it's been quite a day. it's going to be quite a night. i want to turn it over to chris for cuomo prime time. >> thank you, coop. i am chris cuomo. welcome to a special midnight edition of prime time. the president of the united states has been impeached. it's only the third time we've ever had this happen but we've never had one like this. history has been made and it's still being written. the speak every of the house dropped a big cliff-hanger after the votes. she isn't committing to when she will send the two articles of impeachment to the senate. now, first of all, can she delay it? why would she delay it? what does it mean? all we know for sure is it's time to get after it. you know, part of the task, especially on an historic occasion like this, is to figure out what matters. the absolute here is that the 45th president of the united

states, donald j. trump, has been impeached. that word will follow his legacy no matter what else is involves just like it does with bill clinton. that's for certain. what happens next? now we're in the world of uncertainty. the road ahead, we know there's supposed to be a senate trial, but when? the two articles of impeachment passed in the house, speaker pelosi says she won't send them over to the republican-controlled senate until she gets a sense of what the plans are for their trial. >> we have legislation approved by the rules committee that will enable us to decide how we will send over the articles of impeachment. so far we haven't seen anything that looks fair to us, so hopefully it will be fair and when we see what that is, we'll send our managers. >> could you withhold the articles for weeks until you get what you consider a fair trial? >> well, again, we'll decide

what that dynamic is, but we hope that the resolution of that process will be soon in the senate. >> now, this is not something we have done very often. there's not a lot of precedent. they have rules on either side, but they kind of get rewritten each time, and the constitution is very light on what has to happen and, more importantly, on how it has to happen. now, we're going to talk about this, and it's going to be debated over the next couple of days. i know, i know. you thought it was over. it's not over. but what is for certain is that this president has the tightest grip on his party that i have ever seen in my lifetime. clinton had 31 go against him for the inquiry, 5 go against him on impeachment, and that was about lying about sex. this was serious allegations, and you had zero defections.

yes, justin amash, but he's an independent now. he's not really in the republican party. that is historic, and this president knows it. listen to some of his reaction. >> i'm the first person to ever get impeached and there's no crime. i don't know about you, but i'm having a good time. it's crazy. i'm not worried. i'm not worried because it's always good when you don't do anything wrong, you get impeached. that may be a record that will last forever. but you know what they have done? they've cheapened the impeachment process. >> even when something bad happens to him, it's the best of its kind that's ever happened. but you know what? he's right about the galvanizing of the party, and as much as we can look at some polls that we'll talk about and in the house. in the senate it could be a different story. we'll get into that as well. without any, any measure of reserve, it has been an extraordinary day, and it calls for extraordinary minds to help us process what it means in some of these questions i outlined.

we have elaina plott, rash sha rangappa, wajahat ali. not that early on the east coast, but history never sleeps. so let's leave some of this denser what ifs, what ifs, what ifs for a moment. in terms of first journalistically, history is being written right now. what is it saying thus far? >> i think what it's saying thus far is that, as you said, chris, not only was there not a single republican to break against the president, there wasn't a single republican to even concede that donald trump had acted inappropriately in his calls with president zelensky. i find that quite astounding in terms of measuring the level of partisanship, tribalization in this country right now. what that says about the 2020 election, i don't think we know yet. it is of course the first impeachment to take place during -- well, i guess andrew johnson was also his first term, correct? >> not even a term, right?

he came in after an asa assassinati assassination. >> they decided not to nominate him again. >> so how this plays out with trump actively deciding to run for re-election, how his party treats him accordingly remains to be seen. >> strong point. he is the first president we'll watch run for office with the impeachment on their head. good point. the polls, though, ash -- i'm leaving the toughest stuff for you. we're going deep into the weeds of what the constitution says. the idea of what we know. the last couple of rounds of polls we've seen softening in the numbers on impeachment. however, to take one of your own points, we have seen more people say he did something wrong and i want to hear from some witnesses. but should he be impeached and removed under 50% now for sure? the president's rating up from high 30s to low to mid-40s now. is your head on that a

