it's not good. >> thank you. we'll hand it over to chris cuomo for "prime time." the president is not a king, the judge said. what does that mean for the other holdouts? plus, we now now some of the charges rudy giuliani could be facing and we have a senator here trying to give credence to the president's conspiracy theory counterattack. the question is can anyone reasonably believe ukraine and not russia hacked our election? we get news that mr. pecker from "the enquirer" is talking to authorities in yet another case against trump. what do you say, let's get after it. so the big case specifically

addresses don mcgahn, the former white house counsel and orders he appear before the house impeachment probe to testify. the president claimed he could overrule congress on the basis of immunity. the judge crushed that. "simply stated, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded american history is that presidents are not kings." this isn't just about mcgahn. what about mulvaney, bolton, pompeo, others, mike pence and his documents? all that is being kept from congress by trump. what does this mean about that? the d.o.j. is already vowing to appealing this case but the law's against them on the issue of having to appear before congress when rightly subpoenaed. the key question is what can people be compelled to talk about once they appear? for the implications of the ruling, let's bring in ellie honing, jenna ellis.

thank you both and thanksgiving week i'm thankful for you both. what does this mean for mcgahn when he shows up and says the president doesn't want me to talk about that. we go from immunity to pr privilege. what does that mean? >> it tells mcgahn you do have to show up. the president's position is that he didn't even have to show up. judge ketanji brown jackson today really blasted that down, ruled that this idea of absolute immunity is a fiction, is baseless and gets separation of powers absolutely backwards. if and went don mcgahn does show up, still pending appeals, he could invoke executive privilege but it's narrow. it does not apply to ongoing discussions about criminal activity, i would argue, including obstruction of justice. >> jenna, we can't be that surprised, we had harriet myers,

we had the espy case, the courts tend to shared towards fair progress. does this mean they go running to court and say they have to all come in? >> this wasn't a surprise at all, especially coming from this judge. the white house has indicated of course they're going to appeal and the department of justice will. so this is far from over. the precedent here is really what's important. when you start having white house counsel and people who should have privilege being able to talk to their clients in matters of national security, matters that are important to the executive branch, this is not part of congressional oversight. when you talk about precedent and constitutional law for the past 250 years, while it's not necessarily an absolute privilege, it should be very, very close. i thisnk that's what the department of justice was driving at, the privilege

between an attorney and their clie client, in this case the president, is very sacrosanct. so to breach that is not the precedent we should be set persian gulf. >> the judge, not the first judge to do so, thsays that bas doesn't hold water. these are duly commissioned -- >> their subpoenas matter but not for this particular witch hunt. the substance absolutely matters. i disagree with her. i think she'll be overturned. >> that's the beauty of the system. you don't have to like it but you must obey. no judge is going to call it a witch hunt. we can guarantee that right now. what will it mean in terms of subject matter what they get up there to testify? >> first of all, it is going to be really hard to draw a distinction between don mcgahn and the need for congress and entitlement of congress to have that testimony and the need for congress if they choose to take

up this legal fight from all the witnesses missing in action, mulvaney, pompeo and bolton, on down the line. the comment i'm not surprised from this judge. i've been in front of dozens of federal judges in my career. and i was in the courtroom for the mcgahn argument. this judge was on point, prepared and couldn't have been fairer she heard out both sides. we were there for hours and hours beyond closing. it's really not fair to cast aspersions on this judge. >> of course you're dpog say that because you agree with that. trying to compare records and personal attacks don't get you far in disagreeing with the merits of what she said. >> i saw her in action and -- >> i read the opinion. >> that's a long opinion. you read fast. >> he said the flores settlement

was settled by a latino judge, not knowing that flores was the plaintiff. do you think it's wrong for the president to call bias every time he doesn't like a decision? >> i don't think he's wrong he here. >> really? >> that's the difference between liberalism and activism and genuine conservatism. that's why president trump has been so strong with all of his judicial appointment because conservatism means we're actually conserving the rule of law, not making these opinions based on feeling, based on outcome, preferences or politics. so many of the presidents who have appointed liberal judges, those outcomes are predictable based on politics, not the constitution. >> you don't think conservatives do that? >> they shouldn't. if they do, we should call them out as well. >> can you cite any examples of bar associations pushing back on

nominees the way they have in this administration? >> sure. there was a judge just recently deemed unqualified president trump nominated to the bench. >> i have senator kennedy on tonight who embarrassed a potential judge nominee in a way i've never seen before. we keep seeing letters from bar organizations, jenna who say they've never seen this many marginally qualified judges before. is that because all of judge bar associations are biased? >> everybody, it's just their opinion. anyone who is a qualified attorney should be able to read the law and apply it equally and fairly. that's the principle of conservatism. if you look back in american history and look at the bipartisan support for judicial nominations, never in the history of this country have there been outright baseless attacks against a president's nomination just because he happens to be president trump. that is absurd. >> there was a kennedy who not only had been in court but

didn't understand the terms of jurisprudence. >> in your opinion. >> this administration has lost in federal court over and over again. we have not one but two different cases about the trump tax returns he's lost on. the administration lost on its efforts to hide robert mueller's grand jury material. >> the muslim ban. how to treat kids on the border, getting rid of the ac kaca. >> in the case involving jim acosta's white house press pass, that was a trump-appointed judge that ruled against the administration. >> and let's look at how many he's won. a lot of his cases, he hasn't had to release his tax returns. >> the taxes i think will be the most interesting one. his record is bad in terms of his win/loss ratio.

>> if you hate donald trump that much that you're willing to sacrifice the constitution over it, that is a dangerous precedent. >> jenna, let me make one thing clear to you, all right? this show is about respecting the law. you said earlier we don't need personal attacks to make a point. the idea that you have to allege that people hate this president because they don't agree with him -- >> that's not what i said. >> that's the implication. i get the simple implication. >> i stand by my word. >> i think you said it for a reason. thank you both. have good thanksgivings. another legal situation to take up, the president's lawyer rudy giuliani. is he a target, a subject? what's going on with the investigation? we now know more. we have reporting about what's in the subpoenas. now in those documents, they have to give a range of potential problems and what they could mean in terms of charges and how they could fold into the

impeachment investigation. it's all laid out next. - [spokeswoman] meet the ninja foodi grill. get the perfectly grilled flavors of an outdoor grill indoors, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do even more, like transform into an air fryer. the ninja foodi grill, the grill that sears, sizzles, and air fry crisps. i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. i'm a verizon engineer,

and i'm part of the team building the most powerful 5g experience for america. it's 5g ultra wideband-- --for massive capacity-- --and ultra-fast speeds. almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. that's 25 times faster than today's network in new york city. so people from midtown manhattan-- --to downtown denver-- --can experience what our 5g can deliver. (woman) and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places... it's pretty crazy. ...just imagine what it can do for you. ♪ hbut mike bloomberg became thele clasguy whoho mdid good. after building a business that created thousands of jobs he took charge of a city still reeling from 9/11 a three-term mayor who helped bring it back from the ashes bringing jobs and thousands of affordable housing units with it. after witnessing the terrible toll of gun violence... he helped create a movement to protect families across america. and stood up to the coal lobby and this administration to protect this planet from climate change. and now, he's taking on... him. to rebuild a country

and restore faith in the dream that defines us. where the wealthy will pay more in taxes and the middle class get their fair share. everyone without health insurance can get it and everyone who likes theirs keep it. and where jobs won't just help you get by, but get ahead. and on all those things mike blomberg intends to make good. jobs creator. leader. problem solver. mike bloomberg for president. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. introducing new vicks vapopatch easy to wear, with soothing vicks vapors for her, for you, for the whole family. new vicks vapopatch. breathe easy. well you remember what happened last year. you can't bring a backup thanksgiving to my sister's house. it's not like we're going to walk in with it. we'll bring it in as we need it. ...phase it in. phase it in? yeah, phase it in.

we need a solution.ut their phones down. phase it in? introducing... smartdogs. the first dogs trained to train humans. stopping drivers from: liking. selfie-ing. and whatever this is. available to the public... never. smartdogs are not the answer. but geico has a simple tip. turn on "do not disturb while driving" mode. brought to you by geico. even after you clean, odors are still trapped in your fabrics. febreze fabric eliminates those odors. and try febreze unstopables with twice the fresh-scent power. tackle tough odors with irresistible freshness. la la la la la

new information, not just speculation. we have a hard list of the troubles that mr. rudy giuliani could be facing. how? it comes from a federal grand jury subpoena. feds are looking into conspiracy to defraud the u.s., obstruction of justice, making false statements to federal officials, wire fraud, money laundering and violations of federal election laws that prohibit the use of straw donors and foreign money in u.s. elections. this ain't penny ant eshe. it's not a gotcha list and can't be brushed off at anonymous sources and it's important to

remember who mr. giuliani is most closely tied to. >> secretary perry, ambassador volker and i worked with mr. rudy giuliani on ukraine matters ter express direction of the president of the united states. >> express direction of the president of the united states. not an opinion. that is a recall. remember who was calling the shots, which may bring us to this idea of insurance. >> i've seen things written like he's going to throw me under the bus, right? when they say that, i say he isn't but i have insurance. >> to which the president said today -- >> what do you think rudy giuliani means when he says he has insurance? >> rudy's great guy. rudy is the best mayor in the history of new york, in my opinion the strongest mayor, the best mayor. >> and he ain't going to trash talk him right now because rudy is right, he knows a lot.

and he was working solely as a defense attorney. but that only goes so far. it's clear those who knew what he was doing in ukraine offer a different take. >> rudy giuliani was a hand grenade that was going to blow everyone you. >> hyperbole aside, back to the subpoena, it asks for records as well related to the former mayor himself, his company giuliani partners and any payment to giuliani or his firm, as well as political donations to the pro trump super pac. a grand jury subpoena isn't a wish list. the feds can only list crimes they are actively investigating. mr. giuliani said all the sdny had to do was ask us because mr. giuliani did everything in a proper and legal way. nobody at the sdny has spoken with him. however, they don't have to.

the longer that that is true, the less that may be good for him. in a federal investigation, you don't want to be the last person they speak with. that might mean you're not just a witness, you're the target. now, republicans can try to make a credible case that the president should not be impeached, but why instead this defense about ukraine and not russia interfering in our election? senator john kennedy is here to make the case. ♪ for every family going home for the holidays, there are countless people working to help them get there. thank you to everyone we rely on to get us home to the ones we love. ♪ have you ever worked with dr. francis? oh yeah, he's ok. just ok? guess who just got reinstated! well, not officially. nervous? yeah. yeah me too. don't worry about it, we'll figure it out. i'll see ya in there! just ok is not ok.

at&t has america's best network, now with our best plans, at our best prices, starting at $35 a line for 4 lines. new from at&t. of millions of americans during the recession. so, my wife kat and i took action. we started a non-profit community bank with a simple theory - give people a fair deal and real economic power. invest in the community, in businesses owned by women and people of color, in affordable housing. the difference between words and actions matters. that's a lesson politicians in washington could use right now. i'm tom steyer, and i approve this message.

applebee's new sizzlin' entrées. now starting at $9.99. steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn?

even though the facts in the impeachment hearing seemed pretty clear to most witnesses and most of america, a case can

be made that the president did something wrong but not worthy of removal. instead of that case, some are doubling down on the idea that the president did nothing wrong because saying it was ukraine and not russia who interfered in the 2016 election is right. >> who do you believe was responsible for hacking the dnc and clinton campaign computers, their emails? was it russia or ukraine? >> i don't know. nor do you. nor do any of us. miss hill -- >> let me just interrupt to say the entire intelligence community says it was russia. >> right. but it could also be ukraine. i'm not saying that i know one way or the other. >> let's bring in louisiana senator john kennedy. that's him there and that's him here. how have you been?

i want to hear from you do you really believe that it wasn't russia? >> i did that interview yesterday with chris wallace, damn good reporter. i was answering one of his questions and he interjected a statement and asked me to react to it. what i heard chris say was he made the statement that only russia had tried to interfere in the election. and i answered the question. that's not what he said. i went back and looked at the transcript. he said only russia tried to hack the dnc computer. now, chris is right. i was wrong. the only evidence i have and i think it's overwhelming is that it was russia to tried to hack the dnc computer. >> that's what the consensus is.

>> yup. i've seen no indication that ukraine tried to do it. >> let me stop you for a second. you just did something we've never heard this president do, which was say, hey, i know i said that, i was wrong. so good, let's check a big honking box. you don't think ukraine was the one to look at the server. why do you think the president keeps saying something that he also knows is not true? intelligence community, the senate committee on it are, you know, entire apparatus that looked at this, you guys have been briefed about it, why does he say something that you know is untrue? >> well, here's why -- there is a lot of evidence, proven and unproven, everybody's got an opinion, that ukraine did try to interfere along with russia and probably others in the 2016 election. >> what evidence? >> well, in january of 2017

politico did a long, long exhaustive article talking about it. on october 21 was this year, the "economist" magazine wrote a long piece, probably the best i've read, talking about ukraine's involvement in the election. there have been pieces on cbs -- >> they raised questions. they raised questions. but we both know mueller spent almost 30 pages on this. he testified it was not ukraine, they were not part of the russian apparatus. yes, many foreign actors try to interfere in our elections and otherwise. but that's not what this is about. this is about the president trying to justify leveraging ukraine for political advantage and i don't know why you want to be a part of that. >> well, if you look at the articles, chris, independent not s -- i'm not saying they're all accurate but they're all

reputable reporters -- >> so is our intelligence community and so is the mueller report. >> they talked about i think it was common knowledge that president poroshenko at that time did not support president trump. but let me tell you why it matters. what matters is not what i think. what matters to me as i analyze this case is what the president thinks. there are two scenarios in my opinion. and i don't think this case is about a quid pro quo. i think that speaker pelosi's theory and chairman schiff's theory is that the president asked for an investigation of a political rival. the haalternative theory -- >> that's what his words were, senat senator. >> right, i understand. and i can see why people have that interpretation. but the alternative theory is that the president asked for an investigation of possible corruption by someone who happens to be a political rival.

now, the latter is arguably in the national interests, the former would be in his personal parochial interest. here's what bothers me, chris. that in the house, chairman shift and speaker pelosi refused to allow the president or the republicans to offer any evidence of the second theory. and i don't think that's fair. i think that offends me. that's a violation of due process. >> we have possibly two more phases but we certainly have one more phase and these rules are no different than they were under the clinton impeachment. let me ask you some questions. one, the president has given aid to ukraine twice before now. biden was the same subject of the same theories in each of the two prior distributions to ukraine. the president never mentioned this. the only thing that changed between the two times he gave money to ukraine and this time is that the former v.p. is

running for president. is that just a coincidence? >> well, i don't think it's fair to assume without allowing the defendant to rebut the evidence that the president asked for an investigation of a political rival. i this i he ought to be allowed to put on evidence rebutting that. >> he will at the trial. rudy giuliani came on the show that's why he was over there was to find biden. my question to you, senator, says who? when have we ever seen this president make any move against corruption that involved funding? he funds russia, he funds turkey, he says great things about north korea. since when is he a corruption hawk? he doesn't even talk about his own administration that has the most corruption we've seen in modern history. >> i this i when the case gets to the senate and the reason i'm offended by what's going on in

