2020 HAS NOW LEARNED NOT TO INSTALL PEOPLE WHO CAN STAND IN THE WAY. >> JOINING ME NOW IS ADVICE VICE CHAIRMAN LIZ CHENEY. WELCOME BACK. >> WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR PROCESS, THAT IS THE BASIS AND THE FOUNDATION ON WHICH WE CAN HAVE THESE DEBATES. >> ON THE WYOMING BALLOT WE KNOW OF TWO ELECTION DENIERS, I ASSUME THEY WILL NOT GET YOUR VOTE? >> THEY WILL NOT. IT MEANS, IN THE CASE, FOR EXAMPLE FOR KARI LAKE AND MARK MEACHAM IN ARIZONA, BOTH SAY THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE FACTS, LOOKED AT THE LAW, LOOKED AT THE FACTS THAT THE COURTS ALL RULED AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. WE LOOKED AT THE AUDITS AND ARE WILLING TO IGNORE ALL OF THAT AND SAYING WE WOULD NOT HAVE CERTIFY THAT ELECTION. THEY'RE TELLING YOU THEY WILL ONLY CERTIFY AN ELECTION THAT THEY AGREE WITH. THERE'S NO GREATER THREAT TO DEMOCRACY THAN THAT. >> GARRETT HAAKE ASKED ABOUT YOUR CRITIQUE OF REPUBLICANS THAT WERE CAMPAIGNING WITH KARI LAKE. HERE WAS HIS RESPONSE. >> I BELIEVE EVERYTHING STATE DESERVES A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR, AND ARIZONA DESERVES ANOTHER REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR. >> A LOT OF REPS IN THE LAST THREE WEEKS THAT I HAVE DESCRIBED AS EMPATHETIC TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING, HAVE SUDDENLY SAID PARTY OVER COUNTRY. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT DECISION. >> I THINK THEY'RE INDEFENSIBLE DECISIONS. I THINK GOVERNOR YOUNGKIN HAS DONE A GOOD JOB, BUT NOBODY SHOULD BE ON THE ADVOCATING FOR SOMEONE WHO WILL NOT HONOR THE SANCTITY OF OUR ELECTION. >> IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEEN HARDER TO IGNORE KARI LAKE, AND SOME HAVE CAMPAIGNED WITH DOUG MASTRIANO, THIS WIN IT, WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN, WINNING TRUMP IS EVERYTHING. HOW DO YOU BLOW THAT UP? >> I THINK YOU HAVE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT EVERYBODY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION, THE OBLIGATION TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT. NOW YOU HAVE A LOT OF REPUBLICANS -- DEMOCRATS DO THE SAME THING, IT SEEMS LIKE OUR CANDIDATES ARE MORE DANGEROUS RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU HAVE A LOT OF REPUBLICANS SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M GOING TO IG KNOW THE THREAT POSED BY A FORMER PRESIDENT WHO ATTEMPTED TO USE FORCE TO OVERTURN AN ELECTION. I'M GOING TO IGNORE THAT, IGNORE THESE PEOPLE WHO EMBRACE HIM. I'M GOING TO IGNORE THE DANGER AND FOCUS ON THE NEAR TERM, IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY GOING TO PREVAIL? >> I JUST CAME BACK FROM GEORGIA. BRAD RAFFENSPERGER, KEMP BEAT BACK -- THEY WON, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'LL BE IN BETTER SHAPE. WHY CAN'T OTHER REPUBLICANS LOOK AT IT AND SAY THAT'S GOOD POLITICS, NOT INTOED? >> I'M HOPING THAT OUR PEAT WILL ULTIMATELY COME BACK TO THAT, IT MAYBE TAKE A COUPLE CYCLES, BUT PEOPLE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THEY'RE ACCOUNTABLE. WORDS MATTERS, AND WHEN YOU SUPPORT AND ENDORSE SOMEBODY WHO SAID THAT THEY WILL ONLY HONOR RESULTS IF THEY WIN, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT. >> SOMEBODY WHO HAS BEEN WALKING THIS LINE HAS BEEN MITCH McCONNELL. ON THE ONE HAND, I THINK YOU AND HIM AGREE ON SOME THING WITH TRUMP -- >> IN HIS MIND SHE WAS COMMITTING A CARDINAL SIN RELINQUISHING. WHY, HE WONDERED ALLOWS BY CONTINUING TO CONDEMNING TRUMP. JUST IGNORE HIM, LIKE I DO, IS WHAT HE SAID. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE? >> OBVIOUSLY THE IDEA WE COULD SIMPLY IGNORE DONALD TRUMP AND THE THREAT WOULD GO AWAY IS CLEARLY WRONG. I THINK LEADER McCONNELL AND LEADER McCARTHY HAVE OBVIOUSLY TAKEN SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT APPROACHES. McCARTHY HAND EMBRACED HIM, McCARTHY HAS IGNORE HIM, AND THOUGHT WE COULD GO FORWARD AS A PARTY. THAT'S CLEARLY NOT THE CASE. MY VIEW FROM THE BEGINNING, ONE OF TO REJECT INSURRECTION, WE HAVE TO REJECT WHAT HE STANDS FOR. I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE ABOUT WHICH YOU CAN MAKE A POLITICAL CALCULATION. >> HE HAD A CHANCE TO VOTE TO CONVICT DONALD TRUMP. DO YOU THINK -- HOW MUCH OF A MISTAKE HIS DECISION NOT TO VOTE TO CONVICT WAS? >> I THINK IT WAS A MISTAKE, I THINK IT WAS THE WRONG DECISION. THE FACT THAT ALL THE OF THE REPUBLICANS WHO DID NOT VOTE TO CONVICT -- SOME DID, BUT NOT ENOUGH -- YOU KNOW, WE WERE IN A SITUATION I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THAT TRIAL TAKE PLACE IMMEDIATELY. I DON'T THINK THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN HELD. I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE TO THAT DELAY OF THAT TRIAL, AND THAT WAS A MISTAKE, AND CLEARLY THIS WAS AN OFFENSE FOR WHICH HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONVICTED. >> DO YOU THINK LESS OF McCONNELL? >> HE AND I DO NOT AGREE, AND I WOULD NOT LIKE TO CHARACTERIZE IT BEYOND THAT. >>> YOU THINK YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT McCARTHY'S SPEAKERSHIP. >> LOOK, THE SPEAKER IS SECOND IN LINE TO THE PRESIDENCY. AT EVERY MOMENT SINCE FRANKLY THE AFTERMATH OF THE ELECTION IN 2020 WHEN MINORITY LEADER McCARTHY HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE RIGHT THING, HE ALWAYS SERVES HIS ACCOMPLICE CAT PURPOSE. SUCH AS THE AID TO UKRAINE, THE IDEA THAT THE PARTY WHO WILL NO LONGER SUPPORT OF UKRAINE WANT PEOPLE. FOR SOMEBODY WHO HAS THE PICTURE OF RONALD REAGAN ON HIS WALL IN CONGRESS, THE FACT HE WILL MAKE THE LEADER OF THE PRO-PUTIN WING OF MY PARTY IS A STUNNING THING. THE FACT HE'S WILLING TO GO DOWN THE PATH SUGGESTING THAT SOME ERIC WILL NO LONGER STAND FOR FREEDOM, I THINK TELLS YOU HE'S WILLING TO SACRIFICE EVERYTHING. >> DO YOU THINK THIS IS A GAME, OR IT'S AN ISOLATIONAL STREAK THAT'S ACTUALLY TAKING HOLD? >> WE CERTAINLY HAVE ISOLATIONISTS, ALSO IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AS WELL. BUT LEADERS HAVE TO LEAD. WHEN A LATE LEADER IS SUGGESTING THAT SOMEHOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL NOT SUPPORT THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, WHICH IS THE FRONT LINES FOR FREEDOM HAPPENING IN UKRAINE RIGHT NOW, AND THE NOTION HE WOULD BE WILLING TO EMBRACE THAT, TO ENABLE IT, TELLS YOU HE'S NOT FIT FOR THE OFFICE. >> WE HAVE IRAN NOW ON THE GROUND IN UKRAINE HELPING THE RUSSIANS. AT THE SAME TIME, IRAN SITS ON OPEC. OUR SUPPOSED ALLY SAUDI ARABIA, WHO DOESN'T LIKE IRAN, IS SITTING HERE MAKING DECISIONS THAT ESSENTIALLY ARE HELPING THE RUSSIANS, HELPING THE IRANIANS, HURTING THE WEST. WHAT KIND OF -- WHAT SHOULD OUR FOREIGN POLICY BE TO SAUDI ARABIA RIGHT NOW, CONSIDER THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES? >> LOOK, FIRST OF ALL, WE OUGHT TO ABSOLUTELY AND CLEARLY WALK AWAY FROM THE NEGOTIATING TABLE WITH THE IRANIANS. THE NOTION THAT THE IRANIANS ARE NOW PROVIDING THESE DRONES TO THE RUSSIANS TO USE IN UKRAINE, IF NOTHING ELSE, HAS CONVINCED US TO WALK AWAY FROM THE TABLE, THAT SHOULD. ALSO, THE RUSSIANS ARE HAVING A HARD TIME REPLENISHING THE SUPPLIES. THE SANCTIONS ARE