Transcript for GOP Rep. Liz Cheney says Dems 'continue to play games' in shutdown negotiations

of the house Republican party, Liz Cheney. Thank you for joining us. You heard your colleague invoke your father in his debate over vulgarity and impeachment. I know some of the rhetoric you have seen, you think the Democrats are radical and out of touch, but do you think this is something you all can push successfully given the president's own record? Hey, George. Well, thanks for having me on. The key thing we heard from the congresswoman this week is the fact that she is very focus on a politically motivated impeachment. What Adam Smith was saying terms of impeachment and the seriousness is absolutely true. We have to all look at exactly what the Democrats plan to do here. You had speaker Pelosi in her remarks talking about the importance of working across the aisle to get things done and then a mere few hours later, you had video of congresswoman Talib. I think at the end of the day, they need to understand and recognize that impeachment is not a political thing. It never should be, that it tears at the very fabric of our constitution if it is, and to be pronouncing on that issue, you know, of just having been sworn in, without having any evidence at all, can't be anything but political. So I think that's the key thing in terms of what we saw over the course of the last few days. Let's talk about the shutdown. You heard congressman Smith say he believes the president has the legal authority to declare a national emergency and have the military build the wall. Should he invoke it? You know, nobody wants him to invoke it and I don't believe the president wants to invoke it. We all hoped frankly that once speaker Pelosi secured the votes to become speaker on the floor, her willingness to negotiate would, you know, be more evident, and she would be more willing to come to the table to do what's right for the American people. Unfortunately what we have seen over the last few days is she is very much just completely captive eft of her party and so where I was interested to hear my colleagues on the armed services committee, congressman Smith, talk about the fact there is a wall, that's a very different point than the one speaker Pelosi makes which is that a wall is immoral. We believe what's immoral is not to secure our borders, not to protect the people of this nation. This president has no more important obligation. Those of us who are elected officials in congress have no more, and we have to secure the borders. At this point, the Democrats continue to play games. We had -- there were meetings yesterday where secretary Nielsen was able to lay out the security concerns at the border, the very real security concerns, drugs, crime, human trafficking and we're hopeful there is going to be another meeting again today, but we have got to see the games stop, and this is not an issue of, you know, who is doing what and who has the upper hand. The border has got to be secured. That's what people want to see and they want the partisanship to end. You saw the congressman say you believe the Democrats have paid attention to border security. How do you answer his broader point that the president is asking the American taxpayers so pay for a campaign promise he broke, that Mexico would pay for the wall? The president has talked about that, and the extent we'll see increased economic benefit of the renegotiated trade agreements with Mexico. We can't sit by and do nothing. I can't believe that's a position they plan to take to the voters. I think especially when you look at the fact that in the past, many of them including their current leadership have voted for a barrier, for a wall, for border security, have bragged about the fact they have done that, is no question that when you have got caravans, when you have got illegal immigrants, when you have got our border patrol agents being attacked, when you have got our border patrol agents asking for enhanced security at the border including a wall, including barriers, that's what we ought to be doing, and we ought to stop playing these political games and get it done. They would say, they need at least a billion dollars. It does seem there are some breaks in the Republican ranks. Three Republican senators have said they want the government to open first and then continue negotiations. Your own colleague in the house, congressman Brian Fitzpatrick says it's congress's basic job to fund the government. This should happen on a different track. What's your answer to that? It is our job to fund the government, and it is also our job to make sure that we secure the border, to make sure that we provide for the security of the nation, and the Democrats, you know, could any moment now, control the house. Instead of playing games where they strip out one bill and strip out another bill and try to play, you know, partisanship on the floor of the house, they ought to do what they have agreed to do in the house and that's provide the appropriations to secure the border. We have national security issues we're facing. This is one of them. We're facing a huge challenge with China, from Russia, from Iran, from ISIS. We need to be in a position where we can turn our attention to those, or we can make sure we have the border secured and we're doing everything possible to provide the security the nation needs as a whole and stop with the political games. The president talked about national security this week as well. We heard congressman Smith on Syria, and I want to show what the president said in the cabinet meeting about Afghanistan. Russia used to be the soviet union. Afghanistan made it Russia because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan. The reason Russia was in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia. They are right to be there. Russia right to be in Afghanistan? No. Obviously I disagree with the president's assessment of history there. The soviets went into Afghanistan as part of the doctrine, and they were determined to spread communism around the globe, and what bankrupted them was Ronald Reagan and his determination to support those who were fighting on behalf of freedom around the globe, to fight back against the soviet communists and his determination to build the defense initiative to bankrupt the soviets by forcing them to have to put more and more resources into their military. At the end of the day, that's clearly what bankrupted the soviet union, and that's -- they were in Afghanistan because they were, you know, very much adherence to the doctrine, but I would say when I listened to my colleague, Adam Smith talk about what the armed services committee be focused on, I hope he will not direct the committee to be focused on political attacks on president trump. I think that we as a nation face too many huge challenges, and it is certainly the role of the house armed services committee to conduct oversight, but it's also as we do that, our role to make sure that the defense department is doing everything it needs to do to modernize. I'm certainly hopeful we will not see congressman Smith cutting the defense budget. We have just began to rebuild after the devastation of the Obama years, and we have to continue on that trajectory and on that path. We face tremendous challenges from adversaries who have weapon systems we cannot defend against, and we will be falling down in our duty if we fail to do what's right for oversight and appropriations to keep the nation safe. Is the administration in the right place now on Syria? I have said the administration -- that the United States should not pull out of Syria. I have been very hopeful as I have seen reports that we are now going to slow that down. We have got about 2,200 special operations forces there, and they are conducting crucially important work in terms of air support, in terms of artillery support. It is their presence that has helped the kurds be effective in the battle against ISIS and it would be devastating if we were to pull out precipitously, and if we were to have a situation where the Iranians were given free rein to really establish a land bridge there and control and dominate Syria. That would be counter to our interests and it would allow ISIS to begin to again, form safe havens potentially and it would not serve the interest of our allies and those regions. I hope we'll slow that down and look at conditions on the ground and not make a precipitous withdrawal. Thank you for your time this morning.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.