it, neither could bernie. jeanne moos. cnn, new york. and thank you for joining us. anderson starts now. what did the president know about the ukraine whistle-blower complaint and when did he know it? john berman here in for anderson. tonight new reporting that says he knew as much as a week before he finally released the frozen military aid to ukraine and weeks before he said this to his ukraine fixer gordon sondland about what he wanted from kyiv. >> i say to the ambassador in response, i want nothing. i want nothing. i want no quid pro quo. tell zelensky -- president zelensky to do the right thing. so here it my answer. i want nothing. i want nothing. i want no quid pro quo.

tell zelensky to do the right thing. then he says, this is the final word from the president of the united states. i want nothing. thank you, folks. >> so according to the new reporting in "the new york times" when he said that, he already had known for more than a week, maybe two, that the whistle-blower was about to make out -- point out the very thing you just heard the president take pains to deny, a quid pro quo. it might explain why the president not known as a great experts in the classic was showing off latin. here is the times lead. president trump had already been briefed upon a whistle-blower complaint about about his dealings with ukraine when he unfroze military aid for the country in september according to two people familiar with the matter. cnn political analyst and "new york times" white house correspondent maggie haberman shares the buy line. joining us on the phone. it's a special night whoa you ask in all sincerity what did the president know and we did he

know it. >> john, thanks for having me. as you laid out we reported tonight the president was briefed by the white house counsel and the national security council lawyer john eisenberg in august that -- about the fact that the whistle-blower complaint existed, the whistle-blower complaint talked about as -- as we know now not just the president phone call with president zelensky from july 25th but also the question of freezing the military aid. and it's not significant not just because as you say the aid was unfrozen -- i think it was less than two weeks later, roughly then, but also the president was aware of this certainly when this happened, but also when he spoke to gordon sondland, the ambassador to the eu, who testified that he had a conversation with the president where the president said, you know, he was trying to get clarity on whether there was a -- some sort of a holding up of the aid to try to pressure ukraine on investigations. and the president said i want

nothing, i want nothing, no quid pro quo. and then something about wanting ukraine to do the right thing. the words quid pro quo were not part of the public vernacular on this at that point. when the president was briefed on this when when he spoke to gordon sondland. it's a notable phrase. and it just -- any pinpointing of clarity we can get about where the president was in all this is significant. >> any sense of the detail in which he was informed when he was told about this in august? >> no, and we addressed that in the story. it's not clear how much cipollone and eisenberg got into with him. it's possible they presented only top lines. i do not believe they told him who the whistle-blower is. we have no reporting indicating that. and based on the fact a number of white house aides seemed to be in the dark about all of that, you know, after this became public doesn't indicate that. but, again, it did -- it's unusual for a couple of reasons, john, one of which is they're

briefing the president on a the complaint that the president is the subject of. on the one hand this is unprecedented right. i don't think we had an incident that i know of of a whistle-blower complaint about the commander in chief. and so it's not really clear where this happens. and the reason they were briefing him was they were explaining that they didn't think they had to share this with congress and they were seeking an opinion from the justice department on whether they had to. so that's the context in which this conversation was taking place. and i think that their argument would be that there was no press den for this. i think it's for incriminate critics of the administration is raises question about whether it was appropriate to be sharing the existence of the complaint with the subject of it. >> and raises that question. it raises all kinds of questions about the time line of a series of events that happened, including the ones you talked about. and then there is the confidential he had with the republican senator ron johnson, days after it turns out he had been briefed about the

whistle-blower complaint. how would senator johnson describe that conversation. >> senator johnson described it that basically he reach out to the president. he had heard complaints about in. and he reached out to the president to try to understand, you know, what it is he wanted. and was he seeking essentially some version of what had been described. and johnson heard and the president had a reaction to the extent that, you know, no, no, that's not true. who told you that? >> but finance again it it puts a final point on the fact that he was aware of this as he was being asked and asking the question who told you that is worth noting given that at that point there was a whistle-blower complaint that at least some people had knowledge of in the administration. >> indeed. makes you rethink everything we know that the president said during that time fragment. terrific reporting thank you for being with us. have a great thanksgiving. >> you too. >> senator richard blum blumenthal a democratic member of the snt judiciary committee. the president had been briefed on the whistle-blower complaint

