>> my call was perfect. >> reporter: -- new york. >> no one does it quite like jeanne. thanks for a perfect evening. thanks for joining us. "a.c. 360" starts right now. good evening. there's new reporti ining tonign nearly every aspect of the impeachment inquiry cliincludin cnn polling that shows a shift in the question of impeachment, itself, done before a whole string of developments including enough late today to fill a week's worth of broadcasts. just about 90 minutes ago the sbem intelligence community inspector general refuted a key republican talking point on the whistle-blower complaint saying, yes, the whistle-blower had, quote, direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct. in other words, it was not just hearsay, as the president's defenders have been saying. the inspector general who, by the way, was appointed by president trump, is the person who initially investigated the whistle-blower's complaint and determined it should be seen by congress. and according to new cnn reporting, secretary of state mike pompeo also had direct

knowledge of certain alleged conduct because it turns out he was on the call in july in which president trump pushed ukraine's president to investigate the bidens as well as the long debunked conspiracy theory about the 2016 election. a made-up conspiracy theory that president trump's own former homeland security adviser over the weekend said was a running obsession of the president. despite being told repeatedly it was debunked. according to other new reporting tonight, the president pushed australia's prime minister to help attorney general william barr look into it and that follows the news late today that the house intelligence committee has just subpoenaed the president's tv lawyer and ukraine fix it man, rudy giuliani, for documents relating to his efforts to lean on ukrainian officials on the president's behalf. on top of that, there's what the president, himself, said about his desire to, quote, find out about the whistle-blower. listen. >> mr. president, do you now know who the whistle-blower is, sir? >> well, we're trying to find out about a whistle-blower.

we have a whistle-blower that reports things that were incorrect. as you know, and you probably now have figured it out, the statement i made to the president of ukraine, a good man, a nice man, knew was perfect, it was perfect. but the whistle-blower reported a totally different statement, like, the statement, it was not even made. i guess statement you could say with call. i made a call. the call was perfect. when the whistle-blower reported it, he made it sound terrible. and then you had adam schiff who even worse made up my words, which i think is just a horrible -- >> we're trying to find out about the whistle-blower, the president said there, and all that stuff about what the whistle-blower said not being what the call was is not true. as the -- as to congressman schiff who chairs the house intelligence committee who you heard the president talk about there, he also tweeted that congressman schiff, and i quote, "illegally made up a fake and terrible statement, pretended it to be mine as the most important

part of my call to the ukrainian president and read it all loud congress and the american people. arrest for treason?" that's the president of the united states asking his twitter followers if the head of the house intelligence committee should be arrested for treason. that's where we are tonight. on top of that the president invoking the civil war with this tweet quoting conserve ti pastor robert jeffress, "if the democrats are successful in removing the president from office, which they will never be, it will cause a civil war-like fracture in this nation from which our country will never heal." pastor robert jeffress at fox news. it was that kind of news on that kind of day and it's not over yet. cnn's jim acosta has new reporting and joins us now. how are the president and his advisers taking impeachment threat tonight? >> anderson, i think a new reality is setting in over at the white house, a reality you and i are accustom to, one that's attached to the real world. i will tell you talking to some sources who have been involved

in some of these conversations over here at the white house oifr toef the last few days, there are aides and advisers being upfront with the president, leveling with him that he faces the real likely ho llihood of impeachmen this point. not getting into whether or not he'd be convicted and removed from office in the senate but could be impeached in the house of representatives. i tell you, anderson, i got a very stark quote from a republican congressional aide up on capitol hill a short while ago who said we are entering a phase with a lot of unknowns, people are anxious about what else is out there. i think that goes directly to the anxiety that is being felt up on capitol hill. this party has been with the president every step of the way, but you do get the sense that the ice is starting to break. >> both secretary of state mike pompeo and giuliani have been issued subpoenas. do we know what the strategy is going to be? is there any indication the white house is going to let them compl comply. >> i think that's an excellent question. i think the news today the secretary of state mike pompeo

