the immediate forecast. so fingers crossed, no destruction, at least until the next time, wolf and there will be a next time. >> let's hope for the best. nick watt on the scene for us, thanks very much. i'm wolf blitzer. erin burnett "out front" starts right now. out front next, breaking news. a key impeachment witness said he was silenced and told by a white house attorney never to mention trump's call with the ukrainian president. why? plus nancy pelosi talks about the articles of impeachment. she won't rule out including obstruction of justice in robert mu mueller's probe. giving the gop and giving advice to democrats on how to beat trump. he's my guest. let's go out front. >> good evening. i'm erin burnett. out front tonight, silenced and breaking news, we are learning that president trump's top lawyer on the national security council tried to silence concerns about the president's

call with the ukrainian president. a call that president trump even today still insists was perfect. >> i call it a perfect conversation because it was totally appropriate, very good and everybody is saying it. >> everyone wasn't, and isn't saying it according to a source, lieutenant alexander vindman testified that trump's lawyer told him to never discuss the details of trump's call with ukraine's president. john eisenberg, the lead counsel for the national security council instructed vindman to be silent after vindman went to eisenberg to report his concerns with trump's behavior on that call. this matters because eisenberg was in a position of great power. as the lead counsel on the national security council, he was on the receiving end of two complaints by vindman about the president's behavior on ukraine and of another complaint by fiona hill and then top's russia adviser on the nsc.

so what did eisenberg do? tonight we learned that after three complaints including the specific concern about trump's call with president zelensky, eisenberg did two very important things. number one, he broke protocol, moving the transcript of the call on to the top secret server. two, he told vindman to never say a word about the call to anyone, all right? even after vindman had expressed these concerns? what were eisenberg's motives? he is slated to testify under oath on monday, and we have a lot of breaking details to get to this hour and i want to go straight to kaitlan collins and you also have new reporting tonight and we know the white house attorneys have not been allowed inside these closed-door depositions on capitol hill and they seem to be getting help from allies who had been inside that room. >> that would be jim jordan and mike meadows and two members of the freedom caucus and they spoke with him frequently and they're in the room during the closed-door testimonies and we

are being told by sources they've been informally helping the white house office sort through the publicly reported aspects of the testimonies happening on capitol hill, some that spanned several hours from current and former administration officials. what, exactly they're doing to tell them is an open question and they're helping them get a better grasp on what's being said because of course, no white house counsel is present in the room, something the white house has vented about several times saying they at least need to have a voice in the room because they don't know being said since the transcripts haven't been released either. mark meadows remarked to cnn's request for comment and he said he was just offering brought characterizations of what exactly it is that's going on in those rooms, but of course, that kind of gives you a glimpse, erin, into how the white house is responding to this, because they feel like they've been blindsided and they've not been told exactly what's going on while democrats say we're doing our work behind closed doors and

adam schiff saying they'll start releasing the transcripts next week before moving on to those public hearings and we should also note there should be some republicans who were not sitting in on the depositions and including he had not been to one of them until he'd been to alex vindman, the official you were referring to this week. the white house will be wrestling now with what they're going to do once these hearings go into the public points and everyone can see what it is that these witnesses are saying about the president and his efforts to pressure the ukrainian officials. >> thank you very much, kaitlan. i want to go now to andre carson who is on the intel jligence committee and has been inside the room for those depositions and i appreciate your time. i want to start straight with the news right here and two other people who have been inside those depositions and mark meadows and jim jordan apparently, we understand, have been informally helping

attorneys in the white house for the president to sort through some of the testimony, they're saying publicly reported aspects of that testimony, each though those white house lawyers have not been allowed in those closed-door depositions. do you see any problem with this? >> i absolutely do. you know, for me, and those of us who serve on the intelligence committee, we take our responsibility and take our oath to the constitution and our commitment to the committee very seriously. i think that repeated leaks and repeated posturing and doing the white house' bidding is unacceptable to me. as they like to mention constantly and had envisioned separate, but equal branches of government and for my colleagues to do such a thing to me, is unpatriotic. >> look, it's a significant thing to say. here's what we understand happened here with colonel vindman. i don't know if you just heard our reporting, but apparently, we understand he testified that after he went to john eisenberg,