in august, that is before he unfroze the military aid to ukraine. so just that alone is this an example of two plus two equaling four again. >> it's bigger than two plus two equaling four. this really terrific report i think shows why the president was in effect objecting to the potential charges about him before the charges were made, that clip that you showed where he says no quid pro quo. and it was well before that phrase entered the public lexicon. but it also raises the very, very profoundly important question about whether the president participated in attempting to conceal that whistle-blower report, as both the department of justice, the office of legal counsel and his own legal adviser said they should do. and only because the inspector general of the intelligence community insisted that whistle-blower report be made public was it evenly given

public light. >> well this was a white house counsel, the white house counsel reviewed the decision and asked the justice department. ultimately they said don't turn it over. why would the president be responsible for that unless he ordered it which we have no evidence of. >> there is direct evidence as yet whether or not he ordered it. but there is circumstantial evidence in the timing of his release of the aid, not until september 11th. only because of protests and i was one of the senators who urged that the aid be released. but we had no idea about the whistle-blower report. the president evidently did and that probably was a key reason that he released the aid, after learning that there was this very, very important whistle-blower complaint. so essentially what it shows is consciousness of guilt. >> you were a prosecutor for years. i was going to ask about that. using the frayed quid pro quo before anyone else uses the phrase quid pro quo, that you think shows consciousness of guilt?

>> combined with other circumstances, absolutely, if i were arguing in case to a jury, i would say that we had enough evidence even before this report to rest my case. but here is another piece of evidence that is very powerful that can be used in building the case. and saying that it should go forward toward impeachment. and let me just add, if the president wants to tell the american people about his innocence, he ought to come forward. >> well. >> and talk to congress about it in public under oath rather than hiding behind a computer screen. >> he has an opportunity or at least people have an opportunity next week. the house judiciary committee is getting in the game here. they are holding public impeachment hearings. and what they're going to do first is talk about the constitutionality or what constitutes an impeachability offense and have dollar zlars in to talk about. but the spt welcome to go invited himself if he wants to. but it's more likely he sends

his legal testimony there. what do you expect them to say. >> i think what they'll say is that all of these facts, whatever they are, in the legal history here don't constitute an impeach. able offense. but clear i there was bribery, which is specifically mentioned in the constitution as an impeachable offense. the president offered to perform a legal responsibility, namely releasing that military aid, in exchange for sog of value and benefit to him. >> except the republicans say there was no explicit promise of the release of military aid and in exchange. there is no recording of the president saying out loud even though witness after witness say it's their understanding that was the case. >> well as a prosecutor, i used to sometimes wish for recordings and videos of crimes. they're not all that common. what you have is circumstantial evidence. and the powerful witnesses that were on display last week, they had nothing to gain.

and everything to lose. they were career civil servants who were risking everything and consistently described what the president said about these events and what his expectations were. and where you began in this conversation,s two plus two equals four. that's what you argue to a jury. and ultimately the senate is the jury here. and the court of public opinion. >> senator richard blumenthal, thank you for being with us tonight. >> thank you. >> more perspectivy senior political analyst david gergen. jeffrey toobin. usa today column invite kirstin powers. former trump campaign strategist and cnn political commentator and a washington corporate lobbyist. jeff, the timing here has always seemed convenient. and there are always those noting the president released the aid after the white house knew of the whistle-blower report and same thing with the quid pro quo. but now you have a report that says he was specifically told.

>> right. >> specifically told. >> why in matters -- why this matters is that one of the defenses has always been that was raised in the intelligence committee hearings is what's the big deal? they released the aid. and the president of ukraine never did the investigation. how could there be an exchange if the president of ukraine never came through? what this story establishes is the reason he released the aid is he got caught. he got caught in this illegal or improper or wildly inappropriate enterprise of trading taxpayer money for dirt on joe biden. he got caught. that's what the whistle-blower letter says. and that's why he released the aid because he didn't want to be caught anymore. he wanted an excuse to get right with, you know, a situation where he had been caught. >> you know, kirsten it's

