If leader mcconnell doesnt call for these witnesses in his proposal, were allowed to amend it and ask for them. Im allowed to amend it. And then if they say, well, lets wait and hear the arguments, well want to vote after they hear the arguments as well and well do everything we can to force votes again. You heard there, he is going to try to force votes on this, likely to take place behind close doors because, of course, the rules of the impeachment process means that senators cant talk. They have to be silent. This will likely take place outside of our view. Senate Mitch Mcconnell said days ago he has enough votes to pass these rules with just republican support. We heard from a handful, a small number of senators, who said theyre open to hearing from witnesses, but even they say they want to address that later in the trial, according to the socalled clinton model after each side has made their opening arguments, the house managers and trumps defense team and after senators have had a chance to question both sides. Those people who said yes im open to it, will they change their minds . After the case is presented, sometimes you get a yes. A lot of stuff up in the air. Athena jones, thank you very much. Lets look at the men and women who are w. H. O. Will be making the case to the senate. The framers worst nightmare. Theyll face president trumps handpicked legal team on the righthand side. White House Counsel is in there as is the man whose work led to president bill clintons impeachment, ken starr, as well as alan dershowitz. Most or all of them being chosen, weve been told, working on television. Alan dershowitz was on cnn, saying how he sees himself in this historical trial. He says the part he plays will be less about donald trump and mo more, in his words, about the constitution. Im not involved in the daytoday issues. I was asked by the president s defense team to become of counsel on the specific issue of the criteria, the constitutional criteria for impeachment. Thats a very important issue. I will be making that argument as an advocate, not as an expert witness. I will be advocating against impeachment of this president based on the constitutional criteria in the constitution. The white house has been responding to the case with a sevenpage brief. Whats at core of the president s defense . This is their first forceful formal response. It mirrors that letter you saw in the fall when the president was being impeached in the house, where they were saying they were not going to cooperate with their request. Theyre making the same argument here, except theyre specifically referencing these two articles of impeach, break them down, saying they do not believe either is constitutional, saying theyre defective and that they violate the constitution. Democrats saying they did not get the documents or witnesses they wanted in that house impeachment. Theyre hoping theyre going to get that now as athena was just laying out. While allies are telling the president hey, if they do get the witnesses they want, john bolton, those types, we will push for the hunter bidens, joe bidens, adam schiffs. Whats notable about this response, we are expecting to get a longer one by the deadline of that filing for tomorrow. They are not denying that the president tried to withhold the aid from ukraine or when would a white house meeting demanding that they demand this investigation into the bidens. An argument you heard them make multiple times is that the president did nothing wrong. Its still interesting to hear alan dershowetz say he is not part of this daytoday legal team. Alan dershowitzs name was underneath the letterhead. And he will be arguing on the president s behalf. Maybe its about the constitution and not the details of the case here, but he will be arguing on his behalf. We talked to white house officials, why is there this distancing youre seeing from l alan dersho with witz . They said they dont know, that he is on the team and on the side of the president s point of view. Thats for sure. Joining me now for more, team of experts. I want to begin with you, carrie. At the center of the president s teams defense is that this is constitutionally invalid because it has not alleged a crime. Thats what you hear from dershowitz as well. Respond to that. So the act of impeachment doesnt require a crime to have been committed. The president isnt going to be prosecuted for something. The only remedy to deal with an abuse of his office, and thats what the house managers have laid out in their brief, that he abused his authority to provide defense assistance to a foreign country. That is a Core National security authority. Theyre alleging that he abused it. That doesnt have to be a violation of the criminal code in order for it to be impeachable. In other words you dont need a statutory crime thats on the books but in effect the framers Gave Congress the ability to define what is impeachable behavior . The senators have the ability to determine what they think rises to the level of impeachment. There is not specific elements like we would normally think about in terms of an elements of a crime and a criminal act. Instead the main reason there