WORKING. WE OUGHT TO DO MORE WITH SANGING AGAIN IRAN, BUT ACROSS THE BOARD, I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD WHO NO LONGER THINK THEY CAN COUNT ON THE UNITED STATES, NO LONGER THINK THEY CAN TRUST US, THAT THEY'LL STAND WITH OUR FRIENDS AND ENSURE WE'RE STANDING AGAINST OTHER ADVER SEARSES. >> THE MIDDLE EAST, THOUGH, LOOKS PROBLEMATIC FROM -- SOME OF OUR CLOSEST ALLIES ARE KIND OF NEUTRAL IN THIS WAR. ISRAEL HAS BEEN SON OF NEUTRAL, KIND OF HELPING LATE, OBVIOUSLY SAUDI ARABIA. HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM DO YOU VIEW THIS? >> IT'S A BIG PRONE, AND IT'S A PROBLEM OF LEADERSHIP. WE HAD NEED TO BE DOING MORE FASTER. WHEN KEVIN McCARTHY SUGGESTS THE REPUBLICANS ARE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT AID TO UKRAINE, THAT IS INCREDIBLY DAMAGING TO AMERICA'S STANDING IN THE WORLD, DAMAGING TO THE EFFORTS THAT THE UKRAINIANS ARE IN, WE HAVE TO BE A LEADER IN THE WORLD. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO THE DAYS OF ISOLATIONISM, WHICH HAS BEEN A THREAT EVER SINCE OF END OF WORLD WAR II. >> AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BREAK WE'LL GO DEEP INTO THE JANUARY 6th INVESTIGATION. FOR FOUR YEARS YOU WERE PUBLICLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, YOU WERE NEVER A BIG FAN, AND BUT YOU VOTED WITH HIM 93% OF THE TIME. DO YOU LOOK BACK AT ANY MOMENT, BOY, MAY I SHOULD HAVE SPOKE OUT SOONER? >> AT THE TIME, I WAS CONFRONTING HIM ON THE POLICIES WHEN I DISAGREED. THEY TENDED TO BE MOSTLY NATIONAL SECURITY POLICIES. I'M A CONSERVATIVE. I VOTED WITH HIM 93% OF THE TIME, BUT I THINK THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT HIS ELECTION AS PRESIDENT OF 2016, BEGAN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN VERY DANGEROUS FOR THIS NATION, AND WE NOW SEE HIS'S DOING EVERYTHING WITHIN HIS POWER TO STOP A PEACEFUL TRANSITION, AND CAN NEVER BE PRESIDENT AGAIN. >>> WHEN WE COME BACK, THE JANUARY 6th COMMITTEE OFFICIALLY ISSUED A SUBPOENA TO THE PRESID >>> WELCOME BACK. ON FRIDAY DONALD TRUMP WAS OFFICIALLY SUBPOENAED BY THE JANUARY 6th COMMITTEE, ORDERED TO TURN OVER DOCUMENTS AND HE'S ORDERED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE PANEL BY NOVEMBER 14th. ALL THIS CAME JUST HOURS AFTER STEVE BANNON WAS SENTENCED TO FOUR MONTHS IN PRISON FOR CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS, FOR DISOBEYING A SIMILAR SUBPOENA. THE SENTENCE WAS STAYED PENDING APPEAL. THE CONGRESSWOMAN IS BACK. YOU'VE GOT AS TO START WITH STEVE BANNON FIRST. YOU BOTH SUCCESSFULLY SHOWED THAT YOUR SUBPOENAS WERE ENF ENFORCEABLE AND WILL SERVE TIME. >> STEVE BANNON IS A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO CLEARLY HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE. HE ACTUALLY, AS YOU'VE SEEN, WAS CONVICTED OF CONTEMPT, AND SENTENCED TO PRISON. OTHERS HAVE COME IN FRONT OF COMMITTEE AND TAKEN THE FIFTH, AND I THINK IT LEAD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO ASK, WHAT IS IT THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE ATTEMPTING TO HIGH? >> YOU ISSUED THE SUBPOENA. I ASSUME YOU'LL LET IT PLAY OUT. WHAT HAPPENS ON NOVEMBER 5th IF YOU DON'T HAVE MATERIALS. >> WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT THE FORMER PRESIDENT WILL UNDERSTAND HI LEGAL OBLIGATION AND COMPLY WITH THE SUBPOENA. WE MADE IT CLEAR, IF HE INTENDS TO TAKE THE FIFTH, HE ALL TO ALERT US AHEAD OF TIME. I WOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE EVERYTHING TO READ THE LETTER THAT ACCOMPANIES THE SUBPOENA. UNDERSTANDING WHAT A GRAVE AND