tuesday night, 9:00 p.m. eastern only here on cnn. thanks very much for watching. i'm wolf blitzer in the situation room. erin burnett out front starts right now. out front next, trump's shifting story. the president's changing reason for launching a strike that killed iran's top commander. this as the secretary of state struggles with the meaning of "imminent threat." plus ukrainian investigators are looking into whether there was a bomb on board that plane that crashed. are key republicans working on a plan to include witnesses for trump's impeachment trial. a major development. let's go out front. and good evening. i'm erin burnett. out front tonight trump changes his story, providing details he didn't provide to the house and senate. details about what he said was an imminent threat against

americans from iran and its top general. >> don't the american people have a right to know what specifically was targeted without revealing methods and sources? >> well, i don't think so, but we will tell you that probably it was going to be the embassy in baghdad. >> did they have large scale attacks planned for other embassies? and if those were planned why can't we reveal that to the american people? wouldn't that help your case? >> i can reveal i believe it was four embassies. >> four embassies. yesterday morning it was just one and that one was in baghdad. >> we did it because they were looking to blow up our embassy. >> trump is asking americans to trust him, right, on his decision to take out soleimani, to trust him and not congress with the big decision of whether to go to war. this is a very big ask because trump's record when it comes to telling the truth is bad. and when it comes to numbers, well, here he is talking about

the number of jobs the u.s. would lose if he tore up the u.s. arms deal with saudi arabia. >> we're talking about over 40,000 jobs in the united states. it's 450,000 jobs. it's 500,000 jobs, american jobs. i would prefer that we don't use as retribution cancelling $110 billion worth of work which means 600,000 jobs. i think it's over a million jobs. >> from 40,000 to over a million. you cannot make this up even though he did. when it comes to trump, accuracy does not matter. making something sound big is what matters. and because trump is out there now sharing classified information about one embassy or maybe it was four embassies and changing really important numbers, his chief defender, the secretary of state, mike pompeo, has been put in the hot seat. what embassy threats? how real? how imminent.

here he is over the past 24 hours. >> we don't know precisely when and we don't know precisely where, but it was real. >> so, pompeo doesn't know when or where, but trump is telling america it was baghdad and three other embassies. was this threat real and imminent? the american people do deserve to know the truth. and now the exact details, the numbers, the places. because tonight the credibility of the united states is on the line. kaitlan collins is outside the white house. kaitlan, do we know what is behind the changing stories, the changing narrative that's come from the president? >> no, that's really been the question facing them for a several days now. i don't think they did a lot to answer that today or to suffice the questions their critics have been raising. that's the big question. why do we keep seeing these different reasons from different officials ranging from the pentagon to state department to west wing over what it was that led the president to carry out this strike and why the top national security aides have

been reluctant to reveal information about this. you're seeing the president slowly do it himself by being the first person to say he believed they're plotting to blow up the embassy, then saying it was multiple, then today being specific saying four embassies though the white house is declining to say what those embassies were or whether they were warned there was a plot the president says they were planning. the other big question that lawmakers have is just how imminent this threat was going to be. those questions only intensified after pompeo said last night they didn't know when that attack was going to happen which would lead the question of how do you know exactly that it's imminent if you don't know if it's going to happen? and today when i asked the secretary of state what is his definition of the word "imminent," he paused for a moment and then he answered like this, erin. >> what is your definition of imminent? >> this was going to happen. and american lives were at risk.

and we would have negligent as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said we would have been negligent if we not recommend this action against qassem soleimani. >> several lawmakers in those briefings say they were not told about a plot on four embassies or any embassies of the united states. and that is why another question being raised tonight, if this was so imminent, why were these lawmakers not told about this during these intelligence briefings on capitol hill this week? >> kaitlan, thank you very much. obviously crucial questions here. i want to go out to maggie hassan who sits on the homeland security committee. were you aware that four embassies were being targeted by iran and general soleimani? >> i was in the classified briefing and i'm just going to start by one, thanking you for having me on. two, reiterated that general soleimani was an enemy of the united states, had american