interesting. this is one more the piece of evidence not in fibrin of congress here but a report here more evidence on top of a mountain of evidence. >> yeah. >> what does that matter. >> i think the more -- you know the more evidence you can get -- i mean it supports pretty much everything that we have already seen. but i think it's really important because, you know, you have the president insisting, i said there was no quid pro quo and somehow that's meaningful. now we know why he was using the phrase which always seems strange because it's not how anybody talks frankly. specifically not how he talks. the fact that he knew he had been accused of quid pro quo because he had seen this report i think is meaningful. i think also just extremely troubling that he was being told about this whistle-blower report and that it was the decision of the white house that they were going to keep it from congress when under normal circumstances that would be sent to the relevant committees in congress that have oversight. and so there is just a real

lawlessness and just obvious corruption to this kind of behavior. >> you know, david dwergen, i want to read you the text exchange between the top u.s. diplomat in ukraine bill taylor and sondland. >> tailor writes i said i think it's crazy to withhold critical assistance. >> i believe bill i believe urine correct about the intentions. president president has been critical clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. the president is trying to evaluate whether ukraine is truly going to adopt a transparent reforms. president zelensky promised during his campaign. sondland testified that's what the president told him. we heard the president reading out loud from that note card. but of course that's what the president told him because he knew he was being accused of it by a whistle-blower. >> yeah, but -- and your the point john is what? i still don't understand where the connection is- -- the next

us is here -- or anything that shows that the reason the president withheld the money was because -- because of this meeting. there could be, you know, as the president said and others have said, the president was concerned about whether or not the ukrainians would clean up their act, whether or not that was true or not whether other people were kicking in or not. jeff maggie's reporting goes far but it doesn't go as to your far as you'd like to see. finally to note quickly. apparently senator blume that you will forpgt he is a jorp in the upcoming trial. seems like no need to have a trial in his mind he clearly states the president is guilty. >> i will only note that jurors loo like linsey graham have said they don't want to look at the evidence or watching watch the hearing because any decided the president is innocent. >> right, exactly. so -- so john, just to come back, this is a political endeavor, i don't think that

after all of what we have seen in the house, the polling -- nobody was swayed house members on either side aren't swayed. if anything some of the democrats may be swayed in terms of seeing the polling hearing from americans saying the president shouldn't be impeached. >> evidence no of that. >> the polling. >> no, no, the polling -- cnn polling shows that 50% of the american people have of americans support impeaching and removing the president. it hasn't changed in two weeks. hasn't fallen. it hasn't risen. it hasn't fallen or risen. >> it's fallen. yeah. >> not the cnn pollman not the cnn poll. >> but -- >> the morning consult pole. >> public opinion -- >> it's fallen it's basically stayed the same across the border board if you average the polls. >> john why do you think -- but john why do you think that the democratic house members are talking about censure now versus impeachment. >> brandi lawrence brought that up and she backed off.

i understand that appropriating. i do. what i'm saying is thatten processes seem to be set here. but they haven't fall. . people haven't backed off impeachment not yet. david gergen, i want to bring you into the conversation. on the idea that david urban brought up there. which is that there isn't a tape recording or there isn't videotape of the president saying i order a quid pro quo, which seems to be the only level of evidence that would move republicans in congress on this. >> well, woe know a lot more if the president weren't stone calling. and the hypocrisy here is that the republicans are claiming there is no direct evidence we don't have the president on tape or doing something that's very direct. and there is a reason for that. and that is the people who talked to the president have all been prevented from testifying. you know, and the president has shut down that part of in inquiry. what we're into is that there is plenty of circumstantial

evidence -- overwhelming circumstantial evidence that supports the notion that for better or worse the president was not moved by the corruption -- overall corruption and in ukraine. that wasn't his point. sondland made the point to holmes. the president is not interested in and doesn't really give a damn about that. what he cares about is the big stuff. and the big stuff is his own survival. i think what we see here is overwhelming evidence -- and this helps to confirm what we learned tonight about the president what he -- what he knew and when he knew it. it helps to confirm he was conducting a very secretive and well covered-up sbrpds to force or bully the ukrainians into digging up dirt on biden and hillary. and he knew it was not going to last forever. the pressure began to build up from within the administration against the withholding of aid. he was getting pressure from the

hill and along comes the whistle-blower and that trying reported him to lift the -- did to lift the hold. i think that's very, very plain. but we have to break down the stone wall if we want the full story. >> stand by, friends. a lot more to talk about, including transcripts of closed-door testimony from the white house insider. and just how concerned and upset officials in his department were about the freeze on aid to ukraine. and later more breaking news in a 360 exclusive, lordy, there are tapes one of rudy giuliani's lieutenants and alleged criminals lev parnas and the photos and videos that his lawyer says congressional investigators now have. geico makes it easy to get help when i need it. with licensed agents available 24-7, 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!

