JEN PSAKI (CNN CONTRIBUTOR): There's a very dangerous kind of combination -- argument being made, I should say, by people like Mulvaney that their quid pro quo is a normal part of diplomacy and suggesting that looking for political dirt on your opponent, like Joe Biden or anyone else, and doing that through diplomacy is normal. It is not normal. I worked in the State Department. I have the pleasure of knowing people who have spent decades in diplomacy and working in government. That is not how it works. How it works, you do use levers like things like 'if you do more work on human rights and you are better on that, then we may unleash some more military assistance for you.' That is in the national interest of the United States. Using it as a political cudgel is absolutely not normal, shouldn't be accepted. And I'm actually surprised that Republicans in Congress are accepting it and being so silent as they are now, in accepting this.
SEAN DUFFY (CNN CONTRIBUTOR): So hold on a second. So we spent two years on a Russia investigation, right, and Democrats and the media were all about what happened in the 2016 election. What Mick Mulvaney said was Donald Trump said let’s look and say let's get the server. This is the DNC server that had everything to do with the Russian investigation in general.
PSAKI: This is the disputed crowd absurd conspiracy theory that you’re talking about right now.
DUFFY: It may be, but he says I’m investigating the 2016 election and the DNC server.
AMANDA CARPENTER (CNN CONTRIBUTOR): That the intelligence community already made findings that everyone agrees upon, but for some reason Donald Trump is sending [attorney general] out on a goose hunt --
DUFFY: Let me speak. The FBI never got the server. It went to Crowdstrike, and Crowdstrike is partially owned by a former Russian -- now I'm not saying --
PSAKI: First of all, what you are stating is completely inaccurate and factually wrong.
DUFFY: No, no. It's not, it's actually true.
PSAKI: It's a conspiracy theory on the right wing blogs.
DUFFY: Why does this table disagree with the point we should look at 2016 Russia collusion?
CARPENTER: Because we already know what happened. We already know what happened. It's said and done.
TAPPER: The only thing I’ll say about this is Tom Bossert, the former homeland security adviser for President Trump has said that this whole thing is a debunked conspiracy theory, this is a former Trump aide saying that.
DUFFY: But it may be but Donald Trump could still legitimately go back and say I'm looking at 2016.
CARPENTER: Do you think that is a waste of taxpayer money?
DUFFY: No I don’t. Not at all.
TAPPER: And let me bring in the congressman.
REP. JOE NEGUSE (D-CO): I think it is important to take a step back. I serve on the Judiciary Committee and I take the oath that I took very seriously when I was sworn in ten months ago. This is about putting country over party. And let’s not lose the big picture. We know for a fact that this president tried to get a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. We know that.
TAPPER: From Ukraine, you mean
DUFFY: We don't know that.
NEGUSE: We know that from the call summary notes, Sean we know that — hold on.
TAPPER: Through an investigation into the Bidens is what he’s suggesting.
DUFFY: Our party matters of picking party and country because this country is doing great under President Trump. People are making more money, there's more jobs, there's more opportunity, our military is stronger and to say we’re going to look back to the 2016 election and go after Donald Trump for trying to clear the clouds is absolutely ridiculous.
CARPENTER: I wish that were the case but it's increasingly country or Trump.
DUFFY: You can't have a quid pro quo if the Ukraines don’t know about the quid pro quo.