[Sciutto:] We're now just minutes away from hearing from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Will she address when she might send articles of impeachment on to the Senate? We will soon see. For now, according to a source, my next guest is in talks to possibly be on the president's defense team during a Senate trial. With me now, Republican Congressman Mike Johnson of Louisiana. Congressman, we appreciate you taking the time this morning.
[Rep. Mike Johnson:] Hey, Jim. Great to be with you.
[Sciutto:] So it's our understanding that you met with White House Counsel Pat Cipollone yesterday along with Representative Jim Jordan and John Ratcliffe, under consideration to be on the president's defense team. Is that accurate? And would you accept such a role?
[Johnson:] You know, I'm really not at liberty to talk about that. I would be delighted to serve on the defense team. I feel very strongly in the president's case, and if he asked me to serve in that capacity, I certainly would but
[Sciutto:] OK.
[Johnson:] there's really I don't have much more to talk about it this morning.
[Sciutto:] OK. You heard the Senate majority leader make his case to the floor, and you know that he is opposing any witnesses being called during a Senate trial. I want to play the Senate majority leader, 20 years ago, on CNN when a Democratic president faced impeachment, his position on witnesses in a Senate trial then, and then get your reaction. Have a listen.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell:] Every other impeachment has had witnesses, it's not unusual to have witnesses in a trial. And I think we're handling this in exactly the appropriate way under the Constitution, and it will end soon.
[Sciutto:] Why were Republicans in favor of witnesses in a Senate trial when a Democratic president faced impeachment, but not when President Trump is facing impeachment?
[Johnson:] Probably for the same reason that Chuck Schumer had the opposition position during the Clinton trial. Look, these are political exercises. And I think Mitch McConnell has said that very clearly. He said it frankly yesterday. You could play a game tape, he said, from 20 years ago on both sides, and both sides would probably be on the opposite side of the issue. I think the important point that he made this morning was, that Adam Schiff has made a mess
[Sciutto:] Can you make a principled argument? Can you make a principled argument? I know it's easy to say politics is politics, but can you make a principled argument for why the American people should not hear from the president's advisors, who have direct knowledge of his decision-making on Ukraine? Why shouldn't Americans have that chance?
[Johnson:] Jim, I don't oppose it. I mean, I would be in favor of a lengthy trial because I think the president has a should get a chance to put his case on. But I think what Senator McConnell's saying, is that Adam Schiff and the Democrats made a mess of their case. They rushed this thing through because they were breathless in its sense of urgency, and they put together their best case and it's falling apart. And so now they've got to redo it. And Chuck Schumer wants to basically fix the mess that they created. I don't think he'll have an opportunity to do that.
[Sciutto:] Let's get to the heart of the allegation at the center of this, and some claims that are made by you and other members of the Republican Party. You, for instance, have said repeatedly that the president was merely guaranteeing that U.S. aid to Ukraine was being used properly. I want to quote from a letter from the Under Secretary of Defense John Rood. He wrote Congress in May of this year, two months before that presidential phone call, that the Pentagon, quote, "certified that the government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability." They certified that the aid was going to the right places and should go. Why was it then justified for the president to take aid away from an ally at war with Russia if the Pentagon certified it?
[Johnson:] The president is the commander in chief. He is the top commanding officer of the U.S. armed forces by the way, our constitutional republic is set up, 63 million Americans voted to give him that responsibility and the oversight ultimately of the use of precious American
[Sciutto:] Did they give him the right
[Johnson:] taxpayer dollars overseas.
[Sciutto:] to delay that aid for personal political favor?
[Johnson:] That's not what happened here. I don't think that's what happened. When he
[Sciutto:] Oh.
[Johnson:] in the famous phone call of July 25th, he said, "Do us a favor," talking about the country.
[Sciutto:] Wow.
[Johnson:] He ran on an American first
[Sciutto: I -- Johnson:] America first priority and platform and theme, and that's what he's been consistent about. He wants to make sure
[Sciutto:] Well, as you know
[Johnson:] that our taxpayer dollars aren't
[Sciutto:] multiple advisors
[Johnson:] squandered overseas.
[Sciutto:] Multiple advisors testified under oath that there was a direct connection to investigating the Bidens. I want to ask you about something else. Because what's going on right now
[Johnson:] That was their conjecture and speculation, Jim, that's what they said under oath. There's only one direct witness, and it's Sondland.
[Sciutto:] The president's appointed E.U. ambassador, who used the words "quid pro quo," as I know you heard. But I do want to ask you because something's going on right now. The president's personal attorney returned from Ukraine once again. He says he's gathered a whole host of information relevant to investigating the Bidens. This is one of the people Rudy Giuliani met with in Ukraine. He is a member of the Ukrainian parliament, pro-Russian, who trained with the KGB. Is this a reliable source of information for investigating a U.S. citizen and the former vice president?
[Johnson:] I don't know anything about that. It's the first I've heard of it. Rudy Giuliani's a private citizen, he can travel anywhere he wants and investigate anything he wants. We also heard a rumor he was in Ukraine to film a documentary film. I mean, I don't know, but that's not relevant to the impeachment that happened on this House floor just last night. It's
[Sciutto:] He interviewed this guy and he's got a picture of him, meeting with him on Facebook. So it's not made up.
[Johnson:] Well, I mean, OK. That really doesn't have much to do with what we're doing here. And last night was an absolute tragedy. I think Mitch McConnell was right in his comments this morning, that the Democrats have opened a Pandora's box. Because you have to think about this a few years down the road. What happens, Jim, when there's a Democrat in the Oval Office and a Republican majority in the House? The Republican base around the country will begin to demand impeachment as soon as that president makes a decision or a policy position or a statement that they don't like. Because the bar has now been set so low, they have cheapened impeachment, as the president said. And that's of great concern for the republic and it should not be lost in all these discussions today.
[Sciutto:] Congressman Mike Johnson, we appreciate you joining the program this morning.
[Johnson:] Thank you, Jim. Appreciate it.
[Harlow:] Well, that was a fascinating interview. He's in favor of a lengthy trial. I wonder if
[Sciutto:] It is. He did say that he would support witnesses being called
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] that's notable.
[Harlow:] Yes, I thought so too, Jim. OK. At any moment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will speak. She will take reporter questions. This, after she's refused to commit to sending articles of impeachment directly to the Senate. Will she give some clarity on that today? Stay right here.