>> big news. "the washington post" just reported remember that weird meeting at the white house with president trump and the russians and rex tillerson where the russians kind of laughed at the american media as they sauntered into this meeting with the president and other officials? well, the post reports that our president told the russians in that meeting that he wasn't concerned about moscow's interference in the u.s. election because his reasoning went the u.s. did the same thing in other countries. let me quote directly from the post reporting. here's what we're -- well, look, that's the gist of the story. all right? well, why does this matter now? here's how it fits in. it's part of the bigger story. it seems that it's not just the call with ukraine that the white house tried to keep secret. the memo and the readouts about what the president said to these russians was also something that was secreted away. so you can add it to calls

between president trump and the saudi crown prince, mohammed bin salman and between the president and vladimir putin. why? these are certainly unusual moves that must be explained. it's not clear if those calls were given the same level of super secrecy that we now know came with the call to ukraine's president where the president asked for an investigation of the bidens, but it is another crack in a wall of silence. there was an even bigger blow, i would argue, today shedding light on mounting concern in the white house. the u.s. special envoy to ukraine, kurt volcker, resigned today, just one day after the whistle-blower report came out. why? not clear yet. but he is mentioned in that whistle-blower report and we'll look at how he fits into this ever more tangled web around his

lawyer. right now i want to get to a come woman who may have helped drive nancy pelosi's decision to conduct an inquiry. representative alyssa slotkin joys joins me right now. i would ask you to exercise your expertise wearing two hats, as an intelligent officers as a lawmaker and as a consistent. gi -- constituent. >> i also worked at the national security council under presidents bush and obama. there's no way around it, just the breaking of norms and traditions that have gone on from the very beginning, it's a little hard to take. you know, i think the president

back in 2017 clearly didn't understand what we do and do not do in other people's elections and was flippant about it. and now, of course, many, many things -- many months have gone by and we know a lot more about the story. but to be honest with you, i think a lot of this stuff that we're talking about now, they are details that are part of the story but it sort of gets caught in the details when we don't focus on the big picture. >> i agree with you. so let's transition to that. because his statements to the russians, write it off to ignorance or flippancy, as you say. but the arrogance of creating a two-tiered system of how you protect information, it's no coincidence to me "the washington post" is finding out what happened in that meeting now, that there's all this exposure about this other system. have you heard about this other system, the password system that the ukraine call was in? >> sure. >> is that something you guys do in the intelligence world or they do is he nse?

>> again, at the nse there are multiple types of systems, some for unclassified information, some for classified and then some for what's called code word, which is exsepceptionally classified that even people with top clearance doesn't necessarily get to see. and what breaks with executive orders is anyone taking information from the unclassified system that has no reason to be classified and putting it in one of those higher level systems. i learned on my first day as a cia officer there are many, many different strict ways you can classify information, but embarrassing information, politically sensitive information, that is not classified information. so what they did by moving it wasn't right. i still think, you know, that it keeps us in the weeds a little bit from the bigger story, which is what the president did to use his leverage to get dirt on a political opponent. that is the story. that is the big thing here that was different enough for myself and my fellow national security freshmen to come out for an

impeachment inquiry. but, you know, we're doing a methodical process now. i'm really glad to see that a number of the committee members are staying behind. they've been asked to stay behind here in washington to follow through with some of the -- >> instead of recess. >> yeah, instead of recess. because it shows a different process. i think that one of the things that we've been losing, you know, in the past couple of months on this is we're not bringing the american people along with the story. you know, the drip, drip, drip of information on this thing or that thing, it's all -- it's important but we got to be able to bring people along so it not a washington insider baseball story. >> you guys have a challenge because you're telling a new story now. i get that this is new information about ukraine, but for months democrats were saying we already have enough, this is already obstruction and we're fighting with ourselves to figure out what to call it but we already have enough. now you don't even want to talk about that stuff anymore, it

only about ukraine. that could send a message to people as well, congresswoman. are you worried about that? >> i think putting the country through an impeachment inquiry is such a serious thing, we shouldn't do it lightly. for me it's something i never came into congress to do. it not something i go into gleefully or lightly at all. it crossed a threshold in national security. it is different. >> explain that. look at it in this context because you're new to this particular world, even with all the intel experience. now you're in a world where nobody expects any integrity on in level sadly. and i hope that changes. >> so sad. >> they say they all do what he did. they say biden did it with his son. people say this is what they do and now you're going to throw somebody out of office for doing what the industry norm is in washington? what do you say? >> i say it's not the industry norm. it is not the industry norm for the commander in chief, the most