is impeachment in the constitution is to deal with abuse of power. Otherwise, we would have no remedy for removing a president before the next election before abusing his office. Andrew johnson, 1868, bill clinton, 1999. Richard nixon was nearly impeached. Thats why he was resigned. For what rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors specific to abuse of power . In the clinton case, abuse of power was one of the articles against bill clinton. People agreed. They know they wrote that in to the nixon deal. The rest of the impeachment, 15 impeachments at the federal level, right . Three at the president ial level. The rest among judges, across federal judges. This is what the senate has decided you can be impeached for among the judges. Two for intoxication on the bench. Abuse of power, favoritism in appointment of bankruptcy. Did not require a crime to be judged by the senate is thats a basis. So pamela, your point to this is if you look at precedent for where the senate has not just tried judges, where they have the same power but remove them from office, but the president clearly is different. It undercuts a central argument weve heard from the president s attorneys in the answer that was released yesterday and what weve heard from alan dershowitz, that the articles of impeachment, particularly the abuse of power, and therefore are constitutionally invalid. As david pointed out, there are several examples of federal judges who have been impeached for noncriminal conduct such as intoxication on the bench. I asked a source close to the president s legal team about what the thinking of this was. Past president s, it has had to do with criminal conduct. There isnt any distinction im aware of between a president and judges as it pertains to impeachment. My view of this, though, is that the president s lawyers know that as much of this is legal, its also a public messaging strategy as well. By getting this message out there, theres no proof that the president committed a crime or violated a law that. They believe, will resonate with the American Public and the mueller investigation. To pams point, whats the big takeaway in the base . No collusion, no obstruction, total exoneration. Now only one of those things is the collusion piece, mueller said, well, we cant see that. No obstruction . Theres, by my nonlawyer eye, a dozenish examples of potentially donald trump obstructing. Total exoneration, it literally says in the mueller report, if we could exonerate donald trump, we would say so. Pams point is so, so important. This is not about how the senate views it. This is not about how Chuck Schumer views the moves that either Mitch Mcconnell is making or donald trump is making. Donald trump, from picking that legal team to every tweet thats going to come out, to Stephanie Grisham and what she says, its all based on shaping the broader public opinion. Because their bet is that people arent going to follow every Little Movement that happens over these coming moments. They might be right, people wont follow it as closely as we do. Historically, legally, it is, by design, a political process. Yes. Is it not . The framers gave elected politicians the right to decide, in effect, if a president should be removed based on the behavior, whatever the alleged behavior is. Its a political process. The venue for the proceeding is congress. Were not in the judicial system where theres certain standards, certain evidentiary standards, Supreme Court precedent and all those types of things that would apply if we were in the judicial branch. This is on the congress side. And so it is a political process. Thats why they can set what the rules are. Senators will be able to vote whether they have witnesses or whether not. So much is up to how they want to shape this particular proceeding and whether or not they believe that the evidence presented meets the standard of impeachment. The senators have a lot of flexibility here to make that historical procedure. If you read about it, they considered putting it in the Supreme Court to decide. Decided not to, because they decided if you did that, the court could make a decision after the president left office. In effect they would have to recuse themselves. They intentionally left it vague and left it up to the senate of the future to define whether its a high crime or misdemeanor. Weve known that all along. I think it was part of the wisdom of the founders. They tried to prejudge everything. They couldnt. They left it up to the good sensibility of people who came along later about whether the behavior was so repulsive that that person should no longer be present. Thats why this argument about, you know, no statutory crime it really falls, if you look at the history of how they got there. Lets talk, pamela, about Chuck Schumer, ranking democrat in the senate, is saying here. He wants to force a vote about whether to have new witnesses and other evidence right at the front of this. How would that work . Is our best guess that he has those votes at this early stage . Mitch mcconnell has come out and said he has votes for the resolution to move this until after both sides make their cases. Mcconnell