blood on his hands. i'm glad he's no longer on this earth to orchestrate attacks against americans. that being said, the briefing and now the lack of consistency from the administration just has been begging more questions than it is answering. we need to have additional briefings from the national security team so that we can drill down on the intelligence. as you know, the briefing was interrupted well before we all got a chance to ask the questions that would have helped us -- >> yes, i do. >> -- understand the full picture. and we need a strategy from this administration. >> so, did they give you any? did they tell you there's four embassies or three embassies or two embassies or anything about the plot? did you have any of this information or did you learn it from fox news? >> i have been kesh concerned. i'm not going to discuss details of the classified briefing but

there is a contradictory set of stories which speaks to not only us having to have a full briefing but it speaks to the importance of having a full fledged debate about the war powers act. >> i'm sorry to keep pushing on this. i know you can't share what was in the classified briefing. you keep using the word "contradictory." you're letting us know there's something in here about what he's saying and what you heard that is inconsistent. >> that is in fact, true. and we were -- yeah. we were pushing for details that would have allowed us to assess whether we thought the threat was imminent, for instance. there is no question that iran is a malevolent force and its proxies have attacked and sponsored attacks on u.s. troops and our allies and americans and our interests. and all of those things are true. but when you are looking at whether the president was acting within his article two powers to

prevent -- to go after an imminent threat to prevent our troops or whether there was rightly something that he needed to come to congress about so that we could not only be clear as members of congress but so that the american people can understand what the threat is what the mission should be and whether we're going to have a sustained conflict and what the strategy now is for preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon. >> so, in terms of deescalating, the terms of the nature of the threat itself, there's contradictory information in what he's saying. you raised the word imminent. the reason this word matters for people who wonder why there's such a threat about it. if something is imminent, the threat has the authority to act in a potential act of war. that's why the word matters. senator murphy quoted either fox news getting higher level briefings than congress or, wait for it, there was no such imminent threat referring to the interview i just played a

portion of with laura ingram where the president talked about the attack on four embassies. do you feel confident that you've been given any information that proves imminence? >> that would be what i would want to be able to go back to a second briefing about. there is no doubt that we can talk about iran being a threat to the united states. it has been for years. it continues to be. >> right, but that's different an a specific imminent -- >> that is exactly right. and that is why this whole conversation is so important. and that is why it is so important for us to have a discussion on the -- in both chambers of congress to make sure that we understand what the threat is that the administration sees, what its strategy is going forward. we all agree iran is a malevolent actor. but we need to make sure we have a strategy working with our allies to keep it from getting a

nuclear bomb, to protect our u.s. troops and our u.s. interests in the middle east but all around the globe. and that's what we are not hearing from this administration. and that concerns me greatly. >> so, "the wall street journal" reports tonight, senator, mr. trump after the strike -- i'm reading from the paper -- told associates he was under pressure to deal with general soleimani from gop senators he views as important supporters of his coming impeachment trial in the senate, associates said. are you comfortable at this point saying his decision to do this strike had something to do with impeachment or do you think that is a bridge too far? >> i am concerned about what "the wall street journal" reported, but i think that report and the question that is suggested in that report is precisely why the national security team of this administration needs to come to congress, first to brief us with specificity on the intelligence

that graave rise to their assessment, that they told us it was an imminent threat although as you pointed out we are hearing contradictory accounts of that very issue. but it also speaks to why it is so important to fully include the american people in a discussion about a sustained conflict and a war against a foreign power. our founders understood that if we were going to have a sustained war against a foreign power, that the american people needed to understand because it is their blood and treasure on the line there. and they need to be fully participating so they know what the mission is. and that would alleviate some of the concerns raised by the wall street wall street joir"wall st" >> i appreciate your time. disturbing video of the final moments of the ukrainian jet that u.s. authorities believe was shot down by an iranian missile. plus nancy pelosi says she's handing impeachment articles

next week. why -- why still waiting? and a new cnn poll shows the stop 2020 candidates locked in an extremely tight race at the top in the crucial state of iowa, first state to vote, as joe biden speaks to cnn. >> alexandria ocasio-cortez, she said that democrats can be too big of a test. is she right? >> no, she's not right.

our retirement plan with voya gives us confidence. we can spend a bit now, knowing we're prepared for the future. surprise! we renovated the guest room, so you can live with us. i'm good at my condo well planned, well invested, well protected. voya. be confident to and through retirement. it's an honor to tell you that [ applause ] thank you. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need.

