house managers said yes. they could rapidly move through a trial and bring the case to the senate and have it only partially investigated and then try to use the power of the senate to block the executive branch from ever going to court to resolve any issue. that has not been done in the past, nor should it be. the president, like every other citizen of the united states, should have access to the courts, and it is not grounds for contempt of congress to not -- to block the president from ever trying to go to court to resolve issues that need to be resolved. every other president has had that right. this one should have had that right as well. this tale that president trump thinks he's a king and doesn't want to follow the law begs reality. let me remind everyone of the mueller investigation. 2,800 subpoenas that were done over two and a half years. 500 witnesses including the president's, many of the president's inner circle. all of those were provided. none of those were blocked by the administration. and a

he house will be in order. he house will be in order. the house will be in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. scott: we know that union members make higher salaries, work in safer workplace, nonunion members benefit from the high salaries. children will actually do better. vote against the motion to recommit and for the pro act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion to recommit. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from is recognized. >> may we have a recorded vote, please. the speaker pro tempore: recorded vote has been requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. paul d. ryan -- pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, this five-minute vote on recommit will be followed by five-minute votes on h.r. 2474 if ordered and agreeing to house resolution 826. this is a five-minute vote.

house democrats argued that anytime the speaker speaker invokes the house sole power of impeachment the president must do whatever the house demands. no questions asked. invoking executive branch privileges in response to how subpoenas becomes an impeachable offense at trial. here's how chairmanship put it back in october quote any action, any action that forces us toga litigate after consider litigation will be evidence of his -- obstruction of justice. that mr. president is nonsense impeachment. that is nonsense. impeachment is not some magical constitutional trump card that melts away the separation between the branches of government. the framers did not leave a constitutional steamroller that anyone somehow overlooked for 20030 years. when congress subpoenas the executive branch officials with questions of privilege the two sides either reach an accommodation or they go to court. that's the way it works. so can you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot? how would democrats and the press have responded if house republicans had told president obama we don't want to litigate our s

corporate housing -- interim housing into one bucket. it does serve a need. i mean, we're on the verge of a global pandemic and we'll need travel nurses here. a lot of them can't rent from those larger corporations because i charge less money for my rental than the bigger players do. >> thank you for those comments. supervisor safye and i were having a sidebar about the need between now and next week or whenever there may be more hearings on this, to clarify the less than nine-unit definition and so i think i hear what you're saying and we can clarify that. >> it's a duplex but the building is from 1900. >> very helpful, thank you. >> thank you, supervisors. i'm paula mallard and i'm with synergy housing. synergy has spawned from oakwood global housing that existed for 60 years. representing corporate housing, i'm also somebody who has been affected by the limited demand -- limited supply, high demand in san francisco and also family in the east bay. so there are many, many items that impact that, not just furnished housing. what i'm her

standards of housing. these office block conversions are housing on the cheap. in harlow, the council have now given themselves the power to block a number of office to residential conversions. 0ther councils are doing the same. what we really should be doing is investing in social housing, which actually is the only answer to the national housing emergency that we are in. ijust hope and wish that the people who are in those buildings have the shortest stay possible for them and they can move out and carry on with their lives in a more positive way. the government have announced they are launching a review into the quality of homes converted under permitted development rights. but they say they are committed to delivering the homes in this country needs and office conversions are playing an important part in making this a reality. so tens of thousands of people are likely to be living in converted buildings like this for years to come. a very warm welcome to bbc news. my name is mike embley. our top storie

that is housing. the lack of a portal housing is a growing crisis in every region of this country and communities of all sizes. wages have not kept up with the cost of living. especially the cost of rent. as a result, more and more americans are struggling to make ends meet. many are falling short and ending up without a proper roof over their head. every day, more than 6000 americans are evicted. many of them are families with children. 600,000iven day, about americans are homeless across our country. we just cannot accept that. >> here, here. fmr. mayor bloomberg: in december president trump tweeted that fixing homelessness would be "so easy, with confidence". let's say that competent is not his administration's strong suit. [laughter] the truth is, they have not even tried. the only time president trump mentions homeless people is when he is attacking them. but that is our for the course with this president. attack and divide, and a compass nothing. meanwhile, president trump has slashed funding fo

