covfefe horse invited to the white house. kudos to covfefe. maybe she's the one who is a stable genius. >> i'm a very stable genius. >> reporter: jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> thanks for joining us. anderson starts now. >> good evening. tonight for the first time two key witnesses in the impeachment inquiry told lawmakers what they told lawmakers we now have the transcripts of. their depositions before the three house impeachment committees. these are two long-standing state department professionals with seven decades of experience between them. michael mckinley, former senior advisor to secretary of state pompeo, and marie i can't vyova former ambassador to ukraine. he resigned and gave two reasons. because what they said was so significant and mysterious, we're going to do something different tonight and read some of the most important passages word for word.

we'll try to link up the moments that build a narrative according to these two officials illustrate a state department in washington operating at cross purposes from diplomats around the world and a white house that was undermining those diplomats for purposes that seem to have more to do with president trump's political interests than u.s. national security. we'll start with the sworn statements of the former senior advisor to secretary of state pompeo, ambassador michael mckinley. quote, the timing of my resignation, he testified, was the result of two overriding concerns. the failure, in my view, of the state department to offer support to foreign employees caught up in the impeachment inquiry, and second, by what appears to be the utilization of our ambassadors overseas to advance domestic political objectives. in other words, as both he and ambassador yovanovitch made clear in their testimony, using the people and institutions of government, as you'll see, bypassing them for private personal aims. their testimony reflects what they saw and heard as people connected to the president from in and out of the government work to influence the government of ukraine and squeeze it for the president's political

advantage. specifically, the president's ukraine envoy kurt volker. european ambassador gordon sondland and rudy giuliani. as ambassador mckinley tells it, quote, what is clear is that both volker and sondland were engaging the ukrainian government with rudy giuliani on domestic political issues. it's clear from yovanovitch's testimony, it was extensive involving her specifically dating back to late last year. quoting her now, basically it was people in the ukrainian government who said that the former prosecutor general was in communication with rudy giuliani and they had plans and they were going to do things including to me. it became clear, she said, that the goal was removing her from her post. one point of contention. her alleged role in blocking giuliani's effort to bring ousted ukrainian prosecutor victor show kin to the u.s., apparently in pursuit of giuliani's political mission for

the president. following long-standing protocol an american kons sul or officer denied him passage due to corruption. president trump and giuliani are claiming all they cared about was fighting corruption in ukraine. but the guy they are trying to bring to the u.s. is himself considered corrupt by diplomats who actually know about corruption in ukraine. ambassador yovanovitch picks up the story. quote, and the next thing we know mayor giuliani was calling the white house as well as the assistant secretary for consular affairs saying i was blocking the visa for mr. show kin and that mr. show kin was coming to meet him and provide information about corruption at the embassy, including my corruption. now, keep in mind rudy giuliani is the president's personal attorney. at the time he had no formal role in government, hasn't sworn to serve u.s. national interests. he's working for the president doing whatever he can for the president and we should also point out has business dealings himself in ukraine. so maybe there is a money motive forge as well. as you might imagine, none of

what giuliani was saying about the ambassador made ms. yovanovitch a favorite back in washington. but as she testified, the career officer felt stymied. it's not like i sent a cable outlining everything. it felt very, very sensitive and very political. and this, she said, was making top ukrainian officials uneasy. she describes the conversation with ukrainian interior minister in february. question, what were his concerns as expressed to you? yovanovitch replied, he thought it was -- so he thought it was very dangerous that ukraine, since its independence, has had bipartisan support from democrats and republicans all these years and that is getting into u.s. politics, u.s. domestic politics was a dangerous place for ukraine to be. it became dangerous as well for her. donald trump, jr., tweeted about her in march referring to her as a joker. she was singled out during a segment by hannity by name. she raised concerns about it to gordon sondland.

