Katy. It is about my shirt. I have one just like it. Dont anyone out there ask, im not. Lets get on to the news. Sx. I need to leave now. Good afternoon stephanie, stop laughing. The president s frontline is trying to form a coherent defense that mr. Trump abused his authority during a july phone call with the president of ukraine. Senator Lindsey Graham called the president s allegations hearsay. This seems to me like a political setup. Its all hearsay. You cant get a parking ticket conviction based on hearsay. The whistleblower didnt hear the phone call. But the whistleblowers account of that phone call lines up pretty much exactly with the white house readout of that call. And further more, the white house acknowledged that the call was moved to a code word protected server which was first alleged by the whistleblower. On 60 minutes Kevin Mccarthy tried to catch scott pely in what he wanted to be a mistake. What do you make of this exchange . President zelensky says were almost ready to buy more jfrom the United States and President Trump said, i would like to do a favor, though. You added a word. Yes, its in the transcript. Take a look at the transcript, though is right there and, again, the white houses own readout of that call. On state of the union jim jordan threw out a red herring trying to get jake tapper to talk about the bidens instead. The Vice President s son gets paid 50,000 a month and gets hired by a company in an industry he has no experience in and thats fine and all you folks in the press, oh, no problem here. But a number of western governments were calling for that ukrainians president resignation because he was not doing enough on corruption and the investment had been dormant for a year. Furthermore, hunter biden was never found to do anything wrong. As jake tapper later noted and we will, as well, jim jordan who himself has been accused of things in the last year would be more sensitive about throwing out wild allegations. Finally on fox news sunday, Stephen Miller straight up refused to answer the questions that were being asked of him. The president has the state department. Hes got the cia. Hes got the pentagon and hes got a number of other agencies. Why did he use three private lawyers to get information on biden from the Ukrainian Government rather than go through all of the agencies of this government . Two different points. Number one how about answering my question. Stephen, im asking you a direct question. Why did the president use private attorneys rather than go to the state department . If you dont know, thats an acceptable answer. Two issues that were brought up. Why did he do it . Chris, i understand. I understand that you have your question. I have my answer. Two issues that were brought up on the phone call. Your nonanswer at this point. We would ask anybody on the president s side on this, if this call was perfect, then why is the state department and the doj so intent on separating themselves from this unfolding saga while we wait for that answer, support for an impeachment inquiry now stands at 226, including independent justin ammash. The president has said he would only start worrying if National Polls showed more than 50 of americans supported impeachment. Well, today, for the very first time, a cbs yougov found that 55 do. Our big question is, will Donald Trumps republican wall break . Joining me, nbc news correspondent jeff bennett and phil rutger and wbur senior washington correspondent kimberly atkins. Jeff, i do want to start with you. What is the reporting that the president said about those impeachment polls . Well, two sources familiar tell our colleague Kristen Welker and me and President Trump was talking about the impeachment to thiz his allies said if the number gets above 50 ill worry about republican support and now we have this latest poll. An online poll, but a significant poll nonetheless that shows 55 of the American Public supporting an impeachment process. An impeachment inquiry. Thats an important distinction. But that they support democrats getting to the bottom of all of this. And right now, even though democrats are on this twoweek break, you do have the House Intelligence Committee continuing with a pretty packed schedule. They have a number of depositions lined up with people who played a significant role in this sort of ukrainian gambit at least as outlined by the whistleblower report. And democrats and the acting director of National Intelligence say the whistleblower report is credible. They want to hear from the state Department Official who heard, listen on that july 25th phone call in question and also hear from volker and he is the one that had the extensive conversations with giuliani. Interestingly enough you heard adam schiff said he wants to know what giuliani knows. He wants to call him in for some questioning. The temperature were getting from House Democrats is that would likely be, if at all, a private setting. We dont expect giuliani to be called up on the hill because democrats concerned about the level of circus that he might bring with them and the plan is to make the goal as fast and focused as possible. We dont hear republicans defending the president on the content of the call. The words dont exist in the readout of the call or trying to point to the bidens. Why are we not hearing them defend what the president actually said, which is will you do me a favor, though. Well, its really difficult when you have not only the white house read out, as you pointed out, really backing up this whistleblowers claim and the people like the president and Rudolph Giuliani not denying it, saying it is fine. It is hard to defend that. Much easier to go back to the white house talking points which were, of course, mailed out to the democrats, as well as republicans last