powerful man in the world, to reach out to a junior partner nation and leverage that for dirt on a political opponent. that is not normal. imagine a democratic president reaching out to china or north korea and doing the same thing. it's precedent here. it's about the future, not the past. it's about the 2020 elections, not 2016. there's an urgency about it. it is different. it's not something i ever wanted to do. me and a number of us came out this week. it is different. there's strategically important and tactically important. keep it at the strategic level. >> are you equally concerned as others in the caucus now that the call is not all? they keep saying it is just a window, it's something that is a year in the making, many months in the making, involves people in the white house on multiple levels and what they were telling people in congress about why funding was being held, how they are changing different standards of classification to

protect, what access mr. giuliani was being given when we saw the text he released by mr. volcker who resigned. how many different layers are you considering in making your case to the american people as to what this rises to as abuse? >> we need to do a thorough investigation. we're starting that next week. we need to look into the detail and be methodical about it. we can't be jumping the done on anything. that doesn't mean the who el kitchen sink goes into -- >> some in your party say you will vote next month. is in a possible? >> i'm not foreclosing anything. i do think the process needs to be efficient and clear. >> what's the standard? how bad does it have to be to justify to say this president should lose what the people gave him? >> i think if the president has put his own personal or

political gain against the criteria of the country, that indicates an impeachable offense to me. nobody wants to go through this but we are pushed to the point where to preserve the constitution and our democratic elections, we need to do this and we need to inquire and figure out what happened. and i think that we have to have certain standard and norms. i don't think that it's a crazy thing to look into this as a very different matter. i think only this and only something that challenges my oath to protect and defend the constitution would have brought me to this place. >> so you believe it is a legitimate question as to whether or not this president jeopardized the national security of the united states in doing what he did with ukraine? >> i think that is what is on the table and we need to figure that out, yes. >> what does it mean to you that volcker stepped down, the special envoy to ukraine, he was working as a volunteer, also at the mccain institute there

wearing two hats. it's somewhat atypical. he kind of stepped into there's a big hole in the ukraine diplomatic core. he steps out right after the whistle-blower complaint comes out that he was mentioned in. doesn't look good. >> i think it's interesting he's stepping down. it allows him to be freed up to have a real conversation. i think he undoubtedly will be called in to give his side of the story, to talk about what he knows in front of the u.s. congress and i think it's better to do that as a private citizen than someone who is still in the employ of this administration. >> with corey lewandowski, as you know, corey lewandowski said they're exercising their executive privilege. he never even worked in the white house. if they can do it with corey lewandowski, they can do it with him. the rule is clear, if you're not working there anymore, you're not under the privilege anymore. >> let's all hope that not every witness is like mr. lewandowski.

i think mr. volcker is a serious professional and he understands this is a crisis right now and he owes his clear and objective responses to congress. >> what do you make in your analysis with your experience in the intelligence community of mr. giuliani? now, one problem is he told me he was doing this on his own. i asked him specifically are you working under color of authority of the president, certainly the state department would fit into that. he said no. then later here said yes, he is working with the state department. he seemed to be telling the truth. those texts he put out with volcker seemed to suggest he was working. is there a situation or a circumstance where that is okay for a civilian to be working with the state department doing these types of things with ukraine? >> it's highly unusual. i don't know if it been done in the past but it is highly unusual, not something i've seen in 15 years in government. i think mixing political and person with professional and national security issues is

always a dangerous game and never worth it. i think that it's been cloudy at best starting with your interview with mr. jewgiuliani. i think he's acknowledged the very basic top line fact here, which is that the president used his leverage on ukraine to get them to provide dirt on a political opponent. he acknowledged it in front of you, in front of everyone else. that's what changed for me is they were open about it. they didn't seem to be shameful about it, and i just cannot accept that, as an army wife, as the mom of a stepdaughter in the army, the commander in chief can't be doing that. >> it is interesting how many of you heard rudy giuliani lay out the biden case as flagrantly as he did, treat the facts the way he did, use the tone that he did and it started to make you think differently about what you had do in this situation. that certainly was not his intention. congresswoman alyssa slotkin, thank you so much for giving your perspective. you have an open invitation to

come here. the american people have to be brought along every step of the way. thank you for doing so tonight, especially on a friday. >> thank you. >> to be honest, there are no more fridays. it like every night is a big night now. tonight we're learning a lot about the lengths the white house went to to conceal details of the president's calls and conversations. you just heard someone who worked in the intelligence community. she said i wasn't aware people were doing this kind of stuff. the question is why are they doing this? two reporters who are all over this story with some insight next.