sondland told her, you need to go big or go home. tweet out there that you support the president and that all these are lies and everything else. and you know, so you know, obviously that was advice. it was advice that i did not see how i could implement in my role as ambassador and as foreign service officer. so let's think about this for a moment. the advice she says she got from the ambassador to the european union sondland, who is a major trump supporter and donor, was to say nice things about president trump, which is pretty amazing when you think about it, that the e.u. ambassador tells her that the president of the united states is basically a sucker for compliments and can be manipulated by flattery. another lesson she learned was that the road to the president also goes through fox news. here she is describing efforts she heard about to stop the attacks on her. quoting the ambassador, what i was told by phil ricer was the secretary or perhaps somebody around him was going to place a call to mr. hannity on fox news to say, you know, what is going on? i mean, do you have proof of these kind of allegations or not?

if you have proof, tell me. if not, stop. and i understand that call was made. i don't know whether it was the or somebody else in his inner circle, and for time, you know, things kind of simmered down. by may, however, she was removed from her post. adds for her departure from kiev, she describes the conversation with the foreign service director, perez, who ordered her home. quote, she said that there was a lot of concern for me that i needed to be on the next plane home to washington. i was like, what, what happened? she said, i don't know, but this is about your security. you need to come home immediately. you need to come home on the next plane. and i said, physical security? i mean, is there something going on here in the ukraine? because sometimes washington has intel or something else that we don't necessarily know. and she said, no, i didn't get that impression, but you need to come back immediately. and i mean, i argued with her. i told her i thought it was unfair that she was pulling me out of the post without any explanation. i mean, really none. and so summarily. this is not -- it is safe to

say -- how any of this is how it is supposed to work, not the ambassador's removal, career first aid through twitter, alleged phone calls to hannity, the president's tv lawyer scuttling about gathering dirt, not any of it. or as ambassador mckinley put it in his testimony, in 37 years in the foreign service in different parts of the globe working on many controversial issues, working ten years back in washington, i had never seen that. four administration officials were supposed to testify today. none of them showed up. more transcripts are due out tomorrow. i want to talk about all this. joining me now cnn senior political analyst david gergen, nixon white house counsel, john dean. david, i'm wondering how what you make of the transcripts that have been released today. >> we should be very glad they've been released. it gives the granular view, much more sobering and distressing than what we had heard before today. and i think the details show you that this became a ses pool. our own state department became

a cesspool. it's one thing for an american ambassador to be called home because there is a physical threat to the ambassador coming from some thugs or rebels outside the gate. it's another thing to be threatened by your own government. your physical security is being threatened when they ask her to come home. then the president in that phone call with zelenskiy, the president of ukraine, they started talking about her and the president said -- the president of the united states says, she's going to go through some tough things. >> yeah. >> she felt, i think, quite rightly, that was threatening to her and she remains threatened to this day. anderson, it may take as much as a generation to restore foreign service and to attract the kind of talented people we need -- >> really, you think the damage that's already been done is that great? >> yes, i do. >> to an entire generation of foreign service officers? >> i work with a lot of young people, many of whom go into foreign service. they're reluctant now. you have no idea what's going to happen to you if it's going to

be politicized as an institution. >> also whether washington or the white house cares about what you're doing or believes in it. in fact, it's quite clear they don't care about what you're doing. john, what does it say about the administration that a u.s. ambassador was being smeared by the president and his allies on the global stage, and the ambassador wasn't even convinced she was physically safe and had to learn about this from ukrainian officials? >> it's amazing. she's like somebody who was hit by a train and didn't even know she was on the tracks. and she said that she couldn't even imagine, as late as her testimony, the six and seven months she'd been through already. now, what happened, anderson, in her revelation point was very interesting when she heard the rumor of the report in the hill publication, the interview with lasinko. i happened to look at that because it prompted my interest in reading the transcript. and the interview is a set up.