week. But to go back to those talking points or to try to discredit this whistleblower, which still doesnt make sense. Even if you discredit the whistleblower thats like someone saying there was a bank robbery going on and calls the police and the police find the bank robber in the bank and the person who called the cops didnt see me. It doesnt make any sense if you have corroborating evidence else where. Even if the attempts to discredit joe biden and his son, even if whatever theyre claiming some wrongdoing that took place which has not been found. Even if it had been found, what the president did would still be problematic. That doesnt exonerate him. It really isnt clear why theyre going with this, other than they think they want to keep their supporters on their side and by discrediting the whistleblower and by attacking the bidens they think they can do that. The president has been going on in the past few days and unique for him. Over the weekend he quoted somebody who said that an impeachment would lead to a civil war and that prompted this response right here from congressman adam kingsinger. Donald trump, i never imagined such a quote to be repeated by a president. This is beyond repugnant. What is going on and does anybody in the white house telling him that maybe its not a great idea to go and essentially advocate for civil war or warn against americans killing americans because he might be impeached over wrongdoing . Yeah, well, the answer, katy is tale as old as time. Trump says what he want to say on twitter and no way for the staff to control him and i dont think theyre trying to at this moment and trumps instinct all week since tuesday when nancy pelosi opened the impeachment hearings has been to escalate and counterattack and claim that he somehow is a victim of his historic proportions. That he is being unfairly persecuted and the problem for the president is that his different talking points lack intellectual consistency. Talking about the whistleblower and the sources within the government who supplied the whistleblower are spies and committed treason against the United States by spying on the president. Those are his words. And on the other hand, he says that the whistleblower complaint is entirely fake and made up and yet hes already acknowledged publicly that he did talk about biden. He did ask for that corruption investigation and the call with the ukrainian president as is clear in the white house transcript. Hes sort of looking for an explanation and answer that would somehow vindicate him and he hasnt found it yet. The other defense being used a Trump Campaign defense, eli. And heres what he was trying to say. He talked about investigating ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election which has been documented. That they meddled in the 2016 election. A dnc operative thats russian propaganda. Its actually in politico as reported by ken vogel that same theory was already put down by the president s former Homeland Security who over the weekend on nbc said somebody is feeding the president these conspiracy theories and he thinks it might be Rudy Giuliani. Heres tom bossart. It is not only a Conspiracy Theory but completely debunked. It sticks in his mind when he hears it over and over again and for clarity here, george, let me just, again, repeat that it has no validity. Eli, i ask this honestly. Does the Campaign Care about facts here or is their goal just to make things confusing enough wrong or right that the trump voter kind of shrugs their shoulder and says, i dont really know so im going to stick with the president. I think thats right. They are presenting a different set of what they would like the public to accept as facts, alternative facts, you might say. The problem is, as phil pointed out, being contratridicted. Yeah, i asked the uk to investigate biden, so what. We have an exclusive report in l. A. Times who is in ukraine right now and spoke with the former prosecutor who told her that giuliani came over there and asked him point blank to investigate biden and that he had to say, look, if you have more evidence of something, let us know. But at this point, were not opening up a new investigation just because the president of the United States would like us to. And, so, theres just so much evidence already out there that undermines these attempts to gas light and redirect and assemble on this and i think that makes it really tough for the campaign and republicans to hit the sunday talk show circuit and credibly defend what happened. Told Richard Engel last week that there is no evidence that hunter biden or joe biden did anything wrong under ukrainian law. The question we started this all with is, will the president s gop wall break . Will it crack . Do you see any evidence that it could fall away as this process unfolds. And its going really rapidly. The yougov polls showing impeachment inquiry and all those democrats and justin amash and congressman over the weekend who talked about wanting an investigation but then walked back the idea of an impeachment inquiry. Is there some discomfort and could that lead to republican defections down the line . Its possible, but republicans have been very clear that, at least for now, that theyre really sticking by this president. Youve seen a couple republicans say things that say this call was inappropriate, to say at this call was problematic. You have that congressman saying that you should not be talking about a civil war, mr. President. But overall republicans are still sticking with this president. And its interesting to see this because what you have, i think, is the democrats finally getting a message that simple. One that is about 25 words. Which is that the president got on the phone with the foreign leader and tried to pressure that person for his own political gain to investigate a political opponent. Before this democrats had all sorts of things that they were saying about the president in the mueller report. 