is a pretty good vote counter. Justice kavanaugh proves that, yeah. You have some republicans, at least three, who have come out and signaled an openness to hearing from witnesses. That doesnt mean theyll vote with Chuck Schumer from the get go on tuesday. Perhaps when this is taken up later in the senate trial. This is one of the most contentious issues and youre seeing democrats ramp up their arguments. You heard them saying look, this is not a fair trial without witnesses. Now you have john bolton, National Security adviser, coming out saying hes willing to testify, lev parnas, who has been involved with Rudy Giuliani in the ukraine situation. We heard nancy pelosi, theyve done some polling and this fair trial idea has some traction. Sure. Its a difficult political argument to make, is it not, particularly that there should be no witnesses in the trial, particularly for senators who are on the bubble . Yes. And to echo pam, i think its important to remember, if there is a vote that Chuck Schumer forces on witnesses on tuesday, my strong guess is that they will not get the required vote. That does not mean we will never see witnesses. Chuck schumer believes, to your point, jim, politically speaking, look, we learned all this information. There were three witnesses in the clinton impeachment trial. Why would we not by creating a paper record, they will force a series of votes. We always talk about Susan Collins and lisa murkowski, rightly so. Mitt romney, cory gardner, up for reelection. Hes behind right now. Martha mcsally, despite her conduct with with manu raju, totally inappropriate, shes running behind her opponent. There are a group, its five to seven of them. The problem is, you would need 20 of them to remove donald trump, but its different when it comes to you need four. Right. Much more to discuss. Today in other news house impeachment manager adam schiff is saying documents are being when would that could be important for the impeachment trial. Ill speak to acting director Andrew Mccabe coming up. Whether youre a dine outer, take outer, veggie person, definitelynotjustveggie person, bread lover, or cheese lover. All you have to do is answer personal assessment questions and get scientifically matched with a proven weight loss plan. Find out which new customized plan can make losing weight easier for you the new program from ww. Weight watchers reimagined. Join for free and get two months free hurry, offer ends january 20th. Just between us, you know whats better than mopping . Anything at the end of a long day, its the last thing i want to do. Well i switched to swiffer wet jet and its awesome. Its an allinone so its ready to go when i am. The cleaning solution actually breaks down dirt and grime. And the pad absorbs it deep inside. So, it prevents streaks and haze better than my old mop. Plus, its safe to use on all my floors, even wood. Glad i got that off my chest and the day off my floor. Try wet jet with a moneyback guarantee good morning, mr. Sun. Good morning, blair. [ chuckles ] whoo. Im gonna grow big and strong. Yes, you are. Im gonna get this place all clean. Ill give you a hand. And im gonna put lisa on crutches wait, what . Said shes gonna need crutches. She fell pretty hard. You might want to clean that up, girl. Excuse us. When owning a Small Business gets real, progressive helps protect what you built with customizable coverage. And im gonna eh, eh, eh. Donny, no. Oh. And im gonna eh, eh, eh. You will see at vgreat and look great. Ee guaranteed we say that too youve gotta use these because we dont mean it. Buy any pair at regular price, get one free. Really visionworks. See the difference. You wanna see something thatamazing . Ing. Go to hilton instead of a travel site and youll experience a whole new range of emotions like. The relaxing feeling of knowing youre getting the best price. Thesell work. The utter delight of free wifi. Oh man this is the best part. Isnt that you . Yeah. And the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. I can read minds too. Really . Book at hilton. Com. If you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25 off that stay. Expect better. Expect hilton. I spend a lot of time sin my truck. Y . Its my livelihood. Rock music man so im not taking any chances when something happens to it. So when my windshield cracked. My friend recommended safelite autoglass. Tech hi, im adrian. Man thanks for coming. Tech oh, no problem. Tech check it out. Man yeah. They came right to me, with Expert Service where i needed it. Thats service i can trust. No matter what im hauling. Right, girl . Singers safelite repair, safelite replace. Can match the power of energizer. Because energizer ultimate lithium is the longest lasting aa battery in the world. [confetti cannon popping] energizer. Backed by science. Matched by no one. Tonight chairman of the House Intelligence Committee adam schiff is raising several key concerns ahead of the impeachment trial. One of them relating specifically to the Intelligence Community. The Intelligence Community is beginning to withhold documents from congress on the issue of ukraine. They appear to be succumbing to pressure from the