thanks for joining us. we are on the cusp of history. tomorrow the president of the united states is likely to be impeached. the house rules committee is arguing to decide the terms and debate before a final vote. the senate also arguing about whether to allow witnesses. today president trump released a letter on white house stationery written to house speaker nancy pelosi. the president says he's writing it for history to express his, quote, strongest and most powerful protest against the impeachment effort in the house. it's certainly not the kind of letter anyone might think a president would write or send. some might kindly describe it as fiery. others would call it at times unhinged. in the letter he describes speaker pelosi and the democrats as, quote, deranged and spiteful, saying no intelligent person believes what you're saying. quote, you are declaring open

war on american democracy, the president of the united states writes, not to an invading army or an enemy who has hit us with an unprovoked attack. no, president is telling the people's representatives they are declaring war on american democracy. the president also writes, quote, more due process was afforded to those accused in the salem witch trials. he writes to pelosi that at the end of the mueller investigation, quote, you did not apologize. you did not recant. you did not ask to be forgiven. you showed no remorse, no capacity for self-reflection. the president, who never apologizes, never recants, as for self-reflection, i think that's pretty apparent. he's apparently now dismayed that nancy pelosi has not apologized to him. one of the more curious phrases in the letter, you have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word "impeachment." that's gotten a lot of headlines. it does beg the question how does one cheapen the importance of an already very ugly word? again, the president said this

letter is written for the purposes of history. more likely it's to capture today's news cycle before tomorrow's impeachment vote. history remembers many important words from our presidents, but this is not the gettysburg address. today the president was asked if he takes any responsibility for the impeachment, and this is what he said. >> mr. president, do you take any responsibility for the fact that you're about to be impeached? >> no, i don't take any. zero to put it mildly. >> zero responsibility. he was also asked back in january if the buck stopped with him, and he replied the buck stops with everybody. keeping them honest, there are a few things the president left out of his letter, namely his pursuit of a fictional election interference claim about a server in ukraine, his pursuit of a favor from ukraine's president, a favor that would target his main opponent and help him in the next election, his withholding from ukraine of aid and to this date still a white house meeting. the lack of evidence that president trump was concerned about corruption in ukraine involving anyone whose last name

wasn't biden. comments to the press about wanting ukraine to investigate biden. that's not talked about. comments about wanting china to investigate as well, and so on. he also does not mention the key role his personal tv attorney and bagman rudy giuliani has played, which is curious as giuliani has been quite vocal over the past 24 hours. in a range of interviews, he's been very open about his attempt to fuel the unproven allegations against the bidens that started us down this road in the first place. he told cnn that he and the president are, quote, on the same page and that mike pompeo, the secretary of state, was aware of the push to oust the ukrainian ambassador. and the reason he wanted to do this, he tells cnn, because she had been, quote, blocking witnesses to come to the united states, and she'd been doing it for a year. he told "the new yorker," quote, he needed her out of the way, unquote, because she was making the investigations difficult. which means on the eastern of the -- spent the past two months saying didn't happen. investigate joe biden not on behalf of the united states as

he and his supporters have been trying to spin but on behalf of his personal client, donald trump. as we said, speaker pelosi responded to his letter just a short time ago. here's what she told cnn's manu raju. >> your reaction to the president's letter? >> no reaction. it's ridiculous. >> you have no reaction? why not? >> we haven't really fully read it. we've been working. i've seen the essence of it, though, and it's really sick. >> jim acosta joins us now. jim, the letter, talk to me about it. when was it written? how was it written? was it lawyers and the president or what? >> reporter: well, we understand, anderson, this was written over the last several days. this was not something that's been in the works for weeks or anything of that nature. we understand that stephen miller, one of the president's top speechwriters as well as other top aides in the west wing were helping the president draft this speech. we did pick up on some consternation inside the west wing earlier this evening. there are some officials who feel as though they were left out of the process of writing