448 pages and it was convullted. Now, what you have is democrats with a very simple message and the republicans are the ones that are struggling to kind of throw a lot of things at the wall to say, look, we should be looking into hunter biden and maybe this whistleblower isnt right and maybe the person is spying on the president and the president talking about threatening the whistleblower in some peoples minds. What you have are republicans searching for a message and that, i think, shows that republicans could at some point have some defections. But i think as of now, they see their political future as tied to the president. So, its really hard right before an election to say that republicans are going to give up and say, yes, lets go ahead and turn on this president. I guess the indication will be that if Republican Voters start polling that they support an impeachment inquiry or they do not support the president any longer and thats when republicans might break free from him. Thank you so much. Eli, kimberly, we appreciate it. Jeff, dont go too far from that camera. Youre coming back later this hour. Breaking news we do need to report right now. Chris collins is resigning from the house. We learned today that collins plans to plead guilty tomorrow in federal court to charges related to insider trading. Collins initially pleaded not guilty when he was first indicted in 2018. Joining me now tom wynter. Chris collins was the very first republican, tom, to endorse President Trump in 2016. Thats right, katy. One of the first people to be indicted from a standpoint of congressman here in the last couple of years. This is somebody who is indicted for a scheme and him being on the pharmaceutical board in australia received word that a drug test had gone bad. The drug was not effective because his shares were locked up in australia in and trading of those shares was halted there. He wasnt able to do anything with those shares but he was able to pick up the phone and call his son who traded 1. 3 million plus on the markets here in the United States and was able to avoid a significant loss in the course of that trading course of the Insider Information from he received from his dad, congressman chris collins, who is now resigning. He does plan to plead guilty tomorrow at 3 00 p. M. Here in manhattan federal court. So, others were also because of that inside information were able to avoid sizable losses here and, basically, he was caught because the stock was so thinly traded. Any time you move 1. 4 million shares and barely any shares trade, its going to raise red flags. Thats what happened here. Essentially caught red handed and not surprising based on the phone logs and how many coconspirators were involved here. The government was able to get a lot of information and a lot of evidence. Most surprising that he pleaded not guilty in the first place before he decided to change his plea. Chris collins represents upstate new york. It is unclear what is going to happen to his seat. Were waiting on words from our congressional reporter to figure that out. Tom, thank you for joining us. Still ahead, the numbers on impeachment are rapidly changing. How does that affect 2020 democrats. Does it affect them at all . House democrats subpoena the secretary of state to get documents tied to ukraine. Is Rudy Giuliani next. First, keep your friends close and your enemies closer. John bolton is talking and the white house is worried. Than fou. Its my afterwork decompression zone. So when my windshield broke. Woman what . vo . I searched for someone who really knew my car. I found the experts at safelite autoglass. Woman hi vo with their exclusive technology, they fixed my windshield. Then recalibrated the camera attached to my glass so my Safety Systems still work. Who knew that was a thing . woman safelite has service i can trust. Singers safelite repair, safelite replace. John bolton will not go quietly into that good night. President trumps former National Security adviser has already publicly criticized mr. Trumps foreign policy. So, is his call with ukraine next . Joining me, two of the reporters behind this story nbc News White House correspondent Kristen Welker and carol lee. Is john bolton making rumblings about the ukraine call . Hes not. In fact, hes not commenting at all. But we have been speaking to current and former Administration Officials who say that bolton was not on that call between President Trump and the president of ukraine. And that he was actually opposed to the president making the call. He was concerned that mr. Trump would veer off course. Veer off topic and start to air personal grievances. And President Trump talked about some of his theories for the conspiracies that he saw in ukraine. Not surprising that that would be among the concerns that those close to him would have. Now, we also learned that Vice President mike pence was not on that call. No reason given for that. But, katy, this sort of underscores the fact that this is a National Former security adviser who broke with President Trump on a range of different issues and we saw that on display today. Carol was at this event where bolton was speaking out for the first time and made it very clear he has deep concerns about the big foreign policies crises that President Trump is facing right now, katy. Carol, what im struck by is how the president calls this a perfect call. His republican defenders are trying to defend him on it, and yet, the state department is distancing themselves from the call. From putting Rudy Giuliani in touch with ukrainian officials. The department of justice is saying that attorney general