Judge has said don mcgahn and the president s aides dont enjoy absolute immunity, dont have to show up essentially. The administration has been arguing they dont have to show up to respond to these subpoenas. Don mcgahn has been fighting the sympathy 7 months now. According to the judges ruling, it goes without saying the law applies to former White House Counsel Don Mcgahn just as it does to other current and senior white house officials. The implications are huge. If this ruling stands, don mcgahn is going to have to show up and provide some testimony to the house that has been requesting information about what he said to members of to the Mueller Vegas about the president obstructing justice. The obstruction of justice question is very much ripe in the impeachment question. One of the possibilities the republicans are questioning is whether the president is obstructing congress in his refusal to allow some of these witnesses to show up to provide testimony. For now, this means a huge win for democrats arguing the president s aides do not have absolute immunity. Obviously, theres a lot of other people the democrats have been looking to possibly bring in for testimony. John bolton is at the top of that list. Its not clear whether this ruling would apply to john bolton. Hes in a different category. According to this judge nobody is above having to respond to these legal subpoenas from congress. On capitol hill, getting reaction as well, a major win for democrats in the house of representatives. Major setback, at least for now for the president. Yes. It will be a big question how they go forward. We expect an appeal on this ruling that would drag this process out for some time, why adam schiff leading the impeachment inquiry with a letter to his colleagues, in his words, they will not let the president drag this out for months on end in the courts. He says they would not necessarily go down the route of trying to get other people who could be impacted by this ruling to testify, whether like a Mick Mulvaney or former National Security advisor, john bolton or former deputy, charles copperman, resisting efforts to get them to comply. Democrats are now prepared to go the route to get these folks to come forward and ultimately a question for democrats is whether or not to include in ultimate articles of impeachment elements of obstruction of justice in the Mueller Report because thats why he was called to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and his own allegations of obstruction of justice and got locked in a court battle and ukraine came up and became a matter of impeachment inquiry and the court fight took place on a separate track and they converged, democrats decide whether or not to conclude part of their allegations, articles of impeachment obstruction of justice what mcgahn could testify to the House Committee and wrap that into articles of impeachment. At the moment, democrats are signaling they will fight it in court but on in impeachment with issues of ukraine and the president s handling of that and abuse of power and other subpoenas. They believe they will focus on that in days ahead. A lot of deliberation that has to happen in the aftermath of this victory that could ultimately get don mcgahn to come forward. The judge does say mcgahn would have the right to invoke executive privilege where appropriate. This is significant. The white house is arguing absolute immunity and he doesnt have to respond to the subpoena. The court is saying, no, its a Different Branch of government. Don mcgahn can come in and make valid assertions of privilege. Hes allowed to do that. It doesnt mean he has to tell them absolutely everything they want to know and doesnt mean the government doesnt have executive privilege. Going forward they have to make limited privilege at the time. This is significant because don mcgahn is at the center of one of the strongest charges of obstruction of justice, the claim in the Mueller Report the president of the United States directed don mcgahn to create a false record, something mueller determined but all elements were criminal obstruction of justice. He testified before the mueller panel. He did. 30 hours with the executive branch testifying within the special prosecutor. This is the question whether or not he has to go before congress and answer congresss question in an adversarial setting and sets significant precedent for the impeachment now and will make much harder for them to claim they dont have to recognize the subpoenas at all. I think thats true. We are going to see everyone fighting a subpoena come up with their own unique argument for why they are special and they should not necessarily have to comply. When it comes to the National Security position and make that argument whether they can provide that because of his role. When it comes to Mick Mulvaney, i dont think he will say, i will show up and testify before congress because of this judges ruling. If they were brought to court they would argue he is currently a white house employee and make their own arguments. While members of congress will hold this up as an example why everyone should come forward and testify i dont think we will see officials lining up to do this. Jeffrey