You know chuck substance matters by any measure. The president's policy in this administration's policy have been tougher on russia and actually better for ukraine. That obama's was let me give you an example. You just mentioned ukrainian aid. The donald trump administration gave lethal defensive aid to ukraine, javelin missiles to take out russian tanks. Do you know what, throughout the obama administration, i repeatedly pressed president obama to give lethal aid to ukraine i traveled to ukraine? I went to the maidan square inkiev and they needed lethal aid, but the obama administration they said teddy bears and mres. They wouldn't actually give weapons and, at the end of the day, chairman nadler doesn't want to talk about any of that. He don't want to talk about the substance. You know it was respecting. Listening to his comments at one point he said well, there's no crime and you know he's right: there is no crime.

No, he did was talking about street he's talking about the president's lawyer, not about the president, but go ahead all right yesterday yesterday that oh you're right, he said it at first. He said it was contempt and then said: oh well, not really contempt, there'sno crime, but but let's be clear about the president, since this is impeachment of the president. Yesterday house democrats put out a 55 page report. They called it a scholarship, scholarly report that purports to say you don't have to prove a crime. You don't have to prove like a law was violated to impeach a president. That'S a garbage! What nonsense! Yeah! That'S exactly! That is exactly why the impeachment it was written into the constitution. That'S exactly why the phrase no crimes and misdemeanors is in there because they did it before they even wrote our laws, sir, before we had our so so i usually not the constitution. How do you you're saying that it isnot that's exactly the opposite of what is true chuck? Actually, what the constitution says is you can peach in a president for treason, bribery or high crimes and misdemeanors? It specifies that that's right amiss to me and and goes a tallit checked-out is a misdemeanor. What is a miss defined misdemeanor, so high crimes and misdemeanors was a term of art that the framers used, and you know it's striking it in poker. There'S something called a tell when a player has a really bad hand and they that they reveal it. It'S a tell what we saw last night was a tell from the house democrats. You know just a few weeks ago, they're talking point wasbribery bribery, bribery.

They'Re now admitting they can't prove a crime, the can't prove a law was violated and here's. Why any president any administration is justified, an investing corruption and there was serious evidence of real corruption concerning hunter biden on the board: a barista, the largest natural gas company in ukraine. You know how much other biden was paid every month. Eighty three thousand dollars. You know that number keeps changing there's so far. There hasn't been a lot of confirmation and exactly all of that - and i know the number changes hold on chuck chuck chuck hold on a second all right. The media auto care, if there's actual corruption covers a year, do you know howyou may get? Are you learning on the board of exxonmobil? You know in $ 110,000 a year. Do you really think hunter biden with zero? The reason you know this information is the media reported eighteen, ten times as much as a board member of exxon mobil. What i don't understand is why do you believe that if an american is is committing corruption, we should ask a foreign government to announce an investigation. Is that appropriate, or do you go to american authorities, so i believe any president. Any justice department has the authority to investigate corruption. In this case there was serious evidence on the face of corruption.

The recent hundred biden got that position is because hisdaddy was vice. President. You believe, if you create a hunter smith, do believe ukraine may in the millions of dollars a year. Do you believe to serve on the on the board? Do you believe ukraine meddled in the american election in 2016? I do and i think, there's considerable evidence. You do you do and chuck. Let me say this is a senator. This sort of strikes me as odd because you went through a primary campaign. With this president, he launched a birtherism campaign against you. He went after your faith. He threatened to quote spill the beans about your wife about something he pushed a national enquirer story, which we now know he had a realrelationship tonight is it. Let me ask you this: is it not possible that this president is capable of creating a false narrative about somebody in order to help him politically, except that's not what happened? The president released the transcript of the phone call. You can read what was said on the phone call and the by you yourself, but the bottom part was troubling chuck.

Let me point out a game that the media is playing. You know question that that you've asked a number of people is you've. You'Ve said two senators sort of a gasps: do you believe that ukraine, and not russia, interfered in the election now that that in a court of law wouldbe struck as a misleading question? Of course russia interfered in our election. Nobody looking at the evidence, disputes that the president is doing is look it on the evidence. Russia clearly interfered in our in our election, but here's the game. The media is playing because russia interfered the media pretends nobody else. Did ukraine blatantly interfered in our election? The sitting ambassador from ukraine wrote an op-ed blasting donald, don't worry the election. You know why he did. That is what dong-chul, what did donald trump? What did donald trump as a candidate say about ukraine and crimea during the election that might have been so you're saying. That'S with ronald trump and they wanted sarah clinton toget elected okay, so they wrote an op-ed. Our ukrainian parliament is the difference. What you're saying is you're saying a pickpocket which essentially is a hill op edie compared to bernie, madoff and vladimir putin.

Your triangle is you're. Trying to acquit equivocal make them both seem equal. I don't. I don't understand that you chuck'chuck. I understand that you want to dismiss ukrainian interference because a they were trying to get hillary clinton elected, which is what the vast majority of the media wanted anyway and b. It'S inconvenient for the narrative, you know it's hysterical. Two years ago there was article or after article after article in the mainstream media, about ukrainian interference in the electionsbut. Now the democrats have no evidence of a crime, no evidence of violating the law, and so suddenly ukrainian interference is treated as the media clutches their pearls. Oh, my goodness, you can't say that last week chuck you call senator john kennedy, basically a stooge for putin. I did not press it, don't say it's a ridiculous senator. I just concern any work for adam schiff. Okay, so did you get the briefing from the intel community? That said, the russian intelligence services are trying to actively use this ukraine story to frame ukraine for the russian for the intervention twenty multiple briefings i haven't been in multiple briefings year after year after year about 400 of ferretsin, our election, russia's tried to interfere in our Elections, china's tried to interfere in our elections, north korea's tried to interfere in our elections.

Ukraine has tried to interfere in our elections. This is not new. 2016 is not the first year they did and they're gon na keep trying, and so we need to to be strong and dealing with it, but that's, but the media needs to actually report facts. This is a kangaroo court in the house they're going to impeach, not because they have the evidence, but because they hate the president want to do the election. But it's going to go to the senate. It'S gon na go nowhere. I think the american people know thisis a waste of time and and and this is democrats putting on a circus, senator ted cruz republican from texas - always good to go back and forth with you. So i appreciate you coming on and sharing your views, hello from washington. I'M chuck todd and thanks for checking out the meet the press channel on youtube click on the button down here to subscribe and click over here to watch. The latest interviews highlights and other digital exclusives.


Watch Next

Loading...