this letter. but i will tell you, anderson, talking to a couple officials just within the last hour, the white house counsel's office did have some input into this letter according to these officials. but these officials were saying, anderson, listen, these are the president's own words. you can have stephen miller write some of these lines down and so on, but if you go through this letter to nancy pelosi, five or six pages long, it is essentially a summation of where the president has been over the last several months when it comes to impeachment. and according to one official i spoke with earlier this evening, if you want to know and understand the president's state of mind tonight, read that letter. >> and is it known what the president is going to do tomorrow? i mean is he going to be watching this as many people will somebody what's on his schedule? >> reporter: yeah, i was in the oval office with him earlier today, and he said he's not going to be watching these proceedings. he's going to be working on other things here at the white house. we understand the president is not going to give some sort of formal speech in respond to his impeachment in the house

tomorrow. that at least is the planning at this point. he is going to have a rally tomorrow evening in michigan where we expect him perhaps to expand upon where he's at right now in this letter. but, anderson, what we were picking up on in the oval office, and obviously what's written across all of these pages of this letter is that this is a president -- and he told me this earlier this afternoon -- who is taking zero responsibility for the historic predicament that he finds himself in tonight. and i expect him to have that tone moving forward, anderson. >> jim acosta, thanks very much. we want to bring in our political and legal team. david gergen, jeffrey toobin, jen psaki, gloria borger, and mike shields. does the president's letter make sense? is it just to capture the news cycle on this day? this is the headline going into the impeachment. >> that's not what he said. he said it's his bid for history. i think right now it's going to go down as a letter from a two-bit dictator in a banana

republic. it has that kind of quality to it. but you just think about our history and the people we've had, the men of letters who have been in this office. you mentioned the gettysburg address. when you think about donald trump's letters, this letter and his other pronouncements going up against jefferson, going up against lincoln on the second inaugural or gettysburg, against franklin roosevelt and the fire side chats, jack kennedy and his inaugural, this is going to be in those annals as a representation of this president, for a man who apparently, as we were told by his close folks, that he cares mostly about his legacy these days? this is what he's contributing to his legacy? >> i mean it is extraordinary, jeff, when you think lincoln gives the gettysburg address and talks about the civil war, which would lead to the deaths of countless americans, and there's not language like that in that. >> you know, but this is -- it's perfect. i mean this is exactly who he

is. i mean this is not -- you know, if you saw president trump give something that sounded like the gettysburg address, would you believe it at all? i mean we know this man by now, and this narcissism, this lying, this, you know, self-obsession, this ignorance of history, this is all what's here. and you know what? he got elected president of the united states behaving exactly this way, and he may get re-elected behaving exactly this way. but there's no mystery about who he is. this is who he is. >> this is -- this is like the longest tweet in american history. it's a tweet. it's just extended, shall we say? and it shows you that this is a president who has no self-control whatsoever. i am sure there were people who said, maybe just a couple, who said to him, are you sure you want to do this? are you sure you want to say this? maybe a couple of them egged him on. >> you think by now there's somebody who actually said that

still? >> hope springs eternal. >> you can tell the paragraphs that the lawyers put in actually because it's cut and paste. you can really see that. but if i were a senator now and i were thinking, okay, i've got to now judge this man's fitness for office and this thing landed like a grenade today? i'd be raising a lot of questions about that. >> mike, i mean is this something you would want to represent the president? >> well, a few things. first of all, we've talked about. the president is his own chief of staff, his own communications director. and so he did not get to where he is by not standing up and fighting for himself his entire life. and so he's not -- he's damned if the night before he's going to be impeached in a political impeachment, not stand up for himself and say what he thinks and what he wants to do. so you're right. he did write this, and i'm sure his lawyers added some things in because it's about impeachment. this is him, and i think from a historical perspective, he represents this time. he got elected by 63 million

americans who are angry and who are upset with people in d.c. and in new york and other places who don't like a guy like him. and what the democrats are doing this week is really -- it's amazing how personal they make this and how much it's clear they don't like him, which is why impeachment is turning against them. so, yeah, he's being himself. his voters and supporters are rallying behind him. that's the guy they want to see standing up. they didn't think republicans stood up enough until this guy came along, and they love it. >> i do agree with mike this is who he is, and while it's alarming, it isn't particularly surprising. i wouldn't expect democrats to make the letter be what they're going to run against this week. i think what senator schumer, which is making this about preventing witnesses from coming, not providing documents, holding republicans accountable for not asking for that. i mean one of the articles is about obstructing congress, and you have republicans in congress who don't seem bothered by that? >> really? do you really think so? it's like i don't know if -- that strikes me as the democrats