toobin is going through this decision by this federal judge. Whats jumping out at you . This is a tremendous victory for the house of representatives. The question is, is it a symbolic victory because of the element of time . The issue here is when any of these former or Current White House aides will testify. This is a victory but its just the beginning of the legal process. The white house has already indicated it will appeal this to the d. C. Circuit. That is a process that will certainly take not weeks but months. The losing side may well take review in the United StatesSupreme Court. The impeachment process is going on now. Nancy pelosi wants it over by the end of the year. There is no way the legal battle over don mcgahns testimony will be resolved by the end of the year. The question is will any actual testimony come forward at a time useful to the democrats for the impeachment process. Will don mcgahn, the former white House Counsel need to await legal appeals by the white house or Justice Department or potentially could he make a decision on his own, since he has been ordered to appear before the house of representatives by this u. S. District court judge, can he decide to obey what the judge ordered . He could. But my sense is having gone this far he will probably continue. There are a number of witnesses the last few weeks who defied the white house demand to testify. The state department officials, National Security council officials, fiona hill and alex vindman, they testified even though the president said they shouldnt. Don mcgahn could reject that advice especially now he has a District Court opinion on his side. Given the fact he went this far, it seems to me its likely he will wait for the appellate process to play itself out. Youre making a good point he could decide to testify tomorrow and have the protection of this District Court opinion. He did spend 30 hours testifying before the Mueller Report inquiry. He did. But that was at a different time when the white house wasnt interposing these objections. At the time, the white house, when ty cobb was the lawyer who was coordinating the white house response to the Mueller Investigation, the president was allowing people to testify. The president has not allowed people to testify before this congressional investigation, or any congressional investigations. So the question is will don mcgahn continue to honor the president s current ruling or go by either the District Court opinion that came down today or his previous instruction to cooperate with mueller . Thats really up to mcgahn. Its a pretty lengthy decision by this federal judge. Right. I think the most important thing the judge is saying, just because you work for the president and work very very close, at the top of the food chain there at the white house doesnt mean you dont have to show up for what is a lawful subpoena. A part of it, as a matter of law, senior level current president ial aides including white House Counsels must appear before congress if compelled by legislative process to do so. This means that such aides cannot defy a congressional subpoena on the basis of absolute testimonial immunity even if the president for whom they work or worked demands that response. She goes on to talk about the fact it doesnt matter whether you worked as white House Counsel or in the National Security. Thats an important thing, because what the white house has been arguing, the Justice Department has been arguing, theres a certain number of people, very close aides to the president in National Security here that they enjoy super immunity. Don mcgahn has absolute immunity. Theyre saying there is another category super immunity. She is going ahead and striking down not only those arguments, the current arguments don mcgahn has been making but these other ones saying you have to show up. As Susan Hennessey pointed out, you can still absolutely say, i cant answer those questions because that goes to executive privilege and fight that out. You are not allowed to stiff the Congress Just because you say you have absolute immunity. A significant decision by this federal judge. I think its a significant victory. See if it holds up on appeal and significant congressional oversight, the impeachment hearing theyre taking and accountable to another branch. We saw them stand on the white house lawn saying were fighting all the subpoenas. Rejecting the notion. Two branches. Theyre even saying the judges i was in court when they were arguing this. One of the arguments they were making was astonishing. Judge, you have no business trying to decide this. The judge is saying, no, you have to answer to two branches, Judicial Branch and congressional branch. This administration wants to cloak themselves in the bar of the constitution and bill barrs sweeping executive powers. This is the courts and congress pushing back saying, no, we are coequal branches and you are accountable to us and we will see how these hold up on appeal and how various individuals respond to it. It will make it harder and harder for the white house to make it politically sustainable. The harder they fight, the less it looks like good faith interpretation of the decision. As far as the white house and Justice