the holidays are here and so is t-mobile's newest, most powerful signal. 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. skip to the good part with alka-seltzer plus. now with 25% more concentrated power. nothing works faster for powerful cold relief. oh, what a relief it is! so fast!

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. even as maggie haberman was breaking the lead story about what president trump knew and when about the whistle explore report. we were getting transcripts of closed door impeachment testimony on the ukraine affair by a white house budget official.

mark sandy told lawmakers that two officials at the office of management and budget had left jobs and both had concerns that military aid to ukraine was held up. back with jeffrey gergen appear jeffrey koob toobin a devastated urban process. it's not a big deal says the. but when two government officials quit over concerns that's kind of a big deal. >> again it's a cumulative set of facts. this alone doesn't prove anything. but it's yet another fact that shows how out of the ordinary in was, how improper it was, and how the people responsible to actually follow the law were upset about it. >> and mick mulvaney gave the famous news conference mot just acting chief of staff but still has authority over omb. he told the country we should all get over it. but people within his agency, omb they clearly weren't getting over it, kirsten. >> no, and i mean it's not, the

fact that you had multiple people quit over this i think is important information. but there was also a lot of concerns, a memo written, you know concerns that this violates the law, that the -- there was pretty much nobody other than donald trump -- according to david his concern here, right, was that ukraine was so corrupt and therefore that's why this money had to be withheld. and yet nobody who actually worked on the issue has testified that that was the case. and in fact i think it was mark sandy who testified saying that they had made a lot of advancements in terms of anti-corruption, and that they had been cleared to receive the aid. and, by the way, to david's point -- or claim, if that was what president trump was interested in why did he never bring that up in the call? he brought up crowd strike, a conspiracy theory and brought up the bidens. so there is no evidence that the president actually was -- was holding up the money because of

corruption. i think we have now have more information from omb showing how disturbed they were about it. >> dave gergen it's interesting next week the house judiciary committee holding public hearings what constitutes an impeachable offense. and by the rules the president can go and send his lawyers to take part in the hearings and can ask questions. what do you think the white house should do here? what do you think the white house attorneys should do as part of the hearing? >> listen i've said this -- jeff and kristen maffe heard before as well as david. i don't think -- again i don't think the president is under any obls to prove himself innocent here. the house they made the decision want to bring impeachment charges and bring the charges. they need to bring the evidence prove that the president did these things. he is under no obligation. and more ever there is going to be an upcome senate trial following in white house whatever you -- the hearings, and if i was -- if i was the white house i would hold back everything until the actual -- the actual trial.

>> i think david's proposing what has been the white house strategy throughout which is basically to say the whole thing is a kangaroo court, a waist of time, the public hates it but never engaging on facts established. >> but that's an interesting strategy wait and see if they show up. >> i don't think it's just to be quiet. david is suggesting you say nothing. i think you will hear complaints this is a kangaroo court but you will never hear the white house engage the facts. >> david gergen last point here, the house democrats are writing -- the house intelligence committee is writing up the report on this and judiciary will the decide what are articles of impeachment and there is the ongoing debate whether to stick to ukraine or expand to some of the mueller regions. what do you think they should do? >> expand. i think it's important for the country to make a decision based on the whole body of evidence about the conduct of this presidency. not simply the phone call. i do think it would strengthen

their case and i think the country really needs some sort of way to come to grips and peace with all of this that justice has been done. and that will be done through transparency and going the full -- did the expanding -- >> john. >> david we are taking a we can quick break and much coming up including the breaking news sclouf new reporting on the other side of the break that could spell trouble for rudy giuliani and president trump. donald trump failed as a businessman.

he borrowed billions and left a trail of bankruptcy and broken promises.