morning. what are you doing? isn't it obvious? nah. we're delivering live market coverage and offering expert analysis completely free. we're helping you make sense of the markets without cable or a subscription from anywhere you are. i get that. but what are you doing here? nice pajamas. really? i say pajamas. pajamas, pajamas, whichever. good. yahoo finance live. stream free anywhere. welcome to the show. let's make finance make sense. welcome to the show. sfx: upbeat music a lot of clothes you normally take to the cleaners aren't dirty dirty. they just need a quick refresh. try new febreze clothing quick dry mist. it eliminates odors and refreshes lightly-worn clothing. breathe happy febreze...

la la la la la. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. i felt i couldn't be at my best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test

if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. johnsbut we're also a cancer fighting, hiv controlling, joint replacing, and depression relieving company. from the day you're born we never stop taking care of you. walking a dog can add thousands walking this many?day. that can be rough on pam's feet, knees, and lower back. that's why she wears dr. scholl's orthotics. they relieve pain and give her the comfort to move more so she can keep up

with all of her best friends. dr. scholl's. born to move. look, we're all know the basic axiom, if you have nothing to worry about, you are don't hide. so why are we learning about things being hidden? among the many questions being raised tonight as we learn about the white house's efforts to limit access to president trump's calls with a lot of people, not just the ukraine

president, but with putin and the crown prince of saudi arabia and what the president told russian officials in the oval office in 2017 while dismissing their election interference. so let's bring in jim baker and jim sciutto. you know jim sciutto is an anchor here. jim baker is not a journalist, he's someone with legal acumen in the area we're dealing with. the significance to the audience, why does this new matter? >> well, listen, let's start with the oval office meeting here. there's no other way to describe it but as a betrayal of national security interests. you russia has just interfered in the political process and the president tells him he's fine with it, it's okay, which exc e excuses the experience in 2016 but welcomes interference in elections to follow. so you have the behavior and the

comment and then you have the coverup where officials knowing that that statement to russian officials is something that should not be known by the public so they take extraordinary measures to keep it not just from the public but from other members of trump as own administration. and as we reported tonight, chris, my colleague pamela brown and i, that it was not limited to that meeting in the oval office. it was not limited to the steps they took after the ukraine president. they took similar steps after the president spoke to the russian president and after he spoke to the saudi crown prince. it it's a pattern of troublesome patterns with foreign leaders and to conceal those steps from other members of his administration. >> point, counterpoint. their argument is we have all different ways, if you don't

like us, vote us out. it's not something that's an abuse of power. what's the counter? >> it is an abuse of power. let me back up. the president has authority as commander in chief and the head of foreign relations for the united states to classify information. that's true under the constitution. but it has to be for that purpose. it cannot be for the purpose of protecting him and his administration from embarrassment because he says things that are actually contrary to the national security interests of the united states or unlawful. and i mean unlawful in the sense of unconstitutional, in dereliction of his duties as commander in chief and in dereliction of his oath of office. so he gets to classify information but only to protect the national security. that's what he can do. >> what if the national security risk is there's too many leaks? they're killing me in here. we have to protect these things. ukraine is a sense it have situation, they're a fragile place, mbs, have to keep this

stuff quiet, away from the leakers. >> look, leaking -- truly classified information is unlawful. it should not be done. this stuff in my mind is not properly classified when it's done just to protect the political interests of the president or other people or to preserve them from embarrassment. and in the executive order that governs classified information, it says that. that's what the rules say. can you not classify information just to prevent embarrassment or cover up violations of law, including violations of the constitution. >> to that point we know based on past administrations' use of this code-word-protected system, they did not use that for politically embarrassing information. i'm talking about republican and democrat democratic administrations that preceded this one. they used it solely and principally for conversations that included the most sensitive intelligence, for instance, the

bin laden raid, about iran and the nuclear deal. they used it for those kind of conversations, not conversations that are politically sensitive. so this was at a minimum, and i'll let jim speak to the legal aspect but in terms of how classified information was handled in the system, it was a clear break from the norm. >> the tbiggest problem the president has in working ukraine to get to biden, you're going to have misappropriation of federal assets for other purposes. i want to turn our attention to mr. volcker. it the first time, guys, i've ever had them not trash someone for leaving. they're saying he's a good guy, he left. how does it not look bad?