right? the chief counsel of the nsc who said he had deep concerns about the president's behavior on the call with the ukrainian president eisenberg told him not to talk about the call with anyone. you were inside the room for vindman's testimony, and i know that you can't talk about what you heard. >> thank you. >> my question for you is, did you get the impression from what vindman said that eisenberg was just being cautious or was something more going on here with his instruction for silence? >> it's difficult to say, but what i can say is that given the history of president trump and his cronies and the administration, it is clear that they have repeatedly tried to silence detractors and silence those who were concerned about the preservation of the republic and so i think given the behavior, we can only determine their behavior based on their behavior, given their behavior they seem to be dedicated to

protecting donald trump even though his violations are repeatedly plata repeated repeatedly blatant and disrespectful and not ethical. >> the national security counsel's top russia and europe adviser testified thursday that he had concerns over that call, but his main concern was about the transcript actually leaking. he didn't think that there was anything illegal with the call itself. he had that in his opening statement which we have all obviously read those excerpts from. >> is it possible eisenberg was being cautious in the same way that he just didn't personally think there was anything wrong here? >> i can't speak to what's in his mind, but it's clear having read the transcripts as you have, erin, that you have hundred of millions of dollars that have been approved by both the house and the senate that president trump is using as a bargaining chip and a perfect example of quid pro quo to encourage the ukrainian government to investigate a political rival, i.e., joe

biden, that to me is beyond unpatriotic, un-american, illegal and unethical. it's worthy of impeachment. >> when you say worthy of impeachment, it seems it's clear to me that you've seen enough information to know how you're going to vote on this, right? you just said it right there. >> sure. ? i'm curious to how you respond today to what speaker pelosi said and her situation. here's what she said about a vote. >> we haven't even made a decision to impeach. this is what an inquiry is about. >> do you wish that she was being more definitive as you just were about how she sees this? >> well, i think while director mueller's report wasn't necessarily conclusive, he lays out ten or 11 provisions that would enable to aid us in making that determination.

i think what was important about our vote yesterday is that we were able to get on record to move forward with not only public hearings and we were able to move forward with the public hearing led by the intelligence committee to allow the american people to watch this political process, watch these hearings unfold so they can contact their members of congress and their members of the senate and urge them to move forward with what must be done to preserve our democracy. >> congress mid-cap,man, i wantl you "the new york times," the lead counsel from the nsc that he has now been subpoenaed. do you expect him to honor that and to appear for his scheduled testimony on monday? >> he certainly should, and if he doesn't we will take other measures. so i don't want to speak for chairman schiff, but if -- if he is concerned about our country, i would hope that he would be cooperative with our subpoena.

>> thank you very much, i appreciate your time. >> thank you, ma'am. a pleasure. next, the president going out of his way to praise a key witness in the impeachment probe. including key players in the white house. the big question is will they show with subpoenas like the one i referenced. beto o'rourke suddenly dropping out of the race and it was sudden. he was scheduled to speak in a major event and in just a couple of hour, just -- boom, shocked everybody. why? that one's broken. our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition... for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-seven vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. stop dancing around the pain that keeps you up again, and again.

advil pm silences pain, and you sleep the whole night. advil pm what do you charge for online equity trades? um ah, i'll look into it. lisa jones! hey carl, what are you charging me for online equity trades? laughs/umm.. and do i get my fees back if i'm not happy? like a satisfaction guarantee? ugh. schwab! oh right, i'm calling schwab. thanks carl! wait, lisa! lisa... are you getting commission free trades and a satisfaction guarantee? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. performance comes in lots of flavors. ♪ (dramatic orchestra) there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result.

