welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. a majority of americans believe president trump improperly used husband power and put politics ahead of country in his ukraine policy. yet two weeks of public hearings did not move public opinion on whether that bad behavior warrants removing the president from office. plus, presidents are not kings. federal district court judge says the white house doesn't have authority to keep aides from honoring congressional subpoenas, but the justice department is now appealing. so don't expect to hear from don mcgahn or anyone else anytime soon. ten weeks from today, one of the 2020 democrats will wake up the winner of the iowa caucuses. pete buttigieg has the polling lead at the moment. three of his riles today rolling out new iowa tv ads trying to shake things up. >> i'll create more than a

million good jobs here at home. >> bernie fights for the average joe. >> the new leader who can on day one stand with our allies, know them by their first names. >> back to the 2020 race and the democrats a bit later. we begin the hour with a very serious court setback for the white house and the presidential reaction you should not take seriously. the president this morning saying he would actually like for all of his top aides to testify to congress. don't take that seriously, but one of those aides, the house democrats would love to hear from is the secretary of state. he was asked about that last hour. listen. >> sir, the president tweeted just a short while ago that he encouraged you essentially to testify in the impeachment investigation. is that something you're considering? >> when the time is right, all good things happen. >> a little bit of a smirk from the secretary of state. those tweets and the reaction

follows a court rebuke to the white house's claim that it has brought immunity that protects presidential advisers from ever being forced to give testimony to congress. the opinion, now under appeal, was scathing. the judge writing, quote, presidents are not kings and absolute community from compelled congressional process simply does not exist. with me this day to show their regulator, rachel bail, michael sherwood. we are in the middle of a serious impeachment inquiry. what are we to make of a presidential tweet that says, sure, and then the secretary of state has serious questions about his contacts with rudy giuliani and his refusal to turn over state department documents, including the emails of people who have decided to defy him and

testify. >> one thing that's easy to forget when we're dealing with the nitty-gritty of this particular situation is the potential consequences, long-term consequences to the relationship, the power of balances that the framers of the constitution tried to set up between the branches of government. i think what the judge's ruling reflected was the concern that if the president ultimately wins on this and is able to simply say there was no need for my administration or any administration to ever respond to congress in situations like this, it really fundamentally shifts the balance of power in favor of the executive in ways that i think clearly people have tried to do for a long time. there are people who have always argued that the executive branch should be more powerful, but there have been limits and the courts have put those limits on. in this case that's what she was warning about. >> if you're the democrats, you think, oh, we just got an important win. however, it's going to be appealed. it goes from the district court,

goes for it court of appeals, whoever loses there is going to appeal it further to the supreme court. here's congresswoman veronica escobar talking about how broad should we do this, how tightly should we do this? democrats are looking at the stresses on them. she says we could have pages and pages and pages of articles of impeachment. what we have seen over the last three years is, i think, unprecedented. i absolutely believe in being as focused as possible as well. i think the broader we go, that may pose challenges for the american people. here's one of the democrats who says ukraine, abuse of paurks keep it tight, maybe have foot notes about the mueller report. but other democrats are going to say wait if we can get don mcgahn in the chair, shouldn't we wait? >> who's in the driver's seat right now? speaker pelosi. she has said privately, but the instruction has always been ukraine, focus on ukraine. ivanka escobar is a part of that leadership team. there are democrats who do want to go after the mueller report

and the sign that the judge is citing with democrats in terms of forcing don mcgahn to testify, they're going to trying to argue maybe we should wait for something, for don mcgahn to come afford forward but that could be weeks. this is going to be appealed in months. do they want to drag this into 2020? so far the opinion from nancy pelosi is absolutely not. >> it's going to that she's been reluctant about this throughout. but they are watching what's happening. the democrats watching the hearing last week, they thought it seemed strong, and it was strong. it was compelling, interesting testimony. but both sides are locked in. so having don mcgahn come and testify, that is not going to suddenly change public opinion here. and that is what is driving a lot of this. as far as the president saying he's trying to protect future presidents, that's hard to believe. so the reality here is, you know, the people who are making the decisions like speakers