jim sciutto, what could i be missing, the day after the whistle-blower report that he's mentioned in, the special envoy to ukraine resigns? >> he's meant to be america's primary official dealing with ukraine affairs. in fact, we saw from the president's use of his own personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, that from the president's perspective, it appears he was using someone else outside of government. >> that's a key point. jim baker pick up on that. help us with the legalities. we saw the text from volcker to rudy giuliani. did rudy giuliani have to register as a foreign agent? when is it okay, if ever, for a private citizen to work with the state department this way? what are the legalities involved? >> well, so it's a bit tricky. let back up. generally speaking under the constitution the president does have authority to select what envoys or emissaries that he wants to engage with or have

engage with foreign leaders on his behalf. he can do it through the official channels of the state department or do it through others. that to me doesn't freak me out, let me just put it that way. but he does have to be careful about how he's spending u.s. government funds, exactly what's happening, if he's putting state department people out there saying something different, contradicting what giuliani might be saying behind closed doors. look, the way this has come out, it does not look like a professional and well-thought-out strategy by the president to effect the foreign relations of the united states in a comprehensive and cohesive way. it looks like amateur hour with the former mayor going around and saying the things that he does. it looks terrible. so we'll see what mr. volcker has to say. >> i got to leave it there but i appreciate it, guys. i thank you for jumping in, especially on a friday night. i appreciate it. you both got families. amateur hour is bad but the

abuse of power this has to rise to to make impeachment unavoidable, much higher. thank you for bringing us the news and explaining it to us. appreciate it. so big question, how could so many people possibly know what we're only reading now in the whistle-blower's claims? we can't understand the state of play here without knowing the players. and also, mr. giuliani is at the center of this. i don't know that he's going to turn out to be a hero the way he thinks but he certainly cat catalysted democrats and he told us things that are now being seen in a different light. what did they say, how did we get here, where do we go? it's all broken down in a tangled web that i can't believe we weaved next. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable.

don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. t-mobile's newest signal reaches farther than ever before. with more engineers. more towers. more coverage! it's a network that gives you ♪freedom from big cities, to small towns, we're with you. because life can take you almost anywhere, t-mobile is with you. no signal goes farther or is more reliable in keeping you connected.

there are three words when you live with migraine... "i am here." aim to say that more with aimovig. a preventive treatment for migraine in adults that reduces the number of monthly migraine days. for some, that number can be cut in half or more. don't take aimovig if you're allergic to it. allergic reactions like rash or swelling can happen hours to days after use. common side effects include injection site reactions and constipation. aim to be there more. talk to your doctor about aimovig.

romance isn't dead! but it is here. thanks, captain obvious. don't hate-like their trip, book yours with hotels.com and get rewarded basically everywhere. hotels.com. be there. do that. get rewarded. hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.

juul record. mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! they took $12.8 billion from big tobacco. juul marketed mango, mint, and menthol flavors, addicting kids to nicotine. five million kids now using e-cigarettes. the fda said juul ignored the law with misleading health claims. now juul is pushing prop c, to overturn san francisco's e-cigarette protections. say no to juul, no to big tobacco, no to prop c.

more big news. the u.s. special envoy to ukraine is out, kurt volcker. he name was in the whistle-blower complaint. he left the day after this came out. democrats in the house are still going to want to talk to him and now access to him got a little bit easier if he left the white house. he's one of dozens of people who knew about about or actively participated in a concerted effort to benefit one man, president donald j. trump. the whistle-blower cites more than a half dozen u.s. officials who know the facts and a dozen white house officials who listened in on the call. the acting dni's testimony gave us even more names. so as you push in closer to the

president, you see some big names personally in this. volcker's right there with some of the most powerful men in the government, which is why his resignation and possible testimony certainly matter. at the heart of this, we get to two people, the president and a man who hasn't held elected office in over 18 years. it was last week right here that rudy giuliani tried to create so much smoke, he may have choked on it. >> did you ask the ukraine to investigate joe biden? >> no. actually, i didn't. >> you never asked anything about hunter biden, you never asked anything about joe biden? >> the only thing i asked about joe biden is to get to the bottom of how it was that lutsenko -- >> so did you ask ukraine to look into joe biden? >> of course i did. >> you just said you didn't. >> in the days since then, it hasn't gotten much easier towgi.