was on the july 25th call makes what he has to say very important. as we saw in an interview on abc a couple weeks ago about all this, he was asked and i guess acted as if he didn't really know what the question martha rattis was asking him about. as for rudy giuliani that remains to be seen as well. i will tell you, anderson, talking to a couple sources close to this process, they're starting to, i guess, make the rumbling that, yes, the white house may decide to go ahead and invoke privilege to try to prevent both of these aides from telling all that that i kney kn. there's a general feeling inside the president's strategic team that rmg udy giuliani is helpin more than he's hurting. while that may cause some spit takes up on capitol hill, especially among republicans who don't think rudy giuliani is helping, there's a feeling inside the president's team, the president feels this way, himself, when rudy giuliani goes on tv, he releases such a fog of

misinformation from time to time, it tends to throw people off the scent and there's that feeling that rudy giuliani may be needed, so fasten your seat belts, we may see that kind of situation unfold if giuliani testifies. he did put out a statement, though, we should point out earlier this evening, anderson, saying don't count on it just yet. >> amazing rudy giuliani's biggest use is creating fog of misinformation. quite a career turn for the guy. jim acosta, thanks. joining us, senator kamala harris. democratic presidential candidate. and former california attorney general. senator harris, a lot to ask. first of all, i guess what do you make of jim acosta's reporting that the president's allies are concerned he doesn't actually understand the gravity of this impeachment fight? >> well, i mean, to be very candid, i don't think he has ever upd tnderstood the gravity the job, period. and this is serious. this is a very serious matter. we are talking about the fact, as confessed by the president,

essentially, with plenty of evidence including a cover-up and including clear evidence of consciousness of guilt that the president of the united states used american taxpayer dollars to -- and held them hostage with an expectation of favor from the head of a foreign government. he should be concerned, but i don't know that he's ever demonstrated empathy on one end of the scale or consciousness of guilt in any real way on the other end, and so, but i think he's going have to confront the realities of this most latest conduct through the impeachment process. >> it's also, it's favor from a foreign government, not for the benefit of the united states on a policy basis. >> correct. >> it's favor from a -- >> personal favor. >> yeah. i'm wondering what you make of the fact that the -- >> right, personal favor. >> -- president had no problem tweeting a pastor's mention of civil war, that the country could sort golf throuof go throl war. for a president to be invoking the very notion of americans fighting against americans over

this issue, is -- were you -- i guess -- i was going to say were you surprised -- >> we're all speechless. no, we're all speechless. anderson, the last time our count country endured a civil war was over america's original sin. slavery. and if donald trump thinks that this is a moment where he's actually being held accountable for his failures as president and his failure to uphold the oath to protect the constitution of the united states and our democracy, if he's equating that with a war that took place between american people over slavery, i mean, it is yet again evidence of the fact that he is delusional in that he has a very outsized sense of himself as compared to the history of our country. and all that we have been through and all that we are capable of. so, you know, i just think what's most important is we not

indulge his delusions and that we bring him back to reality. i think the impeachment process will do that. >> there are a lot of supporters, though, of the president out there who are good people who work hard and voted for him in good faith and believe in him -- >> sure. >> -- to this day. look at him, just, democrats can't get him out of it by the ballot box, now they're just trying to do it this way. >> i -- listen, i will never fault anyone for a decision they made about who to vote for. meaning that i don't believe that to be then the entire measure of who people are. what i would say is this. to everyone, and i say it all the time, the framers of our constitution, the founders of our nation, they imagined a moment such as this. they imagined a moment where one branch of government would abuse

its power and so they designed our beautiful system of democra democracy, flawed though it may be, designed it so there would be checks and balances. that's what's happening right now. the check an balance is where there has been an abuse by the executive branch, congress is acting and this is evidence of the fact that our democracy is intact and i think we all should support the fact that a democracy requires moments like this where there will be that check and balance and that's part of what makes us proud to be americans, which is that we truly are a democracy with those kinds of checks and balances in place that actually work. >> in the introduction to the broadcast, we played the president saying in the oval office that they're trying to find out about the whistle-blower. learn about the whistle-blower. are you confident that congress will be able to protect the whistle-blower's identity? because, i mean, and i'm wondering, do you believe that this person's not just job is in