Department are concerned yes. The point susan was making, this is not actually what the constitution is laying out. The doj department of justice counsel repeatedly emphasized the power to invoke absolute testimonial immunity with respects to current and former senior level aides belongs to the president. The judge continues this highlights the startling untenable allegations of absolute immunity argument and demonstrates its incompatibility with our constitutional scheme which basically says, you cannot be the white house and Justice Department and stand here and argue the president and everyone who works at the top of the white house is somehow immune from any other arm of our government here. This is not what the constitution has set forward. Jeffrey, is it an absolute certainty if the Justice Department and white house appeal this District Court decision, the court of appeals, higher court will in fact listen and take it up or might they decide, you know what, were accepting the lower decision . They will hear this appeal. This case is too important. They wont simply affirm the Court Without argument. I think its completely inconceivable the d. C. Circuit would simply just ratify the District Courts opinion. They may yet, at the end of the day, affirm the decision. I think this is likely the result. The claim of absolute immunity here is really beyond what any court has ever offered the white house before. I think this is a solid ruling that is likely to be upheld, even if there are some republican appointees on the d. C. Circuit panel. However, that is going to take time no matter what the result is, and i think time is just a very important part whats going on with this whole legal fight, how long it will take. If the higher court does decide to uphold the District Court decision, is it an absolute certainty it would go to the Supreme Court . No. I think the d. C. Circuit has to hear all appeals of when a losing side appeals from the District Court, the d. C. Circuit has to take the case. Theres no where it of secertio and the District Court only hears about 70. The odds are they may yet hear some cases involving the president s claim of he doesnt want to produce his tax returns, subpoena issues. I think its likely they will take some case but any individual case the odds are always against the Supreme Court granting review. I want to go to manu. It was jerrys commission that issued the subpoena for don mcgahn to testify and led to the court ruling just now and what nadler says in his statement, hes praising the district judges decision and calls mcgahn a central witness of the allegation in the obstruction of justice over details in the Mueller Report. He says now that the court has ruled i expect him to follow his legal obligations and properly appear before the committee. That is the expectation of jerry nadler. He says now that the court has ruled, time to come and testify. If you dont want to testify, thats your obligation. You can certainly not answer questions, claim privilege, as this judge said. What nadler is saying here, he needs to appear before his committee, a stark warning before the House Judiciary Committee and the question is whether or not they will delay their proceedings in any way to try to pursue this key witness, whether its part of obstruction of justice to detail to include articles of impeachment against the president the leadership is going. They want to wrap this up. Adam schiff from the House Intelligence Committee does not want this dragged into court, neither does nancy pelosi, house speaker. While theyre calling him to testify no expectation it will happen some time soon. I want to bring in a congressman from the Judiciary Committee. Whats your reaction to the decision . All of us on the Judiciary Committee voted for the subpoena and happy with what the judge ruled and what we all thought she would do. Chairman nadler has been our leader and a chance to have proper oversight of the constitutional houses because of this president s stonewalling because the judge agreed with us. Its the law, oversight as American Apple pie and the commission was doing its job and had a proper and appropriate appreciated victory today. Remind us, congressman, what questions you would have for the former white House Counsel, don mcgahn, assuming he does show up. If he shows up the questions is what did President Trump ask him to do in relation to former attorney general sessions and did he ask him to contact him and have him unrecuse himself and get back involved in the Mueller Report and try to take over the Mueller Investigation . Did he try to ask him to do things to try to get mueller fired. What we saw in his testimony to the Mueller Report, if he would testify consistently seem to meet all the elements of the obstruction of justice and the Mueller Report was strong. The problem with the Mueller Report, barr got the chance to go before the public and paint a false picture and say no obstruction and no collusion. The fact was there were 11 instances of obstruction of justice and mueller said he did not in any way whatsoever hold the president harmless and didnt say that the president was not involved in something, and he said it was up to the congress and