it's gone from he was acting under orders, to he was following orders as the state department the he's painted himself as the true whistle-blower and hero. that's about style. no matter what he calls himself, the actions are hard to discern, especially because the administration refuses to answer whether he ever registered as a foreign agent. maybe he needed to, maybe he didn't. but under federal law you are supposed to if you're a u.s. citizen engaged in negotiations with a foreign government. that brings us to the ruts esulf his work. >> i'm not going to give you proof. what can you do? you can't indict anybody. believe me, the proof is in the right hands money. >> the right hands. can you imagine if this president with his attorney general opened up an investigation into joe biden on the basis of what they're talking about right now? now on that you got to keep in mind the president's own words

and the whistle-blower's logical conjecture, the dots still need to be connected here, but they line up in a straight path to the a.g., which is why i asked question about can you imagine that? bill barr is currently marshal be the resources of the d.o.j. in the hunt of his own facts in the hopes they work to the political benefit of his boss. the fact that so many in power were involved shows this is not about deep state. this is a window as to how the administration operates in the light of day. they are the nine pages that everything changed in this white house when this complaint came out. the former whitewater independent counsel robert ray has heard everything we're saying here. what makes sense to him? what doesn't. what matters and why? what is different about this? what is here that the mueller

report didn't have next. moving into our new apartment. why don't we just ask geico for help with renters insurance? i didn't know geico helps with renters insurance. yeah, and we could save a bunch too. antonio! fetch computer! antonio? i'll get it. get to know geico and see how much you could save on renters insurance. stop dancing around the pain that keeps you up again, and again. advil pm silences pain, and you sleep the whole night. advil pm

to get in a tree, nock an arrow, and disappear. this is what you live for. it's your season. now save on all your opening day essentials during the outdoor traditions sale at bass pro shops and cabela's. tell him we're flexible. don't worry. my dutch is ok. just ok? (in dutch) tell him we need this merger. (in dutch)

it's happening..! just ok is not ok. especially when it comes to your network. at&t is america's best wireless network according to america's biggest test. now with 5g evolution. the first step to 5g. more for your thing. that's our thing. in the human brain, billions of nefor people with parkinson's, some neurons change their tune, causing uncontrollable tremors. now, abbott technology can target those exact neurons.

the most personal technology is technology with the power to change your life. one of the interesting things about the dynamic we're all living here is the president has yet to take any issue with the facts that the whistle-blower laid out. he usually says it's all untrue, it's all fake. his hand are tied because this is transcript that came out with the blessing of the white house. let's stick with the facts and bring in robert ray. >> good to see you, my friend.

>> we are literally living history together. >> i'll take issue with you on the first thing. >> that you're happy to be here? >> i think the president takes issue with a portion of the whistle-blower complaint which attempts to allege there's a coverup and therefore an obstruction of justice. says it didn't happen. so far as i know. >> when is it okay to take certain things and put it in a password protected classification place that is done for political purposes, not national security purposes. >>e let's divide it up in the universe of think, there were diplomatic implications, legal implications and political implications. it's very easy to say it was all about politics. that's really not true, is it? when you think about you've already mentioned on your broadcast legitimate concerns about leaks, which may explain with regard to other foreign leaders were certain things were cabined.

>> that's his best argument. >> anybody who has been in washington, the more people you tell, somehthe more likely it'sg to leak out. >> it's not a problem because i'm a journalist. >> there were some decisions where i literally told two people in the office because i know if i told them, i didn't have to worry. >> if it comes down a bunch of big brains, you, to come and argue that that made it okay. is it? >> the other part was going to mention was the legal part. we know now from the reporting from "the wall street journal" and others i think today, that the justice department was involved very early on and the intelligence community apparently gave a heads up to the justice department. it went through where it should have gone through, which is the national security division of the department. >> the whistle-blower complaint? >> they knew about it before the