barr had nothing to do with this, even though the president mentioned attorney general barr in the phone call with zelensky. What does that say to you . Even though the president says its perfect, his government is trying to back away. I think it says that in the eyes of basically anybody else who speaks privately about this call, who is speaking publicly, as you just mentioned about the call. It wasnt a perfect call. And that it was, at minimum, concerning. So, youve seen a number of officials try to sort of or distance themselves from it. If you talked to republicans privately, you know, theyll tell you theyre concerned about it. Some of the president s own advisors and people who he speaks to regularly will say that theyre concerned about it. But this is what weve seen President Trump do time and again. Hell say, you know, hell keep acting as if, you know, something that he did. Theres nothing wrong at with something he did and that hes a victim. Thats what were seeing a lot of here. The problem for the president now the stakes are much higher for him than weve seen in the past. Do you expect to see something from john bolton on this issue, carol . Maybe eventually, but hes really not he didnt comment or say anything at this event. An event that focused on u. S. korea and he wasnt asked about it by the moderator and he hinted that he is able to speak in unvarnished terms and when the moderator noted that he wasnt speaking about his time in government, he interjected to make clear that that was a selfimposed moratorium, not one that was put on him. Im sure well hear from him, again. Carol lee and Kristen Welker, we appreciate it. Thank you, both, ladies. Thanks, katy. Coming up, is the tide turning on in impeachment. Steve kornacki has the numbers. The secretary of state and who could be next . Ext . Der i can do it next year. No rush. Cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92 of colon cancers. You just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab. Theres no excuse for waiting. Get screened. Ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. Covered by medicare and most major insurers. Whyou should be mad that airports are complicated. Hes my emotional support snake. But youre not, because you have e trade, whose tech isnt complicated. It helps you understand the risk and reward potential on an options trade. Dont get mad. Get e trade. Work so hard give it everything you got strength of a lioness tough as a knot rocking the stage and we never gonna stop all strength, no sweat. Just in case you forgot all strength. No sweat secret. All strength. No sweat. Create up to 12 combinations with applebees new pasta and grill combos starting at 9. 99. And get more bites for your buck with our late night halfpriced apps. Now thats eatin good in the neighborhood. According to nbc news reporting the president said he would only start worrying if National Polls showed more than 50 of americans supported impeachment. Well, according to one poll, were there. Joining me, Nbc News National Political correspondent steve kornacki. Steve, tell us about the numbers. We had a bunch of polls coming out since it was such a fastmoving situation here. This is a cbs yougov poll came out over the weekend. This captures the days after nancy pelosi came out in favor of the impeachment inquiry and you had the revelation of the transcript and whistleblower report. Very important to know what were talking about here specifically. This is the impeachment inquiry. The question asked in this poll, democrats have launched an impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Do you approve or tdisapprove. 55 approve of the democrats decision to open the impeachment inquiry. Where is that coming from a partisan divide. You see extremely strong support from democrats and not surprisingly 8713. I would note over the last couple years when the question of impeachment has been raised in polling in different context, more hesitation among democrats. Democrats almost 90 in line with the party doing the impeachment inquiry. Among republicans, a bit of a surprise here. More than 20 in this poll who say they approve of the inquiry. 23 aapprove among independents and basically split right down the middle. Pay close attention to the wording here. This is the impeachment inquiry and the House Holding hearings and doing an investigation and looking into the possibility of impeaching trump. Now, the question of are you ready to say you support actually Going Forward and impeaching trump on that . Heres what it looks like. Same poll here. 42 say right now they believe trump deserves to be impeached. 36 say he does not deserve to be impeached. This is obviously the key. 22 coming down on the side of too soon. Too soon to say. See how the impeachment inquiry plays out. On the one hand here, the question of Going Forward with the inquiry and having the hearings and doing the investigation. Looks like there is majority support for that. In terms of what that is going to lead to on the ultimate question of the draft artal c if imputschme impeachment and do you remove him from office. A big number saying too soon to say. What happens to that number. 