my advice to these whistle-blowers is the present you is probably very scared and frighteni frighten frightened. but the future you will thank you for what you ve done showing strength and courage. i can promise you you re going to be blessed with peace of mind. you re going to sleep soundly at night after all this is done. and so that would be what i would offer. questioning the patriotism of this person. what do you make of that? i can t comment on the president directly given my ongoing military duties. but what i say what anybody should be doing when they re confronting a whistle-blower is to refute the allegations with facts. you can falsify the allegations, you can simply come out with your own facts to dispute that. and that is how this should be played out. there should never be personal attacks involved in any of this. the attorney for the
not been research my political opponent. thes republicans are rallying around the president. it s disgraceful. welcome to our viewers. this is new day. bianna golodryga joins me for a busy day. great to be here. the whistle-blower is not alone. in addition to the rough transcript of the phone call which corroborates the case that the president leaned on the leader of ukraine to dig up dirt on its political opponent in addition to the text messages that diplomats share these same concerns, there is a second whistle-blower who has come forward with what we are told is first-hand knowledge about that phone call between president trump and the president of ukraine. this undercuts the arguments from some republicans who demean the whistle-blower claims as hearsay. the question now really is what
he or she may have even more leads for investigators to follow up on. and i think trump and his people are really feeling the heat. because they re launching this attack. they re going after the whistle-blower. and i ve seen this happen. when the evidence starts to get really strong as a prosecutor, that s when the personal attacks start flying. that s when the distraction starts happening. we re seeing that happen now. but everyone needs to focus. forget about the attacks on the whistle-blower. look at the actual evidence, the calls, the documents. that s what s going to make the case here. what is the white house s response to this now? first the president said the first whistle-blower is not credible. this whistle-blower has first-hand knowledge. was presumably one of the six people that were in the room to witness the call. what is the white house s take now? well, the press secretary stephanie grisham stated the second whistle-blower doesn t matter because the president did no
so there s more evidence that will be directed here. and the white house acting chief of staff played in this matter. so that s some of the things that i think a second whistle-blower may lend some light to. you just noted the republican response to this and you brought up the president s comments on the south lawn inviting china to investigate the president. some republicans haven t been silent about it. they say the whole thing is a joke. listen. i think again, i think he did it to gig you guys. i doubt if the china comment was serious, to tell you the truth. you really think he was serious about thinking that china is going to investigate the biden family? what do you say to the republican senators? i say they re forgetting a recent chapter in history when in the middle of the 2016 campaign president trump openly said, russia, if you re listening, it d be great if you d get to the bottom of hillary s maims.
the phone call where he leaned on the ukrainian president to dig up dirt on a political opponent. this all comes as two more diplomats will answer questions to congress this week. joining us now political correspondent abby phillip and elie honig. we have this second whistle-blower who has come forward. what more can this person add to the picture? given that we have a transcript albeit a rough transcript of the phone call where president trump leans on the ukrainian leader? we have text messages where there are diplomats talking about quid pro quos. so what does this second whistle-blower add? i agree with you. we already have quite a bit to go on. generally speaking it s worse for donald trump. it s more leads to follow up on. whistle-blowers point investigators. look here, look there. the first whistle-blower led to this devastating evidence. who knows where the second whistle-blower goes. we know this person has first-hand evidence.