they're all leading questions to lasinko. it's like the hill was in the loop on this whole thing. >> i assume they're going to be a witness at some point. >> i think -- there is a reporter from the hill who has been mentioned, who was doing a lot of this reporting early on. keri, after reading the ambassador's transcript, it's almost difficult to overstate just how much havoc rudy giuliani -- i mean, it seemed was allowed and able and encouraged to wreak. it also seems really -- i mean, for the president to be claiming -- his supporters to be claiming this was all concern about, you know, corruption in ukraine, the server, the bidens, all the people it seems like -- many of the people that giuliani and the president are kind of relying on for all their inside information were people who are -- were allegedly corrupt and had been removed from office because of it. >> right. well, i mean, that was, that was

a fake response and a cover story for what was actually going on. i think what's interesting as we learn more of these details is that, anderson, the essential facts that we learned about seven weekends ago when the whistle-blower's complaint became publicly known, and then when the white house released the transcript, and then just a few weeks ago when the white house chief of staff mick mulvaney basically admitted what had transpired in terms of holding out aid in exchange for political information from ukraine is that the underlying facts really haven't changed. and what happened is that the president was using his foreign policy authority to get dirt and political information that would benefit him. what i think becomes more clear through these details in these new transcripts is how much the institutions, and in this case the state department, had been

under pressure from not just the president and not just people in the white house, but from people outside government, like rudy giuliani. and so when i hear others, president's defenders, maybe affiliates in congress or others who are observing from the outside, commentators say well, the institutions are holding up. this is just a lot of bluster that comes out of the white house. these aren't things to be really worried about. these transcripts showed that the institutions are under tremendous strain. >> also, david, strain from the guy who is running the state department. i mean, we talk about secretary of state pompeo. his former advisor, michael mckinley, who we've just been reading about, he says on three occasions he broached with the secretary the idea of making a statement of support for the ambassador yovanovitch. that contradicts what pompeo said about mckinley last month on abc. i just want to play this.

>> from the time that ambassador yovanovitch departed ukraine until the time that he came to tell me that he was departing, i never heard him say a single thing about his concerns with respect to the decision that was made. >> you were asked about -- >> not once, not once, george, did ambassador mckinley say something to me during that entire time period. >> so obviously now it's he said, he said. >> you know, if mike pompeo was brave and smart, i think he would ask to appear before the committee under questions and deal with it. >> under oath? >> under oath. under oath. >> why do you think that would be an advantage? >> i think it's important for the country that we not have a secretary of state who seems compromised, potentially compromised, and a very, very serious situation. and in a state department whose morale is broken. >> clearly he doesn't care about that, or the president doesn't care. clearly he's the president's guy there and the way other

secretaries of state haven't been. some of them believed in the institution itself. >> i have to believe, mike pompeo arrived with a pretty good reputation. he was a strong figure in benghazi against the democratic administration. but nonetheless, he was at westpoint. he was number one in his class. he's a really smart guy. so people thought he's going to be another adult in the room along with mattis. it turns out in order to survive in this white house, you really have to kiss the ring of the president regularly. it compromises your own department. >> we're going to have more with the panel in a moment. new reporting on how this is going down in the white house and what is being done to prepare or day two, and more transcripts. later, after another legal setback, the supreme court and the prosecutors getting a look at his tax returns. i get it all the time. "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. rowithout the commission fees and account minimums. so, you can start investing today, wherever you are even on the bus. ooh, like this guy. yeah, i bet he's investing right now.

he's taking charge. he's grabbing the bull by the horns! and he - just missed his stop, yeah. it's time to do money, so what are you waiting for. download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood. for all of the heroes who serve us, t-mobile is here to help serve them. that's why we're offering 50% off family lines for military, veterans and first responders. so they can stay connected, on our newest, most powerful signal ever. and now, we are also offering half off our top samsung phones for military, veterans and first responders. our service is just one way we say thank you... for theirs. 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.