administration. The nsa in particular is withholding what are potentially relevant documents to our oversight responsibilities on ukraine but also withholding documents potentially relevant that the senators might want to see during the trial. With me now is former actor fbi director Andrew Mccabe. Thank you for taking the time on a sunday. Sure. Your experience but also the role of the Intelligence Community. Are there circumstances where the i. C. Could reasonably withhold documents that the chairman of the Intel Committee says is relevant to an investigation . Jim, its very hard for me to imagine a scenario in which the elements of the Intelligence Community would withhold documents from the committee. If there were an ongoing sensitive operation, for operational reasons they wanted to delay turning things over, thats one possible scenario. Other than that, theres a very Free Exchange between the different elements of the community and the intelligence committee. This has happen asd we learned about another case i dont know if you say stonewalling but at least pulling back. Testify in public around whats known as the global threats, worldwide threat assessment here. Were hearing they dont want to testify in public and that seems to be after last year and years before where they said things that contradict the president s own baseless claims. Right. So you have them withholding documents and you have them withholding public testimony that is part again, the committees oversight of those agencies. Very, very concerning decisions that we see coming from the Intelligence Community. I mean, look, nobody likes to testify publicly. I didnt enjoy doing it when i was in the fbi. You may recall i had to jump in and take over jim comeys testimonial responsibilities on this very same sort of hearing mere days after he was fired. Its such an important presence for the fbi to have at that table that i felt like it was the right thing to do. They typically have a public hearing and then they have a private hearing behind closed doors in the scif to cover the really sensitive stuff. That public part of the hearing is important. People should understand what the leaders of our intelligence entities think of the current threats we face. Ive watched those hearings and certainly have learned a lot about them. Russias threat to interfere in another election, issues that americans have a right to know. I want to ask you about evidence thats come to light since the house impeached the president and before the trial. Some of this is communications. This drew our attention, in particular. You have devin nunes, ranking republican on the House Intelligence Committee. His top aide communicating with lev parnas, close associate of Rudy Giuliani now indicted. Close associate who is described in interviews, include iing on s network saying there was, in effect, a scheme to trade military assistance for investigating the bidens. Im going to throw up one of the Text Messages between nunes aide and parin as. Theyre communicating here about lets do our call at 12 00. We can do the first prosecutor at 1 00 your time. They appear to be speaking to a former prosecutor in ukraine who offered his help in this. Tell us why americans, people at home, or people watching this abroad should be concerned about this kind of communication between such senior american officials and members of congress and someone like lev parnas. Well, its important when we think about lev parnas to think of the whole spectrum of issues he presents. There are aspects of the story he tells that are challenging in terms of his own credibility. He uses some vague generallities. He says everybody knew everything. Did the Vice President know . Of course he knew. Hes not able to cite specifics of speaking to people in some of those exchanges. This is a very different situation. This is on that end of the spectrum for lev parnas in which he has actual realtime Text Messages with the other people he claims to have been dealing wi with, proving in essence he was engaging with those dealings. In this case, with representative nunes and staffer derek harvey. What we see is theres a very senior staffer to the Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee is deeply involved with lev parnas on a very familiar, very frequent basis, involved in the actual meetings that parnas is taking and setting up in ukraine to execute this scheme. So it puts the representatives staffer and eventually the representative himself in the execution of this scheme. You know, we should note that the president s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, he has been in touch with some fairly shady folks in ukraine. Absolutely. Including folks, one of whom who has been providing information to him, training with the kgb. Based on your experience, are these the kind of communications that a country like russia attempts to take advantage of, that information . Of course, of course. To be able to have insight as to what the president or his close advisers are actually thinking and doing, and trying to execute on the ground in a place like ukraine, where the Russia Intelligence Services operate in a completely unfettered