shortly. he was hospitalized a few weeks ago for a procedure to relieve pressure on his brain which was successful. and of course as we learn more, we will get that to you. but again he does look forward to returning home soon. thanks for watching us. anderson starts now. good evening. the start of a week filled with things we've simply never seen before including impeachment hearings with the target refusing to take part and that is not all. the house judiciary committee is out with a witness list of day one of proceedings. also late today members of the house intelligence committee got a preview of the majority report on the testimony that they've heard and how republicans put out a 123-page rebuttal. it is sharply at odds with testimony so far as well as with the president's own words. plus the republican senator john kennedy of louisiana is repeating russian talking points in defense of the president. again even after being told they are russian talking points by intelligence officials and

hearing this from the president's own former expert in the field. >> some of you on this committee appear to believe that russia and its security services does not conduct a campaign against our country and that perhaps somehow for some reason ukraine did. this is a fictional narrative perpetrated and propagated by the russian security services themselves. >> we'll talk about that tonight. and lisa page breaking her silence. talking about being accused of treason by the leader of the free world. and if that weren't enough or because it is too much the ridiculist comes back. and once again now hiding behind a stonewall, the white house counsel late yesterday in a letter to chairman jerry nadler called his committee proceedings baseless and highly partisan and saying accordingly under the current circumstances we do not intend to participate in your wednesday hearing. the letter holds open the

possibility of participation in future hearings but to be real, we've heard that song before. whether it is about testifying into the impeachment inquiry or releasing taxes or talking to the mueller investigation or having top officials cooperate with the ukraine probe, the president sings the same tune with the exact same lyrics before doing the exact opposite. >> i would love to speak. i would love to. nobody wants to speak more than me. >> i'd life to have mic go up frankly. >> i'll release my returns. i have no problem with it. >> i would love to speak. i would love to go. nothing i want to do more. >> but the legal people say you could do it now -- >> bill -- >> would you be willing to speak under oath to give your version of -- >> 100%. >> are you going to talk to mueller? >> i'm looking forward to it actually. >> let her release her emails and i'll release my tax returns immediately. >> i like to have the people go up. except one thing. it validates a corrupt

investigation. >> love to but -- you left a pot on the stove and have a term paper to write and ultimately the answer is no if he said so up front would be honest. at this point novel. this evening the president tweeted a word salad on the impeachment inquiry ending with shouldn't be allowed. can we go to supreme court to stop. jim acosta is traveling with the president in london where that tweet originated and where he is meeting with nato allies. jim, clearly he's focused on what is happening at home even though he's over there. >> reporter: definitely. as the president landed he did tweet out his support to that republican prebuttal or rebuttal or whatever you want to call it to the house democrats intelligence committee report on what happened with ukraine and in addition the president was latching on to the comments made by the ukrainian president to "time" magazine and the president said that he felt like

he was treated like a begar in dealing with the white house to try to get the military aid and went on to say the president of ukraine has said i didn't do anything wrong. that is not what he said. in addition he's accusing democrats of trying to commit sabotage because they're holding this hearing on wednesday as he's meeting with nato leaders here in london. would you say it is on his mind and under his skin. >> and talk about what you've learned about the white house participation or lack thereof and they are not cooperating on wednesday. >> reporter: right. they are not there on wednesday. the president won't be there on wednesday. he'll be here in london. but anderson, i talked to a white house official who said at this point the democrats are coming nowhere near meeting their demands when it comes to this criteria that they've laid out that would ensure white house participation. anderson, one of those criteria would be whether or not republicans could be able to call witnesses that they want to see testify which would include

the whistle-blower who started all of this. that is a nonstarter for democrats. it is obviously not going to happen. and so anderson, at this point, the white house is not closed the door on participating in the house impeachment proceedings but it is open just a crack at this point. what they would rather see is the whole process move over to the senate where the republicans are in charge and can set the rules much more so than what they are doing in the house right now. but clearly the president is in no mood to cooperate and a lot of democrats are saying, look, why would they cooperate at this point. that would undermine what the republicans and what the president they've said all along which is that this impeachment proceeding is a hoax and not legitimate by participating they would add legitimacy to the process. >> and again to set the timetable, the intelligence committee, they're expected to vote on the report tomorrow. the republican sponsor the rebuttal, that is out tonight. and proceedings in the judiciary committee that begin on wednesday without presidential cooperation so there is a lot to talk about with our first guest