to get housing. we protected tenants like never before, finally outlawing discrimination against people who have housing vouchers. [applause] gov. newsom: we created a permanent fund to provide legal assistance to at-risk tenants. and historically, we worked together to crack down on rent spikes and unjust evictions, passing the nation's strongest statewide renter protection. [applause] gov. newsom: that was a big deal, folks. that was a big deal. and thanks to your leadership, last year, i was privileged to sign 18 bills to boost housing production. but time and time again, bigger, bolder reform. it hasn't happened, in part, legitimately in part because of concerns that are not make-believe. many of our lowest income residents, understandably, worry about being pushed out of their communities because of gentrification. middle-class homeowners, they worry about their single-family home losing its value. it's a scary prospect. given the house is often the family's biggest asset. those are real concern

we are not building enough housing. i get cities need to meet their housing goals in a way that matches their community. doing nothing is no longer an option. >> i can't be. [ applause [ applause ] as a former mayor, i respect local control but not at the cost of creating two california class system. not at the cost of impairing the california dreams. that's what we are doing. we have to wake up to this reality. [ applause ] we got to strike up our game. we got to wake up our community so people can spending more r time with their family and less time in traffic. this is a commitment. right now this year to major reform that'll eliminate red tape and delays for building critically needed housing like affordable multi family homes especially near transits and downtown. [ applause [ applause [ applause ] i am committed to working with the leaders. our objectives are clear. increase in the way that promotes affordability and inclusion. increase certainty, units pl planned becomes units built. a whole local government accou

the house manager brough house s up frequently. lieutenant colonel vindman admitted on the testimony he did not know if there was a crime or anything of that nature, that is his quote, but again he had deep policy concerns. so, there you have it. the real issue is policy disputes. elections have consequences, and we all know that. and if you do not like the policies and the particular administration or a particular candidate, you are welcome to prefer anothevote for another c. the answer is elections, not impeachment. to be clear, and our country in the united states, the president elected by the american people is in the words of the supreme court, the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations and foreign policy for the government. no unelected bureaucrat, not unhappy members of the house of representatives, and however you are defining high crimes and misdemeanors, there is no definition that includes disagreeing with a policy decision as an acceptable ground for the removal of the president of

[laughter] my house is the yellow house that you see there, and 617, the house is at the back. and both those houses, the house you can see right at the corner, both those houses were built in 1907. one was built in the year, mine was in the front, and that's how it stayed for over a hundred years. when i got the house, as you can see here, the front of the house still looked from what it was in 1907. you can see straight through the house. it's a small house. i have two little bedrooms in the front. and i have kept the character and the fabric of the neighborhood. when i moved in, there was an illegal part of my house which we didn't know about, which was undisclosed to us, which was built in 1970 illegally. and this is the part where you see the windows. and we worked tirelessly with the planning department, you guys told us to do this, and we built our house with our money. and basically this is the only window that gives light in the house. so the rest of the house basically is dark. those windows are taken away. this is the view from my house. and as you can see, we worked

housing? we're in a housing crisis. you're planning commissioners. you oversee the planning department. plan. we have a crisis. plan for that crisis and get this housing built now. you know, it's boggling to me that in a time when people are living on the streets, that we're not doing everything in our power to get as many roofs built over people's heads. so please consider rezoning this area for housing in addition to other uses. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> i'm shap shane o'connor. i'm, like, right on 101 and couldn't be closer to the bayview without living there. i have a business called gardenville station on gerald avenue boarding kirkwood and it's 150-year-old building and probably the oldest building in the bit. it has had many, many lives. what we do with it now is we have it set up as office space for small design built businesses and, also, there's a good sized woodshop and we have outdoor work space and shipping containers that get used as studio space. we proba

shabby, shabby public housing but that is good housing means that it's available for people in those neighborhoods that also can be attractive to people outside of those neighborhoods. and so that would be different from building it in the so-called good neighborhoods now where african-americans are expected to uproot and leave. and i think that's not just cities. that's in suburbs. we now know that the majority of black people live in the suburbs, 60 percent. and so i think you know, i think that there's the placement and i thinkthat if , if we're talking about the building of something like this in our society as it's currently constituted, i think the issues around enforcement of civil rights laws and a commitment to integrated living spaces has to be followed through upon. and the original public housing that was created in 37 had an opportunity to do that. and there were explicit rules that kind of puts people in different kinds of housing. again, because of the concerns about property values and real estate and where black people were living. so i think those kinds of things ar

