good evening. after repeatedly teasing throughout the impeachment inquiry that maybe, possibly, he would consider participating directly in the process, president trump and his attorneys have done the only thing they and many top current and former officials have ever done in this white house, which is refuse to cooperate. the white house was on a 5:00 p.m. deadline imposed by the judiciary committee and they met it with another round of rhetorical fireworks. white house counsel pat sip lone said, quote, your impeachment inquiry is baseless and violated principles of due process and fundamental fairness. he also called the process a charade and reckless abuse of

power. in a tweet shortly after the white house made its decision public, intelligence committee chairman adam schiff wrote, quote, the white house said they wanted open hearings, not closed. then they didn't want those either. then they said they wanted to participate in the proceedings, and now they say they don't. all they really want is to hide the president's serious misconduct. it's not working. jerry nadler, the democratic chairman of the judiciary committee, which is now conducting public hearings, said this, quote, if the president has no good response to the allegations, then he would not want to appear before the committee. having declined this opportunity, he cannot claim that the process is unfair. cnn chief white house correspondent jim acosta joins us right now. the letter saying that the president won't participate in the house impeachment proceedings, it's not surprising. he said publicly he would like to, but that's obviously what he said about testifying in front of mueller, and that obviously never happened either. >> reporter: right, anderson. i mean this is the least surprising news from all week. we saw this train coming a long time ago. but one thing i will tell you,

anderson, is that one thing that is not stated in this letter -- and we have it right here -- it does not specifically state that the white house is not going to participate in these proceedings. so one of the questions i think remains this evening whether or not they're trying to reserve that right to enter this process somewhere down the road. i did talk to a senior administration official earlier this evening who said, yes, it doesn't state that. but the letter communicates that we don't plan to participate in these proceedings. if that makes a lot of sense, if that flows for you. but one thing i should also say, that is at the end of this letter, it says -- it quotes the president's tweet from yesterday when he said, listen, if we're going to do this, if you're going to impeach me, do it now, do it fast. that appears to be where things are headed up on capitol hill. the house is moving rapidly in that drengsz. the one bit of this that i think should be pointed out is that the white house has been insisting all along that this impeachment process has been a sham, and unfair and so on because they haven't been involved in any of these

proceedings. and when jerry nadler, the house judiciary committee chairman gave them that opportunity, now the white house is showing their cards and saying they don't want to be in this process at all until it gets to the senate. >> but if and when this goes to the senate, the question of cooperation is entirely different. >> reporter: that's right. the republicans are in charge. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell can set a lot of these rules. pat sicipollone will be handlin it in a trial. they can call a whole host of witnesses. they could call hunter biden. they could bring the whistle-blower out of the woodwork and compel that person to testify. but there is a debate going on inside the administration, inside the president's legal team, as to whether or not that is a wise idea because once this gets out of the house and the conventional wisdom in washington is all of this is a fait accompli when it gets to the senate and that the president will be acquitted because he has the republican senators on his side. but, anderson, once it gets to a senate trial phase, there's to

guarantee that we won't see surprises as we've seen surprises all along throughout this process. that is why the white house is tempted to say, you know what, let's get this over quickly in the senate as well, anderson. >> all right. jim acosta, thanks very much from the white house tonight. here to discuss, former nixon white house counsel john dean, scott jennings, former adviser to president george w. bush. and david gergen, senior cnn political analyst. david, does the white house not participating in the house's impeachment inquiry undermine the president's case at all because i mean nadler says, well, he can't argue it's unfair. he certainly will continue to as many republicans will argue it's unfair. >> well, i think it certainly undercuts the argument that they're not being allowed to participate. they've been arguing that was very unfair. they didn't have a voice. and behind closed doors of course during the depositions, they did have equal time in terms of asking questions of the witnesses. there have been aspects of it