SERIOUS SITUATION THIS IS, THE COMMITTEE TOOK GREAT -- MADE A GREAT EFFORT TO LAY OUT IN THE LETTER ITSELF THE SPECIFIC INFORMATION WE HAVE GATHERED IN DONALD TRUMP'S ROLE IN THIS PLAN TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION. >> IS THE COMMITTEE OPEN TO HIS SUPPOSED OFFER, OR AT LEAST BEHIND THE SCENES OFF OF GOING LIVE ON TELEVISION? >> THE COMMITTEE TREATS THIS MATTER WITH GREAT SERIOUSNESS. WE ARE GOING TO PROCEED, IN TERMS OF THE QUESTIONING OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT UNDER OATH. IT MAKE TAKE MULTIPLE DAYS, AND IT WILL BE DONE WITH A LEVEL OF RIGOR, DISCIPLINE AND SERIOUSNESS IT DESERVES. WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW THE FORMER PRESIDENT TO TURN THIS INTO A CIRCUS. THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE HIS FIRST DEBADE AGAINST JOE BIDEN AND THE CIRCUS THAT BECAME. THIS IS FAR TOO SET OF ISSUES. WE HAVE MADE CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT HIS OBLIGATIONS ARE, AND WE PROCEEDING WITH THAT SET OUT. >> IF YOU DON'T GET COOPERATION FROM HIM, DO YOU HAVE TIME FOR THIS LEGAL FIGHT? >> WE HAVE MANY ALTERNATIVES WE WILL CONSIDER IF THE FORMER PRESIDENT DECIDES HE IS NOT GOING TO COMPLY WITH HIS LEGAL OBLIGATION, A LEGAL OBLIGATION EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN HAS TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA. >> THERE WAS NEWS FROM A JUDGE THIS WEEK ON WHAT E-MAILS FROM JOHN EASTMAN NEED TO BE TURNED OVER. SOME WOULD AND YOU HAVE YOU'VE MADE A CIRCUMSTANTIAL CASE, BUT THIS MAYBE BE SOMETHING HE SIGNED SOMETHING THAT HE KNOWINGLY WAS FALSE. >> WHAT WE HAVE LAID OUT IN A NUMBER OF INSTANCES INCLUDES THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE MANY HIMSELF, THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, HIS MOST SENIOR OFFICIALS TALKING ABOUT HIS PERSONAL AND DIRECT INVOLVEMENT. WE KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM HIS OWN ACTIONS AND HIS OWN INACTIONS WHAT HEY FAILED TO DO WHILE THE ATTACK WAS UNDERWAY. IT APPEARS FROM JUDGE CARTERS'S LATEST DECISION THAT THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF SIGNED INFORMATION THAT HE KNEW TO BE FALSE AND SUBMIT THAT HAD TO A FEDERAL COURT. I THINK IT'S ONE MORE PIECE WE HAVE SEEN OF A PRESIDENT WHO FUNDAMENTALLY DOES NOT BELIEVE HE HAS AN OBLIGATION TO ABIDE BY THE LAW OR ABIDE BY THE RULINGS OF THE COURTS AND DEMONSTRATES HOW SERIOUS IT IS. >> I'M NOT ASKING TO INFLUENCE ANY ATTORNEY. WHAT CRIME DO YOU BELIEVE HE COMMITTED? >> I BELIEVE THERE ARE MULTIPLE CRIMINAL OFFENSES. I DON'T WANT TO GET IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE, BUT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY TO RECOGNIZE, WHEN YOU ARE FACED WITH A SET OF FACTS, WITH EVIDENCE AS CLEAR AS THIS IS -- SOME HAVE SAID, WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS INTENT WAS. MAYBE HE REALLY THOUGHT HE WON THE ELECTION. WE ACTUALLY KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. BUT EVEN IF -- EVEN IF HE THOUGHT HE HAD WON, YOU MAY NOT SEND AN ARMED MOB TO THE CAPITOL. YOU MAY NOT SIT FOR 187 MINUTES AND REFUSE TO STOP THE ATTACK WHILE IT'S UNDERWAY, YOU MAY NOT SEND OUT A TWEET THAT INCITES FURTHER VIOLENCE. WE HAVE BEEN CLEAR ABOUT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CRIMINAL ISSUES THAT ARE AT ISSUE HERE. IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUST DETERMINES HAS THE EVIDENCE AND THEY MAKE A DECISION NOT TO PROSECUTOR, I THINK THAT CALLS INTO QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE A NATION OF LAWS. >> THEY HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES THEY'RE DEALING WITH THAT MAY BE CRIMINAL WHEN IT COMES TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT. IF THEY MAKE THE DECISION TO CHARGE HIM ON THE MAR-A-LAGO CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT SITUATION, BECAUSE PERHAPS IT'S AN EASIER CASE AND PROSECUTOR AND THEY DON'T CHOOSE TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD, DO YOU FIND THAT TO BE A MISTIKE? >> I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE PROFESSIONALS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THAT THEY ARE TAKING SERIOUSLY THEIR OBLIGATIONS WITH RESPECT TO EVERY ASPECT OF THE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT BY THE FORMER PRESIDENT. LET'S JUST HAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE PAUSE ON THAT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE INSTANCES OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT. >> SEPARATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. >> RIGHT. >> I'M CURE WITH YOU ABOUT SOMETHING IN HISTORY THAT MAY HAVE MISTAKENLY GUIDED OUR VIEWS OF HISTORY, GERALD FORD'S PARDON OF NIXON. IF NIXON THIS NICED PROSECUTION, DO YOU THINK THE COUNTRY WOULD BE MORE OPEN TO DEALING WITH TRUMP IN THE SAME WAY. >> PRESIDENT FORD PROMISED PRESIDENT NIXON AFTER PRESIDENT NIXON HAD RESIGNED FROM OFFICE AND LEFT. I THINK IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION TO MAKE. PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTINUING TO GLORIFY THE PEOPLE WHO ATTACKED THE CAPITOL. HE CONTINUE TO SAY SAY THE THINGS HE KNOWS CAUSED VIOLENCE. >> RICHARD NIXON NEVER ADMITTED CULPABILITY, THOUGH GERALD FORD INSISTED -- >> HE RESIGNED FROM OFFICE, BUT LOOK, WE'VE NEVER IN HISTORY HAD A PRESIDENT DO WHAT DONALD TRUMP DID AND FRANKLY CONTINUES TO DO. WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT SERIOUSLY. >> YOU, AMONG POLITICIANS, HAVE YOU HAD A UNIQUE EXPERIENCE. YOU WERE EXTRAORDINARILY DEMONIZED BY THE LEFT. >> I DON'T REMEMBER THAT TIME, CHUCK. [ LAUGHTER ] >> WHAT HAS THAT EXPERIENCE BEEN LIKE FOR YOU? >> LOOK, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH SORT OF THE FACTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US. MY VIEW IS THE JOB THAT I HAVE TO DO RIGHT NOW AND THAT I HAVE HAD TO, ESPECIALLY AS SOON AS JANUARY 6th, IS SO IMPORTANT THAT REALLY IS MY FOCUS. I THINK THAT WE HAVE SEEN ACROSS THE COUNTRY, CERTAINLY SEEN ON OUR COMMITTEE COMING TOGETHER PEOPLE DESPITE PARTISAN DIFFERENCES, TO SAY THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THE DEFENSE OF THE REPUBLIC. I'VE BEEN EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED AND VERY SAD BY THE RESPONSE TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. I TRULY BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE CHIPS WERE DOWN, PEOPLE WOULD DO THE RIGHT THING. IT TURNS OUT NOT MANY DO. >> YOU HAVE SAID YOU WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKE TO PREVENT DONALD TRUMP FROM GETTING BACK TO THE OFFENSIVELY OFFICE. >> THERE'S VERY FEW CERTAINTIES IN POLITICS, BUT ONE THING YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY COUNT ON IS THAT THERE ARE TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHO WILL DO EVERYTHING WE NEED TO DO TO MAKE SURE DONALD TRUMP IS NEVER THE PRESIDENT AGAIN. THE THREAT HE POSES IS TOO GREAT. HE'S DEMONSTRATED HIS WILLINGNESS TO USE FORCE TO ATTEMPT TO STOP THE PEACEFUL TRANSITION OF POWER, AND THERE ARE SIMPLY MILLIONS MORE AMERICANS WHO, DESPITE ANY PARTY AFFILIATION, UNDERSTAND HOW DANGEROUS