the russian process in the house. and why there is enough time to give the president a fair hearing. the words were repeated on video clips shown during this trial. urgent. urgency. what is happened to that urgency once the house started. did that speaker then rush the papers. so that it can be addressed for this imminent threat. hardly. speaker pelosi failed or held the articles for more than a month. if this trial was so urgent, why not send the articles without delay. then i might conclude by withholding the articles, the speaker exposed that she didn't believe this case was so urgent. perhaps it was an effort to influence our procedural decisions. madam president, i do not have motives here. i will prohibit me from doing so. i nearly and noting an obvious change for whatever reason and as i consider the high bar of impeachment tomorrow, i will vote not to convict. i will do so because there's not overwhelming evidence. because no high crimes are shown, because there is not a broad consensus among my countrymen onl

when house democrats say that we are fighting to lower health care costs, when house democrats say we are fighting to strengthen the affordable care act, when house democrats say we are fighting to protect more than 100 million americans with pre-existing conditions, we mean it. and we mean it because children like your daughter and we are just not fighting on a democratic or republican issue this is an american issue. it's a life-or-death issue and that's why we are committed. health care, health care, health care on behalf of every day americans. let me now yield for any questions. [indiscernible question] mr. jeffries: we are willing to work with republicans to strengthen the affordable care act which is the law that is currently in place. and the notion that senator mcconnell, senate republicans, house republicans and president trump would somehow come up with a magical plan to protect people with pre-existing conditions when they have been determined for 10 years to repeal the affordable care act and we don't see an alternative plan. they don't have a plan to repeal and replace t

the top leader of the majority party in the house is the speaker of the house. susan: before we delve into history, i want our audience to know who they are listening to. you are teaching at catholic university. what courses do you teach? professor green: i teach introduction to american politics. i also teach courses on political institutions. i teach a class on american congress. i teach a class called power in american politics. we talk about the executive branch and the legislative branch. we talk about trump's election, why that happened and the politics that surround the trump presidency. susan: how did you get into teaching and join the academy? professor green: my father was a history professor. i ended up after college going to capitol hill and working as a legislative aid for a number of years. i ended up combining my interest in academia with my fascination and love for legislative politics into the job i have now. susan: what period of time were you on the hill? professor green: 1993 to 1988. -- 1998. i do not know how close i got. i was not working

when the house and the president could not reach an accommodation, the house failed to compel testimony and document production. the house actually withdrew a subpoena seeking testimony from dr. charles, a national security aid once he went to court for guidance. and the house chose not to issue a subpoena to john bolton, the national security advisor whom the house had identified as the key witness. at a minimum, the house should have pursued the full extent of its own remedies before bringing impeachment charges, including by seeking the assistance of a neutral third-party, the judicial branch. in making these choices, the house substituted political preference for speed over finality. the house managers described impeachment as a last resort for the congress. in this case, however, the house chose to skip the basic steps of judicial adjudication. instead, left straight to impeachment as the first resort. therefore, i will vote to acquit on article ii. madam president, this decision is not about whether you like or dislike this president or agree with or oppose his policies, or approv

when the house voted to impeach him. when they passed the articles of impeachment against president clinton. mostly party line. just a few crossovers. but when those articles of impeachment went over to the u.s. senate and they had to vote there on whether or not to convict him and remove him from office, just like it was with president andrew johnson in the previous century, the exact same pattern held. no member of president clinton's own party would cast a vote to actually convict him on any of the articles of impeachment and there by remove him from office. so now we are in our third century as country. our national miss such things is apparently that we get one presidential impeachment per century. and today, as the 21st century impeachment trial of president donald trump came to a close, it ended with a surprise, a historical twist. of course it takes a 2/3 vote in the senate, a large super majority vote in the senate to convict a president on articles of impeachment and remove him from office. impeachments are rar

we need once a month. >> from school, you can't get out of the house and senate or the white house and sign it. >> we are focused on not just getting it done on the house but also getting it in fron t of th president's desk. well, we want to get action on those. a lot of those are new hampshire consent but also in the senate that every senator has democrats and republicans. we'll show and we'll start and work with senators and build a unanimous consent over the senate. >> we are going to bring it here in the house. now, let's see if we can pair them up with members of the house and get it done. let's get it out of the house and get it to the president's desk. >> they agree to it and it comes back to you. any bills that we have identified 14 of them, and a sub component of them and bills that are widely supported. american people want to get something done. first call is a democratic from your district, in new york. linda. go ahead. >> yes, good morning. i have a couple of comments. better than that, i have a question about a friend of mine just last night told me that she's done a medi

