Corruption of this president who got into the white house by cheating with foreign help and whos trying to do it again. Its about upholding the constitutional separation of powers and keeping america from gaining a king. But as if on queue, the right felt the need to be heard. Do you hate the president , mad dam speaker . I dont hate anybody. We dont hate anybody. Not anybody in the world. This is about the constitution of the United States and the facts that leads to the president s violation of his oath of office and as a catholic i resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me. I dont hate anyone. Okay. Well, apparently that man forgot the rule. If youre going to come for Speaker Pelosi you might want to ask yourself three questions first. Question one, did she call for you . If the answer is yes, please, do come forward. If the answer is no, perhaps not such a good idea unless youre prepared to be fully gathered and the man who you saw there getting bewigged by the speaker had to be Sinclair Broadcasting james rosen. Now, you might remember him from one of the many sexual ra hasment scandals at fox before he switched outlets and sinclair is the right wing outlet that forces its anchors to deliver identical republican talking points with your traffic and weather while hiding behind the call letters of tv stasss and rosens talking point, that came sinclair style out of the gop. Can i see a show of the hands, how many voted for donald trump in 2016. I dont think were obligated to say anything about how we cast our ballots. A show of hands. I think youve made your position very clear. So republicans with no defense for donald trump for attempting to use tax dollars to bribe a foreign country that would give the rest of the trump inverse juicy content to use against joe biden if he happens to be the democratic nominee and that would get russia and trump off the hook in 2016 have stooped to whining. Theyre only impeechling President Trump because theyre whining. An interesting tactic that republicans are using, just in your reporting is that the plan that essentially with the administration saying theyre not going to participate in the impeachment trial, should it go to the senate and were assuming it will go to the senate that theyre just going to argue meanness, that everyone is mean . Theyre going to be arguing essentially that. Theyre going to be making the process argument and this is what theyve made since the very earliest moments since the impeachment conversation. Theyve claimed that democrats are somehow railroading President Trump and arent giving him a fair shake in the process and while that argument is something that doesnt have Great Purchase speaking broadly, and that really lacks the the kind of Historical Foundation that youd hope the white house and republicans would rely on, at the same time i can tell you from my conversations with democratic leadership sources that House Democratic leaders, Speaker Pelosi and her deputies are aware of the fact that that argument still will sound persuadable to some independent voters and part of the reason that the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee reached out to the white house and invited trump and invited white house lawyers to have a greater level of participation in proceedings going on in his committee is because democratic leadership wants to make clear to the American People that theyre not trying to railroad is president or violate the norms that are in place. They recognize that even when these arguments may not be meaty they can still be influential on the independent voters. And i think daviddes made a very good point on iter. Putting children in cages iut h. Calling people illegal on stolen land is about hate. Impeachment is not and hes just over a teenager and he seems to know that. But to get back to the arguments that youre just talking about right there, its not as if the white house as you reported has not been offered the opportunity to participate. They have said in this weird letter, heres a copy of it that i have here with this giant trumpy signature on it that theyre not going to send a defense. They have the right to do that. They have said no, theyre not going to do it. Adam schiff has asked mike pence to send material that if it was exculpatory youd think theyd want to send it. There was testimony that was made during the schiff version of the impeachment hearings about a phone call, dumifferent phone calls between mike pence and the president of ukraine. Basically schiff has said declassified and send it to us. Theyre saying theyre not going to do it. How does the white house justify the fact they err saying it isnt fair but theyre not going to participate in their own defense . Its a legal strategy, part of the reason or part of the overarching ride or die strategy that republicans have used as we headed into these impeachment proceedings is the strategy of essentially not giving an inch. Immediately at the outset saying that this probe is a political hatchet job and illegitimate and then refusing for the white house or the state department to green light any participation whatsoever once the impeachment investigation is underway. And of course, that argument goes hand in hand with sort of the flip side of it which is republicans and officials in the white house saying how can people take this inquiry seriously if theyre not talking to people with firsthand knowledge but then how can they talk to people with firsthand knowledge if the white house wont let the people with first hand knowledge or the documents documenting