pelosi and others want to keep this narrow. democrats do not win from expanding this or delaying this. >> just to follow the president's strategy is interesting. this is a little bit of the treat today. reading too much into the people being forced to testify. i am fighting for future presidents, insert laughter here. other than that i would like others to testify. don mcgahn's lawyer stated i did nothing wrong. let me stop there. here's the mueller report. this is why don mcgahn would be a great witness for the democrats. when the president called mcgahn a second time to call on the department of justice, he recalled the president said call rod. rod being rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general at the time. mcgahn recalled the president telling him, quote, mueller has to go. call me back when you do it. mcgahn understood the president

to be saying the special counsel had to be removed by rosenstein, which you could connect to obstruction of justice. when the president says this guy says i'm great, usual when you do your homework, it's not always the case. >> it's not always the case. the tweets you see from the president go along with his public portrayal of how he's trying to defend himself. he's saying this is a sham, democrats are coming after me, it's the witch hunt 2.0. his comments go along with that. they're trying to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks. >> adam schiff says as soon as next week he will send a report to the judiciary committee. the committee then decides whether or not to draft articles of impeachment. the question is how broad will they be, how many, and how fast does that schedule proceed from there. it is not mutually exclusive. the house keeps its rough schedule to finish by christmas, hands it to the senate. if you win these court rulings,

whether it's against don mcgahn or the other case that has bolton and his deputy in it, other challenges, if you win them in time, they can be witnesses in the senate trial. or if you win them later, the oversight committee or the judiciary could have don mcgahn next year. the risk there is you're even closer to the election then. >> yeah. >> i was just going to say, rachel's point about pelosi controlling this is well taken. the one moment in the near future you might see this debate bubble up is when they are actually marking up and drafting the articles of impeachment because that is an opportunity for some of the democrats who feel like it should be broader to say, no, no, to make an amendment, i move to add the emoluments case into the articles of impeachment. there will be public debate on that. in the end pelosi has a lot of control over they are caucus. it probably ends up as narrow as she wants it to be. >> the cases are working through

courts. very much next year they could go to the supreme court, get rulings. don mcgahn could be testify a few months before the 2020 election. i mean, it's just so interesting. democrats are in there pushed to focus on ukraine. there are all these things there are going to spill out into the open next year and it could affect 2020. are democrats going to turn up something that they didn't chase because they were focused on ukraine and say all of a sudden, oh, we should have put this in impeachment in could they impeach him again? i don't know. but there's a lot of stuff that's out there that is not ukraine and that is going to continue to come forward. >> when we come back we'll continue the conversation because you're in effect part of jury here. more and more americans believe the president did behave badly, did put politics first. but democrats have failed to move the dial on the big question. should he be removed? pen in you. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol

works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®

at to cover the essentialsyou have in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. because when you're ready for what comes next, the only direction is forward.

gimme one minute... and i'll tell you some important things to know about medicare. first, it doesn't pay for everything. say this pizza is your part b medical expenses. this much - about 80% - medicare will pay for. what's left is on you. that's where an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company comes in. this type of plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. these are the only plans to carry the aarp endorsement for meeting their high standards of quality and service. so call unitedhealthcare insurance company today and ask for your free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll have the freedom to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and when you travel, your plan will go with you - anywhere in the country.

whew! call unitedhealthcare today and ask for your free decision guide. applebee's new sizzlin' entrées. now starting at $9.99.

as we head into this next chapter of the impeachment debate, there are big challenges both for house democrats and for the president those democrats believe should be removed from office. the democrats, of course, believe their public hearings provide an overwhelming evidence president trump abused his power. putting ukraine and national security at risk to pursue a personal inventory tet da against joe biden. he says it is the democrats who are abusing their power. a poll says the majority of americans believe the president's conduct was improper and put politics above country.

those hearings did not increase the percentage of americans who think the punishment should be a senate conviction and removal from office. let's break down the numbers. number one, just the threshold. should the president be impeached and removed from office? 50% of americans, so half, say yes. 43% say no. the issue is this. watch how this is made out over time. if you go back to march, 36% the democrats have made progress in prosecuting their case. in october 50% says impeach and remove. after the hearings, 50%, the same number say impeach and remove. so the public hearings didn't increase the number of americans who say remove the president from office. 90% of democrats say impeach and remove. only 10% of republicans say impeach and remove. most republicans are safe voting no. we won't impeach or no, we won't convict. independents, 47% say impeach and remove.

that number is actually down a little bit from our last poll. republicans think that's progress. it's inside if margthe margin o. thinking about 2020 and the political basis of both parties, nearly 6 in 10 americans with a college graduation degree say impeach or remove the president. only 47% of those who have not graduated from college say that. white noncollege graduates, a key part of the president's base, only 36% nationwide say impeach and remove the president. this is interesting. have the democrats prosecuted their case against the president? well, 53% do believe he has used the presidency improperly. 56%, that's a big number, say he did it to benefit himself politically. but only 48% say there's enough evidence to warrant the full impeachment process, meaning a house impeachment, senate removal from office. on that second part, a senate conviction, the majority say no.