reflection of how people feel about this? >> no. i think what we learned today is that democracy still works and what those numbers -- i want to say this. if you look at nixon's water gate hearings, at the beginning of the hearings, the approve for impeachment was 19%. fast forward 13 months after the secret evidence came out, the highest level was 57% without fox news. roger ailes said if nixon had a fox news, he'd never be impeached. now fast forward, it's 2019. i think we can safely say that donald trump has a right wing ecosystem that sometimes operates like state tv. all the polls consistently, about 50%, about half this country wants this president impeached and removed. if you look at the cross tabs, 61% of women. look at that number, women. also look at the numbers of 71% of americans think that the aides should testify. that's about 65-plus percent. and 70% of americans think that what he did was wrong. so you add it all up, i think this is bad for president trump

because democracy works. there was accountability. there was rule of law. and if you read the constitution, the framers intended such a serious remedy for a president like this who would abuse his power to bribe or try to bribe an ally to interfere in the elections. and no matter what happens moving forward, and i would love to get in the weeds, he's only the third president in the country with an asterisk next to him, impeached. >> i think we all have to agree, it's never good to be impeached any way you slice it. asha, we'll go easy first and then we'll all get into the weeds because we've got to figure out what pelosi's play is here, how long she should play it and whether she should play it at all. those are the big questions going forward. how strong politically -- i know you're not a politician -- is the "he did this, he had this coming" argument versus the "i'm not sure that this was supposed to be done." those are going to be the dueling narratives. they had to impeach. he checked every box versus i'm not sure they made the case. which wins?

>> i think they had to do this, and i think the fact that there is -- at least the way things stand right now -- very little chance that he's going to be convicted and removed, shows you the conviction that they had that this had to be memorialized as conduct that cannot be acceptable for anyone occupying the office of the presidency, whether it's democrat or republican, in order for us to sustain our democracy moving forward precisely because as wajahat says, this implicates our core democratic process, the pillar of our democracy, our elections. >> all right. so that's the political. now we have to get to what matters here. the president is in high dudgeon. it's not about him. this is all about the people he cares about being victimized. that's his play. pelosi says, i don't know when we're going to hand over these. i got to see what the senate says. now, first on the political side, how does that play play?

>> my sense is not great, chris. >> because? >> i have spoken to a lot of republicans today who feel that this is, if anything, a gift to mitch mcconnell. this is something that they are in no rush on the senate side to proceed with, but also the argument that you're going to see republicans use to really an i mate the case for trump is they're going to say, pelosi is making the case as are house democrats that donald trump is a national emergency. and yet she is holding off on the process that ostensibly could end with his removal from power. the logic doesn't really seem to co-here. whether it's effective, i'm not sure. but democrats are saying this leaves more time for perhaps more evidence to be uncovered, for the court cases to play out with regard to subpoenas for key witnesses. republicans are telling me that they're ready to fire back and say, you already impeached him. you clearly think your case is good enough. what else do you need to wait for? >> the pushback on the second point is we were just supposed

to give you the accusations. >> uh-huh. >> you're supposed to vet them and try them in the senate, but that's been somewhat lost in the dialogue. that's a good mind-set to be coming into it. from your political perspective -- >> i disagree. >> of course. but why would this be a deernt play for them? >> it's a smart long-term strategic move for the democrats because like james bond villains, mcconnell and graham have said, this is the plot. we're going to be impartial. they have to take a second oath before this play and say we're going to be impartial jurors. go back to that first number we discussed. 71% of americans including a majority of republicans believe that the aides should testify. mcconnell says, i want no witnesses, right? most americans realize in a trial, you need witnesses. so what pelosi is going to do, she could hold on to this. he already has the asterisk of impeachment. she says, we've done our job. you do your job. you conduct a fair trial. i'm going to drag this. i have some leverage. maybe a week, maybe two weeks.