over in the house. a question to be asked. in the fast track impeachment process in the house of representatives, the house majority persuade the american not just partisans, but rather, did the house's case win over the overwhelming majority and consensus of the american people? the question fairly to be asked. i cast my vote -- why cast my v remove the president of the united states when not a single vote in the republican party was persuaded. in contrast, when i was hear last week, i noticed in the record of these proceedings that in the nixon impeachment, the house vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry was 410 to 4. in the clinton impeachment, divisive, controversial, 31 democrats voted in favor of the impeachment inquiry. here, of course, and in sharp contrast, the answer is none. it is said that we live in highly, and perhaps hopelessly, partisan times. it is said that no one is open to persuasion anymore. they're getting their news entirely from their favorite media platform, and that platfor

when the house and the president could not reach an accommodation, the house failed to compel testimony and document production. the house actually withdrew a subpoena seeking testimony from kupperman, a national security aide, once he went to court for guidance. issue ae chose not to subpoena to john bolton, the national security advisor whom the house has identified as the key witness. at a minimum the house should have pursued the full extent of its own remedies before bringing impeachment charges including by seeking the -- via systems of a neutral third party, the judicial branch. in making these choices, the d its ownstitute political preference for speed over finality. the house managers described impeachment as a last resort for congress. houses case, however, the chose to skip the basic steps of judicial adjudication and instead led straight to impeachment as the first resource -- resort. therefore i will vote to acquit on article two. decisionsident, this is not about whether you like or dislike this president or agree with or oppose his policies. disapprove of his conduct in

build that housing. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: i wasn't here decades ago when we imposed restrictive laws to prevent more housing, but i will be here when we start build housing in san francisco and the bay area again. it is time. so here's what i want the next decade to look like. i want this to be the decade where we no longer walk by a person shooting up or a person who's shouting out of control or suffering on our streets and shrug our shoulders or turn away and wonder, what should we do? i am determined over the next four years to take in people with addiction and mental health problems so that when you encounter someone in need, you can make a call and know that person will get the help they need. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: as i said before, compassion can no longer mean anything goes. i want this to be the decade when residents and visitors to our city can enjoy every neighborhood every single day without fear of crime or unacceptable behavior. we have what we know is one of th

as folks know, about 65% of of y how housing is rental housing. one out of three tenant households are severe housing programs. 30,000 units of our housing is considered subsidized to be permanently affordable. 60% of tenants live in rent-controlled buildings. that adds up to 139 million households that are low or moderate income. in this most recent year, we have had a little over 2600 eviction lawsuits filing and about 581 default judgments have been entered. the sheriff's department has been given 926 court orders to he convict just to give you an idea of what that looks like -- to evict, just to give you an idea of what that looks like. outreach can be provided by attorneys, sometimes by other peer counselors. we provide alternative dispute resolution, which we have found to be especially helpful in cases where individuals are living in subsidized housing often overseen by our nonprofit housing providers and direct financial assistance, ongoing emergency rental assistance and sometimes emergency rental assistance. so briefly, before we launch

and if it can't be that way and the only option is no housing, that's fine with me. that's an anti-housing position. >> yeah and i would look straight at the top if i could, if i do magic wand. >> it is going to require federal help. a san francisco advocate told me that years ago. as every year passes i hear more and more people say it, our housing and homeless issues are simply too large to be tackled on a local level. but as you see on your ballot we keep trying. >> but unfortunately we are going in the opposite direction. whenever there is less and less money coming from the federal government. the trump administration wants to put less money into hud and we lose more and more affordable housing every year and yet we get the same thing. >> what i find fascinating is they're trying to reject what's going to happen in 20 years. go back to 2000. nobody knew tech was going to be as big as its right now in this area. 20 years from now, flip a coin and tell me what is going to be like. >> you mentioned is going to be a task force answered of the conglomerate groups in

house e of the is here on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, dr. lance watson, st. paul's baptist church,, richmond, virginia. the chaplain: let us pray, we gather today in this house of representatives and the people's house to acknowledge that you alone are sovereign. thank you we share in a nation where life, liberty and happiness, are rights which we hold as self-evident. we praise you for the responsibility we have to do justice, love, mercy and walk humbly with you. give us the power to find need to meet them, find problems and solve them, find hurts and heal them. for every elected official, we ask the blessings of civility, truth, wisdom and grace. amid diversity, embrace unity. open our hearts, courage and imagination that we might envision a b

and he said the house wasn't for rent. and then the amount of money kept going up and up, and... >> really? >> ...so, finally, he rented the house. >> and so the blackburns -- in reality, the barkers -- move in to the neighborhood. george albright, a lifelong lake weir resident, remembers the stories his grandfather told about the tiny town's newest residents. >> the blackburns immersed themselves into the community very quickly. they got to know people around town. she went to church here, apparently gave very generously, so the locals embraced 'em. >> but two months after their arrival, up in chicago, on january 8, 1935, the g-men get a bead on ma's whereabouts when they arrest her older son and fellow gang member arthur "doc" barker and search his apartment. >> they actually found a map that had ocklawaha, florida, in it, and they determined that that's where ma barker and fred barker were holing up. ♪ >> eight days later, january 16th. 15 armed fbi agents surround the lake house. what are they prepared to do? >> they