playing the republicans' process game. it's like whether this is a fair trial or not. how about going to a foreign leader and saying, give me dirt on my political opponent. that's what this is about. >> i think what leader schumer is also say is in the poll, more than 60% of republicans think that witnesses should come and testify, and he wants republicans who are vulnerable to be held accountable for that. so i don't think they're going to be pushing the letter. as speaker pelosi just did, she's like, this is crazy. this is ridiculous. i think that's what democrats will do, but they're going to push harder on their own process -- >> the president also wanted witnesses to testify until mitch mcconnell told him that wouldn't be a good idea because we want to get this over with. but it was the president who said, i want to hear from people who can clear my name. and suddenly the republicans are saying, oh, no, we're -- >> on the obstruction thing, so it turns out during the nixon impeachment, hillary clinton went and did some research on

how many times presidents had been accused of obstructing congress, thinking this is going to be a rare occurrence, and i'm going to get to use this. as it turns out, every president from george washington forward was accused because that's a balance of power issue. i'm a house guy, so i tend to like the legislative branch, so i kind of get it. but that's balance of power issue. so she said let's not use it, and it actually got published. >> well, but -- >> nixon sent witnesses up to the hill to testify. nixon sent -- >> i'm talking about obstructing congress as an actual impeachment issue. >> that was the question he faced, of obstruction. he actually -- and he actually turned over the tapes when the court ruled. there was oversight. >> my point is every president since washington had been accused at some point of obstructing congress because the legislative branch does that to the executive branch. >> of course, about an individual subpoena or an individual witness. what we have seen here and never

before in american history is a complete refusal to produce any witnesses or any documents. that's why he's being impeached, not because they're having a fight about an individual subpoena. >> yeah, but this is a political issue. the american people are looking at this, and this is why the impeachment has been going down like this in terms of people's interest. >> you're making -- >> because accusing him of obstruction -- i'm actually agreeing with your original point. when you have an article of impeachment and obstruction of jurn, the american people go, oh, that's just congress fighting. it takes away from the thing -- >> i would say just on the polls, because i know this is a favorite talking point of you and others. almost 50% of the public thinks the president should be impeached and removed from office. that is a number that has gone up since last summer. it's gone up for independents. it's gone up and down, yes, but the numbers have moved. and for democrats, this is not as big of a political loser, i think. we've seen that by how many of the moderates have come out and

actually chosen to do what they think is right. it's democrats are united on this. >> suffolk usa today poll had trump leading all of the democratic rivals for president, this just came out yesterday, while this is going on. in the battleground states, his numbers are getting better according to the emerson poll. >> it is a politically difficult thing for them to do, but at the same time, the democrats in their districts also feel strongly. >> polls go either way. biden's ahead by seven. every democrat's ahead by a margin over trump in a different national poll. >> let's take a quick break. we've got new comments from senate democratic leader chuck schumer warning the president not to tangle with speaker pelosi. up here at the dewar's distillery, all our whiskies are aged,

blended and aged again. it's the reason our whisky is so extraordinarily smooth. dewar's. double aged for extra smoothness. and a democratic congresswoman joins me to discuss the support and pushback she's received ever since declaring her the epson ecotank. no more buying cartridges.

look at all this ink it comes with. big ink tanks. lots of ink. no more cartridges. incredible amount of ink. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill.

of a lifetime. it's "progressive on ice." everything you love about car insurance -- the discounts... the rate comparisons... and flo in a boat. ♪ insurance adventure awaits at "progressive on ice." tickets not available now or ever.