i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs, for everyone you love. expedia. for everyone you love. i have moderate to severe pnow, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are getting clearer, yeah i feel free ♪ ♪ to bare my skin ♪ yeah that's all me. ♪ nothing and me go hand in hand ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin ♪ that's my new plan. ♪ nothing is everything. keep your skin clearer with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months.

of those, nearly 9 out of 10 sustained it through 1 year. and skyrizi is 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪ i see nothing in a different way ♪ ♪ and it's my moment so i just gotta say ♪ ♪ nothing is everything skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs, or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪ breaking news.

u.s. officials sharing intelligence with ukraine which points to an iranian missile bringing down the jet liner which crashed after take off from tehran's airport. this as ukraine says its also looking into whether a bomb was planted on that flight that crashed in iran killing 176 innocent people on board. we are now getting new video showing the moment the plane crashed. i want to warn you, this video is extremely disturbing. clarissa ward is out front from kyiv. >> reporter: a new video has emerged showing the moment the ukrainian airliner comes crashing to the ground. there's a wall of fire as flaming debris litters an iranian field. >> your security services have also posted on their website they're considering the possibility of terrorism? >> we're checking the internals of the plane as well trying to understand whether the bomb was plant in the plane itself. >> reporter: tonight ukrainian officials say they are reviewing data given to them by

international partners including the united states but are not yet willing to say their commercial jet was shot down by an iranian missile. the ukrainians at this point are keeping all considerations on the table. >> we believe it's likely that plane was shot down by an iran yn missile. we're going to let the investigation play out before we make a final determination. it's important we get to the bottom of it. >> sweden, the uk, and canada also pointing the finger at iran. but the regime is doubling down, iran denying they played any role in the plane's demise and demanding the u.s. substantiate claims of a missile crime. >> translator: the thing that's clear to us and that we can say with certainty is that this plane was not hit by a missile. >> the iranian civil authority announcing information from the black box recovered at the scene could take months to properly extract. ukrainian investigators on the ground in tehran are reconstructing the plane in an

isolated hanger looking for evidence of chemical residue and other evidence of a missile attack. with iranians in control of the crash site, there's no telling what wreckage may have been removed. >> we are happy what we see especially when we saw that the locals are around and picking things and attaching things and getting something from the ground. that's what we had to immediately stop. >> reporter: a growing chorus in the international community demanding a complete and transparent investigation. >> we'll learn more about what happened to that aircraft and when we get the results from that investigation, i'm confident we and the world will take appropriate actions in response. >> part of the reason, erin, that the ukrainians are still being circumspect about coming out saying they believe their airliner was shot down by an iranian missile because they rely heavily at the moment on the cooperation of the iranians. they have 50 investigators in

tehran. they need that access, they need that relationship to be a good relationship. when we push the foreign minister on this issue of whether it can be a technical failure, he said he did point out that the ukrainian investigators have listened to the cockpit investigations that went on with the pilot and the air traffic control. the last words the pilot said was that things were peaceful and everything was okay. if it had been a technical failure, those are not the kinds of last words you would expect to hear from the pilot to air traffic control. >> no, they aren't. thank you very much clarissa. out front now, former cia operative bob baer. bob, let me start with you. clarissa is sharing with us the last words of the pilot to air traffic okay. everything is okay. peaceful night. and then obviously -- which would take away from iran is continuing to insist, right, which is that this was some port

of mechanical issue. >> oh, absolutely. i mean, i think no doubt this is a missile. we had platforms all over the gulf. the air force were watching iran. and they could spot a missile launch. i think it's fairly clear. you know, if that's what the pentagon says, that's what happened. and i can see that iranians denying it. it was a horrible tragic mistake. and iran is not a country to admit mistakes. >> so, colonel lleyton, what ukraine is now saying it could have been a bomb, you heard clarissa putting context around that which is perhaps they are doing that because iran is obviously at this point categorically denying any kind of missile issue and they need to continue to be part of the investigation. >> absolutely, erin. i think it's important to look at the diplomatic side of this. but from a technical aspect, bob is right. we've got this area painted like

you wouldn't believe when it comes to finding electronic signatures. and it's pretty clear to me as someone who has looked at these kinds of things for a long time that a missile struck the aircraft. but if i were in the ukrainian foreign minister's shoes, i would be saying the same thing that he said, we look at everything, and that includes the possibility of a terrorist act or a bomb being put on board the aircraft. >> to what both of you are say, i should be clear that the u.s. said they have proof that the iranian radar locked on to that plane just before it fell out of the sky. this is surveillance video from a nearby building, the video that the plane crashed into the ground. you know, you see it come down and then you see that massive explosion as that airplane hits the ground. this was very -- how quickly do you think it went from all is