that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪ t-mobile's newest signal reaches farther than ever before... with more engineers, more towers, more coverage. it's a network that gives you... with coverage from big cities, to small towns. introducing t-mobile's 600mhz signal. no signal reaches farther or is more reliable. and it's built 5g ready. can match the power of energizer. because energizer ultimate lithium is the longest lasting aa battery in the world. [confetti cannon popping] energizer. backed by science. matched by no one. some farms grow food. this one grows fuel. ♪ exxonmobil is growing algae for biofuels.

that could one day power planes, propel ships, and fuel trucks... and cut their greenhouse gas emissions in half. algae. its potential just keeps growing. ♪ i'm part of a community of problem solvers. we make ideas grow. from an everyday solution... to one that can take on a bigger challenge. from packaging tape... to tape that can bond materials to buildings... and planes. one idea can unlock a breadth of solutions. at 3m, we are solving problems that improve lives.

breaking news, president trump praising the security council aide testifying that he did not see anything wrong with trump's phone call with ukraine's president. >> what do you say to the white house officials that did testify that your phone call was not perfect, that they were concerned about what they heard on that phone call. >> well, all they have to do is read the transcript. the gentleman that came in yesterday, morrison, he was terrific. he was supposed to be their primary witness. he was terrific, and he said he didn't see anything wrong with

it, and by the way, i have a lot of never trumpers that have been in different positions for a long time. >> the president leaving out some key details including that morrison, the person to whom he was referring backed up key parts of testimony from other witnesses including claims that linked trump to a quid pro quo involving aid to ukraine and a probe into the bidens and morrison said he didn't see anything wrong with that particular phone call and that part is also true. out front now is nancy mcnerney, and former republican senator and presidential candidate, rick santorum, and joe lockhart, and former deputy assistant attorney general elliott williams who also served as judiciary counsel to minority leader schumer. thanks to all of you. ambassador, let me start with you, what do you make of the president in his, basically, any time someone comes out and in has, in fact, every time someone has criticized him, he has said

they're never trumpers. >> i think it's outrageous because, first of all, it's factually incorrect. he has accused a number of people ever being never trumpers without any evidence that indicates that they are and that theyy signed the never trump letter and also he's gone further and said people who are never trumpers are human scum. he has referred to people who are decorated war veterans, distinguished ambassadors, loyal public servants and he has unleashed this kind of profane and vulgar attack against these people simply because they disagree with him. i think it's wrong, and i think it is yet more evidence of him subverting the process across the board. >> when we get to this process, senator, the latest witness, lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, i don't know if you just heard our reporting -- i'm sorry, i have a frog in my throat tonight, a source familiar with his testimony says

he went with his concerns which we all know about because he said that in his opening statement to the lead counsel and the nsc who then told him, you know what this don't ever say a word about that. don't ever publicly say a word about it even though the lawyer moved the transcript of the call to the secure server. do you think that could be a significant part to this? >> i don't know, i mean, look, you have the transcript and the fact that vindman, his interpretation of the transcript was concern -- was a concern is one person's opinion, and i look at that transcript and i see something, and i know other people have looked at it and they see something else. i am not overly concerned with that transcript. were there things left out? vindman mentioned a couple of things and nothing of any kind of substantial parts of the testimony that were not included. so, no, i think what the president is trying to say is

you can look at the transcript and people again, have different interpretations of it, but from my perspective and from most republicans' perspective, it is not an impeachable offense what he said on that call. >> elliott, impeachable and illegal are not necessarily the same thing nor do they need to be, and i think it is always important to make that point, right? impeachment you can impeach someone for something illegal and to the point that the senator is saying the transcript obviously, a favor would be a quid pro quo. some people think it's impeachable and some people think it isn't and it's the context around the transcript which we have learned so much that the aid and the president was to get a meeting first in exchange for the aid and it went further and the investigations into joe biden. how far along are we here, elliott? >> it was interesting. i think the president in latching on to your commenting to the testimony saying it was exonerated and whatever he said. >> yeah. >> was because morrison said he