jeopardy, but their life -- are they in jeopardy, physically? >> you know, i have to believe that -- and i do believe -- that the united states congress, the leaders of the united states congress, will do everything that is necessary to support and protect the whistle-blower. the president's tweets and his behaviors about this are just further evidence of the fact that he uses his power in a way that is designed to beat people down instead of lift people up. frankly, when you look at what he's been tweeting today directed at the whistle-blower, directed at so many people, you know, i, frankly, think that based on this and all we've seen him do before, including attacking members of congress, that he, frankly, should be -- his twitter account should be suspended. i think there's plenty of now evidence to suggest that he is irresponsible with his words in a way that could result in harm to other people. and so the privilege of using

those words in that way should probably be taken from him. >> but doesn't that, i mean, play into certainly the hands of, you know, his -- i don't know how many twitter followers he has, i think it's in the range of 60 million, who say, well, look, okay, now, you know, the rich folks in silicon valley are just trying to silence me and taking me off twitter. >> i'm sure that that will be said, but we have to also agree that when the president of the united states speaks, her words are very powerful and should be used in a way that is not about belittling, much less harming, anyone. and this president has, i think, never fully appreciated that responsibility. and so what we see continuously, including in the last 24 hours, is a use of his words, donald trump using his words in a way that could subject someone to harm. and if he's not going to exercise self-restraint, then,

perhaps, there should be other mechanisms in place to make sure that his words do not, in fact, harm anyone. and that's my point. what we want to make sure is that his words do not actually result in harm to anyone. >> just lastly -- >> understanding the potential -- >> right. >> -- for that. >> just lastly, a political question, politico is reporting tonight that you're shaking up the top level of your presidential campaign staff, specifically you're bringing your senate chief of staff into the campaign, elevating another campaign adviser. i'm wondering can yukon fiou yo whether that's true, what that says about the state of your candidates candidacy, how you see yourself in the race? >> i don't know if you heard, i'm kichd mond of moving to iow. our campaign is proceeding in a way of putting all of our resources into the task at hand. i'll be spending an incredible amount of time in iowa. i'm very proud of our team which has been on the ground in all the primary states. >> have you made those staffing changes? >> the most talented people in the business. we are in the process of making

sure all the folks who need to be on the ground are on the ground. i'm proud of what we're doing. >> one more time, you won't confirm whether those specific staffing changes have been made. >> i haven't read the article, apd s anderson. i can't tell you what the article says. i'm very proud of our team. we accomplished a great amount of work thus far which makes me a top-tier candidate and by many accounts within the top four, maybe five, but top four in a field of over 20 people. and so something's been going right. and we're going to continue moving ahead. >> senator harris, appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. thank you. coming up, is the whistle-blower's life in danger? i'm going to ask former white house chief of staff, defense secretary, and cia director, leon panetta. later, our legal team weighs in on the potential legal jeopardy now ahead for rudy giuliani. >> woman: what's my safelite story?

>> vo: my car is more than four wheels. it's my after-work decompression zone. so when my windshield broke... >> woman: what?! >> vo: ...i searched for someone who really knew my car. i found the experts at safelite autoglass. >> woman: hi! >> vo: with their exclusive technology, they fixed my windshield... then recalibrated the camera attached to my glass

so my safety systems still work. who knew that was a thing?! >> woman: safelite has service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ woi felt completely helpless.hed online. my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. vo: take control of your online reputation. get your free reputation report card at reputationdefender.com. find out your online reputation today and let the experts help you repair it. woman: they were able to restore my good name. vo: visit reputationdefender.com or call 1-877-866-8555.

pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. i can'twhat? ve it. that our new house is haunted by casper the friendly ghost?

