ukrainians work with him we do know the secretary of state pompeo was on that call. the state department has repeatedly denied that they that they set up or that they worked with they were asked by rudy giuliani to set up meetings there. we do know that kurt volker and sondland were working with the ukrainians to set up the meetings but there is no indication, anderson that mike pompeo was particle of that. pu he was certainly aware of the role that rudy giuliani was playing in essentially in parallel policy with ukraine. yeah, alex, thank you very much for the new reporting back with us to get reporting pamela brown and jeff toobin and john kasich. what do you make of this, the idea that rudy giuliani is the gatekeeper to all foreign service people, secretary rick perry, again, it s just bizarre because we no he what giuliani s focus was, not legitimate
they are making the document requests. and the idea the white house can refuse to produce all documents, can refuse to produce all witnesses in the entire executive branch, i just can t imagine any court will give that the time of day. although it could succeed in delaying. right. proceedings for quite a few weeks if not months. governor what would you recommend. anderson. the the question on that. i was going to say the question on that is if the full house votes for inquiry, my sense is would provide for weights to the courts. so the courts wouldn t sit on this. maybe that s a strategy that ought to be pursued. but the bottom line there are other witnesses to come forward now. we have at least two whistle-blower. it s amazing we have to try to protect their identity like they were somehow in the mafia reporting. it s crazy. and other people the former ambassador. these folks not being presented. let s try to remove you
administration officials was asked what criteria would democrats have to meet to trigger white house cooperation in this matter? and this official responded by saying that they re not going to get into hypotheticals or a hypothetical situation. that s a clear signal at this point, intersection anderson they are ready to fight this out. the question becomes as it always has been with president trump is who is willing in this nation s capital to try to curb his behavior as we saw during the mueller investigation, the special counsel robert mueller wasn t willing to insist that the president sit down for a live in person interview. they took written answers from the president instead. and you get the sense again that the president s legal team is try trying to box in the opposition in terms of the options they fwree to and at this point hear not agreeing tig. jim acosta thanks very much. one item the white house not raising objections to senate judiciary lindsey graham plans to invite r
didn t believe them because he was putting more stock in what his outside attorney rudy giuliani had been telling him and the negative information. and then we know following that, anderson, the decision was made at the direction of the president to withhold ukraine aid and then eventually released. this raises more questions about that connection, keras. governor, kasich what s if going to take for other republicans on the hill to actually speak their minds on this? is it i mean, assuming that there are some who, you know, believe what the president did was wrong and that it was wrong to ask china to investigate the bidens, a repressive regime like china not known for fair appear impartials investigations at the very least, is it going to take just them sensing a ground swell among republican voters. i think so. i think so, anderson. and look, this is the thing that i have a hard time
during his campaign. he adds, quote i suggest we stop the back and forth by text. tonight a source with knowledge tells cnn that before he sent that text, which sounds a lot like the president s talking points, sondland in fact spoke with the president who told him exactly that, no quid pro quo. which which ironically the president somehow suggested exonerates. tweeting ambassador sondland s tweet which few reports stated i believe urine correct about the president s intention no quid pro quo of any kind says it all. certainly says something that the president is citing the restatement of his own talking points which he gave ambassador sondland as evidence. in addition he blocked sondland he is a testimony before congress today which also says something. cnn s jim acosta starts us off at the white house. clearly the white house thinks they have a political argument. does the president s team think this letter has legal merit. they do, anderson. i talked to a source close to the impea