did not think that the behavior was criminal, but exactly as you said in your question, erin, that's really not the standard certainly congress over the years has found three bucket was conduct, constitute impeachable conduct, abusing the powers of office and behavior incompatible with the office or misusing the office for personal gain and it's just hard to see how, regardless of the fact that reasonable minds can disagree with what happened on the call, it's hard to see that the first and third things there, so one kneading exceeding powers and misusing the office for personal gain were not done on that call. so again, you can disagree with what might have been under a particular ellipses and whether the president should be charged with the crime and did the president abuse the powers of his office, it's just almost unmistakable and i think most, frankly scholars and impeachment would say the same thing. >> at least the ones i have

spoken to who have written the books on andrew johnson and nixon and everybody else, they are in agreement on that. >> ron chernow has said the same thing. when it comes to the phone call and it is the context around it that's important and the republicans may want to focus in on the call and the democrats may want to focus on the context. the role of saying move to the server and don't say a word about it. maybe he'll show up with the subpoena and a lot will rest on that on why he was urging secrecy. >> i think this is a critical piece of the puzzle. >> the president and the white house want you to think that this whole thing surrounds the -- it's only about the call, but it's really what we're finding if that was it we wouldn't have to do a hundred hours of depositions. we're finding that there was a massive effort here on behalf of people who work for the president and the people who worked in government and rudy giuliani outside of the government to abuse the power of

the president to have the ukrainians impact our election here at home. the reason this is important and it's one thing to try to do it and it's another thing to show how conscious they were of their own guilt and how big a deal it was when they want to hide it. it's just another piece of a puzzle, but now we know from this reporting that vindman was told don't talk about this. don't talk about it. if it was a perfect call why would they want to bury this and instruct someone not to talk about it? >> keep your concerns to yourself. >> i want to emphasize that this was the third complaint that we know of that eisenberg had received about the call and other meetings, and he was the guy. this was the man at the center of this because of his position on the security council. >> on morrison's testimony, it's not relevant whether he thinks it was a crime or not. he's not a lawyer. he's a trump loyalist and the importance of his testimony is

not that. he corroborated the things that trump says is never trumpers. yeah, that's all right. all of those things that the human scum testified to is right. >> i just don't have a problem with it, of course, the president is focusing on the latter part. all please stay with me. breaking news, we are learning that the president's energy secretary rick perry was asked to testify. he did personally meet with ukrainian president zelensky, and pete but the gej surging ti new poll in a speech he will give moments from now. for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu.

i have moderate to severe pnow, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are getting clearer, yeah i feel free ♪ ♪ to bare my skin ♪ yeah that's all me. ♪ nothing and me go hand in hand ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin ♪ that's my new plan. ♪ nothing is everything. keep your skin clearer with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. of those, nearly 9 out of 10 sustained it through 1 year. and skyrizi is 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪ i see nothing in a different way ♪ ♪ and it's my moment so i just gotta say ♪ ♪ nothing is everything skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis.

tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs, or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪

annoepidemic fueled by juul use with their kid-friendly flavors. san francisco voters stopped the sale of flavored e-cigarettes. but then juul, backed by big tobacco, wrote prop c to weaken e-cigarette protections. the san francisco chronicle reports prop c is an audacious overreach, threatening to overturn the ban on flavored products approved by voters. prop c means more kids vaping. that's a dangerous idea. vote no on juul. no on big tobacco. no on prop c. breaking news.

house democrats now calling outgoing energy secretary rick per toe testify in the impeachment inquiry. perry has met with the ukraine president on at least three occasions and the white house official said he was one of the quote, three a migos who handled ukraine policy for the trump administration. this development happening right now and it comes in addition to nine witnesses scheduled for next week and that includes john bolton and the white house lawyer john eisenberg. he was just subpoenaed. there is a lot of concern that many of these witnesses, most of these witnesses are not going to show up. >> phil mattingly is on capitol hill. people may not show up, even defying subpoenas may not show up. what does it mean for the impeachment time line? >> a lot of flurry on a friday evening as they can figure out how to get people to capitol hill for the closed-door depositions. >> maybe one or two people and it compresses the timetable.