23 of republicans that surprises me and that might be of some worry to the president because if he wins, again, he needs 100 of the people who voted for him in 2016 and hopefully the democrat for him would not get any new voters to turn out. That could be a potentially worrying number. I think so. The one thing i just say in the polling the last couple years, when you give voters the option of in general. Do you want to impeach or not or keep investigating. That keep investigating number has consistently been significant. That looks like it is folded into it. A number of voters who say they werent willing to impeach but okay with investigating. Now, you have a majority that are okay with the inquiry, but does that ended up folding into outright impeachment . Those are the stakes. Steve, thank you very much. The president ial candidates voice their support for impeachment which makes the topic difficult for the one that are trying to break out from the pack. We asked them over the weekend about impeachment and we also asked them whether they would pardon President Trump if, if, if, it came to that. Would a president orourke pardon donald trump . No. I wouldnt be inclined to pardon him because he has so flagrantly abused his office. Would you pardon him . I cant because its not just about him. Its about the presidency. Joining me, msnbc reporter Garrett Haake and dave. You were in texas over the weekend and i did not get to see you or your parents. Im a little sad about that. You asked beto orourke whether he would pardon him. Tell me about beyond that, though, how does he plan to break out from the pack . I know were coming up on another debate and a couple thresholds they need to make and betos consistently lately near the bottom of the pack. It was interesting. The question about pardoning was a follow up. I asked him about impeachment and he thought this was a situation where you would see trump act as Richard Nixon did and resign before it got to that point. He and some of the other candidates who early on called for Donald Trumps impeachment are continuing to double down on that. Pushing that message. So to the likes of Elizabeth Warren. As for orourke can break out, you know, weve seen this focus from him lately on gun control issue and the mandatory buyback program. He made that the centerpiece of his campaign. He will need to see returns from that in a political sense and well get a chance to see fairly soon if hes getting them with the fund raising deadline coming up today. Orourke took two weeks essentially off the campaign trail in this last fundraising quar quarter to go back to el paso after that shooting. He relaunched his campaign and that fairly viral video in the last debate. It ought to be relatively straight forward to measure that was enough to boost his enthusiasm for the candidacy after a lackluster fundraising quarter. But candidates are especially stuck right now as the country turns its focus towards impeachment and difficult to be a switch in the 2020 field when so much of the political world is focused, instead of the president. Even though were far from the president ial election and the general election, were getting pretty close now to the primaries and with iowa coming up, i believe it is going to be in the first week of february. And, say this impeachment inquiry goes through december or even ends in december or january, how do you as one of the lower tier candidates make your mark . Is it possible to break into this news cycle . Well, even the Iowa Democrats i was talking to over the last day or so were very skeptical that you could break through if youre not already in the conversation. There is a sense that there are a few democrats who have shown their medal and risen above in the polls and have credible campaigns in iowa. Not waiting for some moment to break out. That is only a handful of democrats. For the others, there are a number who are not going to make this debate stage at all. There are a very closed window, closing if not completely closed window for them to get attention. What it does for the rest of the debate, i think, the Musical Chairs song stopped for a very good period for Elizabeth Warren and bad for joe biden and in the sense that warren has been consistent on impeachment and the president s questions have people going back and attack biden and the modern democrat who is not quite comfortable with warren and want something new and not quite focused on policy. Bernie sanders you can tell how he has been rolling out policies the last week he dislikes that a National Conversation is going to be about impeachment instead of his ideas. There is not a whole lot of space in the news cycle to pull apart his idea versus warren. How much does it matter getting in the news cycle and how much does it matter being on the ground. Elizabeth warren proved early on it was not about making headlines and going to the voters where they were, it seems. And talking them directly about her plans and letting the movement follow her. Is there a sense that people are on the road and if theyre talking to people and theyre getting their ideas out doct s o that that is an effective strategy, garrett . Look, i would push back on that only slightly because what warren did successfully at least early on is dominating coverage with stories about her plans. The ground game in this election has largely followed the national polling, at least from what weve seen, right . Joe biden was a late entry in this race. He spent less time in the early states. I dont mean to interrupt, the headlines around her were negative in terms of shes not going to do these big fundraisers and her candidacy is on the ropes. No way she can make it. Shes not going to have the money and instead of focusing on that, she just continued talking about her ideas to voters. Totally correct. Elizabeths rollout in january was rocky. And a lot of questions of whether she would be able to raise enough money. Go back to the beginning of the summer, she has not had a bad news cycle since she started the summer. She was able to build as weve seen in so many ways in this campaign, strength getting strength. Show pictures of a bigger and bigger rally whether they be in seattle or new hampshire, it just projected this idea that the way she is doing things are working. Im sorry to interrupt. The president just talked aboutthe whistleblower in the oval office a moment ago. Here he