>> when the matter comes over, as it looks like it will, we'll have to take it up. the only prediction i can make is that i can't imagine a scenario under which 67 members of the senate would remove the president from office in the middle of a presidential election. >> the majority leader works in the last part on purpose, in the middle of a presidential election, trying to signal to the voters, you'll get your own chance at this. but the numbers are fascinating in that if you ask americans do you think the president was wrong, acted improperly, abused his power, acted for political purposes, you get a clear majority. but should you impeach him, the ultimate punishment, you have to remove, it's a sign it's a high bar, as it should be, as the founding fathers intended this to be, but a very high bar. as democrats have tried to simplify in some respects just talking about ukraine, it is still a complicated matter. hearing after hearing, i'm not sure every new hearing is going

to make this easier for the public to understand. but couple things have changed. democrats have certainly consolidated their views on this. several months ago, as you showed, democrats were worry about this. but you talk to democratic voters out there, as i have, and you watch what democratic presidential candidates are talking about, it's not this. they do not believe this is a winner for them in november. so it's going to play out and be a split screen. in many cases it may be the dominating screen. this may impact the 2020 campaign. the independent number is still within the margin of error. let's see where that goes in a month or so. >> you'll have the judiciary committee hearings and then presumably a senate trial where i think you have a giant public spotlight, the prospect of possibility the president could be removed. if you're the president, you're thinking, okay, i'm focusing on that, the democrats didn't move the number, the percentage of americans who say i should be impeached or removed. a little historical context. president trump now, 50% of

americans say remove. only 29% of americans said that at the height of the clinton impeachment saga and the republicans went full steam ahead. >> even though the numbers have flatlined, that 50% number is not good news for the president. if you look at other numbers in the poll, i think the number for women, the percentage of women who think that he should be impeached has risen in the last month alone. i think this is not good news for the president's re-election, but yes, it does show some problems for democrats in terms of getting republicans on board with their messaging. >> that's a great point about the two different ways to read this. number one, what's right in front of us, a house vote and a senate trial. but also assuming the house impeaches and the senate fails to convict, what does tv on the 2020 political climate. the president said in his tweets it's the democrats abusing their power. 40% of americans think the democrats right now are going too far. 54% thought that of the

republicans, again, back in the clinton impeachment matters, two separate issues. this is about presidential conduct in foreign policy. clinton's impeachment was about personal conduct. >> look, i do not think this is a warning sign for them. if they're not able to move public sentiment at all with those five hearings with a dozen state department or nsc testifying against them, that's a problem. this should baha'i point in terms of making the case to the voters. but this hearing process was so fast for us in washington. it was impossible for us to keep up. think about voters in ohio or wisconsin, people who only tune into news once a week. they were doing it back to back and it didn't sink in, clearly. >> a lot of voters, as they processed this information, the more they learned, but you begin where you are. that's just life.

you begin with your perspective. this is his approval rating this year. started at 37%. right now he's at 42%. we could take this all the way back to the beginning of the trump presidency and you would be essentially a flat line, a little up and down. here's what helps the president. his rating on the economy on most issues the under water. but on the economy, the president is near an all-time high, right now at 50%. 56% or 57% was his all-time high. even as the american people ponder the idea of impeaching or removing a president, he's getting good grades on the economy as we get closer to the election. >> one of the things that -- on the hearings not moving the needle, there are different of any kind hearings in washington. they were hearings that were mired in the details in what is a complicated set of facts. the hearings, what the american people are going to see over the

next two months both in the house and the debate on the floor of the house is going to be a much more kind of robust political debate and then again in the senate. i think what's dangerous for the president is that that's when the american public decides to start tuning in and that could affect the numbers. >> it's a number about the economy, you're right . if in a number stays there, that is what worries democrats the most. a lot of republicans say, goes to work why doesn't he just talk about the economy and not the impeachment stuff? he got some of that advice from bill clinton just a few weeks ago. that's hard for this president to do. >> very hard for this president today. we have another rally tonight? >> sunrise, florida. >> when we come back the president is the one subject to the impeachment inquiry. his personal attorney rudy giuliani subject to an increasing federal investigation. aetna takes a total approach to your health and wellness with medicare advantage plans designed for the whole you body, mind and spirit.