the events as they played out be available to these congressional impeachment investigators . And just so people can understand what were talking about. Jennifer williams just remind you gis what she said about the classified information. Take a listen. Ms. Williams, i want to ask you about phone call between Vice President pence and president zelensky. Were you on that call on september 18th . I was. And did you take notes of the call . Yes, sir. Is there something about that call that you think may be relevant to our investigation . As we previously discussed with the committee, the office of the voice president has taken the president could you move the microphone closer to you . As weve prooefr you eviousld with staff of the Committee Office of the Vice President has taken the position that the september 18th call is classified. Very briefly do they plan to call ms. Williams in the portion of the senate trial. Im not sure where democrats are at in putting together the list of witnesses theyre going to have. Its a work in progress but i think theres a decent chance that williams and other folks that received in the chef proceedings are very much on their short list. Lets talk about Speaker Pelosi because shes been reluctant on impeachment. She was the last in the door in terms of wanting to do this at all. Take a listen. When i became speaker the first time it was overwhelming call for me to impeach president bush on the strength of the war in iraq which i imposed. They had impeached bill clinton for personal indiscretion and misrepresenting about it. Impeached him. Some of these same people are saying oh, this doesnt rise to impeachment. Or that right there impeaching bill clinton for being stupid in terms of Something Like that. Did you talk about the Democratic Caucus and their thinking on, you know, because the speaker is reluctant, she wasnt god goading her caucus, she was trying to stop them from impeaching donald trump if possible. The fact that she is now there, she believes that the president has put our country the National Security danger, is that make her more credible to the caucus with her leading it. To the extent that shes been working with moderates and freshman democrats who won seats, in the process of making the decision about impeachment we know that ever since you know, the early the homes after the 2018 midterms those moderate freshman democrat who is got the house to flip have been concerned about how a conversation about impeachment could affect their ability to keep hold of those seats in 2020 and of course for pelosi and her allies the absolute nightmare scenario would be trump potentially getting reelected in 2020 and those democrats losing control of the house. Remember, even though by numbers of seats, democrats have a comfortable majority, many of those eat seats are one that were really hard fought and won narrowly. However, what were seeing in addition to that many of these freshman democrats are people with National Security backgrounds. Max rose has a military background, so these are vulnerable freshman who when theyre talking about impeachment theyre speaking their own first language of National Security and protekding the homeland. For pelosi being able to get mose those members on board was mandatory. One of theern cans isnt so much a conversation about the fact that theyre participating in impeachment but as an aid to one democrat put it to me, the accusation that theyre only doing impeachment. That they arent also doing the bread and butter Kitchen Table issues that they got elected on. Thats why youll hear pelosi and other democratic speakers talk about other legislative priorities they have, lowing the cost of Prescription Drugs, getting the president s trade deal with mexico and canada ratifi ratified. Those are important to counter act the political challenges that this impeachment process could make for those democrats. Correct me if im wrong but democrats in the house have passed over 200 bills that are sitting there waiting for Mitch Mcconnell to act on. These are not being acted on by the senate. Is that correct . Thats correct. The democrats want to say they have voted for legislation not just that got through the house but that actually got through Mitch Mcconnells senate and that President Trump signed and thats going to be challenging. We know many of the democrats Top Priorities in the house are issues that Mitch Mcconnell has endered dead on arrival but there is a handful of topics where they might get republicans on board and thats just the top priority right now. And my producer is telling me its closer to 400 bills that have been passed in the house that Mitch Mcconnell isnt taking action on. He did it in the obama term and hes doing it now. Speaker pelosi also said that the constitution was written by people who predicated their sort of believes about what the senate would be that people would honor the constitution of the United States and that would not have predicted there would be a rogue president of the United States. They probably wouldnt be a rogue Senate Leader who would ignore the constitution on this and would also ignore every bill thats right wing. Thank you very much. Coming up, much mcconnell is set to shed his image as a tortoise and play the role of the hare when it comes to the Senate Impeachment trial. I know thaw over going to write that in there. To write that in there. Have you spoken to a single republican colleague in the senate who is even considering voting for impeachment . Yes. You have . Yes. Okay. Would you like to name him . No. How many . Its a small list on one hand. And by way, i dont buy this secret ballot thing. Like if there was a secret ballot there would still be only a handful of them that would vote to impeach this guy. You think given what we currently know like maybe theres what, five republicans who might vote to remove the president at max . I think thats probably right. A small list on one hand leaves Senate Democrats three handfuls short of the number of votes they would need to remove donald trump once hes impeached. At least 20 of the 53 Senate Republicans would have to dare to join presumably all or at least most of the democrats to vote against him. Lets just be clear here. Do any of us really believe that 20 whole republicans would have the guts to follow the constitution and risk turning on their boss . The man that theyve treated like hes their king for three years . And i mean even the ones who are serious enough people to know hes guilty, they are lets face it, all scared of trump for whatever reason. So the question is should we think about peechl as more than removal. Should we see it as a jum against him but also against his Political Party so that voters can decide to remove any of them from office who they believe jeopardize our National Security to turn the United States into russ russias little helper. I want to go right to you on that question. You worked in the doj, so you know, if you think of this as a trial, in a sense, this is a trial at which the jury has already decided that they were going to acquit. Right . You have to assume that most republicans are too scared to vote to convict trump because even their friend, he couldnt name any of them. Theyd probably be too terrified. I think thats right. It is a trial with a jury that is unlike any other jury in the country. I worked at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign committee and i think that i bring that up because the bay to think of this trial is its obviously not it is a legal proceeding but it is every bit as much a political proceeding as well and i think one of the things obviously the house impeachment managers are going to make the legal case for why donald trump should be removed from office and we dont need to go through it p its an overwhelmingly compelling case but theres a politicsplipoliti make to Susan Collins and some of these senators who are up for reelection. I dont think theyre the most likely votes but theres a political case to make to them if look, if you vote to acquit him based on this body of evidence thats so overwhelming you own everything that he does after. You own it because you had a chance to remove him and you didnt do that and thats a political argument that needs to go hand in hand with the legal arguments that they would be making. Not just owning everything he does going forward, everything he did. Asking a Foreign Government to investigate a fellow american and trying to get them to ratify a coo coo Conspiracy Theory is endangering our National Security. Its kremlin talk in the mouth of the president of the United States. So if you were still in the dscc would you advise democrats to say in corey gardeners case or Susan Collins youre responsible for risking our National Security. You know that he did it. You know hes guilty. You just sat there like a bump on a log and let him off the hook. Its literally going back and making it a case against them in the election. Is that what do you know whether or not democrats have that in mind as a plan sf. I done know if they have it as a plan. I suspect they will and you can see how nervous people like corey gardener are when theyre asked the question is okay for the president of the United States to pressure or even ask a Foreign Government to investigate one of its political rivals, you see them stammer and run for the hills rather than answer the simple question. Theyll have to own the answer to that question if they vote to acquit him. And yes, his past action are the thing that are certainly up for them to decide in the senate vote but that includes everything going back to russia, if youre listening because what it is that theyll be voting on are the articles of impeachment but they taking up the pattern of donald trump asking Foreign Governments to intervene. Doing it in 2016. Then doing it on the White House South Lawn when he asked ukraine to do it again and when he asked china to do it. Hes going to do it again in 2020. Hes going to do everything within his powers whether its legal or constitutional or appropriate or not hes going to use every power of the presidency to win reelection and if you voted to acquit him youre responsible for that. And i would think that corey gardener whos already in trouble, an argument that he allowed him to shrink the United States to a side kick of russia. Theres an article where he said during the trial the senate can make all orders rules, regulations which may deem essential. That reads like a blank check. Perhaps it could impose a time limit on the proceedings that would prevent a full airing against the case against trimp. You are seeing signs republicans may want to have a side trial of joe biden as their defense of trump. How many shenanigans should we expect . The majority leader is claiming hes going to do a rules based discussion with Chuck Schumer but how many shenanigans should democrats expect from him . I think if Mitch Mcconnell has his way you can expect him to behave like a house republican. I think the question really is whether he can get all every member of his caucus or his conference to go along with him because he c