the congress specifically to deal with it. In essence, saying impeachment, but he left it up to the congress. Barr painted a picture that then set in the publics mind nothing to it. Even the day he released it he came with rosenstein behind him and said similar comments and gave another two hours of false painting. When it finally came out nobody wanted to read 435 pages of l l legalees. And mueller came before us and the wasnt the same dynamic person who fought in vietnam and ran the Attorneys Office is san francisco. Attempts to obstruct the russia investigation, would you like to see the articles of impeachment now being considered include misconduct uncovered during the Mueller Investigation . Were all working as a team. Speaker pelosi has done a marvelous job bringing us together and the caucus. We will continue to work as a team. Im sure there will be meetings to discuss this and chairman nadler and schiff and pelosi will talk to us. We will see you when you get back to washington on thanksgiving. Congressman, thank you for joining us. Youre welcome, wolf. Happy thanksgiving to you. Happy thanksgiving to you as well. Were staying on top of the breaking news. Significant developments. Well take a quick break be right back. Im finding it hard to stay on top of things a faster laptop could help. Plus, tech support to stay worry free. Worry free. Boom boom get free next business day shipping or. 1 hour instore pick up shopping season solved at Office Depot Officemax or officedepot. Com. With moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis or crohns, your plans can change in minutes. Your head wants to do one thing, but your gut says, not today. If your Current Treatment isnt working, ask your doctor about entyvio. Entyvio acts specifically in the gi tract to prevent an excess of white blood cells from entering and causing damaging inflammation. Entyvio has helped many patients achieve longterm relief and remission. Infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. Entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. Pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. Tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flulike symptoms or sores. Liver problems can occur with entyvio. Ask your doctor about the only gifocused biologic just for Ulcerative Colitis and crohns. Entyvio. Relief and remission within reach. Relief and remission oh, ho oh, ho, ho, ho you. You got me. Uh, what do you want . Ive got uh, ai robots, ive got vr goggles. I want your sled, please. No. [ chuckles ] timmy. Itd be a shame if this went viral. For those who never compromise. The mercedesbenz winter event. Whoa. He was pretty good this year. If you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. Ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. Humira can help stop the clock. Prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. Humira can lower your ability to fight infections. Serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. Tell your doctor if youve been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if youve had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. Dont start humira if you have an infection. Help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. Talk to your rheumatologist. Right here. Right now. Humira. Were just getting word the department of justice will appeal the decision from this district judge. That will force don mcgahn, former white House Counsel to appear before congress. Theyre not surprised, they will appeal this decision. I assume they were bracing for this decision against them in front of the house of representatives and ready with their statement. They were in court when the judge here was essentially ripping apart their argument. They fully expected they were going to lose this round, wolf. I will read you more what she says, including saying 250 years of the constitution has shown us president s are not kings, and then she goes on to say, even with respect to the underlying contention of the president himself is entitled to absolute testimonial immunity, she cite as Supreme Court ruling in the meyers case they found binding Supreme Court cases that compelled the opposite conclusion, essentially suggesting its not just don mcgahn who has to show up, if he were presented with a congressional subpoena, the president himself, if he were subpoenaed, would have to show up. Thats really a striking thing. This judge was given one question to answer, right, had to do with whether don mcgahn had to show up. She goes on to address some National Security officials like john bolton she says would have to show up, but also the president himself, according to her. She was kind of ripping apart their arguments up and down, making sure when this goes before the Appeals Court and Supreme Court, those are important questions that might have to be answered as well. Read me the sentence she says that the president s are not king. There was part she says over 250 years of constitution i lost it here on my phone here, she says, quote president s are not kings. I think its a very important thing for a judge to say those words because it is one of those things the Justice Department has been arguing, stated simply, the primary take away from the past 250 years of recordrd American History is that president s are not kings. Again, wolf, this is an important thing for a judge to say, you look at bill barr who spoke to the Justice Society a few days ago, one of the things he made clear was the Justice Department looks at president ial immunity to be a very serious thing, to be absolute and trump everything else. Thats a declaration of war bill barr made saying, not so fast. Its significant for other witnesses. The past week, weve seen witnesses coming forward and testifying over the objection of the white house. The white house cannot prevent people from testifying before congress. We have individual people, both current officials and former officials, doj is offering one part of the law and congress is offering the other. They have to decide which version to comply with and this is the court weighing in, in a way that directly speaks to those individuals saying you have to comply with, not what mcgahn said but takes away from the decision. One of the things the judge says to the Administration Officials, a spicy line in his decision, the trump card should at most be a rain check. It really gets to this idea you cannot, as the white house decide Carte Blanche nobody can ever go before Congress Even after they left the administration. I want to bring Jeffrey Toobin back into this and reread that key sentence. I will read it once again for you, stated simply, the primary take away from the past 250 years of recorded American Interest rates is that president s are not kings. What is so peculiar about the Justice Departments position here is they took such a broad claim of this notion of absolute immunity was invented by the trump Justice Department. If you look at the big Supreme Court cases on these issues, United States states versus nixon in 1974, the paula jones case in 1997 or 09, when bill clinton was president that said he had to give a deposition, they never talk about absolute immunity. Its important even though the house clearly won this case, there is room for further fighting here, even if don mcgahn shows up to testify, what judge jackson says here is that there are certain individual there are certain questions he might be able to assert executive privilege, what questions and what could he answer . That could begin a whole additional round of questions. It is not clear and the courts have never made clear what the precise contours of executive privilege are. Even though this is clearly for the notion you have to show up if Congress Subpoenas you when you work in the executive branch the scope of the questions is not resolved and that could lead to more litigation, even if this is held. The Supreme Court in a major win for the president and white house and correspondent reporting now the house of representatives will not get President Trumps financial records for now. The Supreme Court said on monday, the president fighting on several fronts to shield the records from disclosure, talking 8 years of financial disclosure, the Supreme Court decided the house of representatives is not going to get them, jeffrey. Id like to know a little more what they did, sometimes called an administrative stay. We will not do anything now while we review the papers and those sometimes last only a few days. A true stay until the litigation is over and could last a few months. Since this is breaking news and all i know about this case is what you just told me, i dont know how significant it is. Jeffrey is right. Essentially the Supreme Court is saying they will set up a schedule for both sides to file some briefs in order for them to hear this out and decide whether to take on the larger case. This was hurtling down to a finish and theyre about to have to produce these records. The Supreme Court is tapping the brakes and making sure everybody has time to decide whether or not this is something they want to continue fighting over. At least for now the Supreme Court will give it a little bit of a pause. The key words, for now, but we dont know how it will change. You getting a reaction for all the breaking news unfolding . Reporter we are getting some reaction. Talking to jay sekulow, he president s outside attorney, he has been talking about this before the Supreme Court about the president s personal tax records, jay sekulow has been arguing for weeks this raises important separation of powers issue, congress should not be able to go into the personal tax records of the president of the United States no matter who is in office and sounds like, at least for the moment, the Supreme Court will hear this out. And democrats, when it gets back to the impeachment inquiry, this is one reason democrats say they dont want to fight all these matters in court, for instance why mm should testify in the impeachment inquiry and saying we should try to bring these officials in to testify but that will take months for that to be adjudicated, and you can see now the Supreme Court blocking the house from obtaining these tax records, it goes to show you how long these things can play out. The don mcgahn ruling is a point. He left the office the end of last year and here we are almost the end of 2019 getting a judges ruling in all of this and the Justice Department saying they want to appeal. Talking to legal sources close to the don mcgahn situation, in the last several minutes, this has major implications for Mick Mulvaney and john bolton and so on and might not have so many implications for john mcgahn because he is not wanted to testify quite as much as he once was. As it relates to the white house and what the chair saying about the what the white house is saying about the don mcgahn ruling as youve been reporting in the last couple of minutes, the Justice Department will appeal going back to the concern the democrats have had the last few weeks and works to the advantage of the white house. The white house attorney and white House Counsels office and Justice Department, they can block these Administration Officials from testifying in these very important matters and it does raise critical separation of powers issues. The white house can block these officials from testifying, these Court Proceedings are bearing out a point that, yes, they can essentially freeze these officials in terms of how they cooperated in the investigation. It sounds at this point while don mcgahn may be forced to testify on all of this and his attorney, William Burke, is releasing a statement he will testify unless the Justice Department appeals and sounds like they will appeal. The big implications are Mick Mulvaney and john bolton and so far trying to stay away from capitol hill. And mike pompeo, a lot of people trying to stay away from this investigation. Stand by. Everyone stand by. Lots of breaking news unfolding as we speak. We will reveal our special coverage after a quick break. Whatever monday has in store and tackle four things at once. So when her car got hit, she didnt worry. She simply filed a claim on her usaa app and said. I got this. Usaa insurance is made the way kate needs it easy. She can even pick her payment plan so its easy on her budget and her life. Usaa. What youre made of, were made for. Usaa i looitaly avel. Yaaaaass. With the united explorer card, i get rewarded wherever i go. Going out for a bite. Rewarded going new places. Rewarded anytime. Rewarded getting more for getting away. Rewarded learn more at the explorer card dot com. And get. Rewarded im a verizon engineer, and im part of the Team Building the most powerful 5g experience for america. Its 5g ultra wideband for massive capacity and ultrafast speeds. Almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. Thats 25 times faster than todays network in new york city. So people from midtown manhattan to downtown denver can experience what our 5g can deliver. woman and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places. Its pretty crazy. Just imagine what it can do for you. Easy twist design. R. Optimum control. Introducing the allnew nutribullet blender combo. One blender with endless possibilities. Following two major decisions just reached by judges and courts here in washington, d. C. , the u. S. District court judge for the district of columbia, judge Ketanji Brown jackson just ruled don mcgahn, former white House Counsel must testify before the house of representatives. Thats a win for the house of representatives even though the Justice DepartmentJust Announced they will appeal this decision. And the president has been give an victory from the Supreme Court ruling the president , for now, not necessarily, for now, give up 8 years of his tax records to the house of representatives. Significant on both fronts, susan. It is significant. They set a Briefing Schedule december 5th, intending they intend to move rather rapidly on this case and willing to grant an administrative stay indicating they are willing to take up the case and not just the immediate decision whether President Trump has to give up his finances but the scope of the United States presidency overall. Incredibly significant in the don mcgahn case the court is ruling what is called a ju dishble question, not a political question between the executive branch and congress to work out themselves. The court saying, no, it is within our jurisdiction to decide when you have the president of the United States making an astonishing broad assertion of immunity and not complying with congressional subpoenas at all. What kind of decision . A justiciable decision. Go ahead, jeffrey. You learned a new legal word. William burke, the lawyer for don mcgahn just issued a statement. I wonder if i could read it. It is important. Don mcgahn will comply with judge jacksons decision unless it is stayed pending appeal. The doj, department of justice, is handling this case so you need to ask them whether they intend to seek a stay. Thats different from simply honoring an appeal because an appeal has been filed. Its very different from an Appellate Court when an healt Appellate Court simply hears an appeal and could take months upon what William Burke is saying h saying here is he will testify unless the d. C. Court grants a stay. Thats something pretty extraordinary. They dont always grant stays. I was saying earlier, this could take months. If they dont grant the stay, this could actually move pretty quickly. There is now at least a realistic chance that mcgahn will have to testify while impeachment is a live issue. Before the house of representatives. Let me get sean turner into this. Go ahead. After hearing jeffrey read that statement, there are huge implications for all the other senior Administration Officials waiting in the wings after going to the courts to see if they get a favorable ruling. I think its time for the white house to reevaluate the strategy here. Earlier susan talked about the degree this is sustainable. There are people in the electorate that if the courts determine these senior officials should testify, do you believe they should testify and people have said, yes, they absolutely do. What that means for the administration benefitting from and pushing these narrative, these people are not testifying because the democrats are made up their mind, know where theyre going with this, nat narrative is no longer sustainable as the white house fights this particularly where details of the involvement of these people continue to leak out. As these move forward the white house has to look at whether they lose supporters and lose people as these individuals likely go up and testify. To jeffreys point earlier, this does raise a prospect you have don mcgahn testifying sooner than we thought, potentially right into the middle of this ongoing impeachment inquiry which changes the dynamic what the inquiry is about. We know the democrats, at least nancy pelosi, thought about keeping it a narrowly focused inquiry, looking at the holdup of aid to ukraine and dynamics around that. Don mcgahn doesnt know anything about that presumably, he was long gone and essential to the obstruction of justice and does it become a broader and potentially messier inquiry that may go either way for the democrats. A very interesting dynamic. Important point, jackie. Its still a little early, were seeing how people are responding to this ruling. Those who already agreed to testify before congress are bureaucrats, career, public servants, dont make a living off being in the Republican Party. Those who decided to abide by President Trump and not abide by the subpoenas are president ial appointees. I cant see them deciding to go testify. What is likely is what adam told jake tapper yesterday, chief Justice Roberts potentially calling forth new witnesses impeachment trial when it goes to the senate. We have more news in the situation room after a quick break. Employees need more than just a paycheck. You definitely want to take advantage of all the benefits you can get. 2 3 of employees said that the workplace is an important source for personal savings and protection solutions. The workplace should be a source of financial security. Keeping your people happy is what keeps your people. Thats Financial Wellness. Put your employees on a path to Financial Wellness with prudential. If youre on medicare, remember, the annual Enrollment Period is here. The time to choose your medicare coverage. Begins october 15th and ends december 7th. So call unitedhealthcare and take advantage of a wide range of plans with a variety of benefits. Including an aarp Medicare Advantage plan from unitedhealthcare. It can combine medicare parts a and b, which is your hospital and doctor coverage. With part d Prescription Drug coverage, and more, all in one simple plan. For a low monthly premium or in some areas, no plan premium at all. Take advantage of primary care doctor visits. Preventive dental care and an eye exam. All for a 0 copay. Plus, earn rewards for completing other Preventive Care activities, like flu shots and annual physicals. You could also get over 150 in free health and wellness products. So nows the time to look at unitedhealthcares variety of plans, and let us help find the one that works best for you. Also ask about our ppo plans that let you see any doctor who accepts medicare, without a referral. And take advantage of innetwork costs, at home or traveling, when you see doctors in the Unitedhealthcare Medicare national network. With many of our Medicare Advantage plans, youll have 0 copays on the most common prescriptions. In fact, last year our Medicare Advantage plan members saved an average of over 6,500. And with renew active, enjoy a free gym membership and up to 115 in rewards for staying active. You can count on our guidance and support to help you get the most out of your plan. We can also help you schedule appointments or find a specialist. Annual enrollment ends december 7th. Start taking advantage of all the benefits. Of the only Medicare Advantage plans with the aarp name. We make it easy to enroll, too. So call unitedhealthcare or go online today. [sfx mnemonic] breaking news. Cnn has learned that federal prosecutors are taking a very close look at a business opened by the president s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani. Meanwhile, in his first interview since cooperating with federal investigators, an executive of ukraines stateowned gas company says that lev parnas was seeking corrupt deals in ukraine. We talked to drew griffin. Heres his report. Reporter andrew favarov thought it was a joke. The two shady business men had no backing, no experience. But what they did have was the Trump Administrations ear and they wanted a cut of ukraines national business. This was completely crazy. It was the first time in my business when two private actors were offering or discussing the issues that are supposed to be part of u. S. Foreign policy. Reporter he says what parnas and fruman were proposing was a takeover of management at nafta gas. Parnas and fruman would get sweetheart deals and anyone who got in their way, like u. S. Ambassador Marie Yavonovich would be removed. I didnt take it seriously. He told crazy stories. Then it took place. Thats when it was just a moment of, wow, for me. How is this happening . Did you fear that they were really connected to the Trump Administration and had the power to carry out what they were doing . After the events transpired with ambassador yavonovich, yes. Reporter they have been indicted. They allege the two men illegally funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars of foreign funds into Republican Party candidates and a trump super pac in an effort to buy political influence for their new gas Company CalledGlobal Energy producers. They have pleaded not guilty. Igor frumans attorney denied it. They reported their actions to the u. S. Embassy in kiev. He is cooperating with the federal investigation which cnn reports is focusing on the actions of President Trumps personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. Hi, mr. Giuliani. Reporter a source familiar with the matter said federal prosecutors are investigating giulianis possible business ties to parnas, fruman, and their Company Global producers. Earlier this month giuliani vehemently denied any wrongdoing. The reality is anything ive done is totally legal. Favarov said he never met with giuliani but the two men who came to him with a corrupt plan used their association with Rudy Giuliani as proof they could carry it out. Did they mention Rudy Giuliani . Yes. As their conduit . Yes, as one of the channels of communication and getting the right information across to the troublemakers. They said they could remove the ambassador . I find it hard to digest. Reporter whats at stake is much bigger. Russia, he says, is hoping ukraine will fail and that russian style and even russian supported corruption will creep back into ukraines struggling economy helping russia to further destabilize europe. Rooting out corruption is the best way for the u. S. And the west to fight back. He only hopes the leader of his adopted country Still Believes that. Thats why people all over the world look to the United States to set the standard, to show how things can be done in a moral and ethical and a transparent way and i certainly hope as a u. S. Citizen that this beacon does not lose its value because of some bad actors around becauand because of somed and opportunism. He spoke with prosecutors this past week. He wouldnt give us details. As weve learned in details about the sweeping subpoenas in the case, Rudy Giulianis business appears to be a major part of the investigation into whatever deals were being cooked up in ukraine. Wolf . Very important reporting. Drew griffin, thanks very much. Finally tonight, President Trump has often questioned the conclusion that russia interfered in the 2016 president ial election, a view held by the entire u. S. Intelligence community. Some of the gop allies including recently louisiana senator john kennedy are now pushing the debunked theory that it may have been ukraine. Who do you believe was responsible for hacking the dnc and Clinton Campaign computers, their emails . Was it russia or ukraine . I dont know nor do you nor do any of us. The entire Intelligence Community says it was russia. Right. But it could also be ukraine. But we do know that the president s own top National SecurityOfficials Say it was russia, including fbi director christopher wray, william barr, dan coates, secretary of state mike pompeo and former Homeland Security advisor tom bostic. As i have consistently, russia interfered with the last election. I am sure allamericans share my concerns about the russian government interfering in the president ial election. We continue to see a pervasive messaging campaign by russia to try to weaken and divide the United States. Do you accept the conclusions of the ic regarding russias measures . Senator warner, i do. It is not only a conspiracy theory, it is debunked. The United States government reached a conclusion on russia in the dnc hack before it even communicated it to the fbi. All of these officials were appointed by President Trump. None of them are never trumpers or members of the socalled deep state. The president s own Intelligence Community it shows that they were shifting blame from moscow to ukraine. We hope senator kennedy will join us soon. Erin Burnett Outfront starts right now. Out front next. A judge ruling that the former white House Counsel must testify in the impeachment probe. Even trump may not be immune from testifying under oath. Also breaking, federal prosecutors Digging Deeper into Rudy Giuliani. The president still coming to his lawyers defense. Whats the quote, unquote, insurance policy theyre talking about . And what his republican colleagues are telling him behind closed doors. Good evening. Im erin burnett. Major ruling that could have a big impact on the