the fact is, we had not done enough to build housing so that we have what we need to get people housed. we just haven't. so here in the city we are lucky because people care about making sure people are housed. the 600 million-dollar affordable housing bond passed by voters will be a great opportunity to invest in building more affordable housing , but we can't build it fast enough. so having access to the abigail, having access to the post street -- post street site and the bristol where there is another step up housing, those are so important to getting people housed now. so i just want to thank everyone who is here today and all of your work that sometimes escapes under the radar and people are not completely familiar with everything that goes into making an opportunity like this possible. it is appreciated, it's going to make a difference for 89 people at post street and 62 people right here at the abigail. it's going to make a difference for so many people and i'm so grateful we have this opportunity to do just that today. how the person who has helped in our efforts to move the n

the fact is, we had not done enough to build housing so that we have what we need to get people housed. we just haven't. so here in the city we are lucky because people care about making sure people are housed. the 600 million-dollar affordable housing bond passed by voters will be a great opportunity to invest in building more affordable housing , but we can't build it fast enough. so having access to the abigail, having access to the post street -- post street site and the bristol where there is another step up housing, those are so important to getting people housed now. so i just want to thank everyone who is here today and all of your work that sometimes escapes under the radar and people are not completely familiar with everything that goes into making an opportunity like this possible. it is appreciated, it's going to make a difference for 89 people at post street and 62 people right here at the abigail. it's going to make a difference for so many people and i'm so grateful we have this opportunity to do just that today. how the person who has helped in our efforts to move the n

we won, took back the house. people who voted for obama, then voted for trump, we got them back because we ran on issues that mattered, mainly health care however as the nominee has to run on the issues that really matter to america. >> harris: does michael bloomberg have the secret sauce? >> let's see how many billions he spends on advertising. wuhan can buy a lot of sauce >> harris: dave brown. come back. thank you. "the daily briefing" now. >> dana: we begin with the fox news alert with the impeachment saga on its last legs, thankfully. waiting to hear from the lone republican hold out in the senate, utah senator mitt romney, he's expected to speak any moment. hello, everyone. i am dana perino and this is "the daily briefing." just a reminder, senator rounds he has not announced if he plans to vote for or against getting president trump out of office. she was one of just two republicans who voted for hearing from new witnesses just last week. g.o.p. leaders say they have enough votes to acquit the president on

at the white house. he walked in and they said the stage will be here, and he looks up and says the chandelier has to go. we all went, not on your life. do you know how much effort it takes to take a chandelier down? well, you do. the people here do. the funny thing about it was one of the things we always discovered, the chores are provided by the secret service, and for a long time they got asked questions by people that seemed to be how much is it worth? they have to wrap their mind around it in terms of how valuable it is, or in terms of the chandelier, how much does it weigh? if it dropped on you, you would be dead or not? and the tour officers made it up. they said 1200 pounds. wow. then we did conservation to them and took them down and re-pinned all the glass and we asked the company doing the cleaning and weigh alld you please of the parts? 600 pounds. there were off by a factor of two. they over exaggerated but 6000 pieces of glass in those chandeliers. here at the end of that production of 177

rowntree housing trust. thank you for waiting to talk to us, we had lots to talk about from america earlier. it is good to have you with us. when we look at the scale of the housing challenge, do you detect that the political will is there to devote the kind of resources needed to meet this challenge? well, government is trying to respond. it allowed councils once again to build counselling housing, which is a very good thing, they have been allowed to borrow as much as they can to build some more. that is going to ta ke build some more. that is going to take some time. leaving everything to the house—builders is not going to the house—builders is not going to work, they only build out as fast as they can keep the prices up. do not rely on them. the housing associations, we want to see them doing a lot more, they sort of stand between the private and the public sector. i think people want something to be done, but it is going to cost to build all the homes that we need and to build them on an affordable