the democrats have control, but i'm not -- i guess i'm not surprised but i'm extremely disappointed the white house is not taking part in this. this is so unlike any other impeachment we've seen and certainly with nixon and clinton. both presidents were much more cooperative, sent witnesses, sent documents, made their case. here i think the trump white house is simply not taking the constitution seriously. they're acting like this is a circus. it's just all politics when in fact at the heart of this, there's very serious questions about our democratic system and the threats to democracy that this represents. >> scott, should the white house have cooperated? >> you know, i think as a strategic matter, they didn't want to do anything that would be seen as legitimizing this. david said a minute ago they've treated it like a circus, and that's because that's how they view it. that may or may not be a legitimate position to some

people, but that's how the white house views it, and that's how they want their people to look at it. so to legitimize it wouldn't be in their strategic interest. now, when they get over to the senate, the president's lawyers -- >> do you think it's legitimate? >> as was alluded to in the reporting, they could possibly then pull up some witnesses there if they so choose. so there would be some participation on that end of it. i also think people at the white house think any participation at this point wouldn't matter. i mean it wouldn't matter what they come into the house with because obviously the house has already decided what it's going to do. so i don't think it really hurts them not to participate at this point, and didn't expect them to in the first place. >> john, certainly among their supporters, it doesn't really hurt them because it seems like their supporters will go along with whatever that position is. if the president had exculpatory information that could head off his impeachment in the house, either in the form of documents or witnesses, i mean this would certainly be the time to make them available, and he's not

doing that. >> that's very true. they have offered really no hard defense. they've really just attacked the process from the outset. they have not treated it with any respect. it's very curious actually. all the precedents show that presidents get right in and offer information. nixon certainly did. not all of it was truthful, but he certainly offered information as did clinton. clinton put on a pretty good case. so his lawyers were there all along. and one of the other things -- they have no choice in the senate. they would default if they didn't have some lawyer representing them in the senate. so they have no choice there. but in the house, they have a chance to actually make a case if they had a case. >> david, does it then -- if they have no choice in the senate, the rules obviously remain to be seen in terms of how things are operated in the senate. but the president's allies would

in theory be able to call their own witnesses without getting denied, and they're not looking just for an acquittal. they're looking to turn this on democrats and make it about them. >> if the bidens are subpoenaed, i would refuse to go. let them go to court with it. i think we'd all be better off going back to the rules that pertained during the nixon days, and that is when you have witnesses that are called and subpoenaed, as john dean will tell you, if you refuse a subpoena, you can get tossed in jail. and i think there's some -- this process has degenerated so much during this trump period that i think we might well be advised to go back to something like that because whatever the republicans do now that i think tears down the process, gets rid of the norms and traditions, the democrats are going to start doing that too and just go cite the republicans. you know, the way the republicans conducted benghazi had a big effect on the way the

democrats then handled this impeachment inquiry. >> scott, i mean you've worked closely with majority leader mcconnell over the years. if the presidents wants a no holds barred, made for tv fight in the senate, is that something mcconnell would deliver? how do you see this playing out in the senate? >> yeah, i can give you my sense of what i think the senate leadership would think is in its best interest. number one, i think a lot of senators believe it would be better just to get this over with in a reasonable period of time and not drag it out, which would of course mean not calling all kinds much witnesses. the president and the white house have said otherwise publicly. i do think as the process goes along in the senate, could you have the house impeachment managers go for a few days, the president's lawyers go for a few days. i could see a scenario where at the end of the presentations by both sides, you know, if the senate leadership whipped the senate and found 51 votes to proceed, meaning to go ahead and go to final jeopardy, then they

would just basically end the trial and go ahead and have a vote, and it would be over. that would of course mean that you had 51 votes to proceed. so i could see a scenario where some people would continue to say, anderson, that they would want to have a long trial and call witnesses. but if at some point after both presentations, 51 votes exist to go to final jeopardy, they might just do it. that could take as few as ten days. it might take a few more. but in a best case, short-term scenario, i think you could get it done in under other two weeks. that might not make some of the president's allies happy, but he'd get an acquittal, which is exactly what he wants. >> i wouldn't be surprised if donald trump decides he wants to go appear in the senate side and come up and make a statement on his behalf, not take questions, and walk out. he loves that kind of theater. then he can claim at the end, well i made my statement. i explained what it was, and they voted to acquit. >> hmm, we'll leave it there. thanks very much. a lot to look forward to.