hey jill! hey kurt! movies? i'll get snacks! no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on our car insurance with geico. i got snacks! ohhh, i got popcorn, i got caramel corn, i got kettle corn. am i chewing too loud? believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. here's the thing about managing for your business.s when you've got public clouds, and private clouds, and hybrid clouds- things can get a bit cloudy for you. but now, there's the dell technologies cloud, powered by vmware. a single hub for a consistent operating experience across all your clouds. that should clear things up. we touched on one of the

many pieces of breaking news at the top. before we get deeper into it, it's worth remembering the weekend began with a stunning report in the wo"washington pos that president trump in 2017 the day after firing james comey told russia's foreign minister and ambassador to the u.s. he was not concerned about russian interference in 2016 presidential election. that set the tone for the last several days and bears repeating because it's cut from the same cloth as the breaking news tonight about the president's behavior on phone calls with world leaders. according to a source familiar with calls the president had with foreign leaders dating through december of last year, he was so often so -- so often unprepared that he was coached by several staff members and advisers as the calls took place to avoid veering off track. in addition, the source tells us the president often had to be reeled in by white house staff adding that then-chief of staff john kelly would sometimes mute the call so staffers in the room could give the president guidance or advise him against saying something he should not say. more perspective now on that as

well as the day's other fast-moving events from leon panetta, president obama's cia director, defense secretary, and white house chief of staff in the clinton administration. secretary panetta, what do you make of the news that secretary pompeo was on the phone call with president trump and the president of ukraine? how problematic could that be? >> i think it's very problematic marl particular fly for secretary pompeo who at least up to this point has not acknowledged that he was on the call. and if he was on the call, and then did not say something about the contents of that call, i think that can raise issues regarding his credibility as well. >> well, the only comment pompeo has made so far in this was last week when he said that he hadn't yet read the rough transcript, which is obviously, you know, disingenuous since he was on the call, according to all the reporting. it's hard to imagine secretary of stategravity of this.

at least under normal circumstances i would think. >> yeah, no, it raises -- it raises some serious concerns. about whether secretary pompeo has been forthright about what was involved here. look, we heard tom bossert who was homeland security adviser to the president, indicate that this whole conspiracy idea that giuliani was pitching had been debunked a long time ago and was frustrated that the president kept somehow grabbing onto that conspiracy theory. if tom bossert knew about that, then there's no question in my mind that secretary pompeo knew about that phony conspiracy as well. so, it raises concerns about whether the secretary took steps to really try to prevent the

president from making the mistake he made on that phone call or whether, frankly, he was an enabler, and that -- that raises serious questions then about just exactly what kind of role that he played with regards to this whole issue. >> i'm wondering when you hear the president and his allies, not just attacking the credibility and the motive of the whistle-blower, but also suggesting that, you know, the person's identity needs to be revealed, i mean, that goes against everything that a whistle-blower, you know, protection is supposed to accomplish. >> the purpose of that whistle-blower law is to be able to protect someone who sees something illegal going on or some kind of fraud taking place and reports that and is protected from any retaliation as a result of that. this particular whistle-blower, having revealed what that

individual found to be the case, now is the target of the president of the united states. so the real test is going to be whether or not this whistle-blower, in fact, can be protected in presenting his complaint. is he ultimately really going be protected? or is he going to have to, frankly, reveal himself which is against everything that the whistle-blower act was meant to protect. >> do you think the whistle-blower is actually in danger? >> i don't think there's any question but that targeting the whistle-blower really does jeopardize the life of that individual. and it's for that reason, i think, that we have to take this very -- very seriously when it comes to the whistle-blower law. if we want that law to have any strength, if we want to encourage others to abide by the whistle-blower law, we are going to damn well have to protect

this individual. >> that's an extraordinary statement that it's not just their career that they theneed be concerned about, it's their actual physical safety. >> no, i don't think there's any question. your sif slife suddenly becomes jeopardy. and there are those that have no qualms about going after somebody who revealed something that impacts on the presidency of the united states. but, again, the whole point of our democracy is to encourage people to be able to reveal crimes that they're aware of and not be punished for revealing those crimes. not be punished for revealing something they thought violated the constitution, violated our laws. >> secretary panetta, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. just ahead, rudy giuliani subpoenaed. the question is, women ill he

actually comply? and does he have to? that's next. plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants. ♪ what might seem like a small cough can be a big bad problem for your grandchildren. babies too young to be vaccinated against whooping cough are the most at risk for severe illness. help prevent this! talk to your doctor or pharmacist today about getting vaccinated against whooping cough.

talk to your doctor or pharmacist today this fall, book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a free night. because when your business is rewarding yourself, our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪ it's been a long time since andrew dusted off his dancing shoes. luckily denture breath will be the least of his worries. because he uses polident 4 in 1 cleaning system to kill 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. polident. clean. fresh. and confident.