what i'm also going to do if i'm the democrats, long term. play for 2020. go after the vulnerable republican senators who are running. hang mcconnell and trump on them because they're going all in supporting this, right? well, guess what? if you got 50% of this country saying they didn't want this guy impeached and removed, i would say gardner, tillis, ernst, who else? collins and a few others, hey, guys, vulnerable senators, they went all in. they defied the constitution. they defied their oath. they didn't go for the rule of law. we know that half the country wants this guy removed. 71% want witnesses. why didn't you do your job. why did you go with mcconnell? it's a win. >> you're saved by the waj here. we're going to go to break. but when we come back, these are the competing arguments. pelosi can do this because the process is still in the house. and transmittal of the articles of impeachment will therefore be up to them. the other one is, no, it isn't. once impeachment is over, now it is the senate's procedure, and

they can do whatever they want whenever they want. we will take you through which of those is stronger next. ♪ think you need to buy expensive skincare products to see dramatic results? try olay skin care. just one jar of micro-sculpting cream has the hydrating power of 5 jars of a prestige cream, which helps plump skin cells and visibly smooth wrinkles. while new olay retinol24 provides visibly smoother, brighter skin. for dramatic skincare results, try olay. and complete your routine with the olay eye collection. brand power. helping you buy better.

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!

1 in 4 of us millennials have debt we might die with. and most of that debt is actually from credit cards. it's just not right. but with sofi, you can get your credit cards right by consolidating your credit card debt into one monthly payment. including your interest rate right by locking in a fixed low rate today. and you can get your money right with sofi. check your rate in two minutes or less. get a no-fee personal loan up to $100k.

we're portuguese? i thought we were hungarian. can you tell me that story again? behind every question is a story waiting to be discovered. this holiday, start the journey with a dna kit from ancestry.

all right. the speaker causing a bit of stir on this momentous occasion with some questions about when she will transmit the articles of impeachment. let's bring in phil mattingly. not quite a curveball because pelosi will say, i didn't bring this up. you asked me about it, and i have to see what they're doing there, and then we'll figure it out. does that wash in terms of procedure? >> reporter: in terms of can they actually do that? >> yeah. >> the short answer there is yes. i think you kind of hit on it last block. there's ambiguity in terms of what the actual rules are going forward. at least there's certainly ambiguity in the constitution as to whether or not the house has to immediately transmit the articles of impeachment over. the short answer is, no, they

don't. there's nothing that says the speaker has to immediately transmit them over. they haven't appointed managers yet. they haven't informed the senate officially that they passed these articles of impeachment. with that in mind, the speaker can technically hold on to them as long as she wants. >> she has the cover of another vote, right? phil was explaining this to me before we got on air tonight. they do have to have another vote, so you can't smack her on the wrist yet and say you're not supposed to do this, right? there is still one more step? >> that's exactly rye. this he have to have a vote to appoint the managers that would present the case in the united states senate. usually that's the trigger. the articles get sent over physically to the united states senate floor and that's what historically has triggered the senate trial. until that happens, the house can say, look, we haven't done it yet, and therefore we can hold on to them. i think the big question now is, one, how long is the speaker willing to actually do this? two, what will she actually get out of it? there's a lot of talk maybe this will give leverage to democratic leader chuck schumer in the

senate and his negotiations to get a trial that includes witnesses. maybe this will, perhaps most importantly for democrats, give the opportunity to hammer home the message that based on what mitch mcconnell has said about his relationship to the white house, about the fact that he's not, quote, impartial when it comes to this trial, that this isn't going to be a fair process, a process that you and i and everybody up here in the senate is going to eventually lead to the acquittal of the president. i think the big question now is we're in uncharted territory. >> look, the one weird thing that's absolutely going to happen is when mcconnell has to raise his right hand and take an oath before god and on about the constitution that he will be impartial when he just said he isn't. that's going to be a little weird double speak even for washington. what do you know about the appetite of the senate to act immediately? you know, is this something that they're going to necessarily be pissed off about? >> the most interesting thing over here, look, there have been a lot of questions about what a senate trial would look like, the time line, the procedure, the process.