a lot to watch in the coming days and weeks. still to come tonight, rudy giuliani's latest whereabouts and a new report on how people people in the president's inner circle know what his attorney, rudy giuliani, is doing and where he's going. we'll have a live report on the deadly shooting also at a florida navy base and the latest in the growing mystery surrounding the shooter, a saudi national. man: sneezes 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! (alarm beeping) welcome to our busy world. where we all want more energy. but with less carbon footprint. can we have both? at bp, we're working every day to make energy that's cleaner and better. and we see possibilities everywhere.

to make energy that's cleaner and better. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute, because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. you ever wish you weren't a motaur? sure. sometimes i wish i had legs like you. yeah, like a regular person. no. still half bike/half man, just the opposite.

oh, so the legs on the bottom and motorcycle on the top? yeah. yeah, i could see that. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive.

can a banana peel fuel your flight. bp and fulcrum bioenergy think so. together we'll reduce emissions and landfill waste by turning garbage into jet fuel. at bp, we see possibilities everywhere. we have more breaking news from the white house. multiple officials cnn tonight that president trump continues to use his personal cell phone to make calls despite warnings from staff that this could leave him vulnerable to foreign surveillance. officials say it's highly likely the president's phone call to gordon sondland from a restaurant in ukraine over the summer was picked up. that's the one -- or i should say the phone call with gordon sondland. gordon sondland made the call.

sondland told the president the leader of ukraine, quote, loves your ass. this means that foreign surveillance could have picked up any calls between the president and his attorney, rudy giuliani, whose call logs were subpoenaed by congress. speaking of giuliani, his current whereabouts are something of a mystery after a surprise tour of eastern european capitals where the president's attorney met with former ukrainian officials trying to dig up dirt on the bidens. all he would tell cnn is he's no longer in ukraine. the trip caught a lot of people off guard including apparently senior officials at the white house according to a new report in "the daily beast." er erin, you're reporting that giuliani's trip has startled some sen senior administration officials. what have you learned? >> we started looking at this story a couple of days ago, and we started pinging people in the trump administration, senior officials in both the state department and the national security council. what we found out is these officials didn't really know what was going on. you know, they were sort of

aware that giuliani had been to budapest but were unaware that he was planning on going to kyiv. so there were a lot of meetings and discussions about what exactly rudy was up to. now, the concern was not only that he was meeting with individuals who had in the past peddled disinformation on biden and burisma, but also individuals who had peddled the sort of conspiracy theory that it was ukraine that meddled in the 2016 presidential election, not russia. and as we know from dr. hill's testimony several weeks ago, that was the main concern for her too at the national security council. and i believe she even said to house impeachment investigators that, you know, this idea was a russia conspiracy theory, that it had been ukraine that meddled in the election. so that's the real concern for national security officials today. >> and have they been in touch with giuliani or tracking his movements? do we know? >> so we do know they've been tracking his movements. we do not know whether or not

they've actually been in touch with mr. giuliani. i don't think giuliani is transmitting back to washington to the state department or the national security council about what exactly he's up to. but we do know white house aides are increasingly nervous about his interactions, and we also know that american individuals have counseled ukrainian officials close to president zelensky not to meet with giuliani while he's in kyiv. and so this is just sort of concern, you know, in the white house and the national security council about exactly what he's up to. >> and what has giuliani said about this? he's told cnn he's no longer in kyiv. >> so i believe that is a recent development. as of earlier today, we understood that he was still there. giuliani says that he's just doing what he's always been doing for the past year and a half, which is representing his client, president trump.