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!

democrats have been firing back at the letter president trump sent house speaker pelosi a day before his likely impeachment. you heard speaker pelosi a response basically blowing it off. a short time ago senate democratic leader chuck schumer weighed in, warning the president not to tangle with speaker pelosi. >> well, he's obviously under a great deal of duress, but if he thinks he can bully nancy pelosi into backing off, he's with the wrong customer. the amazing thing about president trump as president and before, the very things he does, he accuses others of doing. bully. this is the most bullying ment president we have ever had. accusing people of things? this president accuses people of things all the time, every day. so he ought to look into the mirror. >> back with our team, political and legal analysts. mike, during the break you were saying you worked on the hill with the gingrich time. you see mistakes being repeated. >> oh, yeah. >> by democrats. >> i highly recommend everyone watch the a & e special "the

clinton affair" and watch it while this is going on to compare. it's brilliant. it's really well done. >> you know you are a political nerd when you are going to itunes to get -- >> yes. but i also lived it. and what i can tell you is i see democrats making some of the very same -- many of the very same mistakes that we made in 1998. >> like what? >> well, first of all, the investigation shifted with clinton from one thing to the next thing to the next thing. then finally it was like we got him. what that did was tell the american you were just trying to find him on something. this is political. secondly, republicans hated bill clinton, viscerally hated him. you just heard chuck schumer on there. we had henry hyde as the chairman of judiciary and we kept trying to put henry hyde out there because he would only dryly talk about the law. there was eight counts of criminality in the starr report. so we should talk about that, yet we couldn't help ourselves. chuck schumer, he's a bully. the thing that he does, he lies

all the time. so their messaging starts to drift into how much we hate donald trump. >> there's only one problem with that view is that he does lie all the time. and you know, what are they supposed to do, ignore that? what are they supposed to do it. >> do you want to impeach him and have the country with you or do you want to call him a liar? >> how about both? >> bill clinton was a liar. we kept calling him a liar, and -- >> you have to remember what he lied about compared to going to a foreign country and jeopardizing -- >> bill clinton had eight criminal referrals. there's nothing criminal about this. criminal referrals. he was disbarred. so we kept saying -- we have an obligation to talk about this. this is my conscience. we have to impeach him. we don't have a choice. >> bill clinton lied about sex. this is about -- >> and that was their message.

it was only about sex. >> this is about the president of the united states going to a foreign power to get dirt on -- let me just point out. there's one more political difference between now and clinton. at the time, and david gergen and jeffrey toobin will remember this and gloria probably too. at the time, support for impeachment was in the 20s, and bill clinton's popularity was in the 70s. >> exactly. >> that is quite different from what we're looking at -- >> people thought he was doing -- >> david? >> i actually agree with you on some of this. listen, i think nancy pelosi has been terrific. you have to give her a lot of credit. but the democratic messaging on this has not worked well. it's so many different things and i think the country has gotten tired of how repetitive the conversation has been. >> but when you think of the -- >> one thing chuck schumer said in that erin burnett interview is why donald trump won. he looked in the camera. erin burnett said, well, mitch mcconnell said he's not an impartial person. are you impartial? yes, i am. that is exactly why donald trump

won and why he'll probably win again, because he's lying. we all know he's lying. chuck schumer is not impartial. >> mitch mcconnell said -- >> he actually told the truth. it's a rare thing in d.c. >> and lindsey graham came out and said, well, you know, i'm not an impartial juror. >> i'm saying this is why the voters elected trump, because they don't care about the fact checking when they see chuck schumer do stuff like this. >> but you said you're a hill guy. you must care at some point, at some place in your psyche about whether we maintain the institutions and the mores that this guy is running over, that mcconnell is beginning to run over now. you must worry about the legacy of the republican party at this point. >> i do. and one of the things i worry about also which the president outlined in his letter today is when it becomes so partisan. and many people have warned about this, that we go all the way to impeachment for something like this as opposed to say a censure vote or just bringing it out to the public and then say

let the voters decide in an election. so i care a lot about the institution and norms, and i think they're being trampled by the democrats in this case. >> but i think -- and i keep going back to nancy pelosi again on this because at first she said that impeachment wasn't worth it, that trump wasn't worth it. and so she wasn't for impeachment. then came the phone call with ukraine, the withholding the meeting and funds, and the president not asking to investigate corruption but in fact asking for an announcement of an investigation of corruption. and when you put all of that together, her point of view was -- and i think these moderate democrats' point of view is, how can we not pay attention to that? and if you just censure the president, what does that mean? >> it certainly doesn't protect us -- >> it says voters, you're in charge of -- >> what does that mean. >> censure also implies a certain acceptance of responsibility on the part of the person who engaged in the misconduct, not someone who says that the phone call was maybe

flawed or maybe -- okay, he says it was perfect. what human being talks about their own behavior has perfect? i've never met anyone like that, but the president says that. so how can you respond to that except by confronting it. >> i think if you look at the circumstance now, what the republican party is doing is they are normalizing that any president, a democrat or republican, can go to a foreign power and seek political dirt on their opponent. that's what's happening right now. that's your republican party, and that's what they're doing. >> the democrats are normalizing using political attacks to impeach someone. if joe biden gets elected president, do you think republicans will try and impeach him? based on this, i think they probably will. >> if joe biden goes to a foreign partner, foreign ally or adversary and seeks political dirt on mitt romney or some republican, i would say he should be impeached. >> if joe biden brags about how he got a foreign government to do something that related to his son, that's enough for an investigation -- >> but it didn't relate --

>> mike, you can't make the normalization argument when you watch how democrats are behaving. they are not above anything normalization. and secondly, the american people are sick of us wanting to normalize things when their lives aren't -- >> your argument is about whether or not the democrats should have gone forward with this. do you believe the fundamental accusation by democrats, which is that the president was asking for a favor for a foreign power to investigate his political rival? >> no, i don't. you and i have talked about this, so i know you're not going to like my response. but joe biden was the sitting vice president of the united states. it is legitimate for the united states to ask another country, was our sitting vice president in his official duties as the vice president doing something corrupt? there's nothing wrong with that. >> but also there's absolutely no evidence of that. >> well, you have to have an investigation to get the evidence. >> wait a second. we know. joe biden was representing the view and the position of the united states government, the european union, as well as the imf. and he was asking for the firing of some be that the ukrainian people were asking to be fired.

>> you don't think there was any conflict whatsoever when his son is sitting on a company that was being investigated by the people he talked about. >> the person he wanted to be fired was not even investigating burisma at the time. >> so no conflict? >> no. >> we've got to move on, but the thing i don't understand about your argument is that if he believes there is actually corruption and the bidens were corrupt, there are levers within the united states to investigate corruptions by the vice president of the united states. there's email trails. why go to a power which you claim is corrupt to launch an investigation which theoretically because they are corrupt would be corrupt? i mean why not use the fbi or the treasury department or whomever? that makes no sense. >> i believe he was asking the new leader of the country to work with us on this and to announce you're going to go and do something on this. >> he just wanted the announcement. >> there's no investigation in the united states, kprecorrect? >> the other reason why this thing falls apart is because the

aid was never actually held up. >> we've got to take a quick break. on the eve of the house votes on impeachment, rallies are under way in several cities tonight. you're looking at portland, oregon, demonstrators calling for president trump's removal from office. we'll talk it over with a democrat from a swing district who has announced she will vote for impeachment. she had a town hall a few days ago, facing some criticism in the crowd for that decision. we'll talk to her ahead. when i rent a car, i never compromise.

too shabby! too much! i can rent this? for that price? absolutely. it's just right! book your just right rental at thrifty.com.

itintroducing the new braava jet m6 robot mop. it's just right! 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. we need a solution.ut their phones down. 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. can you tell me the story again? every family has their own unique story.

give your family the chance to discover theirs this holiday season, with ancestry.

there's more breaking news tonight. rallies supporting the impeachment of president trump are under way tonight in several cities. a coalition of liberal groups organized the demonstrations across the united states. this comes on the eve of the

historic vote on two articles of impeachment in the full house tomorrow. some members of congress are still deciding how they're going to vote. first term michigan democrat elissa slotkin, who represents a swing district, says she will support impeachment. the white house is hitting back saying she, quote, sold out her constituents. the congresswoman faced applause, some outrage when she explained her decision yesterday at a town hall meeting. take a look. >> the thing that was different for me is this very, very basic idea that the president of the united states would reach out to a foreign power and ask for an investigation for personal political gain. while we may not agree, i hope you believe me when i tell you that i made this decision out of principle and out of a duty to protect and defend the constitution. i feel that in my bones, and i will stick to that regardless of what it does to me politically because this is bigger than politics. [ cheers and applause ]