whistle-blower complaint. >> apparently he went to the cia counsel's office, right? >> i don't know what happened. but somehow the justice department got a heads up. the person who heads the national security division of the justice department went over to view the transcript. and then after that, they reported back to the chief of the criminal division and the deputy attorney general got involved. so, again, all those things you would expect to happen. and that's why -- the reason for that is because there are legal implicatio implications. >> but the question is whether or not that rises to the level of making this okay to put under password protection. that's the issue. we'll see how it plays out. >> just so it's clear for the viewers, what you're talking about, we're not talking about okay. what we're talking about is did that constitute to a rise to the level of obstruction of justice? just because things are shielded from access or public view -- >> why can't it just be an abuse of power? >> that's not tantamount to obstruction of justice or abuse of power. >> i didn't say it was. i don't know about the abuse of power. if you did it for political

purposes, you could say it's an abuse of power. >> all the headlines in the morning newspaper this morning, everything was about trying to characterize all of this in terms of how this came out, which is a process issue, as concealment suggesting that the white house did something wrong. >> it does look like that, though. that's why they have to explain it. they have to explain why it okay. >> i don't have any problems with explanations or hearings in order to understand exactly what happened, but don't jump to the conclusion that that's obstruction of justice. >> i'm identifying it as an issue. >> fair point. >> i'm identifying also if the d.o.j. knew about this in advance before it even went through the whistle-blower proce process, it then raises the issue is that why you were so reluctant to have this complaint go to congress, because you knew what it was about, you looked at the transcript of the call, you knew it was bad for the president and you decided to sleep on that statute and makes it pretty clear -- is that an abuse of power? >> no. again, there are legitimate

executive privilege issues, c t legitimate issues with diplomatic implications, making sure there's not public disclosure of a private conversation between two world leaders. it's not just one thing. i understand everybody is now excited about the white house sat on this and the justice department was involved in trying to conceal it from congress and the american people. >> but i'm reversing the point as a question of perspective, which is, right, just because it's complicated doesn't mean you can't explain it. you have to explain why it wasn't an abuse of power. i'm not saying that the burden of proof is on the president but you have help understand the situation. >> i still get back to what we talked about two days ago, which is at the end of the day, what was this hearing about yesterday before the intelligence committee in the house? mostly it was about process. >> you didn't want us to see this because you knew it was bad for him and that's not what you're supposed to be doing. >> okay. and the justice department made a call on this with regard to

executive privilege -- or the white house did with regard to executive privilege and the justice department made a call in connection with whether or not it satisfied the particulars of the statute. you may disagree with the answer, but there's a ten-page off of legal counsel opinion that represents the view of the government about what the law is with regard to the issue. >> right. >> and in any event, after all of that and all this process, the whistle-blower complaint has been released and the transcript of the call has been released. so what you're left with is a process argument about trying to hunt for -- >> and process matters. look what we're learning now. do i care in a vacuum that this president was reckless enough to say to the russians in a meeting i don't care that you interfered in the election, we do the same thing? no. and i don't think it's a coincidence that we're finding out about it now. that someone tried to keep it quiet because they thought it fit into this category of political exposure they didn't like, that's what feeds understanding. you say it's not about process. it has to be, robert, because what we're trying to examine is

was there a many-months-long process here of engineering political advantage for this president with ukraine, with the state department, with the white house that was working over congress, insinuating giuliani into the state department that if you don't do the right thing with the biden matter, you are don't get to the white house and the president -- >> you're making it sound like it a many-month process. the phone call was in july. >> it's been going on before that, march, april. >> i remember talking to him about it in the green room and it clearly was public at least by may. >> that's a lot of months. it wasn't one phone call. >> i'm talking about the president's conversation now and the process that we're talking about. i don't know. every day is a new day that the democrats decide to focus on something else, with i is thich sattsat satter -- scatter shot approach.