of odor causing bacteria. to the wait did frowe just win-ners. prouders everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines.

mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy a new samsung note. click, call or visit a store today. rudy giuliani appears to be suggesting he may not comply with the seasubpoena issued earr today from three house committees for documents related to the impeachment inquiry. he wrote, "i received a subpoena signed only by democrat chairs who have prejudged this case. it raises significant issues concerning legitimacy and constitutional legal issues including inter alia, attorney/client and other privileges." the committee chairs wrote, i quote, "our unququ"you acted asf the president in a scheme to

advance his personal political interests by abusing the power of the office of the president." also cites this moment from giuliani's interview with my colleague, chris cuomo, in which he eventually admits he asked ukraine to look into joe biden. >> 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 senko, who was appointed, dismissed the case against -- >> you did ask ukraine to look into joe biden. >> of course, i did. >> you just said you didn't. >> the subpoena also demands giuliani turn over all the tax phone records and other communications he cited repeatedly in tv interviews as proof he was working for the administration in his dealings at the direction of the state department with ukraine. joining us now, former fbi general counsel james baker, former deputy assistant attorney general, elliot williams. both are cnn legal analysts. james, how big of a development is this? giuliani from the

whistle-blower's account, by his own admission, seems to be at the center of the investigation. can he not cooperate? >> well, he cannot cooperate to a certain degree, yes. i think all americans should cooperate fully with a lawful subpoena from congress. that seems straight forward. unless you have a valid privilege you can assert. i suspect the mayor at the end of the day if he gets good legal advice, i hope he does from somebody else, he would comply at least in part, would be my guess, provide some documents and claim he's provided documendocument s. my guess is he will try to assert attorney/client privilege over a lot of material. not comply with that part of it then you're going to end up in court and congress will try to enforce the subpoena and it will take months and, you know, we'll see how that goes. i think it's a logical step for congress to do. and he should comply, but he doesn't have to comply if he has a legitimate privilege he can aserlt. >> elliot, let alone, putting

aside even presidential executive privilege, just attorney/client privilege, any conversations he has with his client, president trump, i assume that he can legitimately argue is attorney/client privilege. conversations with people of the state department, if he is doing something at the behest of the president or for the benefit of his client, does -- is that privileged through attorney/client privilege? >> what i think is incredibly complicated here, we don't quite know what rudy giuliani's role is and that's going to affect what kind of privilege he can assert. is he acting as an agent of the president? is he acting as the president's personal lawyer? which would allow him to assert attorney/client privilege. if that's the case, that means we -- it's almost an acknowledgement that the president is acting to his own benefit. right? so and he's not an employee of the executive branch, i think. and so that gets in the way of his ability to claim -- for the president's ability to claim executive privilege. so who exactly is rudy giuliani? the thing is he's sort of all over the place and i think by

being all over the place and acting both as a personal lawyer to the president and apparently as an arm of the state department, he's jeopardizing the privileges that he can claim. i just don't see how he wins a privile privilege claim here. i think this ultimately ends as jim had said, congress suing him, either holding him in contempt of, you know, duly executed congressional subpoena and if it really comes to it an obstruction of justice charge because we now van open impeachment proceeding. it remains to be seen. >> james, you said it goes to court, that takes months. if the democrats are hoping, you know, if folks in congress are hoping to, you know, try to kind of streamline this and just focus on this one issue and get it done by the end of october, that seems unlikely, then, there would be anygiuliani would coope or not. >> well, you're not going to get -- yeah, i think you're right, anderson, you're not going to get a resolution on that particular part of it.