>> congresswoman elissa slotkin joins us now. that's a really hard thing to do, and i respect any politician who is able to, you know, accept the protest, hear it, deliver what they want to say, and yet still do it in a way that is respectful. >> yeah. i mean that's the job, right? i mean before i ran in 2017, i remember my representative wouldn't show up for town halls, and it was the big health care vote. i remember saying, like, you don't get to just choose to ignore your constituents. so how could i go and do the same thing? >> you've said this is the last thing you wanted to be doing in your first term as a congressperson. >> yeah. i mean, listen, i got into this because i wanted to work on issues that help people's lives. and for me, you know, it's one of the most serious things that you can do as a congressperson is to be involved in an impeachment. and i just -- that's not what i wanted to be spending my time on. >> is it something that the voters in your district, supporters of the president or not supporters of the president, have been talking to you about

through -- i mean was the mueller report something they were talking to you about? is this something that's foremost on their minds, or is it health care, prescription drug prices, all the rest? >> honestly it's like the kitchen table issues. i tell people a town hall attracts a crowd. that's for sure. >> but you're getting larger crowds now. >> yeah, we're definitely getting larger crowds. but i'm a congresswoman so i shop at weird hours. so if i'm going to target or kroger at 9:30 at night and going shopping, there's very few people there. i cannot get through the grocery store without someone grabbing me by the arm and talking to me about the price of health care, that they can't afford their son's insulin. they couldn't send their daughter to summer camp because they couldn't afford four inhalers that were required by camp. these are things people are talking about, how they do better in their lives, not frankly impeachment, the mueller report. >> so earlier we had a panel, and people were saying, well, look, jen psaki was saying as soon as it's done, democrats want to move back and talk about

other stuff that the voters are caring about. if that is the case, then why go through this impeachment if it's taking away focus from things that voters care about? >> listen, i'm a former cia officer, and i will tell you you don't get to pick everything that you work on. sometimes the world happens to you. and in this case for me, you know, i resisted and did not want to be involved in impeachment for many, many months. and then the facts changed, and then in spent, you know, this very, very simple idea -- it really isn't complicated for me, that when i heard the president and his lawyer acknowledge that they reached out to a foreign leader to ask for help in an american political system, in our system, that for me was different. and that for me was severe and all through the inquiry, you know, when i went back and really looked at all the documents, they were supporting that same idea. and that can't be normal. >> so to the people who were in your town hall who are supporting the president and don't like your decision, who

say, well, why not let the voters decide, we have an election coming up. >> that's where i was for many months. i had colleagues who sort of right out of the gate were supportive in impeachment, in january of this past year, i had colleagues who came out after the mueller report. for me, i really kept saying, you know, i don't like the president's conduct, but let 2020 decide. and then the president talked about bringing foreigners and getting them involved in the very election i was depending on to have a democratic process. and this was prospective, not retrospective. we were now talking about a future election, not 2016, not what happened in the past. and to me that is just fundamentally different. he asked a foreigner to help investigate a political rival. he used the power of his office, and not for the national security interest, which is totally normal, right? i worked for president bush. i worked for president obama. it is totally normal for a president to wield their power. that's typical, for the national security interests of the country. we put the screws to countries

all the time, but this is for personal gain. it was for him. and that's -- that's what a king does. that's not what a president does. >> congresswoman slotkin, i appreciate your time. >> thank you. up next, a group of republicans who have -- are forring a group with a single purpose to ensure his defeat in next year's election. we'll be right back. mike bloomberg's never been afraid of tough fights,

the ones that make a true 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.