peaceful, then the missile strikes to when that plane actually did hit the ground. >> very quick. these people didn't know what happened. that plane wing breaks off, explosion in one of the engines. if that's where the missile hit, people wouldn't even thouknow i. it all happens very quickly. the plane was 9,000 feet off the ground, something like that. it had barely taken off. i don't think they would have known. pan am 103 went down that way and people didn't realize what was happening. >> well, that's -- thank god. that's the one thing i think everybody can be grateful that hopefully these people knew nothing. colonel, we have learned on the same night that president trump chose to strike general soleimani, the united states also targeted another senior military official. "the washington post" is reporting this was sort of the guy in charge of all the money. key commander of the elite quds force, obviously worked with

general soleimani. he was in yemen on that night and they had planned both of these attacks. this one failed. but this does seem to show this was a much bigger operation. and this was not opportunistic. you have two people targeted in the same night in different countries. >> that's right, erin. and what you're looking at here is perhaps a semi-strategy to decapitate the quds force. so, if that's the case, you know, that's clearly an escalation and the way in which we're going after this particular iranian entity. and going after the money guy is a very important thing to do because if the president is right in his assertions that embassies were part of the pattern of attack that the quds force was planning, then they need money to do that. and to go after the money guy helps keep those operations from actually coming to fruition. >> bob, now officials telling "the washington post" and american official that they may

go ahead and target this same guy, abdul reza shahlai is his name, the guy in charge of the money for the revolutionary guard. what does that say to you, bob? how does iran react to this, the united states is basically saying we're still going after your guy? >> well, we're going to wait and see. so far they've been restrained. but as colonel lleyton was saying, the quds force is an organization. it's got hundreds and hundreds of people all across the middle east. it is a very -- that organization has killed a lot of americans, have killed two of my bosses in lebanon. and you have to take it down if that's your intent is to go after iran. now, will the iranians react one day? we simply don't know. but right now they have shown considerable restraint. they didn't respond like i thought they would to soleimani's assassination. >> thank you both very much. obviously i think the emphasis for that is we just don't know where we are in this, what's

over and not over. thank you both. next will a small group of republicans break with mitch mcconnell when it comes to calling witnesses, including john bolton? and bernie sanders comes face to face with the other bernie sanders. >> so, who do you want as president? one of these washington insiders or a guy that has one pair of clean underwear that he dries on a radiator? we're k12.

and we're giving families an online option for public education. where schools provide students

with the personalized attention they deserve. students can thrive, find their passion, and learn in an environment that encourages discovery at their own pace. these schools may not be for everyone, but they are here for anyone. k12 education for any one wean air force veteran made of but doing what's right,.yone. not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa

new tonight, republican senator susan collins of main revealing she is working with a fairly small group to reach a deal that would let both parties call witnesses in president trump's impeachment trial. that's both parties so that could open up a whole other can of worms. in principle, this is something that other republicans including mitch mcconnell have dismissed out of hand. it comes as house speaker nancy pelosi says she is preparing to send over the articles of impeachment to the senate next week. manu raju is out front on capitol hill. she sends those articles over as she's indicating to do next week. what is the timeline you're

hearing? >>. >> reporter: it could move pretty quickly as soon as next week. we assume the articles will be sent by the middle of next week. the white house and the republicans want the president to be acquitted by the time the state of the union occurs on february 4th. i'm told they want the president to use the address to boast about him being acquitted by the u.s. senate. and it's possible that that time frame could essentially work out but it ultimately depends on whether or not witnesses are called before the senate. right now it would require four republicans to break ranks, joined with 47 democrats to call those witnesses to come forward while people at susan collins have suggested they would be open to it. it's unclear whether there will be a coalition to get behind that. we'll see how that progresses. the way it's going to look is this. starting tuesday, nancy pelosi will meet with her house democratic caucus, discuss the matter going forward. we do expect a vote probably at this point on wednesday to actually appoint those impeachment managers. those are the people that are going to prosecute the case.