is. Were trying to find out about a whistleblower. We have a whistleblower that reports things that were incorrect. As you know, and you probably now have figured it out, the statement that i made to the president of ukraine, a good man, a nice man, knew was perfect. He was perfect. But the whistleblower reported a totally different statement. Like the statement was not even made. I guess statement you could say with call. I made a call. The call was perfect. When the whistleblower reported it, he made it sound terrible. And then you had adam schiff who, even worse, made up my words. Which i think is just horrible, i have never seen a thing like that. Adam schiff, representative, congressman, made up what i said. He actually took words and made it up. The reason is when he saw my call to the president of ukraine, it was so good that he couldnt quote from it because there was nothing done wrong. It was perfect. Adam schiff decided, i cant let this happen. Let me make up. Did you ever hear of this one, jean . Adam schiff made up a phony call and read it to congress and read it to the people of the United States. And its a disgrace. This whole thing is a disgrace. Theres been tremendous corruption and were seeking it. There has been corruption on the other side. Theres been corruption like youve never seen. Now, the new president of ukraine ran on the basis of no corruption. Thats how he got elected. And i believe that he really means it. But a lot of corruption having to do with the 2016 election against us. And we want to get to the bottom of it and its very important that we do. Thank you very much. The president clearly not happy about the whistleblower. He wants to know who the whistleblower is and he called him almost a spy and talking about corruption on the part of the democrats. None of that has been proven. Who is being investigated for corruption or at least conflicts of interest or abusing the power of the presidency is the president of the United States. A reminder to all of those watching at home, the whistleblower what they said matches up directly with the white house readout of the call. There really isnt a lot of daylight between those two things. Furthermore, the white house confirmed what the whistleblower alleged that they moved that call to a secure server because they didnt want it getting out. Hans nichols is at the white house. What have you got . Our own Haley Jackson asked the president if theyre trying to find out the identity of the whistleblower and if they know who the whistleblower is . He came awfully close to trying to say theyre trying to find out who he is. Trying to find out about a whistleblower and then launched into his critiques and attacks of that whistleblower and then attacking adam schiff. Theyre going to try to undermine the credibility of this whistleblower and coming awfully close hinting that they may out this person. The president saying he wants to directly cross examine him and then also challenging the legitimacy of the impeachment inquiry and theyre saying the president was misquoted by adam schiff. Adam schiff was asked about that on one of the talk shows and what he was saying is not a direct quote of the president but what the president meant for argumentive purposes. The backdrop to all of this, you know, as well, katy, concern in the white house on how this was rolled out and handled the initial steps of the impeachment inquiry and thinking about how to rectify that with some sort of Rapid Response team. That meeting and that decision what are they planning on doing if they find out who the whistleblower is . Prosecute him or her. What do they want . We dont know that. We dont have any indication of what their strategy is. We clearly know theyre going to try to undermine that whistleblower. You seek protection thats why you do it through the whistleblower channel and also to maintain your ability not to have your job be any way affected. Thats why youre an anonymous whistleblower. Laws and regulations set up and report something through a whistleblower channel. So, what sort of either legal or political recourse the white house has against that whistleblower, the president may try to stretch that. He already tried to stretch that in some of his comments about him suggesting that this person is guilty of treason. Katy . Hans, thank you very much. President trump is putting the whistleblower in danger, according to his lawyer. In a letter to the acting dni joseph maguire, the events of the past week have heightened our concerns that our clients identity will be disclosed publicly and that as a result our client will be put in harms way. It is not an unreasonable fear. The president has openly talked about spies and treason and ruminated about how spies were treated in, quote, the old days. He also says he wants to meet his accuser and his accusers sources. Joining me, former fbi special agent clint watts and former whitewater associate kim waly and the author of how to read the constitution and why. Clint, the president wanting to know who it is. Is he just trying to put the persons name out there in order for the internet and his defenders to trash that person or from your sense of things, does he want to take it a step further . I see it as if he gets that name out into the public, then weve seen how this game goes before over the last two years with the mueller investigation. Everybody came up as some sort of a source or a witness in any of those actions was ultimately discredited across the fbi. I mean, there was a huge essentially destruction of the counterintelligence division, if you look at it in a way. If you look at that play book, what will we expect now . If the name gets out in the public, everyone can do the president s bidding on his behalf to tear down the credibility of that