you have fast-acting power over pain, so the whole world looks different. the unbeatable strength and speed of advil liqui-gels. what pain? president trump spent the run up to the impeachment transcripts suggesting they would be tampered with by the

intelligence committee chair adam schiff. no complaints about the veracity of the transcripts. some grumbling about what house minority whip steve scalise called the democrats selectively releasing transcripts from their closed door hearings. republicans were also part of those hearings. as for the white house reaction, cnn's jim accosta is there for us tonight. has the president said anything so far about the transcripts? >> reporter: not a whole lot, anderson. we should point out he's having a rally in kentucky now. standing on stage are supporters wearing t-shirts that say, read the transcript. i think the president and his supporters are referring to the transcript of his phone call with the leader of ukraine, not the transcripts being released up on capitol hill. as the president was leaving the white house earlier in the evening, anderson, he was going after marie yovanovitch, the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine. and at one point he was asked whether or not there was a smear campaign orchestrated against her. he did not deny that. and keep in mind this is the former ambassador who said in this transcript of her testimony that she felt threatened

personally threatened by the president and the president, all he had to say about yovanovitch is the president of ukraine did not have kind things to say about her as well. >> in the transcript of the actual phone call, it was actually, if memory serves me correct, it was actually president trump who brought up yovanovitch. >> reporter: that's right. >> saying not great things about her. >> reporter: exactly. >> and saying she was going to go through some stuff, and i'm paraphrasing. i don't have the exact quote. >> reporter: that's right. >> he weighed in about the transcripts last night before they were released. his line has been, you know, that adam schiff is somehow going to doctor the transcripts. >> reporter: that's right. he's gone after adam schiff. we've seen that. he also is continuing to -- this campaign against alexander vindman, the national security official, lieutenant colonel in the army. you know, essentially said to reporters last night that vindman is a never trumper and that he has evidence of this and we're all going to find out what this evidence is. he hasn't produced that at this point. the other thing we should point out -- >> by the way, he also said that

the birth certificate of obama for the longest time, he had detectives in hawaii and they were finding remarkable things. >> reporter: we have seen this movie before. that's right, anderson. he is going after the credibility of the whistle-blower. this evening at the rally in kentucky, saying that, well, wait till you find out what this whistle-blower has been saying. you're going to find out. going back to what you were just saying, anderson, this is a tactic the president has used time and again. he will often tease things out as if this is another he episode of the apprentice and next week's episode you're going to find out what the whistle-blower really had to say when, in fact, that evidence and information is never presented to the public. >> jim accosta, thanks very much. now back with david gergen, carr carr carrie cordero and michael dean. not only when witnesses are able to look at their testimony before the things are released, there are republicans sitting there as well. so i don't even understand that whole notion.

it's just ludicrous. >> anderson, one of the more interesting redactions is right at the outset of the transcripts where they redact the names of everybody who is in attendance. so that shows how few republicans probably did attend these sessions. we don't know because in these editions, at least, that information is not revealed. so the redaction actually favors the republicans for their no-show. you're not going to be able to mess with these transcripts. the witnesses know what they said. they would be outspoken if there was something not properly included in there. and they're pretty haunting documents and they're going to be even worse when they're played out live. >> carrie, do you think it's a mistake for democrats to not try to compel rudy giuliani to testify given how central he clearly is in all of this? obviously there's political considerations based on time lines. >> i think the democrats, my own

view is they would be wasting their time with rudy giuliani. i don't think his testimony -- if he ever were to testify, it would be a circus. i don't think -- he's not going to be cooperative, so i think it would be like the lewandowski hearing. i don't think they should waste their time on him at all. they have good witnesses already. they've done the closed hearings. they have bill taylor. lieutenant colonel vindman. they have marie yovanovitch, ambassador mckinley. they have people who have credibility who have given a lifetime of service to the country, who are nonpartisan, and who have come forward and testified under oath to the facts. and so amongst those witnesses and maybe a couple others, they'll determine which ones they want to have come in public and give more testimony. but i don't think they need rudy. you know, there is transparency now. the republicans have been in all of these testimonies, in all of these hearings. they have now released some transcripts. there is now public information