those managers then will go to the senate chamber, read aloud those two articles of impeachment by the house, allegations the president abused his office and also he obstructed congress. after those impeachment managers are named, that's when senators will get sworn in. the following week at the moment we're expecting that's when the opening arguments will begin. each side will make the case. democratic impeachment managers will make their case. the president's defense team will make its case. at that point, the questions will be how do they progress do. they push to bring forward those witnesses? do they subpoena witnesses? or do the republicans move to dismiss the case or acquit the president? and that's where the white house and mitch mcconnell are hoping for as an acquittal to happen soon after those arguments are concluded. erin. >> all right, manu. thank you very much. out front now, democratic congressman dan kildee of michigan. i appreciate your time as always. speaker pelosi says she's ready to send the articles over next

week. it has now been over three weeks since trump was formally impeached in the house. so, what is causing her to wait until next week? do you know if there's something specific she is still trying to accomplish? >> no, i think we're going to have a meeting of the leadership on monday evening as we typically do on the first day. and we'll get i think a little bit into the detail. there is one aspect of it that has to be done and that is the appointment of impeachment managers. and i know that work is underway. so, there is some formality to transmitting the articles over to the senate. obviously our hope is that those senators who are thinking about their legacy and thinking about their obligation under the constitution will take their job seriously and realize that in order to make a decision based on the facts, the facts have to be presented to the senate. and that can only come in the form of those very relevant witnesses. >> so, you know, you just heard the reporting that susan collins

says she's working with a small group of republican senators to support witnesses. if that is true, it would be extremely significant. but the caveat there was from both sides. is that a deal democrats should do? you know, they get mick mulvaney, they get john bolton, but they also get hunter biden. >> yeah, i mean, let's hope they don't turn it into a side show. the question is on the president's behavior. the question is on whether the president sacrificed american national security in the interest of his own political gain. and the witnesses that can bring factual evidence to answer that question, this is a trial, an impeachment trial for the president. this is not an opportunity for people to go after joe biden. but do you know what? it's unpredictable. i think though in the long run, if the information that, say, mr. bolton has or mr. mulvaney has or mr. pompeo or even

mr. duffey from the office of management and budget, if that information reveals what many of us suspect it will, i don't think anything else will matter or not. whether the senate will be convicted, he will be convicted in the court of public opinion. >> you know whurks just do the look at what happened with clinton where you have a few days for one side, a few days for the other, vote on whether there's witnesses, closing arguments, maybe even have witnesses inserted in the middle of that, the bottom line is the map would be president trump could be acquitted the day before or the day of his state of the union if he gets the votes from republicans, right, which would allow him to come out triumphant. are you okay with that risk? >> well, i'm not okay with a whole lot of things that the president does. and if he uses the state of the union to talk about the state of donald trump, that's going to be on him. but it's a risk that we take. we can't control everything, obviously. we just want to do our job. and, you know, if the senate

does its job and the facts are revealed as a part of that trial, no matter what the senate votes, the facts are going to be out there. and i think the president's going to have a hard time taking what he would consider a victory lap based on information that i think will indict him even further. obviously we can't control everything. that's a reality we have to face. >> yeah. so, when you and i last spoke, you suggested -- you were just saying the way things manu was laying out the articles get handed over. and then there needs to be a vote on who the house managers are going to be. in english, those are the people who are going to be making the case, the lawyers making the case to senators that you all have. you had suggested that the intel chairman adam schiff or judiciary committee jamie raskin could be house impeachment managers depending how this played out. for a republican who supports impeachment broke with his

party, justin amash was on the show last night and i asked him about whether he would be an impeachment manager. he's a lawyer. here he is. >> it's something that i told my democratic colleagues who have asked me that i'd be happy to talk to the speaker about. but i even had that discussion. if the speaker wants to have that discussion, of course i'd be honored to have that conversation. >> do you think that she should talk to congressman amash? >> well, i mean, obviously every member of congress has a stake in this and i consider congressman amash a friend even though he and i disagree on a lot of issues. but i think it's more important that we put managers that can best bring the case, not so much that represent an ideology or a particular perspective. but the people with the training and the knowledge and expertise to best present our case. and if it turns out that's justin amash and that that's the

speaker's judgment, then i'm with her. but i suspect we have members who are members of our caucus who have been a part of the deliberations, who have been a part of the process of coming to this conclusion that can advance our case. but it ought to be the members who can best present both the constitutional basis and a factual basis for impeachment. >> i appreciate your time congressman kildee. thank you. >> thank you. you bet. >> look, as impeachment is going to roll right into iowa meaning there's three senators who aren't going to be in iowa, we have a new poll showing an incredibly tight race in the first state to vote. what happens when half the contenders are off the trial sitting in washington. plus joe biden's wife hitting the trail and talking on president trump. >> we knew donald trump was going to be a difficult opponent, that he was never going to play fair.