congresswoman and intelligence member jackie speier. thanks for being with us. this report from republicans, now they are arguing that the pressure that president trump put into the democratic rivals stem from a quote deep-seated genuine and reasonable skepticism of ukraine due to the history of pervasive corruption. what do you say to that? >> i think it's poppycock. and i think it is once again an effort by the president and all of the members of the house and senate on the republican side to try and weave say falsehood into a trueism. it was very clear what the president wanted. and certainly the hearings we had showed how much time and energy the tres amigos, sondland and perry and volker had to tap dance around the meetings with

the president of ukraine because this investigation was critical to them getting aid or getting a meeting at the white house. and it is very true that the president of the united states knew about the whistle-blower in august. and so his lifting the hold on the aid in september was more related to the fact that there was a whistle-blower complaint and that the inspector general had identified it to the intelligence committee although he couldn't tell us what the whistle-blower complaint was about. >> the rebuttal also -- just completely ignores a lot of the evidence that witnesses testified to under oath. and it essentially -- they could have argued well, yes, it wasn't ideal for the president to mention the bidens in that call, the call wasn't great, it wasn't

perfect. but it is not impeachable but they went lock step with the president demanding that they -- they're doing exactly what the president demanded. >> ambassador sondland sat in that hearing room and said, yes, there was a quid pro quo. that was their witness. the appointment by the president of mr. sondland to his post and he's saying there was a quid pro quo. sondland also said the only thing the president is interesting in is something that will benefit himself. he doesn't care about ukraine. so that's pretty damning. and yet the republicans find a way to twist that into something that is once again a falsehood. and they say -- and the president does this too -- if you say something false often enough, it becomes true in their minds. >> the republican report, it is coming out just as the democrats on the house intelligence

committee are finalizing their own report expected to draw probably the exact opposite conclusion the republicans. so what are americans who are watching this at home supposed to believe when you have two competing reports from congress that draw completely conductory conclusions? >> well like barr before the summary came out, the republicans are putting out the rebuttal before the actual document comes out from the intelligence committee. it is intended to confuse the american public. so that they throw up their hands and say, i don't even want to deal with this. and their effective to a certain point but for persons who feel strongly that our democracy is at risk here, they're looking at this and realizing that this is quite dangerous and that is why you saw that there was an increase in support for impeachment by independents after we held the hearings by the intelligence committee and had all of those 12 witnesses

come before us. >> it is kind of creepy that republicans in lockstep would be to willing to essentially try to muddy the waters before this committee report comes out. you would think there would be a way to have just one committee report that has some dissension in it without trying to just basically destroy sworn testimony. >> well, because the republicans aren't acting independent of the president. they are basically taking his talking points and mouthing them and much like devin nunes was trying to create some falsehood by racing over to the white house with this information and racing back when, in fact, it was at the white house the whole time shows you that from the very beginning this is been

orchestrated by the president and the white house. and they are just following orders. and you may ask well why are they doing it? because they care more about being re-elected than they do about the state of the country. and when our national security is at risk, as it is now, when the president can withhold aid like he did to ukraine, again, doing the bidding for russia, it's quite serious. >> the inquiry now moves from the intelligence committee to the judiciary committee. judiciary is very different place than intel. some of the president's most per foeshs defender like gohmert and gaetz all serve on judiciary, how concerns are you about what happens there? >> i think what will happen there is what happened in the intelligence committee. you'll have experts come forward and have constitutional scholars

talk about whether or not this is an impeachable offense and how you would move forward with impeachment. we do have the facts in front of us. we have a whistle-blower complaint that the president himself corroborated with the summary of the phone call that establishes that there was bribery. and so at this point the republicans will make all of the noise that they are able to make but i think the facts speak for themselves. and i feel that it's incumbent on us to make sure that the law is followed here and not the law of donald trump. >> congresswoman speier, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. coming up next, speaking of constitutional scholars from one of the top lawyers and author of a book on item neat katyal joins us. and a woman who said this about the president, my heart drops to my stomach when i realize he's

tweeted about me again. lisa page whose text messages belittling sparked ongoing attacks from the president. she's speaking out. she wanted to move someplace warm. but he wanted snow for the 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! creais back at red lobster.ast with new creations to choose from; like rich, butter-poached maine lobster and crispy crab-stuffed shrimp rangoon. how will you pick just 4 of 10? it won't be easy. better hurry in. before we talk about tax-s-audrey's expecting... new? -twins! ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan.