if congress is building their whole case around what they're going to get from rudy giuliani, that's a big mistake. i doubt that they are. i suspect they figured out whether the former mayor will comply. probably not. i'm sure they're factoring that into their decision, but it's a logical thing to do and i think they would be remiss if they didn't at least try to subpoena the -- mayor giuliani. they have to do that. i mean, look, he's going to try to assert these privileges but he's talked so much in the media and publicly about what it is that he did that at the end of the day, he -- i think he's probably waived on behalf of his client, you know, presumably with the support of his client, because the privilege belongs to the client, but he's just made so many statements, i doubt it's going to hold up in court at the end of the day, but as i said, it's going to take a while to sort out. >> elliot, the intelligence community inspector general pushed back on assertions by the president, some republicans about that the whistle-blower didn't have firsthand knowledge. and the rules regarding how these whistle-blower complaints are processed. were you surprised that he came

out and did that? >> that the -- >> the inspector general -- >> -- did not push back? >> yeah, publicly. >> look, what we've seen countless times now is a very, very, very broad notion of what privilege is from the president and the attorneys around him. certainly, i think these are quite thin assertions. we've seen it -- we saw it, frankly, throughout the entire special counsel investigation some months ago and as we've been talking about tonight, here again. no, i'm not surprised these are pushed back on. they're legally quite thin. i'll say it again, i just don't see how he's able to sustain these assertions of privilege if he is, in fact, to make them. >> elliot williams, james baker, appreciate it. thanks. up next, how the president's backers in congress are defending or trying to defend what the president said on that phone call. [music (plays throughout): lack of afro - recipe for love] ♪ i've got so much love to give ♪ ♪ i've got so much more to give, baby ♪ to start your retirement plan, find an advisor at massmutual.com

[sfx: mnemonic]

again, part of our breaking news tonight, the intelligence committee inspector general refuted a popular complaint among president trump's defenders that the whistle-blower has no firsthand knowledge of thinge ing ing e a against the president. in one interview, congressman jim jordan was repeatedly fact checked on air on cnn. house republican leader kevin mccarthy had his own highly publicized fact check on "6 o minutes." >> president zelensky says we're

almost ready to buy more javelins from the united states for defense purposes and president trump replies, "i would like you to do us a favor, though." >> you just added another word. >> no. it's in the transcript. >> "i'd like you to do a favor, though." >> it's in the white house transcript. >> for more, we have former trump white house lawyer and cnn legal commentator jim schultz, also republican strategiest and cnn political commentator ana navarro. heard the president's allies defending him, casting aspersions on the whistle-blower. do you think this is a dangerous time? i mean, how seriously -- i'm wondering what you make of the president's defenders' reactions to this. >> if it wasn't so serious, it would be funny. what we're seeing is a theater of the absurd. you got the top republican in the house of representatives who goes on "60 minutes" without knowing what the transcript said, without having read it and gets fact checked in reeltialti.

you got jim jordan who goes out there and tries to act indignant and horrified, he's scandalized by hunter biden at the same time that he is defending an administration where there's all sorts of profiteering from the presidency. and then, you know, you've got my old friend, lindsey graham, who -- who really crosses the rubicon of hypocrisy. and there's so much video, so many -- so many clips of lindsey saying during clint exactly the opposite of what he is saying now. you got rudy giuliani who used to be the top u.s. attorney in new york. he was the law. now seeming absolutely lawless anding the most unsubstantiated claims. so when i look at it, some of these people i've known for many, many, many years, rudey ad lindsey. it feels like i'm watching the

invasion of the body snatchers. who are these people? they're unrecognizable to me. they've lost all conscience and all moral compass in order to defend the indefensible. >> jim, the president's former homeland security adviser who i think you know, tom bossert told abc not only is the substance of the president's phone call with the ukrainian president problematic but the president has to get over his debunked conspiracy theory of the 2016 election involving ukraine. do you agree with what bossert is saying? >> look, bossert's a credible guy. i said that on tv last night. i respect his opinion. let's not -- what he was talking about is relating to the dnc servers, not relating to the -- the debunked theory related to the dnc servers and not relating to the phone call with the president of ukraine. that being said, i agree, there is some hysteria -- >> the phone call with the president of ukraine was asking -- i mean, of the two asks, it was look into, investigate, the debunked the y theory, the, quote, made-up theory about ukraine and the servers. that was the first ask. the second was do me a favor

