‘You’ve Already Decided There Is A Crime?’: Martha MacCallum Challenges Eric Swalwell On Impeachment

Virginia Kruta Associate Editor
Font Size:

Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum repeatedly pressed Democratic California Rep. Eric Swalwell on the impeachment process Wednesday, asking whether or not the interviews being conducted by fellow California Rep. Adam Schiff were above board.


MacCallum began with reports that Schiff had repeatedly pressured former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker, pushing him to alter his testimony to suggest that the Ukrainians had felt coerced to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

“Is it the practice of attorneys in a deposition to try and press the people who show up to explain their understanding of what happened into a different assessment than what they believe it to be? Is that the normal practice?” MacCallum asked Swalwell.

“I don’t agree that’s what happened,” Swalwell pushed back. “Nothing that the Ambassador Volker had contradicted what President Trump said. We have a crime of extortion, we all agree that if you use that —”

MacCallum interrupted, “We’re at the beginning of the process, and you’ve already decided there is a crime?” (RELATED: Kellyanne Conway Fires Back: ‘Give Me A Break, We Don’t Need Ukraine To Help Beat Joe Biden’)

“No, no … yes. That is why we’re doing this. The crime was committed,” Swalwell said. “We’re now looking at the suspect, the president, who confessed to the crime by the way.”

“It doesn’t sound like you need much of a process then,” MacCallum shrugged.

“He’s entitled to a fair process,” Swalwell replied.

MacCallum shot back, “That’s a relief.”

Swalwell then pointed out the fact that the president has said that he will not cooperate with any impeachment proceedings until the House opens an official inquiry via a floor vote. “I think you can file that away as what guilty people do. It’s a consciousness of guilt,” he said.

“I think you would understand if people might be hesitant to buy your assessment at this stage in the game —” MacCallum said.

“Innocent people cooperate,” Swalwell insisted, interrupting.

MacCallum continued, saying, “because you called the president a Russian agent and after two years of an exhaustive investigation, that was determined to not be the case.”

“I don’t think that’s true,” Swalwell said again.

“I don’t want to go down the rabbit hole,” MacCallum replied. “That’s what you said and nobody knows what happened.”

Swalwell turned it back to Russia, adding, “If you shake down the Ukrainians the way that he did, that sounds a lot like someone who is using Russian tactics.”