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! the holidays are here and we want to keep you connected to those you love, with the new iphone 11. hurry into t-mobile today, to get up to four iphone 11's on us. only at t-mobile.

♪ ♪ 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. the zip code you're born into can determine your future. your school. your job. your dreams. your problems. (indistinct shouting) but at the y, we create opportunities for everyone, no matter who you are or where you're from. for a better us, donate to your local y today.

we talked about it before the break with jackie speier, democrats are taking issue with the republican rebuttal or the pre-buttal to the house intelligence committee now completed ukraine report. she called it poppycock. adam schiff also weighing in calling the gop effort intended for an audience of one. meaning the president. saying it ignores the evidence presented of impeachable wrongdoing by the president. and republicans for their part writing the democrat's impeachment inquiry is not outgrowth of serious misconduct but it is a campaign to up end our political system and the democrats are trying to impeach the president based on the assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with the policies and processes.

let's get perspective from neal katyal and just out with a book "impeach, the case against donald trump." the republican's prebuttal report said there is no evidence of extortion or high crime or misdemeanor. your book says the opposite this is simple straightforward case of a core impeachable offense. >> exactly. so, anderson, i wrote the book as a simple guide for americans to understand what is going on. and it begins we asking the question why is impeachment in the constitution and a lot of our founders like eldridge gary said it shouldn't be in there at all because we have reelection campaigns and that should be enough to check a president and others like madison and hamilton said what if you have a president who is beholden to a foreign power or if you have a president that tries to interfere with the reelection. that is the instance of of our

founding for what is an impeachable offense. so i don't quite understand the republicans' report on talking points to say there is zero evidence of this. the president's own transcript or fake transcript or partial transcript said exactly that. and the most important thing for everyone to understand is this is not about impeaching a president. because people have policy differences. for me, i'm aghast at the president's separation policy and i find it immoral but that is not impeachable. and it is high crimes and misdemeanors sand as the book explains this ukraine situation is that. >> what is a high crime or misdemeanor. >> so our founders used the phrase treason bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. so bribery we know is one of them. and that is exactly -- what the president is alleged to have done here. >> and you think this is a case

of bribery? >> i do. that is one of the three articles already proven by the hearings that we've had and the transcript released. the president was saying, look i'll give you this goody, this aid that the taxpayers have appropriated and i'm holding up, but in exchange, you've got to do something for me first. and the simplest way to understand, anderson, what the president was asking for is this -- he was trying to cheat in the 2020 election. he was trying to get a leg up upon his political rival by having them announce that they were doing an investigation into joseph biden, the vice president. now that is just -- i mean, the republican defense that we heard today in this 120 page report is oh, no, the president cared about corruption. that is what he was worried about. but if you -- he was convinced ukraine was corrupt. if you are convinced ukraine is corrupt then why do you ask the

ukraine government to investigate a united states citizen. it just doesn't make any sense at all. what i think everyone knows and what was apparent in the last two weeks of hearings is that this was not about corruption, it was about one simple thing, the president wanted them to announce an investigation. not even do it, the way the justice department investigations are done which is in secret. but announce an investigation. >> we should explain that once one saw all of the testimony, not only of ambassador yovanovitch but others in the embassy, the u.s. policy was an anti-corruption policy in ukraine. so it is not as if president trump is raising for the first time the idea of fighting corruption in ukraine. this is been u.s. policy and it is something that the embassy was already doing, to the best they could or making efforts. >> absolutely. nobody disputes the idea that ukraine has corruption issues. but the president's own administration certified just