about what the process will be, so there's a lot of information out there. >> david? >> i think there's a lot of information, but the day is going to come very quickly when we're going to have televised hearings and i think on televised hearings, the country deserves to hear from josh bolton under oath. he's one of the people at the center of all of this. we deserve to be able to hear from giuliani under oath. we deserve to be able to hear from mulvaney under oath. you know, anderson, as i go back and think about these things, remembering another crisis in another administration, when reagan was president, the iran contra scandal broke. and the president was in deep trouble. there was talk of impeachment. there were growing forces for impeachment. what did he do? he said, look, we're sending everybody up that the hill wants to hear from. we're going to send every dakumeda document up. we're going to clean this inside. we're going to play it totally open, totally straight. it went away. it was still a crisis, still a blot on his record, but he did it the right way.

>> we are a long way away from how reagan handled this. we expect more transcripts tomorrow. that may not be the last we hear from some of these witnesses. you know what it's like and how public testimony can really change the dynamics of an investigation. that being said, all those sorts of comments were made about, you know, what would happen when mueller testified, and clearly, you know, for a lot of democrats, was not what they anticipated. >> no, witnesses are hard to read in advance how they're going to appear, and there is no telling how some of these witnesses who do have great credibility might be in front of the television camera. we just don't know. but i think the education process that public television or public viewing of the hearings will provide is really essential.

this just can't go too far in being transparent and the committee really educating the american people about the seriousness of what's going on here. the fact that -- the ambassador's testimony, where she said that the state department is being attacked and hollowed out from inside is just a chilling line when you hear it, when you read it. >> yeah. john dean, thank you very much. carrie cordero, mike. up next testimony that we've been discussing. it's not just easy. it's having-jerome-bettis- on-your-flag-football-team easy. go get 'em, bus! ohhhh! [laughing] c'mon bus, c'mon! hey, wait, wait, wait! hey man, i got your flag! i got your flag, man! i got your flag! it's geico easy. with licensed agents available 24/7.

49 - nothing! woo! tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth.

fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. ♪ ladies and gentlemen mini is a different kind of car. for a different kind of drive. ♪ ladies and gentlemen for the drive to create a new kind of family car, that became a new kind of race car. for the drive to rebel, zag. for the drive that's inside you. and inside us. that's the drive under the hood of every mini. because every mini is... for the drive. ♪

we make aspirin to help save lives during a heart attack... so it never stops the heart of a family. at bayer, this is why we science. wheeveryone is different.ta, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data,

or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, get 50% off when you buy any new lg phone. xfinity mobile. click, call or visit a store today. 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.

briefly recapping our breaking news, house impeachment investigators today released lengthy transcipts of too interviews conducted behind closed doors last month. former u.s. ambassador marie yovanovitch and michael mckinley. both were concerned about domestic interference with diplomacy in ukraine. this has all four white house high-level officials to testify didn't show up. one of the members of the house intoll jensen committee who sat in on much of the testimony was val demmings of florida. i spoke were her shortly before air time. congresswoman democrmings o all the concerning details in the transcripts, i wonder what stands out to you the most. >> anderson, a couple of things stand out to me the most. number one, it is just, i think, appalling that the president of the united states and his enablers would totally try to

impugn the good reputation of ambassador yovanovitch because they did not want her to be a part of their, basically, shady operation that they were doing in ukraine. the other thing that really, i think, is very disheartening is when ambassador mckinley expressed his concern about the department of state, secretary pompeo not having the backs of foreign service officers when he complained about the morale being low, the men and women feeling like they did not have the support of the department of state, that he received no response. and when he received no response from the secretary, he felt like no response was a response and he felt like he could no longer be of service in his current capacity. and so because of the shady operation that was going on involving the president and those around him, i think two