he hasn't changed. i started a tiny investment business, and over 27 years, grew it successfully to 36 billion dollars. i'm tom steyer and i approve this message. i'm running for president because unlike other candidates, i can go head to head with donald trump on the economy, and expose him fo what he is: a fraud and a failure. plaque psoriasis uncoverth clearer skin that can last. in fact, tremfya® was proven superior to humira® in providing significantly clearer skin. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya®. uncover clearer skin that can last. janssen can help you explore cost support options.

hey. ♪hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi

and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today. more breaking news to that spell more troubles for president trump as well as possibly his lawyer rudy giuliani. in a statement the lawyer for

one of giuliani's former associates arrested on campaign finance vials told 360 this. joseph a bondi confirmed to cnn that his client turned over photos, videos and other materials to congressional investigators but declined to detail the contents. mr. bondi also confirmed that mr. parnas is complying with the intelligence committee subpoena to the fullest extent possible, notwithstanding limited access to mr. parnas as phones computers and records as seized by federal prosecutors at the time of his arrest. now in a separate conversation bondy's lawyer told 3360, the material including photos and video is more extensive than anything the public may have seen on the internet. these are some of the pictures that are out there. on the internet. o of parnas and his associate igor frum within president trump and rudy giuliani. back with us david gergen jeffrey toobin kirsten powers and david geshen.

a question how significant is this. >> it obviously depends what's in the documents. what seems to be going on here is that one of the two defendants, lev, looks to be making a deal, looks to be trying. >> trying. >> trying to make a deal where he either gets lesser charges or no charges. that seems unlikely now he's been indicted and potentially turning into a witness. would he be a witness against rudy giuliani? would he have incriminating material? we don't know about. but that seems to be the back drop to what's going on. but in fairness to giuliani we need to -- we don't know what's in the documents and photos. we can't say they're incriminating. >> david urban, one thing that's interesting, republicans i talk to about rudy giuliani i will ask them how far out on a limb are you willing to go for rudy giuliani and all this? they base country say not far at all. how toxic is rudy giuliani?

how much of a problem is he to the trump presidency? >> well, look, i think the president and rudy are obviously very close friends. so, you know, i don't think the president is ever walking away from rudy giuliani and i don't think rudy giuliani is ever going to walk away from the president. i don't think that's a question that has to be answered. just to quickly to david gergen made a point about having lots and lots of different articles of impeachment. you know the point that i just want point i want to make and have people i think about there are 31 house democrats that in seats that donald trump carried handily and they want. knowing the senate acquits by all accounts are those 31 democrats are they feeling confident going to the floor and just how many proechls in courage will there be on the articles of impeachment snowing at a that senate is quitting and running free election in about ten months? that's a point that's -- you may have a lot of articles but let's see how many people vote for it. >> that's a political consideration.

also a politicsle consideration for susan collins and cory gardner and senators who my be running for sfeets in states democrats won. >> snoot senate's not losing to. >> but politics at plate for a lot of people casting votes. david gergen to the issue of rudy giuliani, you've worked in many administrations, you have seen administrations distance themselves from people. based on what we know about rudy giuliani, should this administration start working hard to create some serious distance? >> i think the president has already started that today with his comments that he didn't direct rudy giuliani's operations in ukraine and which everybody else said basically he did. and he said ealso said i don't know what he is doing out there he is a warrior as if that excuses everything. but he said he goes out for a lot of reasons, some of which have nothing to do with me. you already feel he is

maneuvering to put a little light between the two of them. i want to make briefly a couple of other points. you know, the polls are not just a private disappointment to democrats but also should be private disappointment to republicans who thought -- if the democrats went down the road of impeachment it was going to blow them away. that didn't happen in the polls either. that's true. but the last point is, with this continuing flow of new information, new facts, new insights there ha has to be a mechanism the intelligence committee or the house can have to remain open to keep the window open after the time of the votes come in. what if new evidence comes in that really does show something that -- that krincinches the ca. >> you can always add articles of impeachment. you can keep on doing the process. nothing says you have to be finished once you vote on certain articles you can't vote on others coming up. but democrats have to decide to do that. kirsten powers to you, lev