weeks before that ukraine wasn't so corrupt that the aid couldn't flow so they signed off on that. and then the president tried to cut funding for corruption efforts, anti-corruption efforts in ukraine. so basically they're left with the story they're trying to fight corruption when they have no example anywhere else in the world of the president caring about corruption. this is the one thing and it just happened to be magically this involves his chief political rival joe biden. >> what do you make of the white house strategy, a., its effectiveness and, b., legality in terms of not cooperating at all, no documents from the state department, from the white house other than that rough transcript which they released er-- releas early on. >> i dedicated my life to the study of the constitution and i didn't know that the president's strategy here was a thing. i didn't think it was possible. i mean, the idea that a president on his own can

unilaterally say i'm not going to bother cooperating with an impeachment investigation, that is the essence of constitutional arrogance and the destruction of our separation of powers. i think it is an impeachable offense just the way the president has acted toward this impeachment investigation. and we know this because yesterday the president's lawyer, the white house counsel sent a letter to congress saying that this is a ridiculous investigation involving and saying that presidents in the past have claimed executive privilege to not cooperate including he names clinton. clinton never did that. clinton never asserted executive privilege over the impeachment investigation. and indeed past presidents like polk said in 1846 said executive privilege has nothing to do with this. impeachment is all about getting the truth out to the american people and all of the information. this president is afraid of the truth coming out in congress. and so he's tried to gag every

executive branch employee, every document, every phone call, everything from being given to the congress. i can't think of something that is more destructive to our constitution. >> neal katyal, thank you again the book is "impeach, the case against donald trump." former fbi lawyer lisa page after text messages criticizing him became public breaks her silence. see what she's saying now and how the president is already reacting. that is next. tom steyer: wall street banks took advantage

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.

i looitaly!avel. yaaaaass. with the united explorer card, i get rewarded wherever i go. going out for a bite. rewarded! going new places. rewarded! anytime. rewarded! getting more for getting away. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. and get... rewarded! [ dramatic music ]ing ]

ahhhh! -ahhhh! elliott. you came back! as we mentioned at the top of the program, lisa page is breaker her silence two years after the public disclosure of

the highly critical text messages expressing mutual dislike of president trump between her and agent peter stroezac. page said i'm done being quiet. president trump late today tweeting, when lisa page, the lover of peter strzok talks about being crushed and how innocent is ask her to read the insurance policy text to her just in case hillary loses and he tweeted he also why were the lovers text messages scrubbed after he left mueller. where are they, lisa? we'll have more on it from 360's randi kaye. >> reporter: this is the moment lisa page realized she'd had enough. >> i love you peter. i love you too lisa. lisa i love you. lisa. lisa, i love you lisa. >> reporter: the president of the united states mimicking a sexually aroused lisa page then texting her lover fbi agent

peter strzok. the two were having an affair while strzok was leading the investigation into the trump campaign and russian interference in the 2016 election. page spoke with "the daily beast" in her first public interview since thousands of the couple's private text messages were made public. saying the president's demeaning fake orgasm was the straw that broke the camel's back calling it a reprehensible, degrading stunt. for two years trump has been on a terror against page and strzok given the anti-trump comments revealed in their text messages. in august of 2016 page wrote, trump's not ever going to become president, right? right? strzok answers no, no, he wouldn't. we'll stop it. and after trump won the white house strzok texted omg, i'm so depressed page responded i don't know if i can eat, very nauseous. and there is no evidence as trump and his allies suggested

that page and strzok were part of a conspiracy to bring down trump's presidency. page told "the daily beast" she doesn't use social media that her friends alert her to the president's digs. in august last year the president tweeted, will the fbi ever recover its once stellar reputation, so badly damaged by comey, mccabe, peter s. and his lover the lovely lisa page. adding, the great men and women of the fbi have been hurt by these clowns sand losers. in this tweet a month earlier, he refers to lisa page not as an fbi lawyer, but as an fbi lover. page told "the daily beast" it had been so hard not to defend myself, to let people who hate me control the narrative. it is like being punched in the gut. my heart drops to my stomach when i realize he has tweeted about me again. he is demeaning her career and calling it sickening and accusing page of treason which