good career service -- foreign service employees were basically displaced or left the state department. >> chairman schiff today said that the house committees aren't going to delay their work and wait for the court to decide about testimonies like aides like charles kupperman and john bolton. why do you think this needs to be -- do you think this needs to be done at a rapid pace? i understand the political calculation with the upcoming election and this kind of sucking the oxygen out of that. but your former law enforcement official, there is something to be said for getting as much evidence as you possibly can? >> there certainly is. from the beginning we said we wanted to do a very methodical, a very thorough, but also a very timely investigation. i believe a lot has happened over the last month and a half. finally, we've had persons who were either associated with the administration or with the department of state and others

who were willing to obey a lawful subpoena and come in and give testimony. i certainly believe that we are making every effort to get every bit of information and testimony that we can in this investigation. but as chairman schiff said today, anderson, we are moving forward, and we will consider those who the president instructed not to appear, who chose to follow that unlawful order, as another article of impeachment. >> you think there should be more than one article of impeachment? >> well, it certainly seems like the president is on a roll. and i would think that all that is going on with him, we know now that the president abused his power by trying to get a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election. we know that persons were directed to remove the call record of the president's july

25th call onto a secret server. we know that the president has instructed several people to not appear and cooperate with congress. and so i do believe that the president is really -- the evidence is really clear, convincing and really pretty overwhelming. >> your republcan colleague congressman jim jordan said democrats, quote, cherry-pick which transcripts they release and when. what is the determining -- what's determining the order in which transcripts are getting released? >> well, i mean, if you think about it, ambassador yovanovitch and ambassador mckinley were two of the first ones that were interviewed by the intelligence committee. and, look, i know the republicans are struggling to defend that which is indefensible, but i was glad to see these transcripts being released so that the american people could see exactly what

the ambassador said during their testimony. >> i think volker went before, but i hear you on jim jordan's point. there is reporting tonight also that as the inquiry moves into the public phase, republicans are considering actually moving congressman jordan over to the house committee. do you think that's a smart move on their part? >> anderson, i came to congress with 27 years of law enforcement experience. i've conducted numerous investigations. i have always been in search of the truth. if congressman jordan is interested in joining me in that effort, i welcome him to the committee. >> congresswoman demmings, i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> potential impeachment is not the only battle the white house is fighting. up next how americans got one step closer to seeing the president's tax returns as soon as next month. we'll look at the last-ditch effort to keep them private. most people think of verizon as a reliable phone company. (woman) but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next.

(man) we weave security into their business. virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. ♪

rowithout the commission fees and account minimums. so, you can start investing today, wherever you are even hanging with your dog. ooh, like her. she's probably investing right now... taking charge of her money, making it happen. she's - not going to be happy about that pillow. it's time to do money, so what are you waiting for. download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood.

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. restoring control and harmony, once thought to belost forever.

the most personal technology is technology with the power to change your life. tonight the battle of releasing president trump's tax returns appears headed for the supreme court. that's the vow from one of the president's attorneys after losing appeals court decision. manhattan dla da is hoping to succeed where house democrats have not. s procuter is demanding eight years of returns from the president's long-time accounting firm. the trump legal team argues the president is immune from criminal investigations while in office, but the appeals court says that doesn't block the enforce. of a grand jury subpoena.

if the supreme court takes up the matter, justices could issue an opinion before christmas. investigative reporter david k. johnson is one of the very few to uncover any of the president's tax returns. he's the author of the making of donald trump. he joins me along with cnn legal analyst sean wu. david, if this decision stands, you say that president trump could have a serious problem once a manhattan grand jury gets the tax documents. what do you believe that they could show? >> well, donald lost two income tax fraud trials. and in one of those trials, the tax return introduced in the case was shown to his long-time now retired tax preparer jack m itn ik who testified that was his signature on the document, but he did not prepare that tax return. donald has a long history of filing inconsistent documents with different government agencies.