parnasen a igor fruman thoos these guys are characters. are rudy giuliani and the president pictures. but the lawyer says he has information that devin nunes is tide up in in as well. how do you see this playing out? >> well, i mean, i think it's like what jeffrey said it dpentds on what they have and can deliver. they also claim they at a dinner with the president had told him -- they were the ones really driving the smear campaign against marie yovanovitch and they had told him she was working against his interests. so, i mean, maybe if they did in fact have recordings of something that could be meaningful. i don't think -- well, i want to say two things one to david's point. i completely disagree about giuliani. i think trump would throw him under the bus in a split second and wouldn't think twice about it. i don't think however that even

throwing him under the bus gets trump out of this because there is too much evidence showing that he was driving this bus, basically. >> sure. >> but i think he would absolutely do it. >> berman can you refresh my memory what's the name of the company the two gentlemen ran. >> fraud guarantee. >> i keep wondering. >> what was the second choice name worse than fraud guarantee? i don't know. >> jeffrey toobin david gergen kirsten power processes. david urban thank you for being with us thank you happy thanksgiving to all of you. >> president trump drops another swear word at a rally talking about democratic investigations we'll have more on the polling we've been talking about. and some surprising splits it reveals on who wants the president impeached.

♪ ♪ experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment.

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. ♪

moments ago at a rally in sunrise, florida, president trump had a single colorful word to describe all the impeachment news lately. and if you have kids, cover their ears. >> and now the same maniacs are pushing the deranged impeachment -- think of this. impeachment. impeachment. a witch hunt. the same as before. and they're pushing that

impeachment witch hunt, and a lot of bad things are happening to them. because you see what's happening in the polls? everybody said that's really bull shit. >> keeping them honest, according to a new cnn poll and with all due respect, that's bullshit. after five days of public testimony half the country, half believes the -- believes the president should be impeached and removed from office. 50% are in favor of impeachment and removal, just 43% disagree that he should be impeached and removed. we should point out the number hasn't moved at all since last month's poll. but there is a winding gender gap. 61% of women believed believe he should be impeached and removed up five months since the last poll. joining chief of staff of the rnc and mike sheels and froerk director of the black caucus. both cnn political commentators.

and mike, i understand that the white house and republicans are saying, oh, the support for impeachment and removal hasn't shot up. but just the number of 50%. if 50% of americans want you impeached and removed from office, that's not really good news for a presidency, is it? >> well, john, it's very interesting. i never look at just one poll. i always look at a number of polls. but i also read the cross tops and read the cross tabs of this palm. the poll has sampled into 25% of republicans. and that's no b.s. and so, look, it's not illegitimate poll of the people it was polled i'm sure the numbers are right. but it's got a massive number of independents in it. and when you look at the emerson college poll that came out, another serious poll, the -- whether or not to impeach went down 11 points during the hearings. the gallup poll another serious poll came out and literally bounced back to where impeachment was before the

hearings began. >> but i'll say, mike -- i guess what i'll say you take the totality of the polls and everyone does the average, they haven't moved or barely moved and if they have moved 538 shows the average show nas support for impeachment and removal crept you will you a albeit slightly let's take the ofrmg. every i can shoit cite i write writer ipso you can site one going down if it hasn't moved to have 50% wanting you out of office i'm asking that's not a comfortable place to be. >> look first of all i don't buy that there is 50% that want him thrown out of office to but to accept the point you make this has been i believe very, very bad for the democrats. they've had the time at bat. they made the case. and, look, i highly, highly recommend seriously everyone watching this go watch a -- the clinton affair a six party series on a and e.

i worked for newt ginrich in the 90s when will bill clinton was impeached and so many parallels. we went down a path convinced that we had to uphold the law and had to impeach the president. the republican was forcing us there. we paid a political price for it. democrats are getting'd ready to -- we'll see. >> they haven't moved numbers. >> a lot of democrats are will pay a price. >> clinton's approval rating wagons in the 60s but i take your point. angela this is a ror shack test. >> by virtue of the fact that my colleague couldn't answer the question, the answer is this is not good for the president. i want not good just like he can get as many black folks as he want to stand behind him at a rally with off brand black voices for trump t-shirt there is no black voices for trump. >> 34% of support in the emerson poll. >> so, mike when you talk i let