is punishable by death. she told the zaly beast it is intimidating insisting she didn't commit any crime and explains the president is still somebody in a position to actually do something about that. to try to further destroy my life. lisa page who left the fbi last year said all she wants is her life back. but that is unlikely to happen any time soon. next week the justice department inspector general report will be released. detailing whether trump was unfairly targeted by the intelligence community in the russia probe. randi kaye, cnn, palm beach, florida. perspective from cnn political analyst kirsten powers and susan hennessey and legal naults and also a friend of lisa page. susan, i know you don't speak for lisa page but in your opinion how important is it for her to finally be speaking out? >> i think it is incredibly important for her to be speaking

out for a couple of reasons. one, i think it is important that people understand the huge personal toll that the president degrading demeaning disgusting attacks take on people. that these are real people. some people who have served our country over a period of decades and to have him act like this in public, it has a real cost and the public needs to understand that. and i think it is significant that page is telling her story now. about what doj did about their involvement in essentially selectively leaking text messages under circumstances that certainly raised the appearance that they were not doing so because it was in the public interest but instead that this was doj senior officials and doj spokesperson attempting to give the president fodder to pick up this false and malicious narrative and really attempt to destroy these people's lives. >> kirsten, what do you make of this? she's remained silent for years as randi pointed out in her piece and in the interview she talked about the final straw was president trump at that october rally seemingly sort of -- well

reading the text as he did. what do you make of it? >> well, i mean, i think that what she did, the text i think were inappropriate. but nothing that she did merits what happened to her. so especially because the inspector general found that there wasn't any bias. she didn't -- is there was nothing in her work that would suggest that she was doing anything -- and in fact on the hillary clinton investigation she was more aggressive than some of the other people in terms of pursuing clinton. so it doesn't seem to have impacted her work. and so people are just sort of selectively choosing the text which are just her expressing her personal opinions. they are in appropriate but it doesn't give the president the right to bully her which is what he is doing. he is destroying this woman's life. and she's still with her husband, i gather. she has children.

she has every right to get on with her life. she had an affair. that is a private issue. and certainly president trump is in no position to be sitting in judgment of that. >> susan, do you think that page has been particularly targeted by the president because she's a woman? >> i do. i think it is sort of indisputable there is this clear misogynistic undertone that he speaks about her in overtly sexualize terms and discussing her physical appearance and doesn't discuss other individuals the same way and i do think it is quite clear that the president is targeting her for a particular type of debasing degrading comments that in part because she's a woman. let's keep in mind, this is a serious seasoned national security professional. this is somebody who has a lot of substance and a serious person and the only way the president referred to her as the lovely lisa page, the lover. he really does try to sort of degrade her and demean her and

that is a trend we've seen him -- that is a pattern we've seen from the president with regards to any woman who really would dare to speak out against him or challenge him in any way. >> kirsten, do you agree with that? do you see a way he speaks about women that is different? because obviously he degrades many people. but male and female. does he speak about women in a different way that you notice? >> yeah. absolutely. i think that he -- people can say oh, he's an equal opportunity offender because he attacks men but susan is right there is a way that he attacks women that is different, that tends to be gendered in the way that he does it. and this is so disproportionate to what happened also. there is so many tweets about this woman who has a family and a life and a career and the glee that he has, not just with her but with other people and in trying to destroy people is so troubling. and there was a time when we would say this is unpresidential

but people don't seem to care any more. his supporters don't care how unpresidential this is and how indecent it is. this is not how we should treat people. >> the white house has saids it presidential because the president does it so therefore this is now presidential. >> yeah. well, i would say we have a lot of other presidents and so we don't change the -- our entire standard based on one person's behavior. i would look at the history of how people have typically behaved and this is unthinkable. absolutely unthinkable of any other president doing something like this. >> kirsten powers susan hennessey, appreciate it. just ahead, popular defense of president trump just gone up in smoke according to a new report, i'll talking to former republican senator and congressman who also served as defense secretary about how his party has come to embrace conspiracy theories under this president. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

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. ♪ itintroducing the new braava jet m6 robot mop. with an adjustable precision jet spray and advanced pad system

braava jet breaks up messes and gets deep in corners. braava jet. only from irobot.