individual. Also just speaks to why would any executive leader in the government go ahead and attack their own employees . Thats the other part that is ridiculous. Not supposed to be just the leader but the leader of the executive branch. Going after another person which seems to be from the Intelligence Community which is a central employee. Theyre working at a very high level of the government. Again, knocking out a key, very experienced player probably in the intellgence community. Lindsey graham is following up on the president s requests and hes now saying that he wants to know who the whistleblower is. Heres Lindsey Graham. I know what the deep state and i know the difference between a whistleblower and deep state operative. This is deep state operative pure and simple. People who may not have worked in the white house may not appreciate this. You have a group of unelected bureaucrats that think they need to take down that president. That was Steven Miller talking about the deep staet and youre seeing Lindsey Grahams tweets and ill read this. We cant have process designed to destroy the presidency that relies on anonymous accusers or hearsay accusatioaccusations. Its important we find out who supplied the information to the whistleblower. What was their agenda . Kim, would you call this a witchhunt . No, of course, its not a witchhunt. This is deeply problematic as a matter of basic law. I mean, as i explain in the book. Two things. Legal requirements and then also norms of conduct. Norms of conduct include complying with the spirit of the law and, in this instance, goes way back. This isnt even prior to the statute. This concept of having people inside organizations that can tell, you know, the people in charge whats actually happening inside so you can root out corruption. The problem with this process, what is happening with the president in addition to putting this persons life probably in danger is that its going to chill the whole purpose of having a whistleblower statute. Why would anyone if they know of information of wrongdoing inside any administration, why would they go through the proper legal channels to report it through congress, ultimately, if they know what happened to the last person who did that . This person who did this is a real hero regardless of what Lindsey Graham and others say. The question Going Forward is not even whether this person is credible, but which, of course, the ig found he was, but what happens, what are we going to find out with respect to the facts that this person is reporting. Its not about the calls on the servers and what are they saying about those other calls. To you clint, Steven Miller says hes been in for three years and knows what deep state operatives are. What is he talking about . If he has been in the government for three years he should tell us who the deep state is, hes working there. The deep state is anybody who might have a negative thing to say about donald trump. Anybody who doesnt share their views is labeled as a spy, part of a deep state. What we have here are people who are performing their jobs based on what u. S. Law says. They are doing things according to the book. The whistleblower complaint went very much by the book and you can tell these people are deeply worried. I want to know if as miller refers to a deep state, what was the ink thing about sending out Rudy Giuliani to mess around in ukraine whenever you have state department employees, Defense Department employees Chris Wallace tried to ask him that question and he wouldnt answer it. If it was such a perfect call, why are all those Government Agencies backing away from this and getting as far as they can from this. Why the ag had nothing to do with it and the state department is saying they didnt know about it, even though they set up giuliani with ukrainian officials. Chris watts, so good to see you. Kim, youre sticking around. House democrats want documents related to the president s dealings with ukraine. Who will they subpoena next . Wednesdays. At outback, theyre for steak and beer. Walkabout wednesdays are back get a sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, and a draft beer or cocacola all for just 10. 99. Hurry in wednesdays are for outback. Outback steakhouse. Aussie rules. Wednesdays are for outback. So chantix can help you quit slow turkey. Rkey. Along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. With chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, youll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. When you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. Stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or lifethreatening allergic and skin reactions. Decrease alcohol use. Use caution driving or operating machinery. Tell your doctor if youve had Mental Health problems. The most common side effect is nausea. Talk to your doctor about chantix. Plants capture co2. What if other kinds of plants captured it too . If these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. Carbon capture is Important Technology and experts agree. Thats why were working on ways to improve it. So plants. Can be a little more. Like plants. The house may be in recess, but it is still moving ahead with the impeachment inquiry. House democrats issued a subpoena to mike pompeo for documents from the ukraine controversy. Documents they asked for weeks ago. And congressman adam schiff plans to target Rudy Guiliani for documents next. The open question remains, will the white house comply. Joining me, jeff bennett, and independent counsel kim wehle. Geoff, what do House Democrats want from mike pompeo. Reporter they want any and all documentation regarding the state department and Rudy Guilianis interaction in the whole ukrainian gambit. This is something they asked for for weeks but