that means aetna is helping you get ready to be the best grandmother the world has ever known. with medicare advantage plans that come with monthly premiums starting at $0. plus hospital, medical and prescription drug coverage in one simple plan. and wide provider networks including doctors and hospitals you know and trust. plus a limit on your out-of-pocket medical costs. and health coaching and fitness memberships to help you age actively. so you can be ready for what matters most. aetna medicare advantage plans call today. we'll send you a $10 visa reward card with no obligation to enroll. or visit us online at aetnamedicare.com/tv. there's a company that's talked than me: jd power.people 448,134 to be exact. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality.

and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room. ( ♪ ) only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol®.

for fast pain relief. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®

stop and consider this. rudy giuliani is still on paper anyway the president's permanent be lawyer. even as federal subpoenas indicate the former new york city mayor is a potential subject or target of a very broad federal investigation. giuliani insists he did nothing wrong and says he has nothing to hide but prosecutors are closely looking at giuliani's associates and his consulting business. a grand jury subpoena reviewed by cnn shows prosecutors are trying to untangle a complicated web of potential law breaking,

conspiracy, acting as a foreign agent, obstruction of justice, money laundering, and funneling money into u.s. elections, all of that raised in this subpoena. carrie cordero and evan perez join our conversation. if you read the subpoena, wow. >> right, wow. it's not good news for any of the people involved. but if you're rudy giuliani, there's a couple things that should worry you, right? if you're simply, again, a subject of this, right, and there's a fine line between subject and becoming a target, you have to be worried that nobody's called you to try to get your side of the story, right? certainly if you talk to some of the lawyers involved, people who are representing the other two gentlemen, parnas and fruman, they believe their clients are not the goal here. they believe that this is meant to flip them and roll on someone

else. and who else is directly in line of that? it has to be rudy, right? so rudy giuliani, who says that he's not heard anything from prosecutors, his lawyers say they have not heard anything, any requests for information from prosecutors. you have to be concerned that what the prosecutors are doing is building a case broadly and certainly homing in on rudy and anyone else who may have been involved in whatever conspiracy that the prosecutors say was at work here. >> i get what they say or believe they have to see publicly. there was a subpoena delivered delivered to giuliani's consulting firm. wouldn't his lawyers know about it? >> right. they would know by now. >> they would know by now from another lawyer if they hadn't seen it personal. he says he's done nothing wrong. that's what he told "the wall street journal." all they have to do is ask me. there's an effort to spread as many lies about me as possible so i'm not credible when i continue to reveal all the massive evidence and then he goes on to make an unfounded

allegation against the bindens. this is the trump justice department investigating the president's personal attorney. help me counselor, first, number one how serious is it? and number two, imagine if obama were president or hillary clinton or president. when the president is asked this question, he says yes. either the president's current lawyers or rudy's lawyers go to the president and say why don't we issue a statement and say this relationship is on pause. we have no contact, we're not doing work together until this matter is resolved. you can say you believe he's innocent, but why does the president remain in this embrace with giuliani? >> i think they're trying to preserve some argument that they have privileged conversations to the extent -- yeah. i don't think that that would be -- i think that would be a pierceable assertion of a privilege because it sounds from all the different things that

rudy giuliani is involved in with the president, including going to ukraine and trying to dig up political derogatory information on the bidens, that would not actually be privileged information. but i think perhaps they like to keep him closer to the president, have the appearance of him being in the inner circle, and have at least the argument to make that thinks communications with the president are privileged. >> and so here's a little bit from "the wall street journal." the subpoena is the clearest indication yet that the investigators are investigating giuliani's consulting work. he the subpoenas also sought information on a company cofounded by mr. parnas. tod then giuliani lobbied the justice department on his behalf. and he's out on television and on twitter saying hunter biden's