politico is reporting that the intelligence committee found to evidence so support a key claim by the president's top defenders on impeachment. the claim which is always unfounded is that it wasn't just individual ukrainians opposed to trump or his policies it was a top down effort just like with russia. here is john kennedy who already had to walk back a separate ukrainian conspiracy theory making this other claim over the

weekend. >> i think both russia and ukraine meddled in the 2016 election. >> the fact that russia was so aggressive does not exclude the fact that president poroshenko actively worked for secretary clinton. >> again, politico reports that the senate intelligence committee found no evidence the ukraine leaders directed any effort toward candidate trump and senator kennedy was asked if he attended a recent briefing for intelligence senator that russia is using conspiracy theories and no, he did not attend. we have secretary cohen. as a freshman senator and you broke with republicans and played a crucial role in the deliberations on impeaching richard nixon and when you see what is happening today when republicans buy into conspiracy

theories to back the president, what goes through your mind on where the republican party is at least in the house. >> well it is disappointing. i go back 40 years and look at the members of the committee, there were great differences between the republicans and the democrats. but there were republicans on the committee who were willing to listen to the facts. and to follow where the facts would lead. and they led to the impeachment of richard nixon on abuse of power and obstruction of justice. there was another obstruction of congress as well. i saw the same kind of republican spirit of following the law during iran contra. once again the facts really mattered. and now it seems that facts don't really matter. that they have the, quote, alternative fact mantra that is recited repeatedly. there is only one set of facts. you could have different opinions about what the facts mean. but only one set. and now i see as the equivalent of sort of pepper spray being used to blind the eyes of the people from seeing what the

facts are. i saw no evidence presented during any of the committee hearings and i believe that is the case with the senate investigation as well that indicated that ukraine had any organized attempt to interfere. what i do remember is president clinton when he was candidate -- trump, rather, when he said russia, are you listening? russia, are you listening? they were listening. four hours after he made that speech, the gru got involved in attacking the democratic headquarters and their campaign. now with the question of ukraine, you better be listening and that is exactly what took place here. quid pro quo people are tired of hearing it. but basically it is saying that the president in essence was saying i have something that you need. you have something that i want. let's make a deal. you go first. that is the essence of what has taken place with ukraine. and so those are the facts. and i don't care what others say

that the ukrainians were somehow involved or biden's son was somehow involved, the facts are clear that the president invited another country to participate in our elector system. that to me is an impeachable offense. >> and you're the former secretary of defense. what does this say about the state of the republican party when they claim there was interference in the election which is a russian conspiracy theory. you talk about the senators and congress people in watergate, i imagine those republicans who you said were listening to the facts, they must have been facing pressure in their home districts by people who supported nixon and didn't want to see nixon go down. how were they able to muster the courage to listen to facts when these folks don't seem to be? >> well it was a different world then. we didn't have social media. we didn't have one network devoted to defending the president. so it was a different world.

but nonetheless, they felt compelled to rise above their own party interest and put the country first. and that is really what is at stake here. this is about, yes, about trump and the impeachment of trump. but really what is at stake is the rule of law. because the president has said the rules don't apply to him. that he can't be charged with anything. that he can't even be investigated. so we're talking about one man rule. that is not democracy. that is something closer to autocracy or certainly to a dictatorship. i don't believe the american people once they listen to all of the facts will say that is a standard we want. no rules apply to any president going forward. i don't believe the american people support that. i think it is incouple bent upon the democrats because the republicans are not going to join in, incumbent to make the case that we don't want to throw away all that we have accumulated over the years, the rule of law separates us from the law of rule. the law of the jungle.

of might makes right. and if we succumb to the notion that the president is above the law, then i think we are sacrificing the democratic system and america will not be the country we thought it is or should be. >> secretary, that is ominous. i appreciate your time. >> my pleasure. still ahead, something different. the ridiculist. how devoted president trump is to images of -- guess who? president trump. be right back. [sneezing]

♪ you don't want to cancel your plans. [sneezing] cancel your cold. the 1-pill power of advil multi-symptom cold & flu knocks out your worst symptoms. cancel your cold, not your plans. advil multi-symptom cold & flu. the holidays are here and we want to keep you connected to those you love, with the new iphone 11. hurry into t-mobile today, to get up to four iphone 11's on us. only at t-mobile.

hi honey, we got in early. yeah, and we brought steve and mark. ♪ 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. 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!