so far the state department has not provided the documents voluntarily. So the committee, this is the House Foreign Affairs committee, set a friday deadline for pompeo to turn that over. What makes this time different than all of the previous instances were the white house has tried to obstruct House Democrats oversight. You have adam schiff saying because theres a formal impeachment inquiry happening that if the white house doesnt produce, if they dont produce officials to testify we talked about earlier, talked about those depositions, he is saying thats grounds for a new and separate article of impeachment, obstruction of congress. Theres the latest interview on fox news, where Rudy Guiliani suggested all the evidence was on his phone. I wouldnt be surprised if that phone doesnt get subpoenaed. Kim, if the white house says fine, add another article of obstruction or article to impeachment, obstruction, the republicans dont care, if the democrats want to take it to the courts, what can they do, how quickly could that move . Two things. Number one, they dont need documents to impeach, it is a political determination, not a legal one. Based on what polling happens, what happens with the republican caucus, they could decide listen, were moving forward regardless of white house compliance. If the white house continues to stonewall, they move to compel in federal courts and the question would be whether theres a legitimate reason for congress to want this. To date, the White House Position has been absent actual impeachment inquiry, you need to show legislative purpose, that is, you need information to pass new substantive legislation. As a legal scholar, i can tell you thats a very weak argument. I am curious why the democrats havent moved forward with motions to compel as upholding rule of law. At this moment, i would suggest courts wont green light the white house stonewalling, number one, and number two, there are procedures in courts for expediting these kinds of decisions. It doesnt mean it will dragon for weeks and weeks if a motion to compel is filed. If i represented congress, i would ask for it to be expedited and quickly through the appeals process to the United States supreme court. We saw with United States vertsversus nixon, the court held the tapes had to be turned over. Are they ready for that or planning on stacking up articles of impeachment . Reporter yes and no. Nancy pelosi when she was on morning joe the other day said she realizes time is not on her side, dont want to roll the dice, leave the questions in the courts where a trump appointee may not reule in their favor. They feel whats in the record is impeachable enough. As the investigation moves forward, they want the documents they might need to build the public case, if for nothing else to have as a backup. How closely are republicans watching National Polls about the president . Fairly closely. The moderate republicans in the senate, they dont want to be out on a limb for President Trump if the president ends up cutting off the branch behind them, right, so thats why you hear the senators saying i havent read the whistleblower complaint. Saying they havent read it gives deniable plausiblity. So of course theyre watching the polling closely. I love that, we havent read the report, only seven pages long, didnt read that tweet, didnt see that other story in the washington post, i didnt hear the president say that. Whenever they dont want to comment, they have plausible deniability. The latest version is call my office. Im sorry, is your receptionist a duly elected member of the senate . I dont think so. Geoff, what happened with amaday. He looked like he supported the investigation, congressman from nevada, initially supported the impeachment inquiry, quickly walked it back, said no, just investigations. A semantic thing. The comment was construed as supporting impeachment. What he says he meant to say is any sort of allegation of that nature deserves to be looked into, deserves to be investigated. He says he was not calling for impeachment. Geoff bennett, kim wehle, thank you. Coming up, beto orourke joins ali velshi. He will be here in a few minutes. Do not leave msnbc. Do not leaver when you trade . I want free access to research. Yep, td ameritrades got that. Free access to every platform. Yeah, that too. I dont want any trade minimums. Yeah, i totally agree, they dont have any of those. I want to know what im paying upfront. Yes, absolutely. Do you just say yes to everything . Hm. Well i say no to kale. Mm. Yeah, they say if you blanch it its better, but that seems like a lot of work. No hidden fees. No platform fees. No trade minimums. And yes, its all at one low price. Td ameritrade. Juul record. They took 12. 8 billion from big tobacco. Juul marketed mango, mint, and menthol flavors, addicting kids to nicotine. Five million kids now using ecigarettes. The fda said juul ignored the law with Misleading Health claims. Now juul is pushing prop c, to overturn san franciscos ecigarette protections. Say no to juul, no to big tobacco, no to prop c. That will do it for me this hour. Youre not looking at emails . I have not been getting emails for awhile, just started coming in. Missing my venmo request for cash. You know i always pay up. Good to see you, friend. Monday, september 30th. Case closed. A line President Trump is pushing as he and allies go on defense against the house impeachment inquiry. He sent at least ten tweets on the probe. He continued to defend the july phone call with the ukraine president and attacked the whistleblower. The House Democrats, House Intelligence Committee chair adam schiff, moments ago he had this to say. Mr. President , do you now know who the whistleblower is, sir . Were trying to find out about the whistleblower. The whistleblower rep