swampy, help me. >> right. this is the height of swampiness, the idea that because you're rudy giuliani and your close to the president, you can get these meetings at the justice department, that's not what donald trump campaigned on. and so i think this is a problem for the justice department, by the way. >> it's not what donald trump campaigned on. forgive me more interrupting. is ethical anyway? >> it is a web of conflicts. i mean, for a lawyer -- first of all, he's doing legal work, consulting work, political work, personal political favors, and politicize hackry. it is a complete web of conflicts of interest. >> even if he was standing alone on an island, but this is just like the michael cohen situation. it is happening in the middle of a broader scandal that the president and rudy giuliani are involved in, the impeachment

inquiry. the political concerns for the president as incorporates hone in on whatever rudy giuliani's personal and financial problems might be, what does that do to other information that is potentially damaging for the president? >> one of my favorite lines the president said is rudy giuliani finds corruption wherever he goes. you can read that in so many ways. i just want to get this in. i think this is anthony scaramucci trying to defend or at least buffer his friend, rudy giuliani. >> to quote him when he was a prosecutor, when you open up the window, you hear clip clop outside, it's a horse, not a zebra. there's bad stuff going on. i pray for him and his family. i'm not going to come on the show and rail about the mayor because he's a close personal friend. but here's what i don't like about the whole thing. we're no longer taking an objective standard to what's going on. >> law school must be much cooler than journalism classes. we don't get clickity clack.

>> remember what happened with michael cohen. the president separated himself from his former attorney and then ended up flipping on him and testifying before congress. so clearly that could also be part of the calculus keeping rudy giuliani close. what i find interesting is it shows the ukraine controversy that the democrats aren't investigating right now, there's a whole other side of the story. i have heard from democrats who want to get into the financial side, the financial underpinings, what was giuliani doing, was he benefiting himself? if they go down that route, you mentioned a tangle of webs, and there's this other political risk that if it turns out that rudy giuliani was doing this all himself and trying to manipulate the president, maybe it helps the republicans to say rudy was freelancing and it doesn't help their case. >> the president is not in charge of his own government argument has been used before this other cases.

>> and gordon sondland's testimony counters that argument. >> so does the july 25th call. >> he was working with rudy, he was out of government and he said multiple times everybody knew what was going on. >> the president says read the transcript. he told the president of ukraine rudy is my guy. the secretary of the navy has harsh words for the commander in chief. re's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

$$9.95? no way.? $9.95? that's impossible. hi, i'm jonathan, a manager here at colonial penn life insurance company, to tell you it is possible. if you're age 50 to 85, you can get life insurance with options starting at just $9.95 a month. okay, jonathan, i'm listening. tell me more. just $9.95 a month for colonial penn's number one most popular whole life insurance plan. there are no health questions to answer and there are no medical exams to take. your acceptance is guaranteed. guaranteed acceptance? conflicts of interest kwlirkts e is locked in for your lifetime, so it will never go up. sounds good to me, but at my age, i need the security of knowing it won't get cancelled as i get older. this is lifetime coverage

as long as you pay your premiums. it can never be cancelled, call now for free information. you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. use this valuable guide to record your important information and give helpful direction about your final wishes to your loved ones. and it's yours free. it's our way of saying thank you just for calling. so call now. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena® audrey's on it. eating right and 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 can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. so it could help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. and it lowers a1c. 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.

on it...with jardiance. here, it all starts withello! hi!... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! wifi up there? uhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your local xfinity store today.

topping our political radar today, more tension between congress and the trump administration. house oversight committee filing a lawsuit against the attorney general william barr and the commerce secretary, wilbur ross today, trying to force them to hand over documents about the administration's push to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. the committee chairwoman, caroline maloney says they have not produced a single document in response to the subpoenas since the supreme court ruled against them back in june, and the house held them in contempt in july. a new u.n. climate report warns the 2015 paris agreement isn't doing enough to curb global warming. emissions must be cut 7.6% a

year for the next decade. that means participating countries need to cut emissions at five times the current rates agreed to in those paris accords. the ousted navy secretary, richard spencer firing back at his former boss, the president. he was fired by marke esper. in an interview with cbs after leaving the pentagon monday, harsh words for the commander in chief. >> what message does that send to the troops? >> what message does it send? >> that you can get away with things. we have to have good order and insulin. it's the backbone of what we do. i don't think he understands the definition of a war fighter. a war fighter is a profession of arms, and a profession of arms has standards. >> officially announcing the cancellation of the review board, meaning he will be allowed to retire as a navy s.e.a.l. talked a little bit about this

