NICK SCHIFRIN: We reached out to
more than 50 Republican members
of the House of Representatives

to come on the program tonight.

None of them accepted
our invitation.

For a Republican perspective
on today's news, I'm joined
by longtime GOP strategist and

former press secretary
for Speaker John
Boehner Michael Steel.

Welcome to the "NewsHour."

Republicans have been
criticizing the process,
as you know, throughout
the last few weeks,

specifically that these
depositions have been
held behind closed
doors, instead of having

public hearings.

Republicans had a chance today
to vote for public hearings.

Why did they vote against it?

MICHAEL STEEL, Former John
Boehner Spokesman: Well, I think
they would argue that it's too

little too late.

I think that if this vote
had been held three or
four weeks ago, it would
have been a meaningful

part of this inquiry.

I think, at this point, they're
closing the barn door after
the cow has already run off,

from the Republican perspective

I think that we will continue
to see closed-door depositions.

We're not going to yet see the
sort of robust, open, fair,
transparent, televised hearings

that marked the Watergate
impeachment inquiry
and the impeachment
inquiry against former

President Bill Clinton.

NICK SCHIFRIN: We heard language
that goes even farther today
from Steve Scalise, number

three in the House, accused
the Democrats of imposing
Soviet-style rules.

How are these rules Soviet, when
Democrats say that they actually
are based on the impeachment

rules that Republicans set
when they impeached or tried
to impeach Bill Clinton?

MICHAEL STEEL: And some of the
rules that were put in place
by former Speaker Boehner

as part of the Benghazi
Select Committee.

The argument -- and I think
there is a lot of fairness to
it -- is that this is a secret

proceeding behind closed doors.

The news is being released
selectively by the majority.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But that's
what it's been so far.

These -- we're talking
about public hearings.

(CROSSTALK)

MICHAEL STEEL: ... so far.

When we get -- those criticisms
will not be valid when and
if we get to open, televised

hearings, where Republicans have
the ability to confront some of
these witnesses, cross-examine

them, live on camera,
and the American people
can see and judge.

NICK SCHIFRIN: What will the
Republican strategy be when we
begin those public hearings?

MICHAEL STEEL: I think
it depends on the
substance that we find.

I think that the president's
defense that his phone call
was perfect is probably not

going to hold up.

It seems very likely that there
will be evidence of a quid pro
quo, either retrospectively,

looking for information
about what interference
may have occurred in
the 2016 election, what,

if any, involvement Ukraine had
in that, which I don't think
that our intelligence services

judge as any.

But that's a question.

The other is whether the
president was looking for dirt
on his potential political rival

- - or his political
rivals, potential opponent,
Joe Biden, and his son.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Specifically, Joe
Biden and his son Hunter, yes.

MICHAEL STEEL: And that's a
very different standard there.

But you can argue -- and I
think Republicans probably will
if the facts are what we think

they will turn out to be --
that what the president did
is wrong, it is an abuse of

his office, but it doesn't rise
to the level that he should
be impeached, convicted, and

removed from office less than
a year before the American
people will be allowed to make

that judgment for themselves.

NICK SCHIFRIN: There's
a lot of nuance in that
argument you just made.

It is not a 10-second
or 12-second sound bite.

Let's talk about the substance.

I mean, are there members of
the House whom you're speaking
to who are concerned about

the substance of this inquiry
and what the president did
vis-a-vis either 2016 or Vice

President Biden and Ukraine
over the last few months?

MICHAEL STEEL: Sure.

And I don't think that -- the
way our laws are constructed,
if the facts are what we

think they are, I don't
think you can make a credible
defense of the president on the

substance, which is why so
much of this debate thus far
has focused on the process.

NICK SCHIFRIN: That's not
the language the president
has been using, though.

MICHAEL STEEL:
That's exactly right.

The president is
the outlier here.

The president wants to insist
that the phone call was perfect.

He continues to refer to
the memorandum describing
the call as a transcript,
which it is not.

We have seen news reports
suggesting that there
were important things
-- important details

omitted from that memo.

So this is the real problem.

Republicans can defend the
president successfully.

He has to be -- he has to be
willing allow them to make
the argument that, yes, he did

do something wrong, but
it doesn't rise to the
level that he should
be removed from office.

NICK SCHIFRIN: So far,
he has not been willing
to allow Republicans
to make that argument.

Why would he going forward?

MICHAEL STEEL: It's interesting.

He has not attacked
Republicans who have made
that argument generally,
the Mitt Romney attacks

aside.

There have been some
cases where Republicans
have made that argument,
and he has not unleashed

a tweetstorm on them.

He obviously believes
that there's nothing
wrong substantively
and wants Republicans

to make a substantive
case for him.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But?

(CROSSTALK)

MICHAEL STEEL: But there's
nothing you can - - there
isn't a case to be made there.

So he has a choice.

He can either allow them to
make the case that comports with
the facts, that is defensible,

that is safe, or he will leave
Republican elected officials
on the mile-high swinging

bridge, and he will be
taking an axe to the ropes.

He will undercut them completely
if he tries to insist they
make a factual, substantive

case for what was pretty
clearly, it seems, if the facts
were what we think they are,

a quid pro quo
and inappropriate.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And quickly,
in the time we have left, you
believe that, if the president

allows Republicans to make
that argument, that, hey,
maybe this wasn't perfect, but

it's not impeachable, that
they will come out ahead?

MICHAEL STEEL: I think that
they will -- the American people
will agree that it is a time

- - that the voters
should choose.

And I think the vote that was
held today will prove to be a
very bad vote for the 30-odd

House Democrats sitting in
seats that the president won
in 2016, half of them in seats

that he won by big margins.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Michael
Steel, thank you very much.