on -- do me a favor on that then the other ask was, you know, was about biden. >> looking into the biden issue. yeah. look, it's the president's prerogative to ask folks to look into corruption as he sees it. and there's been -- i don't believe there's anything unlawful here or criminal here as it relates to the president's conduct. >> you legitimately believe he was ask -- you legitimately believe he was asking the president of ukraine to look into corruption writ large but just only happened to mention biden, that that was the only -- >> specific about what he was asking, no. no. anderson, i make the -- >> he was specifically asking about the bidens. >> look into biden -- >> right. >> as it related to biden. again, i don't believe there's any criminality in making that ask. you'll be hard pressed to find any lawyers that would say differently as it relates to criminality. that doesn't mean congress can't hold hearings and do what they're doing. congress -- i also think as it relates to kind of the hypocrisy that you're talking about, yeah, members of congress saying to

impeach, we need to impeach them. you have members of congress making stuff up, have members of congress saying we have to impeach because we can't win in 2020. >> so the hypocrisy is from members of congress. >> the hypocrisy here is going all around on this one. >> you're taking a brave stand in calling -- >> the white house staff -- let me finish. to say that the white house staff is the only folks who need to be criticized in this -- >> you're not criticizing them at all. so right now, all you're saying is that members of congress, democrats are hypocrites. >> phoenfolks need to get theirs straight. look, as it represents to the letter that we got from the inspecter general's office today, sounds like a lot of bureaucracy to me. i don't much care what the form said. at the end of the day, the transcript was released. the facts are in front of us. >> so -- >> and congress has got to make a determination. >> what folks on the bidens are there? >> what the whistle-blower did or didn't say, i could really care less because we have the actual transcript of what was said in the conversation. >> you only know about it

because of the wishl. you' whistle-blower. if the whistle-blower -- it steams like there's an awful lot of people including the secretary of state who was in on this call and knew about what the president had said -- >> right, that's the facts that we're looking at now, you're looking at -- they are secondhand facts that are coming across. we have the firsthand facts. we have the transcript. so, again, the whistle-blowers, they come forward, that's what they do. and the fact that they made a complaint, well, who cares. the fact of the matter is it was brought to the attention of the united states people. that's a good thing that things are brought to the attention of the united states people. we have the transcript. there's no criminality there. i'm not concerned about it. >> ana -- >> two things, number one, the reason we saw the transcript is because nancy pelosi finally agreed to an impeachment inquiry. and that forced the hand of the administration to release the transcript. before that, we would have not seen the transcript which matches what the whistle-blower complaint is. >> i don't know -- >> of course, you know about that. you think they would have done it? they had all this time to do it. they did it because nancy pelosi -- >> there's plenty of reports that barr and others were

urging -- >> i can also tell you -- okay, listen, i didn't interrupt you, so let me just respond without you interrupting me. >> sorry. my apologies. >> here's the criminality. here's the criminality i see. the criminality i see is asking a foreign government for something of value for a campaign. biden isn't just any regular citizen. he is the top democrat contender that's going to be running against trump. this is in the midst of a presidential campaign. that is criminal behavior. abuse of power by the president of the united states is criminal behavior. and we know now that the whistle-blower's complaint matches the transcript and we know because of what came out today -- >> yeah. >> -- that it is not hearsay, that he had firsthand -- >> exactly. >> -- knowledge. >> i'm out of time, but to be continued. >> let me make a point there. >> no, we're -- i got to -- i got to go. i'm sorry. james schultz, ana that sure row. ahead in the wake of the whistle-blower complaint. i'll talk to one of the most storied whistle-blowers in recent history, daniel elsburg, who leaked the pentagon papers.

? uh, it's too expensive. actually, our unitedhealthcare medicare plans come with renew active, a gym membership and more, at no extra cost. i'm not a workout kinda guy. you get a personalized fitness plan. i'm exercising my brain. and an online brain health program. i need workout clothes? they have tvs here too. renew active, only from unitedhealthcare medicare including the only plans with the aarp name.

if ylittle thingsate tcan be a big deal., that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. 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.

pain happens. saturdays happen. aleve it. aleve is proven better on pain than tylenol. when pain happens, aleve it. all day strong. i had a few good tricks to help hide my bladder leak pad. like the old "tunic tug". but always discreet is less bulky. and it really protects. 'cause it turns liquid to gel. so i have nothing to hide. always discreet.