the house, this will be the first partisan impeachment in the history of our country. i think chairman schiff and speaker pelosi knew from the very beginning how they would vote and what they were going to try to prove. this case is really being tried to the american people. and i just think if you're going to try it to the american people, you ought to afford both sides due process. that's going to happen in the senate. >> it's going to happen the same way it did with clinton. just so they know, you woulder in have that mishead of hair if you'd been in the senate as long as it would take you to be part of the senate in the clinton process, but you went from land transfers to an affair in clinton. you want to talk about a partisan investigation and you want to talk about due process, it was all done by an independent counsel. yes, appointed by clinton's attorney general janet reno but

you have half the room in there own working to defend the president. we've never seen that before either. >> if i were a prosecutor and i were prosecuting you for a felony and i went to a federal judge and said, judge, trust me, chris is guilty, i want an order he can't rebut the witnesses, he can't call any witnesses, he can't have any evidence in court. i would either end up in hand cuffs or a straight jacket. >> this is the difference. this is the indictment phase. even if it goes through the judiciary and they bring articles of impeachment, that is tantamount to an indictment. when you are being investigated for possible crimes, rudy giuliani ain't part of the investigation right now, he may want them to talk to him but we both know they don't have to. the only difference is this room has half of room of prosecutors

working very hard to find him not guilty of anything. >> well, i still think we'll just have to agree to disagree, my friend, because i just don't think it's fair. i just don't think it's fair not to give somebody due process when they're being impeached. >> i agree with you. i just think this is due process and you're going to have a trial. what i don't understand is this, why not make this argument instead. look, what he did here was wrong. if he wanted to go after biden, he should have gone to the d.o.j. or to you or his friend senator agreement, look into this, i think it's worth looking into, i think he's dirty but i think we should do it. he could have done that and he didn't. the only way this makes sense to ask ukraine to do it and just to announce they were going to do it s because his hand print weren't on it. that's what this looks like because that's what came out of

his mouth. why talk about the ukraine theory? we both know it's bunk and now you're attached to it. >> well, two points number one, if you'll look at the articles i talked about, you'll see that there is a lot of evidence that ukraine did try to meddle in the election in 2016. and i think it was very common knowledge, i know it was, that president poroshenko then was actively working against president trump. number two, and i believe that, chris -- >> i think it's common knowledge he didn't like trump. not that he was working against him. you want to weigh it against the mueller findings, the intelligence community findings and the investigative findings that have been briefed to you in the senate. all of that you're saying should be equally balanced with two

articles. >> no, i'm not. i'm not saying that. i'm saying the allegations that has been made against me and against senator wicker, who was on the sunday shows, too, there's absolutely no evidence that ukraine tried to meddle in the election and that's just not true. go read the political article. >> why does the intelligence community say otherwise? >> yb. >> why do all the experts say it? ? you do know, senator in i don't know why you have to go this way to defend this president. >> i'm telling you what i believe, chris. the larger issue is it's not what i believe. it's whether the president is allowed to after a defense. >> he will be of course. we saw the procedures. >> he's not in the house. >> that's because it's the investigative and indictment stage. >> it's not an offense but they're trying to case in front of the american people. >> just look with clinton. >> and if that hadn't happened

with nixon, he probably wouldn't have resigned. this is about the american people. senator, i appreciate you making the case. i don't want people calling you a learn. >> have a good thanksgiving, my friend. >> you, too, and be well. i don't understand the whole argument but i'm happy you made it here. >> have back and we'll talk about it some more. >> done. >> another legal battle affecting this president, it's real and being done right now, hush money fiemts women in extension of what is now a household phrase, "catch and kill." the tabloid titan involved in this is being questioned. look who we have, perfect timing, ronan farrow and a new book. thank you, ronan. see you soon. and we want to keep you connected to those you love,

with the new iphone 11. so t-mobile is giving you an iphone 11 on us for each new line of unlimited. for yourself, or up to a family of four. keep your family connected, and hurry into t-mobile today, to get up to four iphone 11's on us. only at t-mobile. [sneeare you ok?fles] yah, it's just a cold. it's not just a cold if you have high blood pressure. most cold medicines may raise blood pressure. coricidin hbp is the... ...#1 brand that gives... powerful cold relief without raising your blood pressure.

get the perfectly grilled flavors of an outdoor grill indoors, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do even more, like transform into an air fryer. the ninja foodi grill, the grill that sears, sizzles, and air fry crisps.

all right. big news. one of donald trump's powerful colleagues is talking to prosecutors, according to sources. "national enquirer" apparent company chief david pecker was involved with the now infamous catch and kill of former maybe model karen mcdougal story.

hissi his reporting merited no less than a pulitzer prize. perfect timing. congratulations, ronan farrow, on your work. david pecker, haven't we heard this story already? what is this new iteration of investigation? >> the significance of the story is ongoing. what i and a number of other publications, "the wall street journal" did great reporting on this uncovered a series of stories is that david pecker and donald trump had an arrangement to kill these stories before the election and there is still new information coming out about that. in this pobook and podcast comi out, there is a new allegation that the "enquirer" buried a story about a claim that donald trump had been involved in a sexual assault of an underage girl. maybe the claim is specious. that's been true of a number of these stories that were caught and killed, but the process of a collaboration to get the story and get rid of it, that is a potential violation of election law. >> how so?

>> well, up knyou are not suppoo have an arm of the media collaborating with a political entity during the election and spending money that is not a declared campaign expenditure, as you know. the "national enquirer" has admitted it happened and might have been illegal. this is after they lied to me again and again and said it never happened, we were exercising journalistic judgment when we buried these stories. it happened. now we're looking at these frenzies of investigations. the way he manipulated the media to provide cover for some of the alleged live fraudulent activity that happened around him is at the center of many, many threats of that. >> what would that be in terms of substantial? the dismissal will be his penny ante. you say no, there are darker potential iterations of this how? >> the reality is you're right when you talk to legal experts about this they say, a, it's very likely a violation of

campaign finance law and, b, very difficult to prove that, to ever bring anyone to justice for that sort of a crime. this may be one reason why again and again prosecutors have passed up opportunities to hold the folks at the enquirer enkoutabenkout ab -- accountable and cut deals with them. >> is it relevant that pecker is talking with them. >> all look, david pecker and his -- they were going after additional new claims that i document about trump to try to get rid of him. >> why do they say this did it? >> they say in the agreement with prosecutors the goal is to influence the outcome of the election. that's why it's important to our democracy. >> that must cost money. killing a story ain't cheap. >> and it seemed that david

pecker's interest waned. the national enquirer, dillan howard punted that to michael cohen. that's why he had to set up the infrastructure in the shell companies on the fly to do it himself. >> we got the tape where the president said i don't know anything about this. is that something worth mining for you that this is expensive, he may have liked him but he didn't like him this much. was there some type of financial rarngment as well? and if so, would that matter? >> there was an arrangement where there was an expectation there would be some kind of a quid pro quo. at the very least the sources i have around the "national enquir enquirer" that david pecker expected to get that invitation to the white house and introductions to potential sources of funds at a time when the "national enquirer" was flatlining. this was not something he got nothing out of. >> so this book helped to start

change culture. i know we never want to get too far because if people read this book, they'll see the impediments on you personally and professionally, is that this was very hard for you personally. it was challenging for you personally to deal with the process and see what it was about. now comes the podcast. what do you want the podcast to be as an extension of the effort? starts tomorrow. >> this story we've been talking about, the catching and killing of the truth by the "enquirer" on behalf of donald trump. it's a plot point and it's representative of a larger, figurative hole, the way the media covers for politicians buries the truth and we need to hold ourselves accountable. now you have incredible people in the media, sources who worked

with investigative journalists coming forward and saying this is how we made sure that the donald trump argument that the press is the enemy of the people isn't true. >> don't you have a guy who was paid to spy on you in this? >> yeah. the suppression of stories went as far as an international espionage -- one of those spice becomes a whistle-blower, develops a conscience, says i care about the free press. he's the first episode of the podcast. for people who read the book or if you haven't read the book, the voices are a chance to get to know the sources better or a good way into this story that's really accessible. they have a lot to say and a lot we can learn from. >> what is the one change you would like to see that hasn't happened yet in. >> you know, i would like to see more investigative journalism of this type. i this i we are at this cross roads where we have authoritarian rhetoric weaponized against the free

press and yet we have an incredible amount of good investigative journalism happening at the "washington post," at "the new york times," at the new yorker where i write. it is important for us to stay in that fight and do good journalism and stick to the facts and not wear people out with shouting and part asianship. the truth matters to the future of our democracy. if we can keep edge powering brave sources, i think we've got a fighting chance at transparency and accountabiliaccountability. >> so "catch and kill" available tomorrow. >> wherever you listen to podcasts. it's a chance to support this investigative journalism. >> and i appreciate you taking the time to make my audience smarter and better informed on something that really matters. happy thanksgiving to you you, your mom and the whole family. i'm a little bit of a fan of hers.

>> she likes you, too. >> so the closing argument, this story about the navy seal, it's not about why he intervened, it's about what the lesson is coming out of it. i'll lay it out for you and you'll see that it extends to every play this president makes next. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424. introducing a razor that works differently. the gillette skinguard has a guard between the blades that helps protect skin. the gillette skinguard. i'm a verizon engineer, and i'm part of the team building the most powerful 5g experience for america. it's 5g ultra wideband-- --for massive capacity-- --and ultra-fast speeds. almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. that's 25 times faster

than today's network in new york city. so people from midtown manhattan-- --to downtown denver-- --can experience what our 5g can deliver. (woman) and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places... it's pretty crazy. ...just imagine what it can do for you. ♪ well you remember what happened last year. you can't bring a backup thanksgiving to my sister's house. it's not like we're going to walk in with it. we'll bring it in as we need it. ...phase it in. phase it in? yeah, phase it in. phase it in? the roomba i7+ with cleanng base automatic dirt disposal and allergenlock™ bags that trap 99% of allergens, so they don't escape back into the air. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba™

my mom washes the dishes... ...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do? cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time.

wow, that's clean! cascade platinum.

nyquil severe gives you powerful relief for your worst cold and flu symptoms, on sunday night and every night. nyquil severe. the nightime, sniffling, sneezing, coughing, aching, stuffy head, best sleep with a cold, medicine. president trump stepped in to help a controversial navy s.e.a.l. stay a s.e.a.l., and the navy's secretary is now gone because of it. but this is not a story about yet another military man getting away from this president. it's about why. >> well, what message does it send? >> that you can get away with things. >> that's my argument. the red hats should say "get away with anything" because the goal of this president is not to be great. it is apparently, i argue, to beat the system by any means necessary. the law and order president who promised to end the carnage has ignored the law, ignored due process, attacked the justice

system, not out of any grand principle, just to protect himself. and he does it because he thinks he can get away with anything as president. now, a judge just told him tonight he can't just wave his hand and prevent people from testifying to congress. he's not a king, said the judge. the supreme court is reviewing whether he must turn over his taxes to congress as the law states. other courts told him he can't do what he wants to kids at the border or to muslims. when it comes to his party, though, unlike with the law, he always gets a pass. >> show me something that -- that is a crime. if you could show me that, you know, trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing. >> you mean like this? >> mr. giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a white house visit for president zelensky. mr. giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the

united states. >> there is ample evidence -- forget about the latin -- of a bribe, abuse of power. and the senator's reaction to having his standard satisfied is, you know what? give a pass to the president. next, trump's taxes. way back in 2016 before trump had clinched the gop nomination, but his taxes was a rallying cry for opponents. >> maybe in addition to that last year, he wrote a big check to planned parenthood. now, i have no idea if he did or not. why? because he hasn't released his taxes. >> hear that? >> that's cruz now. he grew a beard to hide his face and says nothing. another pass. the party that once stood behind president reagan shouting down russia's leader stood silent as this president took the side of russia's leader over america. >> i have president putin. he just said it's not russia.

i will say this. i don't see any reason why it would be. >> i keep going back to this because we have never, ever seen anything like it before. it is anathema, not just to president reagan, but everything the grand old party was once about, and they said nothing. this is a president whose former lawyer is in jail for arranging hush money payments to a porn star on his behalf, and the party that said president clinton was a matter of moral principle, nothing. this president lies like no politician we have ever seen. think about that. the most ever. and his party, which used to campaign on the notion that character counts now can't count on a millipede's feet how many times they've given this potus a pass for outright perfidy, deseat, not being trustworthy. the party that likes to remind democrats that it was their party in the south that spawned the kkk and other white haters, now idly entertains the

president who has said so much to embolden white nationalists, even saying he's a nationalist when he knows the term is only used by him, so much so that hate groups celebrate him. now, if they continue to allow this president to flout all standards of not just presidential behavior, but adult behavior, if they stand for nothing, they will fall for anything. and that's what's excusing obvious abuses and wrongs suggest. what do they stand for except allowing trump to do whatever he wants. they might as well change their name to team trump. i'm sure potus would be fine with that. here's the real question. if president trump decided to rename the party, who would stand in his way? that's my argument. now, one crucial figure in the impeachment probe has not yet been asked to testify, but that could change. who is it? bolo, next. - [spokeswoman] meet the ninja foodi grill.

get the perfectly grilled flavors of an outdoor grill indoors, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do even more, like transform into an air fryer. the ninja foodi grill, the grill that sears, sizzles, and air fry crisps.

but he wanted snow for thelace holidays.. so we built a snow globe. i'll get that later. dylan! but the one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with homeowners insurance. what? switching and saving was really easy! i love you! what? sweetie! hands off the glass. ugh!! call geico and see how easy saving on homeowners and condo insurance can be. i love her!

bolo. be on the lookout. federal prosecutors are circling rudy giuliani and his associates may have another key witness to testify on their business dealings. who? the ceo of ukraine's state gas company, naftogaz. he told "time" magazine that if u. prosecutors asked him to testify, he'd be willing to talk. asked whether that's info on giuliani or about his now indicted associates, lev parnas and igor fruman, the executive said both. everything is connected was his quote, which is true. parnas and fruman needed giuliani to help them to get access and to help them to deal with this u.s. ambassador marie yovanovich because they all wanted her out because she stood in their way of getting the investigations they wanted. and in the case of mr. parnas and fruman, to get the naftogaz. on the flip side, giuliani used

those two to look for biden. we'll see what it leads to, and we'll see what it will spawn in terms of more conspiracy theories about ukraine meddling because that seems to be the defense dejour. that's french. now, remember, giuliani has denied wrongdoing, but the federal prosecutors are all over it. thank you for watching. "cnn tonight" with the upgrade, laura coates, starts right now. >> is that french too? upgrade? i can't -- >> that's a fact is what that is. >> i'll take t. i don't speak french, but i like the way that sounds. thank you for having me on your, you know, network today. >> i like it. cuomo news network. very nice. always a pleasure. one of the best minds in the business. >> that's nice of you. this is going to be a big story with giuliani. talk about bolo, things to look out for, i mean it's not going to end here. you cannot imagine people who are connected to him are just going to be quiet and silent and not try to implicate other people, right? >> i agree wu. let me ask a question to the better mind. in this subpoena, this federal grand jury subpoena, when they