would there be witnesses? there is one thing everybody in the united states senate agrees on, democrat or republican. and that was everybody was going to get the holidays. no matter when the impeachment articles came over, they were going to get agreement to break until sometime the first week of january. i will say this. when you talk to democrats, they have been so keyed on the idea that it only takes four republican senators to come there way to essentially guarantee the trial procedures they want. that would include administration witnesses, people like mick mulvaney. >> it's a simple majority. >> and the idea that withholding those articles helps them get those four republicans or more to come over to their side i think is tenuous at best. the republicans you talk to who are maybe somewhat on the fence about this, not necessarily removing the president, but at least on the process, want this to move in a traditional historically precedentle fashion right now. tomorrow mitch mcconnell speaks on the senate floor at 9:00 a.m.

he's supposed to lay out his view of what comes next. at 10:45, speaker pelosi will have her press conference. shortly after that, pelosi and schumer, i'm told, are expected to meet behind closed doors to kind of plot their process. and throughout all of this, we are going to be talking to every member of the united states senate and try and get a sense of is this something you're okay with? is this something you want to see changed? is this something the house really needs to send something over now? tomorrow is going to be a huge day in terms of what comes next, but right now we don't have a simple answer. you said it's kind of a curveball, not necessarily a curveball. this was a remarkable moment that the speaker would not commit to sending not just tomorrow but on any time line. >> it would have been a real, what we call in the business, bombshell if she said, we're not going to or she had a hard position. as always, it's not just the latest. it's also the greatest understanding we could have. thank you very much. so very interesting. what do we know? pelosi can buy some time because she has to have another vote,

okay? pelosi can buy some time because the senate is in no rush to start this. okay. but if the democrats objective is to shift the onus and to put pressure on them about how they're doing their job, they can't do that until they actually start doing their job. then there is the other biggest factor -- the president. how does he handle it? how does he use it? let's talk to the panel next. the holidays are here and so is t-mobile's newest, 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. -well, audrey's expecting... -twins! grandparents! we want to put money aside for them, so...change in plans. alright, let's see what we can adjust. ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. okay. mom, are you painting again? you could sell these. lemme guess, change in plans? at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. too shabby! too much! i can rent this? for that price?

absolutely. it's just right! book your just right rental at thrifty.com. 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! (children playing) (dog barking) ♪ (music building) 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. [ drathis holiday... ahhhhh!!! -ahhhhh!!! a distant friend returns... elliott. you came back! and while lots of things have changed... wooooah! -woah! it's called the internet. some things haven't. get ready for a reunion 3 million light years in the making. woohoo! -yeah!

our president's been impeached. that is history. the way it happened is also historic. republicans are not just standing in lockstep with president trump. they are arguing he has it worse than jesus did and comparing his

impeachment to pearl harbor. >> when jesus was falsely accused of treason, pontius pilate gave jesus the opportunity to face his accusers. during that sham trial, pontius pilate afforded more rights to jee jeeds us than the democrats have afforded this president. >> on december 7, 1941, a horrific act happened in the united states and president roosevelt said this is a date that will live in infamy. today is another date that will live in infamy. >> i'm joined by elaina, asha and wajahat. look, waj, let's do this the right way. the best reckoning of how upset they must be to make references to the second deadliest attack on american ground ever and the

crucifixion of jesus right before christmas, what does that tell you about their disposition? >> it tells me they've made a faustian bargain with a would be authoritarian, a man who has been coddled his whole life by privilege, nurtured by the cocoon of the presidency, who for the first time in his life is being held accountable and is rage tweeting and rage shouting victimhood. instead of saying you know what? maybe we shouldn't compare president trump to, i don't know, jesus, or maybe the impeachment to cruc fictiifixio staked or having boulders putting on you and accused of being a witch. nothing is going to happen to trump. he walked out perfectly fine. he felt better about himself. the victimhood and the whining emanates from trump and now has infected the republican party. i will say this, elaina and i were talking about this beforehand. the best gift for democrats is trump. he's going to self-destruct just

like he self-impeached. you saw today at that rally. what is it going to be like leading up to 2020? there is no bottom. it's going to get bottomer. >> why do you believe that what he's doing now is perceptible of his weakness and not his strength? this is what galvanizes people the way he was talking to them today. don't underestimate the power of a demagogue. you know, they exist for a reason. there is no opposite word for them. >> it galvanizes his base, right? however, i will say this. this is my bold prediction and if i'm wrong, i will come back on your show. i will eat crow. make it halal. women, this country has underestimated women. the republican party and trump has underestimated and undermined women. women will be the force that will be so disgusted by him. i'm talking about suburban white women, some religious white women, some republican independent women who probably voted for him. the last three or four years,