>> the president talks to the other president and says look at biden with money and reciprocity hanging in the balance. he's got to explain why that's ok okay. >> well, he doesn't have to explain why that's okay if those two things exist in one conversation, that's well short of being able to show that that's a quid pro quo. >> you don't have to show it's a quid pro quo. you know the statute just says solic solicit. >> the democrats have tried four things. >> i'm not the democrats. i'm right here. >> the four issues are what? treason? no. ukraine is an ally. is it bribery? no. the bribery statute doesn't apply to foreign government officials. >> can you solicit a foreign entity? robert -- >> last one, is it a violation of the campaign finance law? the justice department has said through olc the answer is no. >> you can solicit a foreign government for political advantage. you believe that that's anybody's read on that statute? >> stop. asking for an investigation in

the words of the justice department olc memo is not a thing of value. therefore, it is not an illegal foreign campaign contribution, period, end of story. you may not like that, you may not agree with it. reasonable people can disagree, but you have some of the finest minds in the country at the office of legal counsel making a judgment about that. >> but it's not asking just for an investigation. here's how we know. they already investigated it. you know that and i know that. frankly, they investigated it twice, right? so shokin is looking at it. that's why this farce about biden is so silly. he had this corrupt guy looking at his son's business, they get rid of him and put in lutsenko and then he talks to rudy giuliani and that's going back to something you already investigatedin a iand it's clea

president wants a certain outcome. >> and what were the results of that? anything lead to an investigation harmful to the vice president? >> we don't know yet. >> and the democrats have made this a big issue, they'll sink the vice president's campaign. >> the reasoning is always strong. that's why i love having you on the show. but this is about him making that phone call, where it leads, what it means. i need you here to help us understand. >> that's why you say high bar. i believe it requires based upon history and practice both a high crime and misdemeanor, treason or bribery and an abuse of power and one or the other is not good enough. >> it has to be a high bar, unavoidable or the subject of an election. i'm with you on that. >> we're going to very clearly be within short order to november of this year, which means we're actually literally in an election year. how is that in the best interest of the country to travel down this road rather than have the

people decide? >> i hear you. >> i hear you but our leaders have to make choices, too. >> sure. >> i have to have you back soon. we're going to go beyond the word of politicos and look at the trump and ukraine versus biden and ukraine. i know it's a big deal out there. don't get mad at me and say they're not the same. everybody's bringing them up in the same sentence so let's look at the facts on both sides. that's the argument next. [ tires screech ] mom, you've got to get yourself a new car. the car's fine. [ car horn honks ] i wish i could save faster. you're making good choices. you'll get there. got it? yeah. ♪ thank you. bye.

were you going to tell me about this? i know i can't afford to go. you can't even afford to get yourself a new car. i still have this car so you can afford to go. [ music resumes ] i'm so proud of you. thank you, mom. principal. we can help you plan for that. start today at principal.com. ...6, 7, 8 ♪ ♪ ♪ big dreams start with small steps... ...but dedication can get you there. so just start small... start saving. easily set, track and control your goals right from the chase mobile® app. ♪ ♪ chase. make more of what's yours®. at verizon, we're building the most powerful 5g experience for america. that's why the nfl chose verizon.

because they need the massive capacity of 5g with ultra wideband, so more screaming, streaming, posting fans... can experience 5g all at once. this is happening in 13 stadiums all across the country. now if verizon 5g can do this for the nfl... imagine what it can do for you. thanks to priceline working with top airlines to turn their unsold seats into amazing deals, sports fans are seeing more away games. various: yeah-h-h! isn't that a fire hazard? uh, it's actually just a fire. priceline. every trip is a big deal.

(classical music playing throughout) ♪ ♪ this simple banana peel represents a bold idea: a way to create energy from household trash. it not only saves about 80% in carbon emissions... it helps reduce landfill waste. that's why bp is partnering with a california company: fulcrum bioenergy. to turn garbage into jet fuel.

because we can't let any good ideas go to waste. at bp, we see possibilities everywhere. to help the world keep advancing. so the troubling news tonight about trump's ukraine envoy resigning and more calls with leaders being unusually restricted, one thing's pretty clear. you're going to hear this president and his proxies coming after biden to cover this up and excuse it and soon. but saying something a lot doesn't make it true. what this president clearly did with ukraine is nothing like what biden did. it is true both did pressure the ukrainian government about

prosecutions, but that's where it ends. the why and the how could not be more different. here, biden acted publicly at the direction of the president as part of an international effort to assist ukraine in removing a rogue prosecutor. trump acted in secret without even the backing of congress, in fact, to opposite effect of congress, encouraging ukraine to take action that would help him and hurt a political rival. now, what about hunter biden, biden's son? he was on the board of burisma. are there ethical questions to be asked ? yes. are there standards we could pursue? yes. but when you sit on the board of a ukrainian natural gas company whose owner is under investigation, you've got to look at the legalities. first ukraine was looking at it before biden was on the board.