. welcome back. time to check in with chris to see what he's working on for "cuomo prime time." >> we are going to try to get inside the facts that show the obvious, that this president is

peddling conspiracy theories to the american people just as a cya. this stuff about ukraine isn't new, it's never been real and new reporting of who came to exactly that conclusion? senate republicans, that the gop was telling the truth right before this process. why? >> we'll watch chris eight minutes from now. coming up, something to make us all smile at the end of the day, the ridiculist is next. d be the match uses the power of the cisco network to match donors with patients faster than ever, saving lives like max's. me and dylan are dna twins. ♪ ♪ dylan's like my brother. ♪ ♪ cisco. the bridge to possible.

my hands are everything to me. but i was diagnosed with dupuytren's contracture. and it got to the point where things i took for granted got tougher to do. thought surgery was my only option. turns out i was wrong. so when a hand specialist told me about nonsurgical treatments, it was a total game changer. like you, my hands have a lot more to do. learn more at factsonhand.com today.

like you, my hands have a lot more to do. the ups and downs of frequent mood swings can plummet you to extreme lows. (crying) lift you to intense highs. (muffled arguing) or, make you feel both at once. overwhelmed by bipolar i symptoms? ask about vraylar. some medications only treat the lows or the highs. vraylar effectively treats depression, acute manic and mixed episodes of bipolar i. full-spectrum relief of all symptoms. with just one pill, once a day. elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis have an increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements,

may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. metabolic changes may occur. movement dysfunction, restlessness, sleepiness, stomach issues are common side effects. when bipolar i overwhelms, vraylar helps smooth the ups and downs.

[fa♪mers bell] (burke) a "rock and wreck." seen it. covered it. at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ . tonight not since narcisseus has a guy been so in love with his own image than president trump. today the president tweeted --

actually, it was more like a yell. is there a yell tweet? i'll go with 20twell. president trump found time today to retweet a portrait of himself. the portrait is very good, an artist who spent 70 hours drawing only with ball point pen. he's from nigeria, where president trump said people there only live in huts. maybe soon everyone who wants a visa to america will have to draw a picture of our president or of stephen miller. much have been made of dictators and authoritarian figures. days after attacking maria yovanovitch for not hanging up his portrait in the u.s. embassy, which is not at all

what happened, the president tweeted this photoshopped image of him as rocky, which is totally what his chest looks like. he is jacked and he's ripped i've seep the photos of him playing tennis. by the way, do not google trump playing tennis. just don't. it like "the ring," like that movie, you can't unsee it. anyway, it was just last month -- yeah, i put on my glasses mid ridiculist. it was just last month that a judge ordered mr. trump's defunt so-called found ace to pay $2 million to charities as part of a settlement with new york attorney general's office because they had do shady things, including using funds to buy two giant portraits of donald trump. that's one of him. i believe that's the artist on the other side. the alleged charity supposedly paid $10,000 for that portrait

and hung it at the president's dor dor doral, florida golf course. and there's this phony "time" magazine cover. it's hard to believe the idea didn't come to the president himself. i know trump does have a fake master piece by the french artist renoir hanging in his new york apartment. it's a bad copy of the painting "two sisters." the real one, which is worth probably in the range of $100 million is in the art institute of chicago. mr. trump has in the past insisted his phony renoir is the real deal, which may tell you something about how he views the entire deal making process. maybe the president's interest of seeing his own face on tv and in magazines will lessen in the

coming years but how many billionaires turned presidents egos have shrunk over time? so make a picture of the president and it might get you a cameo on the ridiculist. now i turn it over to chris cuomo. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo and this is "prime time." we have two new pieces of report tag reveal that republicans were well aware of this ukraine nonsense and they looked into it in their senate intel committee. what were the results? we have them. and we're going to dig into a troubling question tonight. did this call that the president claims vindicates him with eu ambassador sondland, did it ever happen? why that's a real question. and