manner, they do whatever they want in ukraine on a daily basis. So, to be able to monitor, possibly surveil, interact with this group of people conspireing in this scheme is a gold mine for them. Andrew mccabe, thank you very much. Be sure. Eight senators who could make an impact on if witnesses are called as well as new evidence. Who to watch. And what we can expect from the chief justice, john roberts. S topical pain relievers first. Like salonpas patch large. Its powerful, fdaapproved to relieve moderate pain for up to 12 hours, yet nonaddictive and gentle on the body. Salonpas. Its good medicine. Hisamitsu. Robin hood and little john runnin through the forest laughin back and forth at what the otherne has to say theres a booking for every resolution. Book yours at booking. Com wthats why xfinity hasu made taking your internetself. And tv with you a breeze. Really . Yup. You can transfer your Service Online in about a minute. You can do that . Yeah. And with twohour Service Appointment windows, its all on your schedule. Awesome. So while moving may still come with its share of headaches. No kidding. Were doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. Go to xfinity. Com moving to get started. Of course, the leadup to president trumps impeachment trial has been contentious, to say the least, with democrats and republicans accusing one another of being biased. One person is obligated to remain impartial, chief justice of the United States, john roberts, who will preside over the senate trial. Gloria borgeer has more on the chief justice. Jim, the phrase impartial justice is not new to john roberts. And he may need to show senators how its done when he travels across the street to the senate on tuesday. In this class photo of the men and women in black, one justice sits smiling front and center. But chief Justice John Roberts will soon leave his natural habitat at the sedate Supreme Court and move to the political mine field of the senate, as he prosides over the trial of the president. When hes over at the Supreme Court, overseeing that body, hes actually a judge. He is casting votes. Hes deciding cases. When he is at the senate, hes not casting a vote for or against donald trump. He is presiding over a trial. The constitution itself is vague on his job description, saying only this. The chief justice shall preside. Im now ready to take the oath. His onetime mentor, chief Justice William rehnquist, took a handsoff approach to the job when he sat on the dias throughout bill clintons impeachment. The senate will convene as a court of impeachment. Two decades later, Mitch Mcconnell makes it clear he would like roberts to stick to the same script. I would anticipate that the chief justice would not actually make any rulings. He would simply submit motions to the body and we would vote. Thats probably just fine with roberts. John roberts is naturally reserved. John roberts is very much concerned about appearances and the judiciary looking impartial. I cannot imagine john roberts having any incentive to intervene in the business of the senate in a way that would look like he was actually controlling the fate of donald trump. Although he has pushed back at the president in the past, directing a public broadside against trump after he publicly criticized judges as political. Roberts wrote, we do not have obama judges or trump judges. We do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. We do not caucus in separate rooms. We do not serve one party or one interest. We serve one nation. Roberts pushed back against trump was an example of what an artful politician roberts is, because it showed him defending the judiciary, pretending in my view, that they are apolitical, but giving himself the political space to continue to be the conservative that he has always been. Roberts was thrust into the courts top role 14 years ago. Now at 64, he leads an ideologically divided court. Just as donald trump and a House Democratic majority continually collide. Two glaciers crushing together and anybody caught in between those two glaciers or icebergs can be crushed. Theres high stakes and lots of tension. And where does that leave john roberts . Well, right smack in the middle of things. Not just presiding over impeachment in the senate but potentially deciding issues affecting the presidency itself at the high court. Every generation has a moment where the Supreme Court seems to stand on the edge of the abusiness. Right now there are fundamental questions about the protection of individual liberty and about the basic structure of our government that are up for grabs in ways we havent seen in decades. Roberts is a product of the reagan revolution, that cadre of Young Lawyers who served in washington to change the world. The tenor of the times was that there hadnt been a republican president. There hadnt been an acceptance or an involvement of the conservative movement. He was a special assistant to the attorney general. Before that, he was clerk to Justice Rehnquist and a very prominent court of appeals judge. So, he was in the judiciary then. Then he was in the white house, the executive branch. When, at 27, he went to work for