look what the house passes and what we do. we have some big differences thethat we will have more work r the american people to extend the deadline that he called the equal rights is something you would be open to putting on the floor. >> [inaudible] >> i don't tell the committee chairman want to look at. one of you suggested earlier that houses an investigatory business. i can only suggest the senate would choose to do that as well but we don't have a dictatorship over in the senate. >> [inaudible] >> i think that is what we just dealt with for three weeks. we've listened and included antenna a number of internal meetings to discuss all this which you ended up doing a great deal about and it's time to move on. this decision has been made as far as i'm concerned it's in the rearview mirror and the consequences in terms of the future are up to the voters of the country to decide who they want to lead the government for the next four and in our case six years. i'm going to take one more. >> [inaudible] and you had the opposite -

and almost the entirety of the house's 78-day inquiry. they channeled personal policy and political grievances and attempted to use the most solemn responsibility of congress to bring down a political rival in a partisan process. it's no secret that democrats' crusade to remove the president began more than three years ago on the very day that he was inaugurated. on january 20, 2017, "the washington post" ran a story with the headline the campaign to impeach president trump has begun. at first speaker pelosi wisely resisted. less than a year ago she said, quote, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there is something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, i don't think we should go down that path because it divides the country. and she was right. but when she couldn't hold back the stampede of her caucus, she did a 180-degree about face. she encouraged senate democrats to rush through an impeachment inquiry before an arbitrary christmas deadline. and in the end the articles passed with support from only a single p

house of representatives.] the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 229. the nays are 189. he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 116-395 by the gentleman from california, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nos prevailed. the clerk will designate the -- redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 116- 95 offered by mr. mcclintock of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a request for a recorded vote will rise. a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. members, this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the ch

i was a house painter. i used to go and paint other people's apartments and then come back home to mine and i would say why couldn't i live in a place like that. and now i do. >> after my fire in my apartment and losing everything, the red cross gave us a list of agencies in the city to reach out to and i signed up for the below-market rate program. i got my certificate and started applying and won the housing lottery. [♪] >> the current lottery program began in 2016. but there have been lot rows that have happened for affordable housing in the city for much longer than that. it was -- there was no standard practice. for non-profit organizations that were providing affordable housing with low in the city, they all did their lotteries on their own. private developers that include in their buildings affordable units, those are the city we've been monitoring for some time since 1992. we did it with something like this. where people were given circus tickets. we game into 291st century in 2016 and started doi

but we can't house them if we don't have more housing. and if we take this money, millions and millions of dollars, $28 million for two, $230 million for all eight, and we put it only into navigation centers, we will not have the resources needed to create those housing exits. [please stand by] >> they pay attention to neighborhoods and to need. and so while one -- while one might be across the line in somebody's district, that's not necessarily we should be thinking about this. we should think about where people are experiencing homelessness. where can we find sites to build with taxpayer resources. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> if i can just jump in, first of all, i appreciate the process, as this has been evolving since 2015. and understand on the one hand the need for flexibility, as the department juggles different tools. on the other hand, i think that the notion of a fair share of criteria, whether it's in this city or other cities like our nation's capital or new york, also makes sense. but i concur with the department that that

absolutely not in the house when you think about the due process that was denied the president of the united states alan and alan knows very well that both clinton and nixon had the right to cross-examine their accusers they had the right to subpoena witnesses on both sides of the aisle that was denied in the house in fact most of the investigation was done by the intel committee in the basement of the capitol behind shut doors most members of the house did not have the right to be in the room nor did the president have the ability to have counsel none the less none the less we heard from the democrats we have overwhelming evidence this case. very clear very easy and then what do they do they get in the senate and they start bellyaching with the losers limp oh we need more witnesses well if the case was so iron why in the world would they need witnesses i mean it would be obvious and i'll predict this joe manchin and john democrat senators from west virginia and alabama they vote against at least one of these articles so what you'll have in the senate just like you did in the house a

be pushing for democrats to win the white house. we have reelected four of the last five presidents to a second term. if donald trump is reelected and republicans keep the senate majority and if there is a vacancy on the supreme court in the next four years, what would we see from your organization and others here in washington? stephanie: you would see a massive, massive effort. emily's list is set up as an elect or alarm for the movement on the party. we think the best way to prevent that scenario is to make sure that senate is in democratic hands, no matter what happens in the white house. so we are hyper focused on winning the united states senate, winning in maine, winning in iowa, winning in kansas, catching a break in texas, seeing other races that come online, because it is all about who is sitting in those seats and making those votes, and the fight is now. the fight isn't when there is an opening, the fight is right now in 2020, and we have to win as democrats if you want to see a fair justice sitting on the u.s. supreme c

this puts donald trump a step closer to being acquitted given the republican majority in the upper house of the u.s. congress the trial resumes for closing arguments on monday but the vote has been pushed to wetness day the day off to trump's annual state of the union address al-jazeera how does your cast or reports from washington. democrats say the impeachment trial of president donald trump is the 1st trial in u.s. history without witnesses is this a fair trial without the ability to call witnesses and produce documents the answer is clearly and unequivocally no but despite hours of arguments trying to convince republican senators to allow new witnesses in the trial the yeas are $49.00 'd the nays are $51.00 the democrats last all but 2 republican senators voted no it's a grand tragedy america will remember this day unfortunately where the senate did not live up to its responsibilities where the senate turned away from truth and went along with a sham trial democrats had hoped to get the support of moderate republican lisa murkowski but in the end she rejected the idea saying in a sta

the house has proven the president's guilt. he tried to coerce an ally into helping him cheat by smearing his opponent. he betrayed our national security in order to do it when we withheld military aid to our ally and violated the law to do so. he covered it up and he covers it up still. his continuing obstruction is a threat to the oversight and investigatory powers of the house and senate and if left unaddressed will permanently and dangerously altered the balance of power. these undeniable facts require the president to retreat to his final defense. he's guilty as sin but can't we just let the stroert voters dec. he's guilty as sin, but why not let the voters clean up this mess? and here to answer that question we must look at the history of this presidency and to the character of this president or lack of character and ask, can we be confident that we will not continue to try to cheat in that very election? can we be confident that americans and not foreign powers will get to decide and that the president will shun any furt

they broke into the house and he's dead. they killed him. >> he was joseph morrisey who had been married for 12 years. their suburban florida home documented by police video was now a crime scene. >> there was so much chaos going on. the whole street was blocked off. there was tons of police cars and the sirens and you could smell the smoke. i just remember running down the street and the police officers were trying to stop me. and i just kept going and she was just standing there in the middle of the street and she just looked so small and so hurt. i ran up and dave her a big hug. she was covered in blood and she just kept saying, he's dead. he's gone. why would they do that? he's gone. >> when i arrived at this house, it was 1:30 in the morning. >> detective brian kendall quickly learned the key facts. joe had been brutally stabbed to death in his own home while his wife and young son had escaped. the detectives spoke briefly with kay. >> she gives me a brief synopsis of what happened that night. >> believable? >> at that

we have affordable housing. please, do not destroy this house. this historic house. and this affordable housing. >> anyone else from the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. let me first just kind of start off by saying this is actually the type of project we're looking to see. besides really low ami housing, we're also in dire need of middle class, middle income housing and this is what we're looking at as of now the best solution towards this. this is under 40 feet. i live in the sunset. it's on transit. and these, when you take a building like this and divide it into three full flats, they're affordable by design because it's not a 5,000 square foot single-family home, it's a single flat. this is actually what i think we need to be doing more of in the sunset, especially on the transit corridors. >> commissioner fung: actually, this building is 45 feet. question for staff. the height limit? >> it is 45 feet. it was a little bit higher with the parapet previously which doesn't count toward height, but that has been eliminated.

suddenly it was in the house in their houses. venezuela is astounded he could be nominee. >> we're at a heck of a fork in the road in this country. everyone wants to make this about president trump and his personality and personality of the democrat nominee whoever it is, really shaping up between socialism and freedom. i think freedom is going to win. liz: larry, great to see you. come back soon. next a big fight breaking out between house democrats over reauthorizing a law behind sweeping surveillance powers. those same powers were used to spy on the trump campaign. a top democrat wants reform but she is getting pushback from nancy pelosi, adam schiff and jerry nadler. attorney general william barr, offering tough talk to the media. be journalists not quote, agents much change. that story iss next. a company'h and gain new perspectives. that's why we go beyond the numbers. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. we'll keep building smarter suv's. to help keep you focused on the road ahead. and. the road beside. did we mention th

and we've seen thousands of pages of documents that the house managers in the white house defense lawyers focused on. and throughout all of it, the house managers never prove their case and so come out their strategy as you know was just the hail mary and they have not proven their case, their only hope was to bring additional witnesses and drag it out weeks or months and go on a fishing expedition hoping that somebody said something that would give them some basis for impeachment because they have not proven it. and this is a vote for the republicans right on the edge and today holding 51 of the majority to say we are done, we had enough and this is over and that means were headed straight to wednesday afternoon the vote on the final judgment and the president is going to be acquitted of the charges and he should be. >> tucker>> sean: now i know thw the congenital liar, jerry nadler, he kept repeating, we have so proven our case beyond any reasonable doubt. if i want to stick to the constitutional aspects and professor dershowitz said that you are one of his best students and he's going