the republicans who have never shied away from criticizing president trump now in an op-ed published in "the new york times," they band together and go much further. in a piece head lined "we are republicans and want trump defeated" they formed a political action committee called the lincoln project and not only want to defeat the. but also what they call trumpism. republicans have embraced and copied mr. trump's cruelty and defended and even adopted his corruption. they have replaced it with trumpism, an empty faith led by a bogus prophet. among the authors is george conway, the husband of kellyanne conway, counselor to the president, and rick wilson, the author of "everything trump touches dies." rick joins me now. so, rick, how does the super pac

plan to defeat president trump and trumpism at the ballot box? >> well, anderson, one of the tools that we have at our disposal is about 120 years of collective political experience and knowledge and the ability to use a lot of tools we built over time on behalf of the republican party in order to try to save the country from a president who has sort of hollowed out the old gop like a parasite from the inside out and to apply some pressure onto the people that are his enablers and supporters and hopefully to be able to engage in enough commitments to go into the swing states where the race will be decided in 2020 and to make a meaningful difference. remember donald trump won by about 77,000 votes in the three swing states in the upper midwest. we believe that there are a number of folks out there who are not comfortable with trump, who are clearly not happy with the direction that he's taken this country, and that they're reachable. and we're not trying to, you

know, convince the hard core red hat maga guys, but there is a huge swath of people, republicans, soft democrats, independents who pulled the trigger for donald trump in 2016. we believe they're gettable. we believe they can be moved, and that's why we formed this project, because we believe it's vital to put our country and the security and the stability of our country over the partisan instinct that we ordinarily would have stuck with as republicans. >> but given that elections so far in the u.s. are a binary choice, aren't you dependent on who the democratic candidate is, and so i mean it's a hard sell until you know -- >> sure. >> -- especially who the democratic candidate would be. >> well, it's an easy sell, but donald trump is a profoundly corrupt and profoundly unstable person. we know that part going in. the democrats, you know, we're not trying to make decisions for the democratic party. we're not trying to tell them who to pick as their nominee or how to run their messaging.

we're trying to make sure that we have a set of tools in the toolbox that puts donald trump in a position where he won't have an easy open field, especially because there are a lot of people on our side who can in some ways, you know, punch harder and cut deeper than the democratic nominee or the democratic party will be able to. >> so are you talking beyond, you know, trying to raise money to get ads in swing districts? >> we are. >> are you talking about getting republicans out campaigning essentially, not campaigning for themselves but just campaigning against president trump? >> well, anderson, one of the things we want to do is put trump's enablers on notice that there is a political and a moral cost to supporting a president who is engaged in behavior that is corrupt at best and corrosive almost every day to our norms and our democracy. and so we want to be able to go out into the swing states and say to people who are protecting donald trump, you know, there are some folks out here who are

going to come and ring your bell and to bring some effective messaging and some effective political targeting into this process, and the group of us -- and it's an expanding group by the way. you would be shocked how many people have reached out inside the republican world that aren't, you know, hard trumpers today, to say let me help, get me involved. so we're certainly feeling like there's a lot of uplift to this thing and we feel like there's a prospect here to do some real -- some real good. as i said, to put the country before the political fortunes of donald trump. >> rick wilson, always good to have you on. thank you. >> thank you, anderson. still to come, the rules committee is wrapping up and we're starting to see what tomorrow's big day is going to look like. we'll get a live update from capitol hill. most powerful signal. and we want to keep you connected with the new iphone 11. so t-mobile is giving you an iphone 11 on us for each new line of unlimited. for yourself, your family or your small business.

keep everyone connected and hurry into t-mobile today, to get up to 4 iphone 11s on us. only at t-mobile.

let's check in with chris and see what he's working on for "cuomo prime time."

chris? >> we all know the president had his last chance to reach out to pelosi and he blew it. he doubled down on being dumb and deranged and now he's going to end up on doorstep's history -- i'm going to bring in tom reed, republican from western new york who defends the president. i have john podesta on tonight to talk about what it was like during clinton and how they handled things differently and why. we're also going to cover that murder on morningside heights. that columbia university kid. i haven't seen a crime like that, coop, since the central park five. there is a problem in this country with crime, including ho homicide, and this is an example of who is doing it. this is kids this time. we're taking a look. it matters. >> setting the stage for impeachment night. what is happening tonight on capitol hill. 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!

janie, come here. check this out. let me see. she looks... kind of like me. yeah. that's because it's your grandma when she was your age. oh wow. that's...that's amazing. oh and she was on the debate team. yeah, that's probably why you're the debate queen. - mmhmm. - i'll take that.

look at that smile. i have the same dimples as her. yeah. the same placements and everything. unbelievable. the same placements and everything. thlook at all this ink no more bit comes with.es. big ink tanks. lots of ink. no more cartridges. incredible amount of ink. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. [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 roomba i7+ with cleanng base automatic dirt disposal and allergenlock™ bags that trap 99% of allergens, so they don't escape back into the air. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba™ as we said at the top of the program, rules have to be set in

place to set the guidelines for the two articles improved by the judiciary committee. that debate has been going on pretty much all day and now into the evening in the house rules committee. that's where cnn's phil mattingly has been watching and listening. he joins us now. what's the status of the hearing now? >> reporter: we are almost done, which is saying a lot after about ten-plus hours over the course of the day. the debate has been what you've seen over the last eight, nine, ten weeks. the republicans very certain to oppose the republicans in this move and democrats making very clear they believe they have a case, a solid case and both articles of impeachment they have propose, abuse of power and o obstruction of congress are both merited and will likely have the votes tomorrow. it's important to note what this process was throughout the course of today is setting up the rules of the road for tomorrow, laying out how the debate will actually work. we have an idea of what democrats are proposing, something they should vote on here in a couple of minutes, depending on what other issues republicans raise.

that will be this. there will be six hours of debate on the two articles of impeachment. those will be divided evenly between the republicans and democrats. any members who want to speak can pretty much log their questions or at least log their effort to speak at the moment with their leaders and will likely get an opportunity to do just that tomorrow. you're not going to see leaders speaking for an hour at a time, or even more. you're going to see a number of people from both parties break into two-minute increments to talk about why they oppose or support these articles of impeachment. another key thing they're playing out after the vote on the articles of impeachment, they'll also have a vote on a resolution to appoint managers for people when they move over to the senate for a trial, crucial things to keep an eye on, laying out the path forward. but now, anderson, they don't have a final vote yet, but we at least know what the rules of the road are going to be tomorrow when the house takes up this historic moment leading to this historic vote. >> you said six hours of debate and then they're going to vote on the managers. and then the actual impeachment. >> yeah.

so they'll do six hours of debate and then have a vote on the two articles of impeachment. they made the point of separating the two articles of impeachment. so there will be -- even though they were in the same nine-page resolution, each individual article will receive a full house floor vote. anderson, that's important because we saw a democratic member from a swing district say he's going to vote yes on one article and no on other. you can split votes but we don't expect that to happen often. over the course of the day there will be a vote and then a vote on the actual rule, the rule they're debating tonight. then we'll have the six hours of debate. than a vote on the managers for the future senate trial. underscoring if you know you're going to have a vote on the managers, there's no doubt these articles of impeachment are going to pass. now it's more a matter of when. and that will be dictated on what hurdles republicans throw up in the process. we know the rules of the road, six hours of debate spread

evenly, then a vote on the two articles, then a vote on the managers. here on capitol hill there has been quite a parlor game on who speaker pelosi will pick to present this case to the united states senate. we'll have an answer to that tomorrow as well. >> i got to set my alarm clock. what time tomorrow does this start? >> you'll want to be paying attention at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. that's when the house is expected to open up. there will be an hour of debate on the rule itself what they're working on tonight, starting around 10:00, some time after 10:00. once they're done with that, that will kick off the debate itself. speaker pelosi in the letter she sent to the entire caucus, i'm sure you guys have been talking about it tonight. talking about the stakes, talking about the moment for her caucus, why this is a somber issue but the most important kind of issue they have to vote on. made clear she wants all the members of her caucus to be on the house floor tomorrow when the house floor opens up. there will be votes early. they want everybody there to be a part of this, underscoring how important this moment is, anderson. >> phil mattingly, you'll be there 9:00 a.m. tomorrow.

i'll be covering it with wolf and jake tapper and all the rest. news continues. want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." chris? >> thank you very. excellent coverage tonight. i'm chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." reality is setting in for this president. he is about to be impeached in all likelihood. what's unreal is how in this final moment that could define how this goes, he's trying to burn down the house in a letter for the ages that the speaker is calling sick tonight. here's the letter, but you will not believe what's in it but more importantly what it does to this president. it is some the wildest trump arguments yet. a night like this, compared with what bill clinton did, we'll do that tonight, you'll see how the choices you make can lead you to very different places.