♪ (honk!) i hear you sister. that's why i'm partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual check-up, and be open with your doctor about anything you feel - physically and emotionally. but now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. just find a period of time to unwind. a location to de-stress. an activity to enjoy. or the name of someone to talk to. to create a plan that works for you, visit cigna.com/mystressplan. cigna. together, all the way. visit cigna.com/mystressplan. women with metastatic we breast cancerers.

standing in the struggle. hustling through the hurt. asking for science not sorrys. our time for more time - has come. living longer is possible and proven in women taking kisqali plus fulvestrant or a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. kisqali is the only treatment in its class with proven overall survival results in 2 clinical trials. helping women live longer with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali was also significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant alone. kisqali can cause lung problems or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious liver problems and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain, a change in your heartbeat, dizziness... yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection,

are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. kisqali is not approved for use with tamoxifen. it's our time. to continue to shine because we are the thrivers. ask your doctor about kisqali, the only treatment in its class proven to help women live longer in 2 clinical trials.

new tonight, impeachment and iowa collide. a brand-new cnn poll just out tonight shows a tight four-way race in iowa.

sanders at 20, warren at 17, buttigieg at 16, biden at 15. it is just a big pile. half of the top contenders are in the senate which means they will be in washington, not iowa. and they'll be washington as soon as next week. and then they will be there for the perpetuity until the trial is over. they are jurors in the impeachment trial. out front former clinton white house secretary, and patrick healey, political analyst for us. this is pretty incredible. we were just sitting here in the commercial break laying out the timeline. from what manu is laying out and what we're understanding, you've got to have pelosi hand over the articles and the managers chosen and the senators sworn in. and you have the martin luther king holiday and then you have a trial formally start. you literally could end with this trial ending on caucus day. >> it could. it very well could. >> and it's six days a week. that means if they want to do a

round trip to iowa on the one day they have off, that's it -- >> yeah. >> -- for sanders and warren and klobuchar. >> yeah. and even if they go out to iowa that one day, they're limited by there can't be a fiery crazy partisan democrat and then monday morning come in say i'm a juror. it's fascinating because it couldn't come at a worse time for the four senators. and because there's no clear front runner, say bernie sanders was ten points ahead in iowa. this would be great for him to freeze this thing for. but he's not. so, on paper, this is a disaster scenario for those four. the crazy thing about politics though is sometimes it gets turned upside down. >> and you just don't know. >> and something happens and you just don't know. and something happens in washington that turns it rather than in the field. >> i want to make the points for everyone thinking they're going to get their big moments in

washington. they have to be silent. even if they have questions, they have to write them down and hand them over. you're not going to get the big moments like in the house. of the senators in the race of the three that are front runners here, who is hurt the most by this? >> i think it's toughest for warren right now because warren is in a position where she is very much competing against bernie sanders for the very strong liberal vote in iowa. she doesn't -- she's not flush with cash in terms of being able to spend heavily on -- >> he is, right? he can flood it with money. >> he is quite flush. and the reality that she's still more in the persuasion business than i think sanders is. here's where i differ with joe a little bit. i think that the senate trial isn't good for any of the senators, yes. but for sanders, he has this durable floor of support that he is able to -- he's going to be able to back up with surrogates, with advertising, with a certain amount of momentum.