about a whistle-blower inside the u.s. government to alleges wrong doing at the highest level. a person many believ has done what he or she feels has done their patriotic duty to aler t e the public. almost 50 years ago it was daniel ellsberg and america's long secret history in vietnam. he leaked the pentagon papers, 7,000 pages of top-secret documents revealing three presidents knew the vietnam war was unwinnable and that government lied to congress and the public about the progress of the war. mr. ellsberg talked about how he believes it compares to the current controversy with president trump. >> dan, you're in a unique position to assess what's

happening right now. i wonder what you make of it, what you've seen so far. >> i'm in an unusually good position in a sense. half my life ago, 45 years ago, president nixon was facing impeachment in considerable part for crimes he took against me as a whistle-blower. i was in court, i was facing charges, not treason by the way, but essentially charges for copying classified information and giving them to the the "new york times" and to 18 other newspapers at that time. but it was al was also saying t about nixon that he departmeidn the public to hear about threats to vietnam and i was saying he was about to unleash b-52s against north vietnam for the first time. he had 12 assets, people from the bay of pigs, brought up from miami with orders to

incapacitate me totally. i must say i asked the prosecutor later what did that mean? kill me? and he said the records were "incapacitate you totally." he said you have to understand these guys, cia people, never use the word kill. they use neutralize. i'm saying that to say that i think that the lawyers of this whistle-blower who feel that he's in personal danger having been threatened quite openly by this president are not exaggerating. i would say he is in personal dang danger. >> what's your advice to this whistle-blower? >> my advice would be to do what i wish i had done in 1964 and didn't do when i had -- when i knew that the president johnson, my president, was lying us into a hopeless wor lesless war, but particular lying to congress, violating his oath under the

constitution and by keeping my mouth shut and everyone else that did that, i was violating my oath to the constitution. i would tell them do what it took me five years to do and don't wait that long until bombs are falling on iran, another war has started, thousands have died or you realize the constitution is being violated, like ed snowden realized that the nsa was doing. and face the possible personal consequenc consequences, which could be very severe to telling the truth to congress and to the press. and don't wait. >> this whistle-blower has gone about it in a different way that you did. this whistle-blower did not go to the press, they went through the official channels. >> yes. >> does it surprise you they chose that way and that it seems to certainly have gotten attention? >> by the way, the channels that he's using, the whistle-blower protection act for intelligence

agents, didn't exist in my day. i wasn't an intelligence agent to begin with. but there was no federal protection of whistle-blowers at that imtoo. even in these days with this law, that route rarely works. people who make the complaint are simply superiors as a troublemaker or untruth tellers. in this particular case the system worked so i have to congratulate to the only the whistle-blower but the intelligence community inspector general who, although he was not required to tell congress did choose to do that. and the defector of national intelligence, maguire, also okayed that. so i congratulate both of them. they hamade the system work as it's supposed to do. >> there's certainly people who are going to be watching very closely what happens to this

whistle-blower toy see if theye willing to come forward. >> that's true. the act is intended to protect whistle-bloweres from retaliation. we seal if it does this time. as for the president's words, if that isn't intimidation of a witness, i don't know what would be. but what i started out by telling you, anderson, is the little-known story that when he says what we used to do to spies and traitors, i think he must be talking about under george iii when telling unwelcomed truths about misbehavior or any other thing about the monarch was treason. and the punish for that was drawing and quartering so that may be what he was thinking to get back to. >> dan ellsberg, thank you for talking to us tonight. >> thank you for the opportunity. >> a lot more ahead tonight, including what the mood is like at the white house tonight with all the breaking news developments. we'll be right back. imagine a world where nothing gets in the way of doing great work.

where an american icon uses the latest hr tools to stay true to the family recipe. where a music studio spends less time on hr and payroll, and more time crafting that perfect sound. where the nation's biggest party store can staff up quickly as soon as it's time for fun. this is the world of adp. hr, talent, time, benefits and payroll. designed for people.

my hands are everything to me. but i was diagnosed with dupuytren's contracture. and it got to the point where things i took for granted got tougher to do. thought surgery was my only option. turns out i was wrong. so when a hand specialist told me about nonsurgical treatments, it was a total game changer. like you, my hands have a lot more to do. learn more at factsonhand.com today.