Ronald Reagans counsel, fred fielding. When youre in the white House Counsels office, you have to put in your thichinging the ingredient of the political impact and the social impact of something, not just the legalistic impact. And i hope that that was helpful to john in his developing his own philosophies. He was for limiting voting rights, for eliminating affirmative action. He was for restricting abortion rights. This was the reagan agenda, and it was his agenda. Married with with two children, the son of an indiana steel executive and the product of a private high school and harvard and harvard law, the Young Roberts always figured he would be writing history instead of making it. What motivated me to go to law school is that there were not a lot of jobs for history teachers. Roberts had plenty of offers as a lawyer and became a federal judge, and then in 2005, george w. Bush catapulted him to the ultimate job at the age of 50. In Public Service and in private practice he has argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court. Roberts was smooth. I will remember that its my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat. Judges and justices are servants of the law, not the other way around. Judges are like umpires. Umpires dont make the rules. They apply them. In the past, roberts has been a proponent of president ial authority. Executive power, especially visavis the congress, has been one of roberts core values. Will all senators now stand . In the Senate Chamber roberts doesnt rule. Even so, he may be asked to. Especially because democrats and republicans are battling over witnesses, but the betting is that roberts will turn those decisions over to a majority vote, as his mentor rehnquist did when presiding over the clinton impeachment. I underwent the sort of Culture Shock that naturally occurs when one moves from the very structured environment of the Supreme Court to what i shall call, for want of a better phrase, the more free form environment of the senate. If i am confirmed when Justice Nominee roberts was asking for senate votes for himself, it went very well. John roberts was the last justice whose appointment was almost apart from partisanship, that his qualifications were so great and his confirmation hearing testimony was so impressive that he got almost half the Democratic Senators to vote for him. But this time its not about him. And those who know john roberts say he will want to keep it that way. Jim . Gloria borger, thank you very much. Democrats will need four republican senators to break ranks if they want to get witnesses called in the Senate Impeachment trial. Well break down who to keep your eye on with that decision coming. Thats coming up next. Ultra sof its softer than ever. Charmin ultra soft is softer than ever, so its harder to resist. Okay, this is getting a little weird enjoy the go with charmin. Just between us, you know whats better than mopping . Anything at the end of a long day, its the last thing i want to do. Well i switched to swiffer wet jet and its awesome. Its an allinone so its ready to go when i am. The cleaning solution actually breaks down dirt and grime. And the pad absorbs it deep inside. So, it prevents streaks and haze better than my old mop. Plus, its safe to use on all my floors, even wood. Glad i got that off my chest and the day off my floor. Try wet jet with a moneyback guarantee and i like to question your im yoevery move. N law. Like this left turn. Its the next one. You always drive this slow . How did you make someone i love . That must be why youre always so late. I do not speed. And thats saving me cash with drivewise. My son, he did say that you were the safe option. And thats the nicest thing you ever said to me. So get allstate. Stop bossing. Where good drivers save 40 for avoiding mayhem, like me. This is my sons favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady . [tina] youre an old lady. Diarrhea . Pepto diarrhea to the rescue. Its 3x concentrated liquid formula coats and kills bacteria to relieve diarrhea. The leading competitor only treats symptoms it does nothing to kill the bacteria. Treat diarrhea at its source with pepto diarrhea. Rowithout the Commission Fees and account minimums. So, you can start investing wherever you are even on the bus. Download now and get your first stock on us. Robinhood. When we see you enter through our doors. We dont see who youre against, or for. Whether tomorrow will be light or dark. All we see in you, is a spark. We see your kindness and humanity. The strength of each community. The more we look the more we find the sparks that make america shine. The Senate Impeachment trial will offer a fascinating opportunity to watch Party Politics play out. Democrats could force a lot of procedural issues, but key ones, including the question of whether the senate will hear from witnesses and view new evidence. With that in mind, cnn politics reporter Chris Cillizza has compiled a list of eight senators to watch, crucial ones. Give us the details here, chris. Of these eight, you would only need four to join democrats. Thats right, jim. These are the eight well be keep iing an eye on as we go through