THOSE, AND WILL MAKE SURE HE'S NEVER IN THE ORLANDO -- OVAL OFFICE AGAIN. >> >> HOW DO YOU BRING A COUNTRY BACK TOGETHER. ? WE SEE THIS DIVISION, SEAL IT IN OUR OWN POLLS. IT SEE VERY DIFFICULT. HOW WOULD YOU TRY TO BRIDGE IN DIVIDE? >> I EXPERIENCE A UNITY EVERY DAY, AS I TRAVEL AROUND THE COUNTRY, AS I WORK WITH COLLEAGUES ON CAPITOL HILL. THERE ARE RESPONSIBLE AND RATIONAL AND SANE PEOPLE IN BOTH PARTIES WHO WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COUNTRY AND WHO WANT TO ELECTION POLITICIANS WHO ARE GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING, WHO WANT TO SEE ELECTED OFFICIALS ENGAGE ON THE BASIS OF SUBSTANCE AND POLICY DIFFERENCE. NOT MINIMIZE THE DIFFERENCES, BUT ENGAGE ON THE BASIS OF THAT. SO I'VE BEEN HAVE I HEARTENED BY THE UNITY I HAVE SEEN. SO MANY PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO SAY STOP, WE CANNOT GO OVER THIS ABYSS. >> DONALD TRUMP ENDS UP THE NOM NEAR IN 2024, YOU'VE SAID YOU WON'T BE A REPUBLICAN ANYMORE, SO IT IMPLIES YOU THINK THE PARTY CAN BE SAVED. >> I THINK THE PARTY HAS TO COME BACK FROM WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS A DANGEROUS AND TOXIC PLACE, OR THE PARTY WILL SPLINTER AND THERE WILL BE A NEW CONSERVATIVE PARTY THAT RISES. IF DONALD TRUMP IS THE NOMINEE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE PARTY WILL SHATTER, AND THERE WILL BE A CONSERVATIVE PARTY THAT RISES IN ITS PLACE. >> I WAS WITH A VOTER GROUP THIS WEEK WHO BOTH WERE EXHAUSTED BY THE JANUARY 6th COMMITTEE, AND WANTED TO SEE YOU IN FOR PRESIDENT. WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR YOU TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT? >> I'M GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON ALL THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. I CARE DEEPLY, AS I KNOW YOU DO, AS MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO ABOUT THIS NATION AND ABOUT THE BLESSING WE HAVE AN A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. WHETHER THAT MEANS HELPING OTHER CANDIDATES, HELPING TO EDUCATE PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY, YOU'VE BEEN ON A NUMBER OF COLLEGE CAMPUSES, VERY INSPIRED BY THE YOUNG PEOPLE, BUT I'M FOCUSED ON WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO SAVE THE COUNTRY FROM THIS VERY DANGEROUS MOMENT WE'RE IN, NOT RIGHT NOW ON WHETHER I'M GOING TO BE A CANDIDATE OR NOT. >> SOME PEOPLE SUGGEST IF HE WOULD BE A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE IT WILL BY ENOUGH TO STOP TRUMP. >> WE'LL SO WHATEVER IT TAKES. >>> THIS INVESTIGATION HAS AN EXPIRATION DATE IF REPUBLICANS TAKE CONTROL. THERE'S NO REPORT OUT BEFORE THE ELECTION. I KNOW YOU, ON THE ONE HAND, WANT TO TAKE POLITICIAN OUT. SHOULD THE DECISION TO CONTINUE THIS INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE ON THE BALLOT? >> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO TAKE POLITICS OUT OF IT. THE COMMITTEE IS INVESTIGATING IN A WAY THAT'S NOT PARTISAN AT ALL. I THINK AS PEOPLE GO IN TO VOTE, THEY NEED TO RECOGNIZE THERE ARE CERTAIN CANDIDATES WHO ARE ANTI-DEMOCRAT CITY. THEY NEED TO RECOGNIZE THERE ARE ELECTION DEIERS AND THEY SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR THOSE PEOPLE. >>> WHERE DOES THIS INVESTIGATION GO? >> IF WE WERE IN POLITICS THE WAY IT SHOULD, IT WOULD PROCEED. I THINK REPUBLICANS ARE NOT INTERESTED IN HOLDING PEOPLE TO ACCOUNT, AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT AMERICANS ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO. WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENED?