especially as he attacks greta thunberg, as he attacks nancy pelosi and her teeth, his worst impulses will come out. >> i hear you and i get your prediction. asha, just in the basket of argument, okay? you're a professor of how the law applies to facts, what works in terms of cogency. and to add to waj's disposition on this, congressman dingell, who obviously replaced her departed husband, she responded to the president. she put a tweet out. we can put it up there. i'll read it once they do. this hurt her. the president knew it would hurt her. he wanted it to hurt her. he's okay saying maybe your husband is in hell. he doesn't mean it as a joke. he didn't laugh. he doesn't care. however, for the republicans to compare him to jesus and compare this to pearl harbor and nobody steps out and says, well, that's too much, nobody says that. nobody says to him, whoa, don't say that about the 16-year-old

with asperger's. nobody says don't talk about the dead man that way. isn't that proof of his strength, not his undoing? >> chris, i cannot get into his crazy. honestly, like -- >> how about everybody else's? you can leave him out of it. >> i think what it demonstrates is a cowardice on the part of the people who believe that they either have to get in line or they're going to be thrown out of the tribe. and right now membership means everything when it comes to politics. i do think that what they are essentially trying to do with these analogies is continue to politicize this impeachment and say that this is a tribal thing as elaina mentioned. i think it's for that reason that going back to this procedural issue on whether pelosi should move these impeachment articles over -- >> you think she can? >> i think she can hold for a little while. >> she's got the resolution vote. >> i think this idea that they can hold it like a sword of

damocles in order to obtain -- you know, as leverage to get the senate to change its rules i don't think is -- that she can do that indefinitely. and i don't think it is the right thing to do democratically. if we look at the criminal justice analog, when someone is charged, they do have a right to a speedy trial. so you can't -- >> larry tribe argues -- >> and professor tribe, you know -- >> what would you do if you had an indictment, and as you were delivering it over, you had solid information that the judge and/or jury were not going to do their job? would you continue with the indictment? >> well, in that case what you'd be able to do is get the jurors kicked off. if you have evidence that someone is not an impartial juror or somehow compromised -- you cannot do that here. but because the republicans have been so brazen in their willingness to say that they're not going to be impartial, let them own the shame of, you know,

not holding a fair trial. you know, being impeached and then acquitted by a rigged jury is nothing to brag about for the president. >> so shift the onus and put a spotlight on it. >> it will be making the presidential equivalent of o.j. jump son and he can hang out with that for the rest his term. >> one of my loose rules is if something happens three times in rapid success, it's probably something to pay attention to. today on the floor you heard crucifixion done. there wasn't a smack of irony anywhere. the president, in his letter to pelosi, said, you are insulting people of faith by saying that you pray for me, which shows one of the most fundamental misunderstandings of prayer i've ever heard from any adult in my life. but earlier we heard members of the gop side of congress saying from a religion -- you know, with this religion bent that the president was being treated as badly as jesus in his final -- it's the third time we've heard them go to that. that means that it's not a mistake anymore.

>> chris, i just want to be really clear in case any of your viewers -- if there's any ambiguity about this point. house democrats launching impeachment proceedings against donald trump is nothing like the crucifixion of jesus christ for our sins of this entire world. so just want to make that really clear. the second thing is i think from a historical standpoint, it's interesting to me because during johnson's impeachment, you had democratic representatives argue essentially the same thing, that pontius pilate afforded jesus more rights in his trial than were given to andrew johnson. so that along with pearl harbor shows that we kind of need to refresh our historical analogies a bit, that not everything rises to those levels. >> but it shows they're all in. >> it shows they're all in. but when it happened in johnson's trial, that ended up making the 11th article of impeachment levied against him. it just shows how much norms have broken down that, you know,

for republicans, that wasn't even something to tweet a disavowal of on behalf of any member. it was just, you know, another day in trump's america. >> because he's the chosen one. >> they've said that also and that this is what god wanted was for him to be president. >> which to me -- i mean the mess jannik language that they would denounce vis-á-vis barack obama, i mean christian conservatives all of the time would just, you know, harangue democrats for speaking in messiahic overtones about barack obama. this is no longer overtones. it's quite complicit -- >> and why am i bringing it up? to be inflammatory? no. to be instructive of where we're going. thank you for making us better on such an important night. appreciate it. next guest has just gone down in history with his vote to impeach. congressman cicilline has been at the forefront of this fight. how does he feel?