then ukraine picked it up before the rogue prosecutor came in. remember, the rogue prosecutor was in trouble and rogue for ignoring cases like this and many other corruption cases to the dismay of his government and others. so to help force a change in that fragile regime, biden acting on the official of the united states, went to kiev, announced a billion dollar loan to the government, but there was a catch. >> look, guys, i'm leaving in six hours. if the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money. son of a bitch, got fired. and they put in place someone who was solid at the time. >> now, why would you get rid of a weak guy and put in a solid guy if you wanted to help your kid who was being investigated? allies of this president will point to his bravado there as somehow proof that he's dirty. see, biden was using american funds to pressure ukraine too and try and kick out and end

that prosecution, they say. no. prosecutor. wrong for two reasons. here's why. one, you're mixing up prosecution and prosecutor and you're doing it for advantage and it's cheep. the prosecutor's deputy told bloomberg there was no pressure from anyone in the u.s. to close cases against that burisma owner. it was shelved by ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015. second, this weak prosecutor wasn't even actively investigating the company at the time. in fact, u.s. officials called him out for not looking at burisma more. why would biden allow the u.s. government to go after his own kid that way? an even stronger point, why fight to replace a weak guy looking at your son with a strong guy looking at your son more? and that's what happened. the new guy came in and stepped up the probe before ultimately closing the case. now, when we look at what was behind that damning july call that this president made and manufactured, the intention has

always been clear right from the mouth of his lawyer. rudy giuliani plans ukraine trip to push for inquiries that could help trump. that's way back in may. the months since, there were drips about this, and then the tsunami, trump ordering his chief of staff to put a hold on hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid. the call transcript, trump asking ukraine's president to do us a favor, talking about a lack of reciprocity with all we give them. in the next breath, asking to investigate biden and his son. remember, they had been investigated. they had already done it. what was he really asking for? advantage. the whistle-blower report. the white house officials were directed to remove the electronic transcript of the call from the computer system where they were typically stored and move it to a separate system that stores classified information. why limit the access to it? those two pieces of information

aren't all. there's a whole universe of events that we're only scratching the surface of. and no real denials from trump, not about that call. it's not fake. he's given us a string of contradicting explanations about why he held up the money, right? innocent, i just wanted to fight corruption. i wanted europe to get involved. but the call itself, holding up the aid money, covering up the call, none of that screams of being on the up and up. in contrast, biden's always been open about what he did because there was nothing to hide. and remember this president has no problem accepting foreign campaign interference. >> your campaign this time around, if fofrners, if russia, if china, if someone else offers you information on opponents, should they accept it, or should they call the fbi? >> i think maybe you do both. i think you might want to listen. >> you want that kind of interference in our elections? >> it's not an interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> you're not supposed to take it. turns out he wouldn't just take it. he'd ask for it as well. this president and his proxies

can accuse biden of doing something, but they do that without proof. this president actually did what they accused biden of, strong-arming ukraine for personal advantage, and there is proof. the two actions are no more equal in character or nature than the two men are. where it leads for this president, we don't know, but we must make sure that we don't advance on the basis of false equivalencies. this must be about facts first. so how does the biden camp feel about this? is this hufrting them? we have a voice in congress, also a key voice on the biden campaign. he is next. hy she wears dr. scholl's orthotics. they relieve pain and give her the comfort to move more so she can keep up with all of her best friends. dr. scholl's. born to move. "have you lost weight?" of course i have-

ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. is that...? quesadillas? gordon ramsay? handing out samples? seems like just an ok use of your culinary talents, dude. yeah it is smart guy. almost like having a brand new iphone but not pairing it with at&t. that's true... gordon ramsay. oi, fingers, it's not a buffet! use the cocktail stick. use a cocktail stick. get the most from your amazing new iphone 11 pro on at&t, america's fastest network for iphones. more for your thing. that's our thing.

dealing with psoriatic arthritis pain was so frustrating. ♪ my skin... it was embarrassing. my joints... they hurt. the pain and swelling. the tenderness. the psoriasis. i had to find something that worked on all of this. i found cosentyx. now, watch me. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are getting real relief with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. cosentyx treats more than just the joint pain of psoriatic arthritis. it even helps stop further joint damage. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms.