Rep. Eric Swalwell

MARGARET: He’s the young Democratic Congressman who has made a name for himself voicing outrage at the President. This week on Firing Line.

 

MARGARET: Still in his 30s, Eric Swalwell is a media-ready legislator from California known for talking…

 

SOT ON HARDBALL: well I saw collusion from the very beginning

 

MARGARET: And talking…

 

SOT ON ANDERSON COOPER: What evidence exists that the president is not working with the Russians

 

MARGARET: About the Russia investigation.

 

SOT ON HARDBALL: He is acting at every step like somebody who wanted to work with the Russians

 

MARGARET: With frequent trips to Iowa, Swalwell has also made no secret of his presidential ambitions. But is there more to his politics than speaking out against to the president? What does Eric Swalwell say now?

 

The Robertson Foundation. Marlene Ricketts the Agnes Family Foundation. DanielS. Lowe the David Tepper charitable foundation. Spencer behavior corporate funding is provided by. Stephens Inc.

 

HOOVER: Representative Swalwell welcome to firing line. 

 

SWALWELL: Thank you for having me on, Margaret. 

 

HOOVER: You are a fourth term member of the House of Representatives and your party has just taken back the House of Representatives which makes you a chair of the CIA subcommittee of the House Intelligence committee 

You’re also on the Judiciary Committee and you’ve been traveling to Iowa a little bit lately and you’ve even mentioned that you’re considering a run for the presidency in 2020. 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah.  Well, I wou–

 

HOOVER: Representative Swalwell, would you like to make news on Firing Line

 

SWALWELL: I, well–

 

HOOVER: And tell us whether you’re going to run for president.  

 

SWALWELL: I intend to make news soon but right now I’m considering–

 

HOOVER: But right now 

 

SWALWELL: Right now, I could do it right here.

 

HOOVER: You could do it on public television. 

 

SWALWELL: I better call my wife first. [both laugh] 

 

HOOVER: What’s your decision tree, seriously?

 

SWALWELL: Well, one I think I can make a difference and I don’t think anyone should run if you don’t believe you can make a difference. I think I have a vision of going big on the issues, being bold on the solutions and doing good, governing not by transactions but by values. Two, I think I could win. Now it’s it’s not an easy path. It is an uphill climb I think for every candidate. But I do believe having national security experience especially while our country’s been under attack by a foreign adversary and also just I think coming from a part of the world where innovation really brings solutions to our everyday problems of health care and believing that if government was as innovative as the people we could really lift up people’s lives. So, I think I can–

 

HOOVER:  So you are from Northern California near the Silicon Valley– 

 

SWALWELL: That’s right. 

 

HOOVER: Where the tech industry is.

 And so certainly you talk about big ideas and how you’re gonna be part of those big ideas but it defies conventional wisdom on the Democratic side that a young white man is going to be the person who’s going to bring the Obama coalition back together in order to beat Donald Trump. I mean why are you uniquely qualified to be president?

 

SWALWELL: I think if I was a young white man that only saw other white men that that would be a problem. I see all people, I understand all people. I‘m the son of two Republicans. My dad was a cop. My mom worked a number of odd jobs to raise four boys and they believe that if they worked hard they would do better for themselves and dream bigger for us kids. So now I’m a father of two kids under two. My wife still works. We’ve got just under a hundred thousand dollars in student loan debt. So we know that American struggle we live that struggle and we want to make sure that you know if you work hard it pays off. And today too many people I think just work to get by and they don’t believe that they can ever get ahead. 

 

HOOVER: Has politics gotten to the place in this country where in order to elevate your position within and stature within your party and your caucus, you have to run for president 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah well that’s not what I’m doing. And so going back to: I would only run if I thought I could win because there’s a lot of other ways I think you could serve. This shouldn’t be a vanity project for anyone, I would do it because I thought I could win and make a diff–

 

HOOVER: Does the fact that Trump won and nobody expected that he won make it seem like a lower threshold.

 

SWALWELL: It may lower the bar as far as who has been president but I don’t think it should lower the bar on who should be president. 

I don’t believe I’m the only person a) that could beat him or the only person that could do the job. We have a lot of talented people. I think you know I have just gone through this hell you know in the last two years and the Russia investigation and I’ve seen what’s at stake. And I’ve come to realize Margaret that Russia did not attack us to put someone in transactionally who would help them. They attacked us to go at that idea of America that my family chased. Which is that if you work hard you could become anything and if you can beat it in the United States you can make sure it doesn’t reach Russia or any other place that has an oligarch like system.

 

HOOVER: You’ve said you’ve gone through hell in the last two years – how?

 

SWALWELL:  You know we felt so powerless for two years as we watched our democracy on the ropes and we didn’t really have the ability to do anything in Congress. Republicans took out the shovels to bury the evidence to protect the president and now we’re not powerless anymore. And I think we’re finding our confidence as to how we can protect our country

 

HOOVER: One of the things that’s helped you distinguish yourself is the facility with which you’re able to go on television and articulate a point of view. You put yourself out there both on social media and on cable television. We did a compilation of your social media interactions in the last seven days, 42 of your 81 tweets have been about Trump.

 

SWALWELL: Yeah

 

HOOVER: And you also are eager to highlight the president’s weaknesses with respect to Russia. I want to just show you a clip of your recent appearances 

 

SWALWELL [ON COOPER]: This evening the question has shifted from whether the president is working with the Russians to what evidence exists that the president is not working with the Russians.

 

MATTHEWS: You’re a member of judiciary. Do you believe the president right now has been an agent of the Russians?

 

SWALWELL [ON HARDBALL]: Yes I think there’s more evidence that he is.

 

MATTHEWS: Agent?

 

SWALWELL [ON HARDBALL]:  Yes. 

 

SWALWELL [ON CARLSON]: What’s dumb is that

 

CARLSON: Really, so every president who met with Russia is treason?

 

SWALWELL [ON CARLSON]: A President, who went over to Helsinki, had a private meeting, agreed to turn over a US Ambassador to the enemy, and sided with them over our own intelligence community, at what point do you a draw line and say that’s not a US president. That’s just the prime minister of Russia defending the president of Russia. 

 

 

HOOVER: Now, I’m going to ask you that question. At what point do you draw the line and not accuse the president of the United States without any evidence of being an agent of Russia? 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah, he’s betrayed our country. And I don’t I don’t say that lightly. I worked as a prosecutor for seven years and I– 

 

HOOVER: But betraying the country, by the way we want evidence before you say that, but you said an agent of Russia.

 

SWALWELL: He he works on their behalf. He since he met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki in July where he took the interpreter’s notes or hasn’t told any U.S. official what they discussed, he has taken us out of Syria which is a top priority of Russia. He sought to diminish or pull out the US from NATO and he’s easing sanctions on Vladimir Putin’s friends who are under investigation and Mueller–

 

HOOVER: But he did pass sanctions against Russia.  He has armed the Ukraine, he has killed 200 Russians in Syria. I mean those aren’t the actions of an agent of Russia either.

 

SWALWELL: He signed I think begrudgingly sanctions against Russia, after Congress and people express concern and he got backed into it. But as soon as he could he has pulled those away. And and and so

 

HOOVER: What makes him an agent of Russia though? 

 

SWALWELL: So during the campaign the Russians were offering and we’ve, we saw this in our investigation and free press reporting show this. They were offering their assistance to help him. They were reaching out. You know whether it was the Trump Tower meeting whether it was you know the number of subject line e-mail we saw that said you know Russia Putin Trump. Let’s connect them. Whether it was trying to build a Trump Tower and say Felix Sater, a Russian American who worked for President Trump, saying if we connect Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump we can engineer this and make our boy president. He never turned down those offers in fact after it was revealed that the Russians were attacking our democracy he went to a press conference and said Russia keep doing it.

 

HOOVER: So we’re familiar with that sequence of events, as a prosecutor– 

 

SWALWELL: That’s evidence.

 

HOOVER: No, But as a prosecutor that wouldn’t be evidence in court. 

 

SWALWELL: No that’s evidence.

 

HOOVER:You know the difference between hard evidence and circumstantial evidence.  

 

SWALWELL: I think an admission by a defendant is the most powerful evidence and saying asking somebody to continue to commit a crime after they’ve already committed a crime and if that is eagerness to collude– I don’t know what else to call it. And then I think you have consciousness of guilt by all of these follow up cover up actions. Again people only tell someone else to lie, people, only lie themselves, people only obstruct justice, if they’re afraid of what the underlying truth would reveal and I–

 

HOOVER: I’m still not hearing evidence that he’s an agent of Russia.

 

SWALWELL: Yeah, I think it’s pretty clear it’s almost hiding in plain sight. You saw somebody standing next to Vladimir Putin at that press conference in Helsinki, parroting what Putin would say and saying well Putin said that he didn’t attack us so we’re gonna believe him that 

 

HOOVER: But are there things that you know because of your position on the Intelligence Committee that you can’t say publicly that lead you to make such a broad and serious statement?

 

SWALWELL: I’m going to just rely on what is already out in plain sight.  I think the Muller investigation will present, you know, additional evidence and I hate to say that but I believe our president is act– he puts Russia’s priorities because they’re his own priorities. Ahead of the United States. 

 

HOOVER: I think with respect to calling the U.S. president an agent of a foreign government–

 

SWALWELL: He should register, he should register as a foreign agent.

 

HOOVER: –there are many of your critics who will say that you have gotten ahead of yourself. does that kind of a hyperbolic language. elevate your position within the party, within cable news, it gives you stature, but is it responsible?

 

SWALWELL: I think the best job I’ve ever had no matter what I do was working as a prosecutor because you had to follow the evidence and you had to make a case. And at the end of the day you got closure when a jury deliberated and reached a verdict. And here I feel so passionate about the country that I love that gave me so many opportunities and I see somebody who I believe is just working against our interests and I see so entangled with Russia that I’m going to make the case that I don’t I don’t really care if it’s popular or not because I think it’s the right thing to do. Just like every verdict I ever got– I I sought those verdicts I thought they were the right ones. 

 

HOOVER: All right. You now have the power to subpoena. Who’s going to be subpoenaed next? 

 

 

SWALWELL: I believe you’re gonna see a new investigation into money laundering. We we– we, one,  don’t — we weren’t able to pursue that  over the last two years every time we connected the dots by the Trump family’s own words, Donald Trump Junior and Eric Trump saying that we’re seeing a lot of money from Russia flow into our organization. The fact that their bank Deutsche Bank was sanctioned for money laundering with the Russians. We think that’s at least as you would say in the law probable cause to look further. Now we weren’t able to look further and we don’t believe that the Mueller investigation is doing that because of its narrow mandate but we think it’s important that most people don’t think the Mueller investigation has a narrow mandate, but we think its impor–

 

HOOVER:  Wait most people don’t think the Mueller investigation has a narrow mandate, they think it has a broad mandate, at least, certainly, that’s a criticism from the right. 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah. So the president said if you remember he said that if Mueller was to investigate his finances he would see that as a red line. We don’t see any evidence that they are pursuing money laundering within the Trump organization.

 

HOOVER: You have said that you will get President Trump’s tax returns.

 

SWALWELL: That’s a priority of our caucus. Yes. It’s it’s not me who can do it. But the chairman of the ways and means committee can get that. And Speaker Pelosi has said that we’re going to see those tax returns.

 

HOOVER: Um, how are you going to get them?

 

SWALWELL: So by law that if the chairperson of the ways and means committee requested, it’s supposed to be turned up. I’m not naive. I don’t expect Secretary Mnuchin

 

HOOVER: Secretary Mnuchin… [laughing]

 

SWALWELL:  To just turn them over I expect a fight that will be tied up in the courts and we saw even when we were able to get subpoenas of the White House in the minority on the Intelligence Committee, the administration fought us. They either stood on executive privilege or made up privileges to stop us from getting what we need. So we’re going to have to depend on the courts. 

 

HOOVER: Do you think you’ll find in the president’s tax returns evidence of money laundering?

 

SWALWELL: I think if there is money laundering that will be an important stream of information to use and again, I just see reason to look. That’s, you know, the prosecutor in me.

 That’s enough to go forward. 

 

HOOVER: What’s the reason?

 

SWALWELL: It’s not a wild goose chase. Well again the fact that his own son said we’re getting money from Russia. In my experience, in the intelligence community, is that the Russians don’t just invest in people out of the goodness of their heart.

  Eric Trump said to golf magazine that, quote. And then Donald Trump Junior when he went over to Russia in 2013 that said we’re seeing a lot a lot of money flowing in from 

 

HOOVER: Mmm–  into their properties 

 

SWALWELL: Yes

 

HOOVER: In terms of the ownership of their properties– 

 

SWALWELL: And the Trump organization.

 

HOOVER: Around the world who happened to be Russian owned. 

 

SWALWELL: And the Russians were just as a tool they use financial distress as a way to kind of make an in if they’re seeking to recruit somebody they will prey on financial distress. And Donald Trump certainly we all know that with multiple bankruptcies has been in financial distress. And is someone, and that’s how they get someone to become an agent is you feel like you owe them something. So you have to act on their behalf and I think we should answer that question. Is he financially compromised by them.

going back to conscious of guilt. Every person before Donald Trump at least going back to Nixon released their tax returns why is he the one that won’t? Again when you put all this together it’s Ockham’s Razor the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. 

 

HOOVER: If you had an ability to really deliver a State of the Union and really reflect on the state of the Union with respect to foreign policy. How do you– how do you find the state of our union now?

 

SWALWELL: Yeah, not good.

 

HOOVER: You think we’re weak?

 

SWALWELL: We’re losing our friends. Yeah we’re losing our friends. It’s going to cost us more, actually, at home.

 

HOOVER: Do you think that Russia is our number one geopolitical foe?

 

SWALWELL: Yes right now I think they’re the most determined foe to work against us because they actually did attack us in the last election. Now China of course is a looming economic threat. And militarily. But I think as far as you know which one has punched us in the face recently Russia did and they– they are going to continue to punch. 

 

HOOVER: You’ve become this outspoken voice on foreign policy specifically in Russia because of your intel committee uh assignment. if you ask all of the heads of all the intelligence agencies, anything that they agree on besides agreeing that Russia interfere in our 2016 election the thing they most agree on is that China–

 

SWALWELL: Sure.

 

HOOVER:  Actually presents the most severe and significant long term economic and national security threat to this country. Why if that’s the case and you believe that, do you spend the overwhelming majority of your time on Russia? 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah I don’t support the overwhelming majority my time on Russia but on the and 

 

HOOVER: certainly on talking about it certainly on television, certainly in your tweets, and certainly also on your legislation. I mean you’re– the largest bulk of legislation that you’ve written has been in response to the president and also with respect to Russia.

 

SWALWELL: I would say it reflects that the times that we’re in and the threat that we face. I don’t think we can weather another presidential election where an outside adversary interferes and we do nothing about. I don’t think our democracy can sustain that. Whether it’s Russia, whether they help the Democrats or the Republicans or whether it’s China: We’re not going to allow outside interference. And that should be something we unite around. 

 

 

HOOVER: China represents a severe and military threat that is probably just as strong if not stronger more dangerous and more severe in the long term than anything Russia represents. There is so much focus on Russia now and you wonder if foreign policy becomes this zero sum game where we end up not thinking about our long term challenges because we’re so concerned about what’s in front of our nose.

 

SWALWELL: You’re right. We have to have the agility to not only stop Russian interference but also make sure that we understand the threat China poses and also not just militarily but economically. And I think when you try to go one on one with China economically as the president is doing and you’ve alienated your friends and you’re just  trying to do it on your own you’re going to lose.

  

HOOVER: Let’s go to the economy. Complete this sentence: the state of America’s economy is 

 

SWALWELL: insecure and it’s not working, uh– So right about 78 percent of Americans according to CareerBuilder are living paycheck to paycheck.

 

HOOVER: It is hard to argue with three point nine percent unemployment highest wage growth in this last year and 2018 and any of the past years in the last decade. The… fundamentals and the confidence of the economy are far better since Trump took office. Than they were under the previous eight years of President Obama’s presidency and I wonder if it’s just too difficult for Democrats to give the president a win.

 

SWALWELL: You know I think if you look at this like a building if you work on the top floor of the building you’re doing really well and those fundamentals matter. The stock market matters because you’re invested in it. If you’re working on a lot of the floors below, where shares

 

HOOVER: Yeah but wages are up, wages are up a lot 

 

SWALWELL: Over half of Americans couldn’t weather a 400 dollar emergency, and wages going up they’re not matching the cost of health care, they’re not matching the cost of transportation and housing. 

 

HOOVER: But overall it’s difficult to argue that that that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act didn’t help the economy.

 

SWALWELL: There’s no evidence that that’s helped the economy. 

 

HOOVER: Do you think that the economy is just on fire.

 

SWALWELL: At the top. But the top floor. Yes. CEOs they’re doing great.

Spending a lot of money, popping champagne… 

 

HOOVER: But its not the top floor, Representative Swalwell, if unemployment is at three point nine percent.

 

SWALWELL: Yeah but again if if you’re working and you’re just running in place and not getting ahead. That’s not the promise of America. 

 

HOOVER: You just seem completely unwilling to say anything positive about this economy in relation to the leadership over the last two years. Are you allergic to saying anything positive about Donald Trump. 

 

SWALWELL: No, I think his approach on North Korea was the right one at the beginning I praise that at the beginning. 

 

HOOVER: At the beginning.

 

SWALWELL: Yeah well I think he’s lost focus and now it to him is a political reason to distract from other issues. But I praised him at the time for taking a different approach. I’m not afraid to say when he does something right.

 

HOOVER: Let me ask you one other thing. One of the criticisms that Democrats have about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,  is that it is likely to contribute to the national debt, do you care about the deficit?

 

SWALWELL: I do. I think some debt is good if the return on investment is good. Most businesses take on debt. But that debt went, 80 percent of the benefits went to the wealthiest Americans. 

 

 HOOVER: Trust me I have no love for conservatives who have said that they care about this issue and did exactly what Democrats criticize them.

But I have a hard time understanding or believing that a Democratic Party with a progressive wing that is ascendant is going to be the party that is going to do the responsible thing to take the most predictable crisis coming down the pike at us and take it by the horns and fix it. Do you feel personal responsibility to tackle the 100 percent debt to GDP and our American sovereign debt levels? 

 

SWALWELL: Yes I feel that. 

 

HOOVER: How, what are you going to do?

 

SWALWELL: I think if you look at some of the drivers of debt which is of course is health care and Social Security and also defense you have to address those So I– yes I take it seriously I was a city council member before I went to Congress. We had– It was we were forced to balance our budget.

 

HOOVER: I’m going to hold you to it because it is eminently important to our national security. When you think about the state of our union in the context of our political culture. How is the state of our union?

 

SWALWELL: Well you know, I see it in my own family. I’m the son of two Republicans I married a girl from southern Indiana who grew up with the Pence’s and, you know, her family is pretty conservative. And you know I can tell that. Something happened in 2016. Our country is you know it’s always been, you know, fractured. But I think there have been moments around big ideas where we’ve come together and we haven’t seen that in a long time.

 

HOOVER: Do you fault the president though for this polarization?

 

SWALWELL: Oh yeah yeah. No I I do I think he spoke to. He spoke to grievances and told us that we should fear each other before we love each other. And that’s hurt. 

 

HOOVER: How do you feel about his Twitter habits?

 

SWALWELL: You know I’m not going to say I’m innocent. I’ve sent tweets where I’m like Oh man I really wish I didn’t send that 

 

HOOVER: What are some of the tweets you regret?

 

SWALWELL: You know during the the, Kavanaugh hearing. Senator Collins was complaining of all the calls that her staff were getting you know about her position and she said that you know they  didn’t feel safe. And I said something to the effect of big deal. You know the poor victim had to move out of her house. And I really regret that. I mean I didn’t mean to give equivalence to that. And I respect Senator Collins in many ways and I think the emotions got the best of me And I tweeted that it wasn’t what I meant.

 

HOOVER: You say you don’t have perfect tweets but you do have perf– imperfect tweets when you’ve called the president you referred to the president as a mobster presidency. You’ve told– said the president’s team were liars and tamper and obstructors. I think that helps contribute to a hyper partisan. Cycle that polarizes the country

 

SWALWELL: We’re living in quite extraordinary times. And so I want people to see that guy stood up to him.

He was a voice he mobilized other people stand up to him.

 

HOOVER: So in a way you’ll see what you’re saying is Donald Trump is such a threat that he has to be the sole focus 

 

SWALWELL: Our democracy’s on the line

 

HOOVER: of some sort of public platform?

 

SWALWELL: I think everything 

 

HOOVER: You don’t have faith in our institutions to help the checks and process of checks and balances that it has to be constantly tearing down the person who is in the presidency in order to save our democracy 

 

SWALWELL: Our institutions don’t run on autopilot. They they take they need the energy and activism of the people.

 

HOOVER: you say that this polarization is because of Donald Trump but there is pretty good research from many of our public research foundations a Pew Research Center for example that has documented polarization over time and and notes that you can see in this graph from 1994 to 2004 to 2014 that the left and the right have increasingly gotten further and further apart. So it’s not fair I think to argue that Trump has started this or has is responsible for this. 

 

SWALWELL: He used the phrase American carnage in his inaugural address.

 

HOOVER: yeah. I found that horrific and personally offensive. And yet. He didn’t create that gap 

 

SWALWELL: that rift as you said was was there when he was president but I don’t think people will say that Barack Obama you know took a match in gasoline you know to the polarization. He’s not a perfect president. I don’t think you know people say that he he made things worse as far as our polarization. 

 

 

HOOVER: The polarization absolutely increased under President Obama over. Many of his legislative efforts. Maybe they weren’t as hyperbolic and maybe they weren’t about his Twitter, his Twitter feed. But but polarization has continued to increase and it has continued to increase not because the person in the presidency but because of these other forces. you say you go on Fox News because your parents see you there.  Let me show you a clip of our recent interaction you had with Tucker Carlson.

 

CARLSON CLIP

CARLSON: why dont we just limit them to what i can have at home, why cant we do that-

SWALWELL: why cant we have a real conversation about this?

CARLSON: THIS IS A REAL CONVERSATION

 

HOOVER: In 1976 William F. Buckley Junior had the Washington bureau chief of The New York Times on this program Tom Wicker and he was on to discuss politics in the press. And they had a different kind of conversation with you’ll notice a very different and decidedly different tone and tenor to their conversation. Let’s take a look. 

 

SWALWELL: Yeah, sure.

 

BUCKLEY: When you have a situation in which reasonable men disagree on a particular proposition. But one side is, is made to appear unreasonable by the use of rhetoric rather than by the use of reason then it seems to me that people who become indignant at the press for using rhetorical weapons and rhetorical emphases and supercilious references and the rest of that arsenal which you know I know how to utilize [ has something rather rather interesting, have a concrete and interesting brief against that particular society.

 

WICKER: Well, I think that by choosing subtly destructive expressions, subtly,  critical expressions, if  judicious selection of verbs, etc. in that semantic way make someone look bad or attempt to make someone look bad, I regard that as slanting the news and I do not think there is any such right to that. 

 

HOOVER: Can you relate to what Buckley said there at the top, which is that often you see on side being made to appear unreasonable by the use of rhetoric rather than the use of reason? Hasn’t that come to the hallmark of the public square? 

 

SWALWELL: Yes, and I try and go back again to my training which is relying on evidence  I always want make sure I have the evidence to back up the rhetoric. Now with Tucker Carlson, I like going on that show because I get to defend what I believe in and I know I’m gonna have the screws put to me and I respect the Fox audience who listens because they matter and I want to make sure that my perspective is getting through not just to my parents and my in-laws but to them. And I don’t mind having to defend my beliefs and I I think my respect for the free press is shown in that I’ll go into that forum to do that.

 

HOOVER: I understand going everywhere not just staying in an echo chamber that’s comfortable and going to places that are uncomfortable. But, how does it feel when you get caught up in that spin cycle? 

 

SWALWELL: I know I’m gonna have the screws put to me and I respect the Fox audience who listens because they matter and I want to make sure that my perspective is getting through not just to my parents and my in-laws but to them. And I don’t mind having to defend my beliefs and I I think my respect for the free press is shown in that I’ll go into that forum to do that.

 

HOOVER: You I mean I understand going everywhere not just staying in an echo chamber that’s comfortable and going to places that are uncomfortable. But, how does it feel when you get caught up in that spin cycle? 

 

SWALWELL: Well I don’t think we’re 

 

HOOVER: where clearly reason and logic is not winning the day.

 

SWALWELL: Well I understand you know part of this is entertainment and maybe that’s why some people keep the channel on. But I don’t want the evidence to be lost. And you know in one to two minute soundbites it’s hard to put all of the evidence through and give annotations it’s impossible.

 

HOOVER: No, its impossible. Its not that it gets lost it’s that it’s impossible. I mean those segments aren’t set up to elevate understanding of a particular issue. They’re set up to elevate the emotions around a certain issue.

 

SWALWELL: You know, I was at the Minneapolis airport waiting for a delayed flight and guy sat down next to me serve in the military from San Antonio and he said I don’t agree with anything that you ever say when you’re on Fox but I like that you go on there. And so maybe that if anything it just shows a respect for the audience that you know I still believe that they matter. I’m not going to discount them and only talk to people who agree with me.

 

HOOVER: Does it ever just feel ridiculous like you’re out–.

 

SWALWELL: Of course, yeah, There are times where all this feels ridiculous. But again people’s lives are on the line and I want to be an advocate for them and I’ll go to the places where I have to do that if I can break through and make a difference. You know even just a small amount then that matters. 

 

HOOVER: Representative Swalwell thank you very much. Thank you.