what does he think about the holdup? what does it mean about what comes next? next. 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.

it is done and things have changed. our president is living a new reality and so are we all. our 45th president is now also the number three with a giant mark of impeachment that will be an asterisk next to it forever. let's get to one of the people behind that vote. congressman cicilline, thank you for joining us. >> my pleasure. >> how do you feel? >> it was a very sad day for the country. i think we demonstrated throughout the course of the day that we had no choice but to move forward with articles of impeachment. the president of the united states abused the enormous powers of his office to cheat in the 2020 election by dragging a foreign power to corrupt our elections, and we heard a lot about, you know, america is based on free and fair elections. we promote that all over the world. we need to protect it here at home, and the president of the united states undermined the national security of our country. he betrayed his oath of office. then he tried to cover up his

conduct, and we were left with no choice but to move forward with impeachment today. nobody celebrates that. nobody came to congress to impeach a president, but we did take an oath when we began our service to protect and defend the constitution, and that's what we did today. >> if it's so clear, why not a single republican vote unless you count justin amash? in clinton, five democrats voted to impeach him. he was actually saved in the senate by republicans. here no crossovers. what does it mean? >> yeah. i think you have to ask the republicans that. i asked that question during the hearing, during the markup. do they think it's okay for a president to invite a foreign power, coerce a foreign power to interfere in an american presidential election? would they do it? i asked, raise your hand if you would ask a foreign power to help you in your re-election. of course no one raised their hand. the question is why are they more loyal to their party than they are to their country? why are they defending this president and betraying the national interest of our country by protecting our democracy? i think everyone was

disappointed republicans did not join us in this effort. when justin amash did join, they kicked him out of the republican party and he became an independent. this shouldn't be a republican or democratic issue. we're all americans. we all have a responsibility to protect this extraordinary democracy that is the shining city on the hill, that's the envy of the world, that people look up to because of our respect for human rights and human dignity and freedom and fair elections. and it's never okay for any president who faces a tough re-election to pick up the phone and try and get a foreign power to intervene. we should remember this is a pattern for this president. this is a president who welcomed foreign interference in the 2016 campaign. it was a systematic and sweeping interference by the russians. he welcomed it. then the day after robert mueller testified when president trump thought he was free and clear of that first offense, he gets on the phone and tries to coerce the new president of ukraine to launch a phony investigation of his chief political rival. this is shocking activity.

this is undermining our right to elect our own leaders and to decide our own futures. it should have had brought bipartisan support and i'm very disappointed our republican colleagues didn't join us in the effort. >> in terms of the support for the move, the most recent polling there's been a softening of americans believing in impeachment. the number is down, and the president's job approval is up. does that give you any misgivings about whether or not you did the right thing? >> none at all. look, this is not about politics. this is not about polls. this is about honoring the oath we take to protect and defend the constitution, whatever the political implications are. and what i was so struck by was the extraordinary courage of so many of my colleagues who ran in districts where donald trump won and they won as democratic candidates for congress, and in districts where donald trump is still popular. that's irrelevant. this is about whether or not we are going to hold the president of the united states accountable, whether the president can abuse the power of his office.