guilty mr white house. mr white house guilty mister wicker. mister wicker not guilty mr wyden mr wyden guilty mister young. mister young not guilty. senators voted for waiting for those- votes to be added up to see so i see what has happened we are expecting to donald trump be acquitted- you can hear first and- a guilty say no give up but we're expecting the very much along party lines are we not. no question it wrong is it going to vote. finding him guilty but that's not gonna be anywhere near enough to get the two majority needed to follow the president goes and remove him from all this so it's up to you posted but only up. to you donald trump. it's not going to. new hearing. others as saying we'll see guiuilty guilt. hehe's going to win because he'l hehe'll he'll getet the numberst never the less it's an experience i will mock him as take a list so set. the chart. in guilty the set of judges that the respondent donald john trump president of the united states is not he is charged in the first goal of impeachment. the clerk will read the sec

the law does not allow the speaker of the house to destroy the records of the house and the rules of the house do not permit some little temper tantrum because you don't like what the president of the united states says. >> the other part of this, a person close to the speaker tells fox news the ripping was not preplanned but video appears to show otherwise, you can see pelosi with the speech behind the desk and pre-rips the pages, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle debating how bad this really was. >> he had no right to destroy this document especially one filled with such impactful stories of american patriots. >> if i took this card and toward it because i didn't like what was on the card i am protected by the first amendment in doing that. that is a form of speech. >> others like leaves eldon say pelosi should be censured. >> it is never going to end. thank you very much. >> donald trump after his impeachment trial finally comes to a close, the senate determining to acquit the president. >> the battle on capitol hill not over yet. lauren blanchard has the latest from democrats.

the white house ignored them and issued 42 subpoenas the white t house refused to comply and even went so far to threaten and intimidate those that chose to appear. even with the unprecedented level of obstruction the house made a strong case once impeachment moved to the senate the president again had numerous opportunities to defend himself the american people and the people of michigan strongly supported having additional documents and relevant witnesses. first-hand witnesses that could speak to the articles of impeachment. that is what a trial is supposed to be about. yet the senate did not hear from people who clearly have key relevant information including the national security adviser john bolton who wants to testify is just a matter of time we will hear what he would have said. acting white house chiefff of staff from omb nick mulvaney line - -ss mick mulvaney international security president and the national security and robert blair. common sense says that if president trump has evidence hof his innocence and be insisting that we hear from them they would have rushed into the

joining me right now, normer white house -- former white house chief strategist steve bannon, the man who called this back in august on this program. it's great to have you here. >> thanks for having me. maria: so you knew hillary clinton was going to come into this race. you said it, and everybody was thinking, what? are you kidding me? but you were right if this is true. assess the combination of bloomberg and clinton. >> look, matt drudge put his name on this, this was original reporting from matt drudge. if he puts his name on something and there hasn't been denials, it's money good. there are clearly discussions going on. you really haven't had a denial from the bloomberg camp, and you certainly haven't had a denial from the hillary clinton camp. and i think this goes back to the heart of why the democratic party has lost its way, the democratic party does not understand today, eight months from election day, why they lost 2016 is. they don't understand about managed decline of our leaks. they've spent three years trying to destroy trump, they've failed to destroy him. eight mont

the house record. even if the house charges were true, they don't meet the constitution's, quote, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, unquote, standard for impeachable offense. the framers believed that there never ever should be a partisan impeachment. that is why the constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the senate to convict. yet not one house republican voted for these articles. if this shallowed, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist. it would create a weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the house of representatives is of a different political party. our founding documents provide for duly elected presidents who serve, quote, with the consent of the government, unquote, not at the pleasure of the united states congress. let the people decide. a year ago at the southeastern conference basketball tournament a frie

and house of representatives today. these folks were in a partisan mode to get president trump for the last few years. when they jumped op this, they rushed, they didn't try to get any kind of bipartisan consensus on this, and then they dumped a lousy unprepared case on the lap of the senate. i'm a senator, yes, and maybe i'm defending the senate, but i think the senators are the ones who felt like this was a bad deal all around, both from the house and the president and they did the best they could with it. >> rick, you're talking about no possibility of bipartisanship. so what happens when you have a president of the united states who goes ahead, invites a foreign power to interfere in our election, and you say that the senators are somehow the victims of this? as opposed to being courageous? >> your characterization of that is inaccurate, carl, this goes back to the white house's point. the idea that he goes to the ukrainians and that there was no other possible motivation for him to ask for an investigation of the 2