democrats right now that i'm talking to are reaching the point of diminishing returns with the closed-door depositions and they aren't willing to wait for long, drawn-out court fights to get them in. when kwhou talk tyou talk to dey made clear, likely after next week or the week after they're going to start moving into the public phases of the hearing. they'll start releasing publicly those closed-door depositions and the transcripts of the depositions and they'll have the first series of public hearings and wondering who may come up and testify and the crucial component of the democratic piece of this investigation as they rally democrats and the broader public and after the broader hearings, they'll lay out everything they found over the course of this process and then things move over the judiciary committee and that's where articles of impeachment will be drafted and what this all means if there is a compressed timetable, the reality is simply this.

sooner rather than later, president trump is more than likely to be impeached by the house of representatives and democratic leaders have made clear, they're moving and moving quickly and they're not stopping at any point soon. >> elliott, you hear if all go through the time line, they think they already have enough. look, decmocrats adding rick perry to the time line, and it appears they are ramping this up and they feel they don't have much time left behind closed doors. >> that's accurate. i wouldn't call it that they feel they have enough, the simple fact is what else can they learn that they haven't already learned from that, number one, from the initial whistle-blower report, then the call transcript memorandum and then the testimony that filled in the gaps in that and what they're doing at this point is sort of gilding the lilly, and certainly rick perry's testimony might be useful, but at the end of the day he's likely not add anything additional facts.

what we know, number one from the president's own statements about this, number two, from his chief of staff statement that he had to walk back and that we've seen thus far is that we have enough to move forward and i think rick santorum will agree with me on that, will it pass audit to pass and will it go in the senate and will they have enough now to go ahead. >> one of the reasons that they feel that time is of the essence and the things that matters is the impeachment is inherently political ambassador and we have a new washington post/abc news poll feels that splitting the country having the president impeached and removed from office. 49% say yes, and 47% say no. independence is the big kahuna here and that is split marginally against, 49-47. the president believes that public hearings are going to help him. here's what he just said moments

ago. >> i think it helps us, look, my poll numbers are very high, we've raised as you know, record-setting money. i don't think anyone has ever seen it before. that's a poll, and on the swing states when it comes to an impeachment word, it's an ugly word to me. >> ambassador, this has played out so much on television. just the constant comments and the opening statements. do you think president trump could be right? open hearings could play to his advantage? >> well, anything could certainly happen especially with televised hearings, but my guess is that when the american public, the electorate is able to see witness after witness, very credible people coming forward and laying out their concerns about our foreign policy being subverted for personal, political gain, our national security being put at risk as well as likely violation of campaign finance laws, an

overall reckless approach by this president to foreign policy issues from ukraine and other issues that may be brought in, the syria decision and abandoni abandoning kurdish allies. when the american people see the facts put forward my guess is they will tend to support a very different approach than you get right now with this very open and balanced divide. >> senator santorum, president trump's campaign manager today brad pascal tweeted nancy pelosi's impeachment turned into a massive fund-raising day for donald trump, 3 million raised online alone in a day, 19 million raised in october impeachment schambaham backfiri. do you think this helps trump? >> i think what president trump said on the lawn there is right. i think these public hearings as this becomes more public are going to help the president. the president has wide, wide

authority, constitutional authority when it comes to foreign policy. more than in any other area of power that he has, number one. >> number two, he was asking the ukrainian government to investigate two levels of corruption and one having to do with the election and the other to do with vice president biden and there might have been a quid pro quo. the reality is the president has broad authority in these areas. the president could have been asking them to do these things and legitimate things for them to act and not holding back, as he says, not holding back aid. it's possible to advance one and not the other. >> i didn't require the ukrainians to do anything and for us to do something in response to that. >> joe? >> candidly, if that's the best response they have, they're in big trouble. i think the risk that -- >> i don't think they're in trouble at all, joe.