this is exactly what our framers spoke about when they developed the mechanism for impeachment. they understood that one day a president might advance his own personal political or financial interests at the expense of our national interest and not advancing the public good but his own personal good. and that's why they developed articles of impeachment. this is the only remedy in the constitution. we have no other choice but to do what we did. we took an oath. we need to honor that oath. and whatever the politics are, they'll work itself out. we have to be able to look our children and grandchildren and the next generation in the eye and say, we did everything we could to protect our democracy and to hold this kind of president accountable for his misconduct. >> if the polls in the beginning had been, if you impeach this president, 90% of the country is against you, do you think your party would have gone along with it? >> absolutely. look, i think the speaker has been very clear throughout this process. we have to do what the constitution -- what the evidence requires and what the constitution demands. there is overwhelming evidence of the president's abuse of

power in an effort to obstruct congress as we investigated that abuse of power. the evidence was really uncontested which is why our republican colleagues talked today about process and a bunch of other things. they never once tried to justify the president's corrupt behavior, and so we had no choice. i think the politics are aside. we have a responsibility to go back to our districts and explain to our constituents why this was necessary, why we had to take this action. this is a moment for leadership. >> let me ask you one more question here about choice and process. the leader -- the speaker of the house said, yeah, we're going to give them the articles of impeachment. we'll figure out when. we want to see what shape that takes. there's nothing in the constitution about this, but there's a clear suggestion that once you impeach, it's now the senate's time to exercise its constitutional duty. how much of a delay is okay in delivering the impeachments, and what would justify it? >> i think what the speaker said was that before she transmits the articles of impeachment, she

wants to have a sense of what the procedures will be like because that will inform her decision of who to appoint as impeachment manager. for example, if it's a full blown trial with witnesses, that may require a manager with a certain skill set. if instead it's merely arguments based on the evidence already collected, that may require different skills. >> where does she get the power to hold back the process until she is satisfied with where it goes from here? >> well, she has the responsibility under the article of impeachment to transmit it at her discretion. so she'll transmit it when she thinks the time is appropriate. i think it's perfectly reasonable to want to insist that we have some understanding that this process will be fair and will be deliberative. when you have the senate majority leader who is saying, i'm not going to be impartial and is saying i'm coordinating directly with the defense counsel for the president, i mean i was a criminal defense lawyer. if the foreperson of the jury ever announced i'm coordinating directly with the defense lawyer, the judge would have thrown them both in jail. >> i get your concern, but you guys are also arguing this is an ongoing crime and the president

is aen itting threat. how can you justify any delay? >> i don't think anyone is suggesting there is going to be any unnecessary delay. the speaker said at the press conference that she wants to see what the process is so she can make an informed judgment about who will best mag thnage that. look, let's focus on the important thing here. this is a serious action by the house. we have accused the president of two very serious crimes. >> uh-huh. >> the senate has a responsibility to try the president, and the american people have a right to expect that will be done in a thoughtful, deliberative, fair process. that's not only something the speaker cares about. it's something the american people care about. >> it's a very important point you make there about what this says, this impeachment. this is an accusation. these are two charges. the political argument that you didn't make a good enough case, your case only needed to be strong enough to sustain the charges. the vetting of those charges happens now in the senate to the extent that they want to do that

job. congressman, thank you very much for joining us on such an historic evening. >> my pleasure. >> all right. so let's get a deeper look at the merit of this potential pelosi delay. what is the right play? it's not an easy one. so let's get after every part of it, next. 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! (man)(elderly woman) you toh, thank you so much. (elderly man 1) i'll be alright. (man) ok. (elderly man 1) ok. (man) ok george, see you again soon.

(elderly man 2) bye bye. (elderly man 3) ah dell, and you brought the family this time! (vo) it feels good to help those in need. you can choose meals on wheels to get two hundred and fifty dollars from subaru when you get a new subaru, like the all new outback. (vo 2) get 0.9% during the subaru share the love event.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ all we need is somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ sweden's greetings. enjoy your first payment on us when you lease a new volvo. now through january 2nd. . donald john trump, 45th president of the united states, impeached. that is now permanent. no denying it. no erasing it. and yet we're not done. there is a senate trial to come. but when? in a surprise move, speaker pelosi suggested she wanted to see what the senate trial looked like before sending the articles over. her reasoning for this is to allow her to fick right managers, the representative who's will make the case in the