yesterday too, but on the way out, normally people say -- bite their tongue. spencer, commander in chief doesn't understand, doesn't have standards. >> an extraordinary interview with david martin of cbs outside the pentagon. it is extraordinary. one of the only trump officials i can think of that has given an "a" departure interview like that. might be speaking for many of them certainly with his letter. >> i think it underscores what we've already known since the departure of jim mattis, which is the deep frustration in the military and in the pentagon, especially the sort of top ranks of the pentagon in terms of what he tells the military to do. that's been a real tension point in this administration, more than i can remember of any other. it's always there, there's always some tension between the president and military, but this is really remarkable. >> president trump's facebook campaign has one certain topic

in mind. where people go to learn about their medicare options before they're on medicare. come on in. you're turning 65 soon? yep. and you're retiring at 67? that's the plan! it's also a great time to learn about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. here's why...medicare part b doesn't pay for everything. this part is up to you. a medicare supplement plan helps pay for some of what medicare doesn't. call unitedhealthcare insurance company today to request this free decision guide. and learn about the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. selected for meeting their high standards of quality and service. this type of plan lets you say "yes" to any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients.

do you accept medicare patients? i sure do! so call unitedhealthcare today and ask for your free decision guide. oh, and happy birthday... or retirement... in advance. ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home.

life isn't a straight line. things happen. and sometimes you can find yourself heading in a new direction. but at fidelity, we help you prepare for the unexpected with retirement planning and advice for what you need today and tomorrow. because when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward.

a new cnn reporting on an issue central to the impeachment inquiry. the ukraine military aid freeze. the house budget committee says it now has possession of trump administration documents related to how that hold on milled aitad took place.

what do the documents tell us? >> it provides interesting dates a as that crucial military aid was withheld. there have been a lot of questions about why the president's demand for ukraine to announce investigations that could help him politically. there was a conference call on july 18th announcing this aid would be withheld in a conference call that stunned career officials and the top diplomat from ukraine, bill taylor. but we're now learning first time that was actually documentation for withholding this aid came on july 25th. why is that a notable date? that's the same day purporeside trump had that conversation with president zelensky of ukraine and president trump urged him to open investigations into the bidens and pursue this theory about ukraine being involved in interfering in the 2016 election. the president has that call on

july 25th. that evening a career official comes in, signs this documentation withholding this aid for the first time. now, afterwards, according to this summary of the documents, afterwards there were more signatures placed to withhold the aid going forward. that political appointee, nickel duff signed off on holding off additional aid to ukraine. on august 3rd there were more signatures placed through the course of the following days. on august 29th, duffey signed another letter that released a more sizable portion of the aid on weekly chunks. that date is the date after that political article that came out that said the aid was withheld for ukraine. that prompted a lot of concerns from senior officials in the ukrainian government and the

like, and that forced the administration and top diplomats in ukraine to try to explain what was going on with the withholding of aid. but the aid continued to be withheld, and ultimately the aid was released and according to this document, september 12th was the date the aid was released. democrats say this is a violation of federal law that essentially requires money to be spent. that did not happen. ear "t" omb have said they have followed all the laws. we're awaiting comment from the office of management and budget but we're learning more about the behind-the-scenes deliberations and the potentially tie to the july 25th call. >> details that both answer some questions and yet raise many others. manu raju, appreciate you coming from the hill. it tells you there was a week before this was verbally ordered and somebody put it in writing. that's where congress will get

its backup saying we passed a law. you can't just do this on the fly and say "no." what else are we learning. >> i agree that it's more details on the time line. when it comes to raising more questions, i mean, it's just another reminder of the fact that democrats still don't have first-hand knowledge from mulvaney or from the omb director who actually made that direction to hold the aid and why he did so. we know that it was unusual and unorthodox and testimony has shown that omb took this decision out of the hands of a career employee, put it in the hands of a political person. but we heard testimony, people say they believe it was sort of leverage on this investigation in ukraine. but we haven't heard from people like mick mulvaney who actually were -- he was the one who directed the aid be held or the omb director. >> the president said in a tweet this morning he would love for these people to testify. >> so would democrats. >> it's right there on the internet. >> of course he doesn't want

them to testify. i think it raises more questions. this does very little to advance the public's understanding of what happened, but it does begin to show a pattern that this was a methodical decision inside the white house. >> until they can prove otherwise, they suggest it was a reflex decision. and then a week later they realize we need to have documentation. somehow this has to be in writing or we'll get in trouble. up next, new ads in iowa. guess what, they're going to have election from today and we'll know who won. red 410 quess in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room.