cy vance's grand jury has access to the tax records. they will see if he altered the tax returns he filed, which would be fraud in all likelihood. >> jay sekulow, the president's attorney, says that the issue raised in this case goes really to the heart of our republic in that the, quote, constitutional issues are significant. is he right there? >> i think he's wrong, anderson. certainly in the president's mind these are dere to the republic, his republic. the supreme court, unlike any other courts, has the discretion over what they will take, and to issue a writ a certiorari to the cases they believe are important enough to hear. they are not going to do that here is my guess. >> you don't think the supreme court will take the case? >> i don't think they'll take it. the reason for that is these are actions which, as was laid out in the court of appeals decision, these are actions that predate the president becoming the president. so he wants to argue absolute

immunity, executive privilege, but none of those apply because this wasn't something that he undertook for his job as presidency. executive privilege, an important privilege, is meant to give the president the benefit of confidential advice to run the country. running the trump business is not the same as running the country, even though he may think so. it's just not going to be applicable here. >> so if they didn't take it, then the ruling by this judge and the appeals court, that stands and the tax returns are released. >> that's exactly right. and the court often does that. they'll let a lower court decision stand because supreme court justices like to think of themselves as being minimalists. they only want to take those cases they think are really essential for the country to take. and when they can, they'll duck the issue because they don't want to reach out and decide things unnecessarily. i think here they're going to say thanks, but no thanks. >> david, the thing is the efforts by the president to hide the contents of his tax returns, they've been going on for decades and he's largely been successful in keeping them under wraps, hasn't he?

>> he's been quite successful other than the 2005 few pages that i got and the 1995 state returns "the new york times" got. we won't see these returns. they will be turned over under grand jury rules that are secret. if there is an indictment or a civil lawsuit brought by cy vance, then we'll first see specifics that are alleged as part of a crime, and then as the case goes forward, we'll see the returns put into the record. and trump has ten days under an agreement with cy vance to appeal to the supreme court. that will get resolved quickly. >> so we should know within ten days? >> well, he has ten days within which to seek the appeal. i'm not sure how fast -- to file it. i'm not sure how fast the court will decide. >> i see. and how long does the court sometimes take to decide whether they'll look at a case or not? >> they usually move relatively quickly. i mean, normally they would look to the next term, so i would expect them to turn around

relatively quickly. it's a little hard to predict, but i think they'll expedite. >> it's fascinating. shan wu -- >> the agreement, anderson is this term. it will be this term. >> david k. johnson, fascinating. shan wu, thanks so much. appreciate it. the president trying to unmasked the ukraine call whistle-blower which is protected by the law. my next guest knows firsthand what it's like to have your cover blown. her name was leaked in a different administration, c.i.a. operative valerie plame on the president's unlawful request ahead. it ignites our imagination. in search of inspiration and daring new ideas. at lexus our greatest curiosity isn't a machine? it's you. experience the rewards of our curiosity.

what is that? uh mine, why? it's just that it's... lavender. yes it is, it's for men but i like the smell of it laughs ♪

despite numerous administration officials corroborating what the ukraine whistle-blower warned about, despite the president's own on camera calls for election interference from ukraine and china, and despite the rough transcript that he released that backs up much of the whistle-blower's account, president trump is still trying to blow the whistle-blower's

cover. the latest from a few hours ago. >> i think that the whistle-blower gave a lot of false information. and you have to see who the whistle-blower is. the whistle-blower seems to have disappeared. >> well, he just leveled another attack. the immunity is protected by law. want to bring in former cia operative valerie plame. she is now running for congress as a democrat thanks for being with us. how important is it that the whistle-blower's identity remain secret, not only for that person but any other potential whistle-blower out there. >> hi, good evening, anderson. thanks for having me. it's absolutely crucial what the president is doing is illegal and harassment. whistle-blowers need to feel if