senate. can she? should she? i'm not sure which question is harder to answer. there's no hard rule or procedure for the timing of the transmission of articles of impeachment from house to senate. supposedly the house managers bring they will to the senate. technically, if you don't have managers, you cannot deliver them. that sounds silly but the house does have the power over impeachment. so for at least one more vote, picking managers, arguably, they have never which means time. if the senate starts to complain, they could argue once impeaches, and you just impeached him taflt minimum any disputed delay will fight notion this is an ongoing crime and the president is a threat to do this again if not stopped. the urgency argument. so assuming you could probably dha a little at least, the question is, why delay? these people all want to go home for christmas. the word in the house and the

senate. and mcconnell has not figure out how to please his people. so there's wood to chop and water to carry, as it says, and no reason to rush. let's go back to the previous point. pelosi would have to justify going so fast until now, only to hold up the horses. here's the most provocative argument to keep control by the house. what is pelosi's duty in the event that she has reason to know the next phase won't honor the constitution? how could she know that? like this. >> i'm not impartial about this at all. >> i was not in any doubt. >> mcconnell, they're both supposed to take an oath. raise their hand to their god and swear to be impartial. can they do it? were they lying then or lying now? professor larry tribe, who is

helping the democrats call here with their strategy, calls the senate out for offering a trial. has the clever reference. it means a trial that looks fair only on the outside. it refers to a prince from crimea, as in ukraine named potemken. katherine was the great lover who was part of the russian ruling family. it is clever. the crimea even happen in 1787. the year our constitution was written. it's all very clever. is it too clever? if pelosi suspects the trial on the charges that she's going to hand over won't be fair, can she wait until they make the rules to see? can the senate make the rules before they get the articles? the easier question is whether this is worth the risk. does pelosi's stretch on this and test patience of people who

are moving polls away from wanting impeachment? or does pelosi pounce on principle and stay gop is out to defend trump at all costs and in violation of the constitution. there's clever and then there's too cute by half. there is having a strong hand and then overmaying the hand. the country has been through a lot. this impeachment has just made a crash in a turbulent sea and it is sure to make waves that will ultimately wash up on to the shores of our collective sanity. we want to avoid a trump tsunami of constant agitation, rage, revolt, revenge, and ripping our already fragile situation apart. the democrats say their oaths to the constitution left them bound to impeach by duty. they did their duty and there's no clear value in sentencing the national nightmare. that's what it is. our president is impeached. he will make his pain felt by all.

the constitutional imperative now is to get away from the politics of left and right as fast as we can and get back to the words that matter most, i argue, in the constitution. the first three. we the people. all right. that's all for us tonight. thanks for watching. the news continues on cnn. 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! 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! at t-mobile, we're lighting up 5g, and when you buy a samsung note 10+ 5g, you get one free. plus you can experience it on the nation's largest 5g network. so you can stay connected like this. score a last minute this. get home easier, like this. and share all of this... with that. so do this. on that. with us. and now, buy a samsung note 10+ 5g and get one free when you add a line. ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs, for everyone you love.

expedia. for everyone you love. this is the epson no more buying cartridges.. big ink tanks. lots of ink. print about... this many pages. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. oh, come on. flo: don't worry. you're covered. (dramatic music) and you're saving money, because you bundled home and auto. sarah, get in the house. we're all here for you. all: all day, all night. (dramatic music) great job speaking calmly and clearly everyone. that's how you put a customer at ease. hey, did anyone else hear weird voices while they were in the corn? no. no. me either. whispering voice: jamie. what?

it's easy to move forward when you're ready for what comes next. at fidelity, we make sure you have a clear plan to cover the essentials in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. and on the way, you'll get timely investment help to keep you on the right track, without the unnecessary fees you might expect from so many financial firms. because when you have a partner who gives you clarity at every step, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. who gives you clarity at every step, (loud fan noise) (children playing) ♪ (music building) experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment.

i'm don lemon. president trump has been impeached. the 45th president of these unite states. now only the third president to be impeached. the house voting less than two hours ago just a short time ago, to approve two articles of impeachment. the first for abuse of power. >> on this vote, the yeas are 230. the nays are 197. present is 1. article 1 is adopted. >> the second for obstruction of