Theres a question of what point does amending a testimony become straightup lying or perjuring one self . One said that the testimony of other witnesses helped to refresh their memories and see in new light their own experiences and will be instructive to see what volcker has to say for himself on the two key questions, quid pro quo, bribery plot, and what he was doing with Rudy Giuliani. His testimony was that he Rudy Giuliani as being a nuance and more helpful to bring Rudy Giuliani in and help him understand that he was promulgating the debunked conspiracy scenarios instead of freelance out there in ukraine. Jeff bennett on capitol hill for us, thank you very much. Joining us is democrat congressman jim himes from connecticut. Congressman, your questioning of
control knell vind man was one of the more emotional moments this morning. I wonder if you could look back to that for us this morning. Yeah. Well, it was a pretty tough moment for me. We had gotten word and sort of saw on social media the plan to discredit contrlonel vindman. Combat veteran, purple heart. You saw the tweet out of the white house today. The strategy is same strategy as with bob mueller. Another war hero. To damage his credibility. And, you know, i could see the discomfort of the republican colleagues of what they were tasked to do and didnt do it with relish. The facts are getting worse and worse for the president as each days testimony goes by. But you know, people just need to step back and say what is involved in one Party Feeling they need to trash the reputation of ambassador ivan i
ivanovich . Of Colonel Vindman . What is involved . Why do you need to trash the reputations of people who have so well served this country . Congressman himes, its so stark watching the way your committee fractured not just in terms of the approach with the witness but the Subject Matter each side is addressing with the witnesses. What does it say to you that from devin nunez, asking about the dnc server, lines of questioning of the whistleblowers identity, how is it in the room . It is uncomfortable. It is particularly uncomfortable because i know that theyre good
people and we are supposed to consider both sides but there is not a both sides. Right . There is a president who went off of the Talking Points he was prepared and instead of asking the ukraine to get more serious about investigating and stopping corruption, he has to they target their corruption at joe biden. Theres not a lot of disputd about that. I understand my republicans try to frame it as he has the right to fire an ambassador. He doesnt have the right to do either of those things for a corrupt purpose. And so whats happening here, katie, my republican colleagues defend the indefensible and hard to do. It requires you to twist yourself into a pretzel, requires you to put your ethics on ice. Why they do it . Look. I get it as somebody whos an elected official. They fear this president and if they break theyre the subject of an attack on twitter and how these professionals have been targeted by the president. So i get it but god i would love
to believe that people look and say i dont know if its impeachable but its ugly and not consistent with the values and the ethics of the oval office but we cant get that. Congressman, ill turn it over to ari in a second but look ahead to the amp. Four witnesses is a lot. Were digesting the emotional moments from the morning and help us make the turn to the afternoon session, what facts are hoping to get into the record in this public setting from Ambassador Volcker and tim morrison . Well, you know, it is interesting because i think going into this day there was a sense on the part of my republican colleagues that volcker and morrison were likely to be more friendly witnesses to their defense of the day and of course they trotted out this single line from morrisons testimony where he was, you know, saying he had some issue with Colonel Vindmans judgment
and trying to damage the credibility and i think that theyre expecting a more friendly set of witnesses but when you think about it, you know, one of the lines we know they try to draw out is that one of the witnesses didnt think the behavior was illegal. Okay. First of all, thats a pretty low bar. Secondly, that is not the judgment of the fact witness is called upon to make. Ultimately, the congress of the United States will gather the evidence and make the decision about whether theres an Impeachable Offense but this is the kind of thing they hang on to in what is a long series of witnesses all of whom saying i was there or heard from people there and this is a bad thing. Thats a pretty when you think about it, a pretty thin defense. Congressman, ari melber here. Thank you for joining us. Looking forward to kurt volcker who you just mentioned. Im curious how you an the committee will question him on the core of the story which is that he was in the car and
didnt know where it was going because hes quite experienced and so theres quite a bit of parsing in what we understand he said to your committee privately. How will you approach that in the questioning and will it matter in your view of what he has to offer as a fact witness . First of all, you may know more than i do but the word on the street is one may seek to amend their previous testimony, something, of course, we have seen before. Congressman, were certain you know more than we do about what the Intelligence Committee is about to do. Well, no. I can answer that question for you, but again, we need to stand by hearing there may be an amendment of testimony. That could shake everything up but to answer your question, Ambassador Volcker and ambassador sondland both claim that, yeah, they were sort of aware that these investigations were out there. And in one case giuliani, we didnt know what they were
doing, gosh, you know well, you know, well conduct ourselves with more fairness than the republicans. I dont think anybody will call anybody a liar but will try to draw out how two peoples jobs were to understand what was happening in ukraine, to Pay Attention to the language of the president , are they in fact claiming they werent conscious of what was going on . Well see how it develops. Sir, this is nicole again. In television we call that a tv. Are you able to tell us whether theres amended testimony and whether its substantive . I only know that because its what your network was reporting about five minutes ago. Well see. I dont know that to be true but again it wouldnt entirely shock me because, of course, have seen this once before with ambassador sondland and if thats true that
could radically change the nature of this hearing. Do you sense that we can pick up on the emotion when theres someone like Marie Ivano Ivanovich and you can hear a pin drop when she testifies and same is true for a lot of the periods of Colonel Vindmans testimony. Do you sense that they feel more pressure to sort of play and dance with the very political lines of questioning from the republicans on the committee . All of the people interviewed worked in the white house or on the National Security council and most of them lifelong nonpartial professionals. The one individual thats not true for is ambassador sondland
and an interesting story because the whole fact pattern of his behavior from start to finish doesnt exude the behavior of a professional diplomat. And, you know, i dont want to prejudge what his testimony may be later on in this week but, of course, he is the one individual who felt it was necessary after he what was the phrase . Refreshed the recollection to amend his testimony. I agree with you. I hope we get a chance to talk to you again before after ambassador sondlands testimony. It is his amended testimony that the memory was refreshed by the transcripts being released from Ambassadors Taylor and i believe tim morrison, as well. We see some action getting under way behind you. Well let you go. Thank you for spending sometime with us. Please come back afterward if youre able to. It is clear this is an event unfolding in realtime. I have likened it to a puppy cam
and a central way the story is far more unpredictable for the Trump White House than the mueller investigation. This is so fast moving. This is so unpredictable in terms of how the public will receive witnesses like Colonel Vindman, spontaneous applause for the patriotism and courage they display. You cant game up with a president ial tweet. If you look at the mueller investigation, it occurred there was an incredible discipline on that team. It went on for months and months and months and months and there were no leaks, no one really knew what was going on so everyone was free to color outside the lines with whatever they wanted to put on it. And then when he testified there was a sense of the air going out of the room in that he was so
intent on just presenting the facts that it was seen as a Big Quote Unquote Victory even though how many times ive heard you said, confirm russian contacts. 150. 150 so, you know, even though they delineated serious obstruction issues in that report this is different. Now the question is how Many Americans who are not already firmly convinced one way or the other are going to be watching this testimony and getting a sense of this evidence . Or will they get it in their respective Echo Chambers . Will they get it where theyre playing the clip of that brave patriot saying you know, because in america, you know, we do it right . That i am an american. I serve america. All the patriotic things that reassured you that this guy was
there just to tell what he saw. How Many Americans will actually see that or how many of them will see what the president is retweeting or what the white house is putting out trying to question his judgment . It is a battle for correct information. And time will tell whether enough americans are taking their jobs as jurors seriously and watching this testimony so they can make up their own mind whos telling the truth and why. Ari, one of the only measures we have of that is Public Opinion polling showing that i think the latest the Washington Post abc news poll shows 70 of americans rendered a judgment on the conduct in question and believe that asking ukraine for dirt on joe biden is wrong. I think that same poll shows up is t support of removal of office. You have been talking about the evidence that it is seeping through. They understand what the
president did. Yeah. He sought to get help in his domestic campaign. From ukraine. Thats why the facts are scary for the white house as supportived by evidence and this testimony under oath. At the end of the day only three president s have seen an Impeachment Probe get to this point. What you see here, the cameras sometimes is shaky keeping an eye on the hearing an the colleagues keeping an eye on when the witnesses walk in for the next round of hearings. This process right here, only three president s faced. Only one of them had this result in them ousted, richard nixon. What was the underlying issue . Whether he was trying to steal the election. Americans do get that. We have a thing about democracy. We know its messy. We know we have an Electoral College and a senate thats not a direct democracy. I do Think Americans in our steeped in culture and civic life understand where democracy fits in and out of the three probes, very different, it was the one of stealing an election
that nixon Didnt Quote Unquote Need to do. He won with a big margin and americans started to think, well, how much of that margin is stolen and how many times did he do this without getting caught . If i can broaden out getting ready for the next hearing, nicole, for those of us living in and out of this in these very odd times, 2019 is donald trump gets through the Mueller Probe with his presidency intact. High rate of indictments of the aides and advisers than any other president ever in the first term, a lot of blood on the field and gets through and turns around the next day and says 2016 i was offered help. My folks got way too close to the meetings. 2020, im demanding the help. Im extorting the help. On this narrow point im reporting what hes publicly admitted. Right. Help me. Im open to it. He was privately lobbying for it. Privately trying to according to the witnesses extort it. And then publicly said yes on the white house lawn. Dont forget. This is what we would see in a senate trial if there is evidence. He said something more damning than any other written report. He wanted a Serious Investigation of the bidens. Point. Point. So americans are watching this hearing with that understanding. The bribery was about the election, not another thing. If the judgment is going to be rendered it is going to be about whether we can accept that as a country. It would seem that where this is heading if you just watch the lines of questioning by republicans theyre moving away from disputing the evidence. The Smear Campaigns against the witnesses are not sort of a bug, not a side effect. Theyre the central defense of donald trump. Right. I think to aris point we have seen teflon don and might be Seeing Tin Trump now but the truth is that i think the republicans for a long time have
been demonstrating theres no evidence and doing personal attack or other forms of distraction like what really did happen with the bidens . And when you bring it back to this point, both that i think ari importantly raises of trumps admission that you also back to clairs question of what happened in that month between april and may, one of the things that happened that the republicans are ignoring is that Rudy Giuliani, was it may 9 or 10, publicly said idm going to ukraine to turn the tables on the democrats because this will be very, very helpful to trump and im going to get what get them to look at 2016 election and the bidens. He said that on may 9th. It was reported in the New York Times on the 9th and then the outcry that resulted in that trip the plug was only pulled because of the outcry that made its way ultimately to the white
house and i think on may 11th that trip was canceled. Thats why to mayas point the time line and the facts dont help the defenders of the president much. You mentioned teflon don and tempting Me To Quote Rick Ross but ill hold back and were moments away. They as you know just reminding the viewers, watching the room, they delayed for some votes and scheduled to come back in two minutes ago. Nicole, i think the question here is, you know, we were getting a readout of a colleague at the white house about donald trump doing the normal thing he does, the tv style points. Yeah. References to the outfits and the mood and whether nunez lost points on style but not that he was wrong going at this currently enlisted soldier in bay but style points. I wonder if as we look at the next amp hearing what the style of the men is going to be and perceived by republicans to hope they would be somewhat defenders when from what i can tell and we
discussed this with a member of the committee, nicole, it seems that mr. Volcker whos so central is mostly trying to distance himself from where the plot is headed and not a great sign. Well, your point to the congressman is absolutely right. He will describe himself as, sure, i was in the car, on the ground, his defense amounts to trying to do the best with the hand id been dealt. I was for ukraine getting the milita military aid. Theres no reason to doubt that but he accepted the Playing Field as it exists and that was clearly the conditionality of military aid on trumps request for the investigations he sought which were into the 2016 election, a theory debunked by Donald Trumps own Homeland Security adviser tom bossert and the investigations designed to damage the bidens. The bidens being who in historical in the locked amber
of the bidens were the family, the potential dynasty, senator that donald trump was worried about most facing in the election and eagleeyed viewers will see in the corner of the screen, a debate that msnbcs involved with and tomorrow night a debate among candidates seeking to both be the nominee against donald trump and potentially weeks even before the iowa caucus be jurors in the potential senate trial. Yeah. We have to remember how donald trump ran his first campaign. And the only frame of reference he has is marketing. Right. He is a marketer. Hes a guy who understands brand and he understands marketing and what he did is he marketed to a segment of the American Public who wanted change, thought they might have gotten it with barack obama. Didnt feel like they got it. You know . They still couldnt afford to retire. Still couldnt afford to send
their kids to college and decided to pull the pin on the grenade and lob it into washington through donald trump because donald trump marketed to them that he was their guy. Now, this is a Guy Who Guilded Toilets and jumbo jets and has never been anything but an elite. But he got how to talk to them. So now he sees the next election through that same frame of reference. Doesnt matter whats true, whether its fair. It Doesnt Matter whether or not its what president s do. He knew he needed something on the bidens. Because what biden had and he got this, that none of the other opponents had,