these weeks of the process. Lets start here. Two senators, one retiring, lamar alexander, longtime institutionalist, doesnt have to worry about trump, is retiring in 2020. Mitt romney, not retiring. Remember, he got elected in 2018, not up until 2024. Not a real issue there. Cory gardner up this november in a state Hillary Clinton won, running against John Hickenlooper who is leading him. Joni ernst, iowa, swing state. They like their nominee here, ernst won relatively easy but will be under some pressure back home. Lets keep going. These are the two faces if you follow politics at all, these are the republican moderates, lisa murkowski, Susan Collins, the last huge senate vote, Brett Kavanaugh confirmation, murkowski voted against, collins voted for. They are both on the record for saying they dont want to rule out the possibility of witnesses. Murkowski yesterday talking to local news, talking about that very fact. Lets play that. I care about the roles and responsibilities that we have, that were outlined in the constitution, and in making sure that we are doing right by them. And so i dont want this proceeding to be a circus. I dont want it to be viewed as a mockery or a kangaroo court. So, look, you can make what you want out of that. Chuck schumer probably likes to hear that, jim, because it sounds like shes open to, at least, talking about some votes that might be with democrats. I want to finish on these last two. Martha mcsally got a lot of attention for being rude unnecessarily to our colleague, manu raju. She is in a state where, unlike and like cory gardner is trailing her opponent. And doug jones, the only one who has a d by his name. Represents a state in alabama that donald trump won overwhelming overwhelmingly. He won a special election to replace jeff sessions, beat roy moore. Lets see what he does. He could vote for against impeachment and still lose against and still lose. Lets see what he does here. Seven republicans, one democrat. I think well be talking a lot about the faces i just showed you. Chris cillizza, thank you very much. President trump, he says that the history theres a long history he has a long history with the legal system. Were talking lawsuits numbering into thousands. What that can tell us about his potential strategy to fight impeachment. honk i hear you sister. Thats why im partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual checkup, and be open with your doctor about anything you feel physically and emotionally. But now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. Just find a period of time to unwind. A location to destress. An activity to enjoy. Or the name of someone to talk to. To create a plan that works for you, visit cigna. Com mystressplan. Cigna. Together, all the way. Visit cigna. Com mystressplan. Until i found out what itst it actually was. Ed me. Dust mite droppings eeeeeww dead skin cells gross so now, i grab my swiffer sweeper and heavyduty dusters. Duster extends to three feet to get all that gross stuff gotcha and for that nasty dust on my floors, my sweepers on it. The textured cloths grab and hold dirt and hair no matter where dust bunnies hide. No more heebie jeebies. Phew. Glad i stopped cleaning and started swiffering. I wanted my hepatitis c gone. I put off treating mine. Epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c. Whatever your type, epclusa could be your kind of cure. I just found out about mine. I knew for years epclusa has a 98 overall cure rate. I had no symptoms of hepatitis c mine caused liver damage. Epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. Before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up, and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. Tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b, other liver or. Kidney problems, hiv, or other medical conditions. And all medicines you take, including herbal supplements. Taking amiodarone with epclusa may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. Common side effects include headache and tiredness. Ask your doctor today, if epclusa is your kind of cure. Are your asthma treatments just not enough . Then see what could open up for you with fasenra. It is not a steroid or inhaler. It is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. Its an addon injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. Nearly 7 out of 10 adults with asthma may have elevated eosinophils. Fasenra is designed to target and remove eosinophils, a key cause of asthma. It helps to prevent asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can reduce the need for oral steroids like prednisone. Fasenra may cause allergic reactions. Get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. Dont stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. Tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection, or your asthma worsens. Headache and sore throat may occur. Could you be living a bigger life . Ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. Tonight a source close to the white house tells cnn that the president sought on high profile legal team that can perform on television for his defense during the impeachment trial. Indeed the evidence suggests that the president repeatedly tried to thwart the Legal Process. When ken starr was building the impeachment case against bill clinton, saying the president had sexual relations with an intern and lied about it under oath, donald trump called the special prosecutor a freak and more. I think ken starr is a lunat lunatic. I think as he disaster. But now starr is on trumps impeachment defense team. Joining robert wray and allen dershowitz. We shall doing do have our best to be thorough and fair. Wray took over when starr stepped down and seems ready to stand by him again. Although there might not be at this point the votes to dismiss this outright, i think you can look for summary proceedings in the United States, in the United StatesSenate Without witnesses. Dershowitz was part of the socalled dream team defended o. J. Simpson. If youre honor didnt see, everybody else saw it. He represented patty hearst and for a time, jeffrey epstein. He told the new yorker he regrets that one. Hes saying a lot of other things. Black lives matter is endangering the fairness of our legal system. His flair for grabbing headlines may be why some say dershowitz will frenlt oral arguments against the impeachment charges. Theyre the kinds of broad, open ended criteria that can be with thatized against virtually any president. The defense team also includes Florida Attorney bomb bondi, james raskin, Pat Cipollone and outside attorney jay sekulow. Even with all that legal fire power, a question remains. One of the issues is, will the president follow legal advice . Even as the president stacks up all this big name legal help, he keeps insisting, the case against him is incredibly weak and anybody can see its a hoax. Cnn, washington. Back with us now, you look at that team. What do you make of his defense team and his strategy as a result . Well, the team might be high profile but i wouldnt say that its a first class team. The president really couldnt get the any of the constitutional, conservative super stars that you might think, the type that worked on the bushgore case, or that type of caliber of lawyer. So what he really shas a mishmash of lawyers. Some freedom the white House Counsels office that have been willing to work for him in that will the capacity. Pat cipollone, pam bondi, someone that he thinks performs well on tv and he knows from florida. And then ken starr and allen dershowitz, an odd couple for a legal team. Their role in the impeachment, some of the comments on the other side. You see ken starr there. He accused president clinton of trying thwart the Legal Process throughout. And by the way, when ken starr was independent counsel, there were witnesses called in the senate trial. There were. So on that point, the obstruction, the second article of impeachment, well hear ken starr making the exact opposite arguments he made before. Fwhaus president has obstructed. Hes not been willing to provide witnesses, not able to provide documents. Those there exact opposite arguments that ken starr made before. Is that on their defense . Is everything seen through such a partisan lens, forgiving what they said then against a democratic president . So much of this legal Team Strategy or this impeachment Team Strategy really seems to be pr. Public relations. I think thats why we saw Allan Dershowitz on tv all weekend. A serious lawyer, a person approaching this historical proceeding with a seriousness of purpose would have been hunkered down preparing this weekend. Not on tv. They know thats what their client wants. And in this case, dershowitz has been qualifying what his role is. Thank you very much for everything. And thank you for joining us as the impeachment heads to the senate. Cnn has special coverage all day every day. Dont place moment from the capitol. The impeachment trial of donald j. Trump right here on cnn. Walk through this storm i would id do it all because i love you, i love you unconditional, unconditionally i will love you unconditionally theres a booking for every resolution. Book yours, and cancel if you need to. At booking. Com robinwithout the commission and fees. So, you can start investing today wherever you are even hanging with your dog. So, what are you waiting for . Download now and get your first stock on us. Robinhood. Excuse me. Uh. Do you mind. Being a motour . What could be better than being a motour . The real question is. Do you mind not being a motour . I do. For those who were born to ride, theres progressive. I do. If your glasses arent so will we. No we wont. Use your 2020 Vision Insurance on your first pair and get 50 off a second pair. Visionworks. See the difference. A book that youre ready to share with the world . Get published now, call for your free publisher kit today did someone put up a lot of money to have the democratic headquarters infiltrated and, if so, who and why . Justice will be pursued no matter whos involved. Do you have information implicating president nixon . I have no comment. The president of the United States demanded the attorney general fire the special prosecutor. That is the definition of tyranny. People have got to know whether or not their president s a crook