they come forward to point out mismanagement, corruption, wrongdoing, that their identity will be protected. i think what trump has been doing yesterday and reiterated again today asking essentially for his henchmen to go out and dig around and reveal the identity of the whistle-blower is immoral. it's outrageous. and we can't function as a democracy, as a government, if you put the ice on those who seek to come forward and say, you know, that's not quite right. >> it's also interesting given the mueller report, we know that when the president during the campaign said, russia, if you're listening, find those emails, according to the mueller report, you know, russian intelligence actually hours later set about doing just that. so the president clearly knows that giving public pronouncements saying, you know, this person should be revealed and this person said things which are not true and equated them to a, you know, traitor or

spy, he knows the impact that that could have on this person. >> oh, absolutely. you know, this whistle-blower, we don't know who it is yet, thank goodness, most likely a male. we don't know that for sure. but clearly he's a patriot. he thought long and hard about what he was doing. by all accounts his report was credible, thorough, he had given it a great deal of thought. this wasn't just something he tossed off. he knew that his life would change. i don't think he could have any idea of the depth of it, how profound it would be because i've experienced that myself, not exactly analogous but being betrayed by the bush administration and going from complete anonymity to being in the maw of media attention. and even though you might know what you did was right and your friend and family are telling

you what you did was right, it is a very disorienting experience. i really on a personal, human level i really feel for the whistle-blower. it's hard now and it's going to get worse. i'm afraid that his identity at some point will become known and his life will just be turned upside down. >> clearly the president believes there's some sort of political advantage to continuing to focus on the whistle-blower when in truth the whistle-blower at this point is pretty much irrelevant to the actual inquiry because, as you pointed out, what the whistle-blower said, which, you know, all the republicans and congress were coming forward and saying it's all hearsay, it's all hearsay, it's now been backed up by testimony -- >> corroborated. >> it's been corroborated. >> yeah, that's right. >> the idea that the president is continuing to focus on this person, clearly there must be some reason for that. >> oh, yeah. i mean, trump's really good at the shiny ball technique. look over here, shiny ball over

here. pay no attention to the substantial, the flagrant abuse of presidential power, the threat to national security, the erosion of our constitutional democratic values, pay know attention to that. let's go after and figure out who the whistle-blower is. and we fall for it each and every -- how long have we known that this is his technique and he's so actually quite good at it. so we need to all take a collective breath. i'm looking forward to these proceedings going into their public phase and it will be very interesting to see what the actual impeachment articles are. is it going to be focused on the ukrainian issue or will it be broader? >> will they include obstruction of justice from something from the mueller report as, you know, there's some democrats who clearly would like that. just as somebody who, you know, knows the cia from a unique standpoint from the inside, what do you think the impact has

been, just the cumulative impact. we were talking earlier about the foreign service and the ambassador was saying it's been hallowed out from the inside. david gergen was saying it might take a generation to get new people in and to kind of repair the damage. >> it pained me to hear the words of that ambassador, of being attacked and hollowed out and probably there are those career professionals at the cia who feel the same way. there's been a slow accumulation of the politicization of our intelligence community, starting with the iraq war and going on up to today. now we have the secretary of state pompeo, who doesn't really care that much about the state department as much as his proximity to trump. and the amount, the years of experience that have walked out the door, and both at the cia

and at the state department, this is not good for our diplomacy, our standing in the world and it's definitely not good for our national security when trump has repeatedly denigrated the intelligence professionals that are serving as americans, not at republicans and not at democrats. >> valerie plame, i appreciate you are being with us. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> when we return, more revelations from the first impeachment inquiry transcripting were transcripts were released today. i'll talk with former white house insider turned critic anthony scaramucci next. robinhood believes now is the time to do money.

without the commission fees and account minimums. so, you can start investing wherever you are - even on the bus. download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood. at bayer, we're into the golden years. with better heart treatments, advanced brain disease research, and better ways to age gracefully. at bayer, this is why we science.

good evening. chris cuomo is off tonight. the impacts of both end of pennsylvania avenue, hours of closed door q & a with two career