now, the real concern, i think, in the context of all of this is that what we know about giuliani is that he often travels and has a knack for traveling internationally to try to sort of school business deals. so the conflation of him trying to score business deals and also representing presidentrump is where that concern really comes into play in the top echelons of the trump administration, with the white house aides, with the national security council. that's a very fine line, and i think that's a real point of concern as well. >> erin banco, i appreciate it. here now, republican strategist wick r rick wilson joins us. what do you make of giuliani? is he trying to get attention? is this good for the president? >> i think one thing rudy is doing is deeply undermining the president's defense that nothing he did was wrong. this was all a standard sort of governmental operating procedure. i think that under -- this new

trip undermines that defense rather dramatically. what i think rudy is doing is doubling down. these guys have become reckless gamblers in this thing, thinking they're going to get some moment that's going to allow the media culture around the president's side of the equation to blow up hunter biden and blow up joe biden. it's really validating joe biden's role as the guy who donald trump fears the most. and he is certainly doing -- rudy is doing everything he can right now both to sort of revive that story, which has been fairly thoroughly debunked at this point, and to keep that line of attack on joe biden alive. >> and also for giuliani to sort of continue to say that this is all a mission about corruption in ukraine, again, there are so many levers of the u.s. government that have already been, you know, involved with anti-corruption efforts in

ukraine or could be involved. the idea that it's rudy giuliani who has any role whatsoever is sort of -- it just defies logic. >> the state department, the department of defense have both certified that the ukraine had made meaningful progress on cleaning up corruption. the end of the poroshenko regime meant we'd still moved even further toward cleaning up the corruption. what this is, is a very itty-bitty fig leaf for them to -- related to the one guy that donald trump fears the most in the general election. that strikes me as less than a coincidence at this point. >> again, everyone seems to acknowledge there's a huge corruption in ukraine as there is in many places in former soviet union territories in eastern europe. the fact that he's reportedly,

according to "the daily beast," alarming senior administration officials who are sort of trying to track him or having him tracked, you would think he would be doing -- he wouldn't be doing any of this without the president signing off on it, i would imagine. >> well, you know, anderson, there's some reporting tonight that white house staffers don't know whether or not rudy has any, you know, sanction from the president on this or not. and the president won't answer the question obviously. but, you know, this again puts donald trump in a very tight position. if rudy is his personal attorney handling this with his agreement and sanction and encouragement, that gives donald trump a huge amount of exposure on this, which he does not. if he's not and he's freelancing and claiming to be trump's personal attorney, either way trump is in a bad situation on this because this does not look like the kind of thing that meaningfully reduces the degree to which donald trump looks as if he's trying to exploit the

relationship of his personal attorney with him to pressure the ukrainians to do something the government would be doing if it was an actual governmental mission. >> yeah. rick wilson, appreciate you being with us. thanks very much. just ahead tonight, the latest on the shooting at an air base in florida and the mystery surrounding the saudi national who killed three people there. we'll be right back. so the whole world looks different. the unbeatable strength and speed of advil liqui-gels. what pain?

the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network.

what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway?

a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing. a mass shooting at a u.s. navy base this morning leaving three dead and eight injured as turned into a global investigation led by the fbi. at the heart of the tragedy is something of a mystery about the shooter and fears of a link to terrorism. tonight we have the latest about

the saudi national who opened fire, his possible motives for doing so, and how he was able to bring a handgun into a military installation in florida. i want to go to cnn's barbara starr who is at the pentagon for us. >> reporter: good evening, anderson. tonight the fbi trying to get answers to all of those questions. it was early this morning when mohammed al shamrani, a member of the saudi royal air force, walked into a classroom at pensacola naval air station in florida, in the panhandle, where he was in his second year of a three-year training course. he had a handgun. he opened fire as you say. eventually two sheriff's deputies were called in, and he was shot and killed by one of the deputies. right now no known motive. investigators are looking at all of that. but this training program, you know, there is about 5,000 foreign military students that come to the u.s. to train. about 800 of them right now are saudis. and most obviously serve

honorably, of course. it is considered vital by the u.s. military. they want to train them. they want them to go home to their home countries and have good military skills. many of them rise to senior ranks in their own military. it's valuable if the u.s. military has to operate overseas with them that they have the same type of training, for example, that u.s. pilots get. but what happened here right now still a mystery. still the fbi and the u.s. navy trying to figure out how it happened. the saudi government is pledging its cooperation. >> clearly, you know, it's being investigated to see if it is terror-related, if this was, you know, beyond a workplace issue or school issue and something larger, terrorism. >> reporter: that's right. i mean there are people on social media with that name, so obviously investigators trying to confirm if there are any