i really don't. >> i do. the risk that you take and any time you have a big, public hearing like this is they could change the political dynamic. the political dynamic is pretty good for democrats right now, so there is some risk and the president is not being candid when he says my poll numbers are great. abc news came out with his lowest approval rating since he took office, 38%. he's never reached 50%. the only president since the job approval poll. his poll numbers are bad. i think the democrats have so far shown a lot of discipline and they need to continue to do that. these hearings can't spread out three or four weeks and it has to be just the facts and not a lot of political drama, people, tell your story and then take it to a vote. there is some risk. there is always a risk when you have something this high profile, but again, i would just say to rick if this was so perfect as the president said,

why would you try to hield this? you're trying to hide it because you're trying to get a foreign government to interfere with our election and the constitution was specifically written to prevent that. >> thank you very much. beto o'rourke very suddenly dropping out of the 2020 presidential race. >> we do not have the means to pursue this campaign successfully. and a lifelong republican, top adviser to george w. bush, tonight, leaving the party. what pushed him over the edge? he's out front. [ slurping ]

must be hot out there, huh? not especially. -[ slurping continues ] -what you drinking? gasoline.

right, but i mean, what's in the cup? gasoline. [ slurping ] for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. for those who were born to ride, don't get mad. get e*trade, dawg.

breaking news. beto o'rourke is outisth bid fo the 2020 presidential nomination. the hasty announcement made hours before he was supposed to speak at a major event in iowa. here's what he just told supporters in des moines. >> this is a campaign that has prided itself on seeing things clearly and on speaking honestly, and on acting decisively. we have to clearly see at this point that we do not have the means to pursue this campaign successfully. >> jeff zeleny is out front. jeff, look, this surprised a lot of people. he was about to make the dcut fr

the november debate and not what anyone expected. one of his advisers said he found out about an hour or so when this was announced and beto o'rourke's own wife could aren't be there when he addressed supporters. yet sudden announcement, jeff? >> in one respect, beto o'rourke accepted the political reality that was before him for weeks if not months, but the timing was certainly very curious. you can see this big democratic dinner behind me, people taking down beto o'rourke signs. we've seen supporters crying, sobbing and we are told by someone close to the former congressman he made the decision personally earlier this week and decided to announce it right before this dinner, but it certainly took everyone by surprise including supporters who flew in from across the country to see him here at the biggest night in iowa politics. one supporter said it was a

selfish decision, and others were crying and the race is moving on without him. >> surprising so many as he was so close to make that cut. another major story on the night that beto o'rourke is getting out is pete buttigieg. he is moment away from giving one of the biggest speeches of his campaign in the very room you're in right now. we have a new poll of iowa, and the top tier of candidate, he's there, warren, sanders, biden and buttigieg. you see him with ith in the margin of error and within a tick of biden. is buttigieg real and growing? >> certainly the momentum is real. we've been seeing it on the ground for several months as we've been traveling for the last few weeks and he's been building a big campaign organization and they're modeled after the obama campaign, of course, and senator barack obama had a big night here 12 years ago, and some buttigieg supporters hope he follows in his footsteps. >> america can believe in him.

at this point, in that presidential campaign this 46-year-old senator from illinois was still an underdog, but slowly starting to catch fire. this year the youngest candidate in the race is also on the move. >> are you ready to go into that hole and leave no question about who has the momentum in iowa right now? it's too soon to know if pete buttigieg will follow the rise of barack obama, but he's turning some of the same heads in iowa like terry and john hale. >> does he remind you of senator obama? absolutely. it's the intelligence and it's that cool composure. it's the ability to be presidential. >> pete is catching on. the more people that see him, the more people that support him. >> it was 12 years ago when obama's long-shot candidacy turned a corner here, dazzling thousands of democrats at the party's fall gala. >> two months after that speech he won the iowa caucuses and

this time the hail is among obama admirers both on the buttigieg bandwagon. >> they have a certain amount of pragmatism to them. >> terry introduced the southbend mayor. >> right now, mayor pete buttigieg. >> she felt like she did in 2007. >> the energy and the excitement and positive and hope and that's what i feel at events like pete and i have not felt is since barack obama. >> you didn't feel it four years ago? >> no, no, i didn't. no. >> buttigieg was also watching that race closely, volunteering for obama in the final days of the iowa contest. >> it's what's going on on the ground and what kind of relationships you're forming that serves you well when the caucus day rolls around. >> no two campaigns or candidate are the same and yet both men represent a fresh face and are calling for change. >> i believe we need leadership to step forward. >> same, old washington textbook campaigns just won't do in this

election. >> the buttigieg campaign is embracing the comparisons, trying to use its $23 million cash on hand and momentum in the polls to build a modern-day obama-like operation. part of obama's original iowa team says the burden is now on buttigieg to meet these expectations. >> barack obama came up as a grassroots organizer and i think that made the whole campaign sort of make sense and flow from him, it still remains to be seen if that will deliver on caucus day. >> reporter: now, iowa democrats are looking for the next barack obama. is it pete buttigieg? we will find out in three months' time and you can see and hear the excitement in this arena in downtown des moines. the pete buttigieg supporters, and the mayor will be taking the first of 13 speeches. the slogan is we can't wait. there clearly is a sense of urgency in the buttigieg campaign. i can tell you covering both

campaigns, there is a sense of similarity and campaign momentum. it was ten years ago in the 2007 campaign when barack obama was finally taken seriously by many democrats in iowa including hillary clinton. erin? >> thank you very much, jeff zeleny. >> and next, a life-long republican. he says he's had it with the gop and he will be voting for a democrat. so what does president trump have to do with the timing now? i'm going to ask him, he is my guest. and rolling out the red carpet at the white house for a hero who barks. so what do you see? i see an unbelievable opportunity. i see best-in-class platforms and education. i see award-winning service, and a trade desk full of experts, available to answer your toughest questions. and i see it with zero commissions on online trades. i like what you're seeing.

it's beautiful, isn't it? yeah. td ameritrade now offers zero commissions on online trades. ♪ audrey's on it. eating right? on it! staying active? on it. audrey thinks she's doing all she can to manage her type 2 diabetes and heart disease but is her treatment doing enough to lower her heart risk? [sfx: crash of football players colliding off-camera.] maybe not. jardiance is the number 1 prescribed pill in its class. jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. that means jardiance can help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. plus, jardiance lowers a1c and it could help you lose some weight. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection,

ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack? on it... with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. the type 2 diabetes pill that's on it. learn more at jardiance.com can match the power of energizer. because energizer ultimate lithium is the longest lasting aa battery in the world. [confetti cannon popping] energizer. backed by science. matched by no one.

we have the river on one end, train tracks on the other side and the highway. if you don't have your own car, the challenges are transportation. >> this is the methadone clinic on this side. >> they should change it from there. >> yeah. >> jose claudio invited me to join the action group that's run by mass mutual's live mutual project. >> my role in the action tank is to go and see what's the need in our community. we come together once a month, once we know what the problems

in our community are. we tackle them and see how we can manage to help. >> so the action tank, we make sure that we get the agencies involved that they can come in and help with the needs that the community have. one example i can give you, without the food bank we would definitely have a hard time because they have to choose especially the elderly between their medication and what the food is at the table. >> we never let anybody go hungry. it is really tight familia that really helps each other. we tend to do that because that's the way we were brought up, you have to help your neighbor. breaking news, the washington post reporting a growing number of republican senators are considering acknowledging that president trump had a quid pro quo with the ukrainian president, but they say it does not rise to the level of impeachment. this comes as president george

w. bush's top economist and mitt romney's economic adviser on his presidential campaign says he's leading the primary and out front now is greg mancue. i appreciate your time tonight and first a chance to >> i know that is why you are leaving the republican party and voting for a democrat. why and why now? >> two reasons. first it's job of congress to be

a check and balance to a president especially when the president shows poor judgment like this one does. the republicans in congress haven't done that. they have been enablers for the president rather than a check and balance. the second reason is the democratic primary is really very important now. there's only two groups of candidates. there's the center left people like joe biden and amy klobuchar and mayor pete buttigieg that would be reasonable presidents a and there's the far left populist, bernie sanders and elizabeth warren who are much more troubling. i think their policies are wrong but worse, they will provide a temptation for those people in the center and center right like me to hold their noses and vote for trump's re-election. i think that would be a very bad outcome. >> would you be able to do that? i know you are switching your

registration but if it were elizabeth warren versus president trump, would you hold your nose and vote trump? >> i would struggle with that decision because i think it's a choice of someone that is ill suited, which is donald trump and someone's whose policy i disagree with. i know her a bit from her days of the harvard faculty. i like her. she's very smart but she's much more of statist than i am. she want a big federal government having much control over our lives. i think that would be a step in the wrong direction. i hope i don't have to make that decision. biden is still the front-runner but he's being slammed by the candidates on the far left for being too moderate an others for his age. here are a few instances.

>> if joe biden doesn't like that, i'm not sure where he's going. democrats are not going to win by repeating republican talking poin points. >> in this campaign joe has not done in getting donations from working class people. >> there's a lot of people concerned about joe biden's ability to carry the ball all across the end line without fumbling. >> do you believe joe biden has what it takes to beat trump? guess the translation is in that primary, which you will vote in, greg, who are you going to vote for? >> i don't know. i'm still deciding. i think biden could beat trump and i might vote for biden but i'm very intrigued by some of the other candidates. i saw a spot for mayor pete in part because he's a harvard grad. i have a fond feeling more my students and i know one of the o

con mis economists working with him. next, the white house may be stock up on kibbles and bits. t-mobile's newest signal reaches farther than ever before... with more engineers, more towers, more coverage. it's a network that gives you... with coverage from big cities, to small towns. introducing t-mobile's 600mhz signal. no signal reaches farther or is more reliable. and it's built 5g ready. my moderate to severe i ulcerative colitis.ing

but i realized something was missing... me. the thought of my symptoms returning was keeping me from being there for the people and things i love most. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira can help get, and keep, uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts so you could experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible.

the magic moment... congress really democratized wall street... i wanted to have a firm that wanted to get everybody in. because people couldn't access wall street. we wanted to be agents of change. for the better. ♪

a top dog is headed to white house. >> reporter: we knno longer hav to say a generic good boy.

his name is conan like the comedian who tweeted that dog is the better conan. it's enough to make a studio audience say. >> i like this. >> reporter: very cute recreation is how the president described the photoshopped image he shared but the live version will be leaving the middle east for the white house some time next week. the photoshop is based on an actual medal of honor recipient. he was a medic in vietnam. his head was replaced by the dog's leaving some to wonder how james feels about this. >> the first time i looked at it, i thought paying tribute to a dog that did something very brave and very heroic. >> reporter: when the dog visits the white house. >> maybe the president will invite me to say hi to the dog. >> reporter: the dog is fully recovering after touching electrical cables while hunting down leader of isis. apparently one good photoshop

begets another from putin putting medal on president trump to the dog giving the president a metal labeled der. the trump campaign is raising funds off conan selling usacamo dog camo for 15 bucks. you can practically hear donald trump whispering to the dog, you know a doctor can get you out of military service, right. >> reporter: given the president's penchon for if you have buffets, can't wait to see what conan gets fed. he's likely to get patted and hugged. as for pet owners who wonder do you think my dog would be trained for such greatness. sure. that dog will take orders for a l

latte. >> a beautiful dog. a talented dog. >> reporter: new york. >> all right. thank so much for joining us. ac 360 starts right now. there is breaking news tonight up and down the impeachment story. john berman in here for anderson. we learned far more on one key front and one thing we didn't know at all. cnn reporting has uncovered an information pipeline running from that secure house hearing room where so many witness vs testified straight to the oval office. there's that. it takes the story in a whole new direction and there's more. new reporting on efforts to silence white house ukraine expert alexander vindman after he raised concerned about the july 25th phone call. the one president trump continues to main that i know th -- maintain that