have you the floor even when it was a bull shit. let's be for real for a moment and the for real moment is this. donald trump has done something wrong. he has been doing things wrong. donald trump has several conflicts of interest he did wrong with the ukraine issue. donald trump did wrong with the mueller report issue. we can go on and on. what's happening is people's conscientiouses are getting pricked they understand how grave the danger the country is in. you can go through cross tabs and the fact that enough republicans weren't polled. but here is what we know. here is what we know. donald trump's impeachment -- on support numbers are unprecedented or if you're a donald trump tweet they're unprecedented, mike that's something the republican party has to account for. it's high time -- i've criticized the democratic party for this. it's high time we do right by the law that we do right by the country. and they're finally doing that

with impeachment proceedings. let's get on the other side of the judiciary hearing and see what happens. >> i will say one thing out of tonight proving polls show that opinions are solidly entrenched i think we showed that angela, mike, thank you for being with us. >> john bolton's presence on social media giving rise to a central question, what in the world is he up to? that's when 360 continues. at fidelity, we make sure you have a clear plan

to cover the essentials 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. more exciting than than getting a lexus... giving one. this is unbelievable! >>it really is. the lexus december to rembember sales event lease the 2020 rx 350 all wheel drive for $419 a month for 27 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

skip to the good part with alka-seltzer plus. now with 25% more concentrated power. nothing works faster for powerful cold relief. oh, what a relief it is! so fast!

time to check in with chris for "cuomo prime time." >> there's only one image but made of many, many pixelations. so, too, will be the investigation of this president. tonight, two pieces that matter. if we were wondering why that

ai aid got rushed through at the last second, as if we didn't know enough already, the whistle-blower come planplaint told to the white house and the president was briefed. if you want to know why they released the aid, they have no better answer. and why did an omb senior sfaf r -- staffer see it as wrong. >> we look forward to seeing you in hd tonight. coming up what john bolton is up to on social media. that's next. tremfya® helps adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis uncover clearer skin that can last. in fact, tremfya® was proven superior to humira® in providing significantly clearer skin.

tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya®. uncover clearer skin that can last. janssen can help you explore cost support options. hi. maria ramirez!

mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.

former national security advisers john bolton is teasing media with quotes like this one, it goes without saying our country's commitment to our

national security priorities is under attack from within. america is distracted. our enemies are not. we need to make u.s. national security a priority. what do you think he's doing? >> he's launching a super pac, bolton pac, which is a way to exert influence and make some money. clearly he's getting back into the gail. he does not want to do his civic duty because congress is holding impeachment hearingswe've heard fiona hill say he referred to this ukraine deal as a drug deal. he was clearly opposed to what is going on. trump keeps saying it's all hearsay, you're not hearing from the people in the room. well, bolton was in the room he has an obligation to testify under oath instead of teasing us on social media. >> he is teasing us on social

media. do you have any belief he would want to talk in front of congress under oath? >> i'm doubtdoubtful. he has very strong foreign policy views and i think he championed those views in the white house, even when they were not popular with donald trump. despite all that, at the end of the day, bolton is first and foremost part of the republican partisan. he's been on fox news, he's got the super pac. so i don't think he wants to do anything that would contribute to donald trump's impeachment because that would then burn his social networks, his financial networks, the entire infrastructure that supports john bolton. >> we only have about ten seconds left, but do you think he will say things publicly critical of the president on twitter? >> i don't know about on twitter but he's certainly saying it behind closed doors and i suspect he will for his book for which he's getting $2 million. >> also paid speeches and audiences but not for free under oath before congress and the american people.

max booth, thanks so much. have a happy thanksgiving. >> you, too, john. >> the news continues. it's time to hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." >> welcome to "prime time." why did they release the ukraine aid to them when they did? more than ever the answer seems to be that the people involved knew that congress was on to the scam. by "they" we can definitely include president trump. why? reported the president was briefed about the whistle-blower complaint before he released the ukraine aide, you know, right when he started saying no quid pro quo, no quid pro quo, i want nothing when he had just said the opposite before that. we have two other pieces of the puzzle that make the picture of potential impeachment even more clear. so what do you say, let's get after it. >> this comes from the