social media postings that he may have made. who he may have been in communication with. did anybody see in evidence that perhaps he was being radicalized. did his behavior change? were there any conversations he might have had with people? what were his ties? the thing that might be important to remember, when these foreign students come here, they go through a security review before they're allowed in. so there's going to be a lot of questions. could he have been potentially radicalized once he got here. >> thanks very much. i want to bring in former pentagon spokesman and also cnn military and diplomatic analyst, retired admiral john kirby. and peter bergen. admiral kirby, you were stationed at that naval air station five years when you did public affairs for the blue angels. i know you consider pensacola a bit of a second home. can you describe what life is like at the facility, the size of it and how something like

this could happen? are guards armed? you know, deputies were called in. i assume there's not a lot of military personnel with weapons. >> it's one of our largest naval bases in the country. it's primarily designed to help train aviation -- people in the navy, either aviators or maintenance and air crews. there's about 20,000 or so people on the base, and of course families live on the base. i lived on the base with my two kids when we were down there in the mid-'90s, so it's a very family-friendly environment on base and a very family-friendly, navy-friendly community in pensacola. they love the navy there. the base has been active since about 1913. so there's a long history with the local community. as for security on the base, because it is big, they have a fairly sizeable security force on-base. it's a mixture of civilian employees as well as military masters at arms. they are armed when they need to

be for the jobs they are doing, but they are not armed all the time. and small arms are not floating around the base the way they would -- and floating is probably a bad word, but they aren't as prevalent as they would be on an army infantry base where soldiers are expected to be issued and maintain their own weapon. these are aviation students. they're not going to be carrying arms on a daily basis. the base c.o. today said having a personal firearm is against regulations. so they do have policies in place to try to limit that. >> peter, at this point what stands out to you in this? >> well, you know, it's hard to get on a military base unless you have a military i.d. or bona fide appointment. if you look back at the last ten years of attacks in the united states, they've all been essentially insiders. fort hood, texas, an army major killed 13 people in 2009. an army soldier killed a group of people in 2014.

here in washington, we had a military contractor kill a large number in 2013. then we had the pearl harbor incident by an american sailor and now we have this. that is interesting to me. the other thing that's interesting, anderson, is we're sending quite a large number of troops, american troops back to saudi arabia having for a long time not had american troops. several thousand potentially going, perhaps even more because of heightening tensions with iran. so you have to also ask yourself the question, you know, how well protected will those american troops be? after all, westerners and indeed american soldiers have been the target of terrorist attacks in saudi arabia in the past. so i would also be concerned about that. >> also i mean, peter, there's obviously a history of, you know, terrorists who have struck the united states who are either from saudi arabia or, you know,

osama bin laden, if i remember correctly, one of the early things he was railing against was the presidents of u.s. forces in saudi arabia. >> of course we don't know the motivation but there was a reason of 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi because saudis can visit the united states a lot more easily like other countries like say yemen or other countries in the middle east. of course what's interesting, the so-called travel ban was targeted at a variety of countries, but not the saudis. so if indeed this turns out to be the motivation of terrorism, i think there's going to be some questions about that issue. but, you know, it's still too early to tell. one thing is this guy had a fair amount of time to kind of think about how to smuggle a weapon onto this campus. he was there for, you know, a little under two years. so he would have every day had to go through security and would have, i think, been able to think about how to conceal a weapon to get onto this facility. >> and admiral kirby, it was a training program funded by the

saudis in accordance with u.s. air -- you know, foreign military sales case. what does the vetting look like for participants? >> so at first when the saudis would nominate an individual to participate in this program, they will go through our state department, the consular office in that country, in this case saudi arabia would do a normal screening for them, a vetting procedure just like they would for issuing work visas for anybody else. so there's an initial screening there, and then the department of defense also does yet another vetting and screening of these individuals as they, you know, are going through the selection and approval process. so there's sort of two levels there. and of course, you know, in order to be in this program, you have to have the necessary clearances to operate some of this equipment, to understand it. so there's a classification issue as well. it's extensive, but i would not think for a moment that they're going to take another look here at this vetting procedure in this case and see if there was anything that was either dropped

in the process, or whether there's an actual systemic issue in the process now going forward. >> yeah. appreciate it. good to have you on the program. just ahead, facing off with the president and a reporter. it's been quite a week for nancy pelosi. her daughter christine joins me next. why she says don't mess with mama. create your own ultimate feast is back at red lobster. 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. in connemara. right! connemara it is! there's one gift the whole family can share this holiday season, their story. give the gift of discovery, with an ancestrydna kit.