applebee's new sizzlin' entrées. now starting at $9.99.

$$9.95? no way.? $9.95? that's impossible. hi, i'm jonathan, a manager here at colonial penn life insurance company, to tell you it is possible. if you're age 50 to 85, you can get life insurance with options starting at just $9.95 a month. okay, jonathan, i'm listening. tell me more. just $9.95 a month

for colonial penn's number one most popular whole life insurance plan. there are no health questions to answer and there are no medical exams to take. your acceptance is guaranteed. guaranteed acceptance? i like guarantees. keep going. and with this plan, your rate is locked in for your lifetime, so it will never go up. sounds good to me, but at my age, i need the security of knowing it won't get cancelled as i get older. this is lifetime coverage as long as you pay your premiums. it can never be cancelled, call now for free information. you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. use this valuable guide to record your important information and give helpful direction about your final wishes to your loved ones. and it's yours free. it's our way of saying thank you just for calling. so call now.

too many after-parties. new neutrogena® bright boost with dullness-fighting neoglucosamine. boosts cell turnover by 10 times for instantly brighter skin. bright boost neutrogena®. ( ♪ ) only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief.

tylenol®. let's end the show to discuss new developments out in iowa. ten weeks from yesterday iowa kicks it off ten weeks from today. we will know who the iowa caucus winner s. -- is. >> the new leader who can on day one stand with our allies, know them by their first names, and have them know there will be no question about the word of the next president of the united states. >> it's not the only new ad. elizabeth warren says, no, look at me. >> we're in the middle of a climate crisis. but we can lead the global effort to face down this threat if we take bold action now. >> one more, bernie sanders says forget those two. look at me. >> bernie fights for the average joe, that's the thing i like

about him the most. he's not there for wall street or hollywood or big oil or big pharma or big anybody. it's big us. >> just interesting the different strategies. biden says close your eyes, i'm a president. bernie, like blue-collar. all of them are trying to appeal to their supporters, but this is what joe biden is trying to do of all those. his is a bit of a -- there's an electability argument. remember this, i don't need on-the-job training or whatever. but bernie sanders, the most interesting thing is he's not in his ad very much at all. but the validater is a man from iowa who is a supporter, but not a typical bernie sanders supporter. when i go to rales i see kids in college. he's trying to tell iowa voters, no, no, other voters like me and it's okay if you do as well. >> the sanders ad is interesting because it's relentlessly on message like the sanders

campaign has always been. but for the first time you're hearing it not in sanders' voice, you're hearing the same message briepis repeated by an average joe. >> it reminds me your optimism is wonderful about the fact that you think we're going to know the day after the iowa caucus who wins, but i remind you, we could be in a recount, an iowa recount. you never know. >> even if it's close, if there's no clear winner, that is part of dynamic. it's interesting that it's this close. the candidates know we have to spend our money. >> yeah. clearly with biden and warren they're very much sticking to the message they've had the whole time, warren being this sort of policy wonk, talking about climate change and biden saying, look, i'm already a leader. but the change with bernie, he's expanding his base or say it's more than the bernie bros that are behind me. we'll see if it works. >> buttigieg spent more than that. he's at $5 million.

warren just shy of $1 million in iowa this week. thank you so much "inside politics" today. see you here tomorrow. have a great afternoon. under way right now, mr. president, you're not a king. that a federal judge ruling that a key witness in the impeachment inquiry must testify, which blows a whole in the administration's claim of absolute immunity. a swing state democrat suggests another punishment other than impeachment for president trump and then walks it back. plus, the pressure builds on rudy giuliani as a subpoena suggests prosecutors are looking into his businesses. and 24 hours after pedaling the president's conspiracy theory, a republican senator admits that he was wrong but then floats another conspiracy.