we need a solution.ut their phones down. give the gift of discovery, introducing... smartdogs. the first dogs trained to train humans. stopping drivers from: liking. selfie-ing. and whatever this is. available to the public... never. smartdogs are not the answer. but geico has a simple tip. turn on "do not disturb while driving" mode. brought to you by geico.

for house speaker nancy pelosi, it's been a historic week. she ordered her committee chairs in the house to proceed without delay in their impeachment investigations and had a memorable exchange with a reporter. in a moment i'm going to talk with someone who certainly knows her very well. but first here's what happened when that reporter asked her this. >> do you hate the president, madam speaker, because -- >> i don't -- i don't hate anybody. i don't have -- i was

make may channel of thy peace. so yesterday's response to that ridiculous premise was exactly there's now the famous photograph of her which i

believe was the white house initially, who put it out. and then she owned and it retweet it. and it is also, it went viral pointing her finger at the president of the policy last month just to name a few. you write that she's been underestimated and people are getting a good look at her leadership. >> i think that's right. this is the same mom that disciplined us in the household. what she calls the weaver of the house. where she takes all the different strands of the diverse house democratic caucus and some republican strands, too, and weaves together policies for the good of the american people. she is very strong in who she is and last election cycle, when there were 137,000 negative ads about her, including some by democrats, she would just turn and say, just win, baby.

and we would be very upset. and she would say, look, it's politics. it will always be tough. what can they do? they cannot take my kids away from me. working so close when i the health coalition, parent with children who were murdered by guns. i think that's given her even more fortitude and purpose to say i'm not going to let donald trump or anybody underestimate me and i won't stop for one minute from stepping forward in my power to help these other families. >> have you seen an evolution of her in terms of her just, there is a lot of people on the democratic side. >> she is playing a three dimensional game of chess that people cannot sort of even imagine. have you seen an evolution in

her? or is this the same person who was ironing your school uniforms? >> well, i think it's both. on the one hand, my mom is a really shy person. i can remember dancing down market street in san francisco at a parade honoring the fire department. she looked at me and said, you inherited none of my natural shyness. then she gets up and does these things on television. mom, you realize you're a meme on the internet now. she did not get that at first. so i think nancy pelosi is showing the same dedication to the issues what she's now more fully confident in her power and donald trump has certainly seen that. i hope he takes my advice and doesn't mess with her. >> i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back. (beep)

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.

let's check in with chris and see what he's working on for "cuomo prime time" at the top of the hour. >> how are you, my friend? we are expectant of a presser about the shooting at the naval base. we have experts and reporters on standby to process it. we'll look at it a little more deeply tonight than just the headline. what is the vetting that goes into it? how do you make the risk assessment and do we treat the saudis different than other countries? if so, why? and we'll go through the new information about rudy giuliani. we see him as the nexus of the investigation. >> coming up, unhappy with your water pressure? mad about your toilet? president trump knows how you feel. the ridiculist is next. 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. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain.

serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. ithere's my career...'s more to me than hiv. my cause... and creating my dream home. i'm a work in progress. so much goes into who i am. hiv medicine is one part of it. prescription dovato is for adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment and who aren't resistant to either of the medicines dolutegravir or lamivudine. dovato has 2 medicines in 1 pill to help you reach and then stay undetectable. so your hiv can be controlled with fewer medicines while taking dovato. you can take dovato anytime of day with food or without. don't take dovato if you're allergic to any of its ingredients or if you take dofetilide. if you have hepatitis b, it can change during treatment with dovato

and become harder to treat. your hepatitis b may get worse or become life-threatening if you stop taking dovato. so do not stop dovato without talking to your doctor. serious side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, liver problems, and liver failure. life-threatening side effects include lactic acid buildup and severe liver problems. if you have a rash and other symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis b or c. don't use dovato if you plan to become pregnant or during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy since one of its ingredients may harm your unborn baby. your doctor should do a pregnancy test before starting dovato. use effective birth control while taking dovato. the most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, nausea, trouble sleeping, and tiredness. so much goes into who i am and hope to be. ask your doctor if starting hiv treatment with dovato is right for you. ♪ ladies and gentlemen mini is a different kind of car. for a different kind of drive. ♪ ladies and gentlemen for the drive to create a new kind of family car,

that became a new kind of race car. for the drive to rebel, zag. for the drive that's inside you. and inside us. that's the drive under the hood of every mini. because every mini is... for the drive. ♪ [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 ♪ time now for the ridiculist. tonight it is less than three weeks before christmas and over at the white house not a

creature is stirring. today president trump started promising to get to the bottom of something that, well, kind of stinks. >> we have a situation where we're looking very strongly at sinks and showers and other elements of bathrooms where you turn the faucets on and areas where there's tremendous amounts of water where it rushes out to sea because it couldn't handle it, they take a shower and water comes dripping out, very quietly dripping out. people are flushing toilets ten times, 15 times, as opposed to once. they end up using more water. so epa is looking at that very strongly at my suggestion. >>. >> people are flushing toilets

ten to 15 times? in the past when the president talks about people, it's either imaginary people, like the number of people he now who voted for hillary clinton multiple times, wearing different hats or it's number two, people are talking about it, which means really he's talking about it. this mess smells like a number one and number two. it's big but it sounds like less of a water pressure issue and more like a hazmat situation. president trump is not the only one having porcelain problems. senator rand paul is as well. maybe this is why they've become such allies. back in 2011 senator is addressing an energy official. >> frankly, my toilets don't work in my house and i blame you and people like you who want to tell me what i can install in my house, what i can do. you restrict my choices. >> it restricts his choices with

all due respect, senator paul, your choices such as they are should be obvious, unless i'm missing something, sort of a binary. senator paul scolded the energy official which precipitated the best response. probably in the history of senate hearings. >> i can help you find a toilet that works. >> will somebody please help rand paul find a toilet that works. good grief! oh, and i can help you find a toilet that works. and his other complaint, energy saving light bulbs and you know who else was on a tear about that today as well. >> they got rid of the light bulb that people got used to and the new bulb is many times more expensive. and i hate to say it, it doesn't make you look as good of course being a vain person, that's very important to me. it gives you an orange look.

i don't want an orange look. has anyone noticed that? so we'll have to change those bulbs in at least a couple of rooms where i am in the white house. >> so, first of all, i give props to the president for saying to the president he's vain, it's self-aware, self-deprecating. it's charming. it's not something we often see. i like that. i think it reflects well on him. as for the light bulbs are the reason he sort of has an orange glow? i wouldn't ordinarily even bring this up, comment about somebody's glow but he did and he blamed the light bulbs. i don't want to be rude but i don't think it's the orange -- i don't think he looks orange because of the light bulbs. see the line? it's a make-up or it's a tanning lotion or a spray or something. whatever's going on there, if you look president when he's outside, it's clearly not a

light bulk problem. you can see the line around his face where the make-up or the tanner or whatever it is stops. it's a whole system. it's a whole thing. but, hey, you heard him say his administration is looking into all this so let's leave it there. sleep well, america, and know the president is working hard from his throne room to get the gridlock unclogged on the ridiculist. i want to hand it over to chris and "cuomo prime time." >> as good a metaphor for the state of play as there can be. anthony, thank you very much. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." as you know, a u.s. naval base has become a crime scene for the second time in a week. this time it was a saudi military member named as the murderer. we're waiting on a presser from the fbi. they took over the case. now, one obvious item of interest is motive, specifically was this an act of terror? that means something different to the fbi. they have to check certain boxes.