is he going to win the iowa caucuses? we don't know that. but for warren at least, i think she was -- i think she would really benefit from having those last two weeks of being able to go out, be persuading, not talking about medicare for all, but trying to broaden. >> joe, you have pete buttigieg dropped nine points in this poll from november. some might look and say he peaked too early. maybe that's right. maybe that's not right. the truth is he and joe biden are going to be out there. >> yep. >> and they're going to have the state to themselves. and that could be very significant. what do you make of that when you juxtapose it with a nine point drop and everybody else is in the range. >> those are two separate things. i think you've seen a pattern of candidates, elizabeth warren -- first kamala harris if you want to go way back to the summer. and elizabeth warren and pete buttigieg. they take the pounding that it takes and only biden has been

able to sustain a relative -- >> i mean he stays at 15%. >> he stays there. he doesn't -- everyone else has moved. so, this is predictable. as patrick and i were talking about on the way in, the one candidate that doesn't seem susceptible to this is bernie sanders. and i think it's because as patrick said, he's got this base that are going to do -- they're going to be out there no matter what happens, no matter what bernie says. >> and he's not going to bleed to biden -- >> no. >> they're two very different propositions. >> right. the story in iowa right now is how undecided and nervous so many voters are, not sort of certain that -- you ask a lot of voters and they're not sure where they're going to be. you ask a lot of bernie sanders supporters and they're very much committed. with him. >> thank you both. don't miss the next democratic debate on cnn tuesday at 9:00 p.m. eastern. next we sit down with joe

biden's wife to see how she is taking on his critics. plus bernie sanders's run in with the other guy that can get a red face and white hair. >> if you become president, you've got to be flying back and forth to play him. >> it'll be great for the country, terrible for me. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

i can. the two words whispered at the start of every race. every new job. and attempt to parallel park. (electrical current buzzing) each new draft of every novel. (typing clicks) the finishing touch on every masterpiece. (newborn cries) it is humanity's official two-word war cry. words that move us all forward. the same two words that capital group believes have the power to improve lives. and that, for over 85 years, have inspired us to help people achieve their financial goals. talk to your advisor or consultant

for investment risks and information. ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs, for everyone you love. expedia. for everyone you love. 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. motor? nope.

not motor? it's pronounced "motaur." for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. tonight joe biden's top surrogate making the case that he is the most electable democrat running and taking on his critics as she says so. arlette saenz is outfront. >> my name is joe biden and i am jill biden's husband. >> reporter: jill biden is married to a 2020 front-runner. she's quickly becoming a campaign headliner of her own. >> if the election were held today, who would you want to step in to clean up this mess? >> reporter: former second lady crisscrossing the early states. here in new hampshire this week with young voters, meeting with

volunteers and making her pitch at intimate house parties. >> how do you see your role in this campaign? >> i see it as a partner. this is a critical time for me to support him, because, you know, i want change. i mean i want a new president. >> reporter: like her husband, biden is frustrated with the current occupant of the white house. biden's watched as her husband and son, hunter, have become targets of president trump. >> we knew donald trump was going to be a difficult opponent and that he was never going to play fair. i think we were ready for whatever was going to come our way, but i think it's important that you move forward in a positive way. >> reporter: joe biden has faced criticism from his democratic rivals. bernie sanders saying he has too much baggage and can't excite voters to beat trump. >> i say that's ridiculous. i don't like it that democrats

attack other democrats. we're in this race against donald trump. >> reporter: alexandria ocasio-cortez said that democrats can be too big of a tent. is she right? >> no, she's not right. democrats can't win without independent support. a lot of people come up to me, arlette, and a lot of people say, you know, i voted for trump last time but i'm sorry i did it. they said i want to vote for someone who is pragmatic, who's a moderate, who's reasonable, who can achieve things. and that's my husband. >> off the campaign trail, biden has devoted her life to teaching, even working at a community college as second lady. but this semester she's taking a break from the classroom to help her husband win the nomination. >> i just took a leave of absence, but if we get to the white house, i mean i think there would be no better message

for teachers to say, hey, look who we are. >> reporter: as she jumps from stop to stop, biden says she draws energy from life on the trail. >> you know, it's invigorating. look at those women i just met. they were so much fun. i meet really interesting people all over the country and hear their stories. >> reporter: arlette saenz, cnn, concord, new hampshire. >> and next the candidate and the comedian coming face to face.

♪ ♪ ♪ well i'm standing here, looking at you, what do i see? ♪ there's a booking for every resolution . book yours at booking.com yeah, i've had some pretty prestigious jobs

over the years. news producer. executive transport manager. and a beverage distribution supervisor. now i'm a director at a security software firm. wow, you've been at it a long time. the thing is, i like working. what if my retirement plan is i don't want to retire? then let's not create a retirement plan. let's create a plan for what's next. i like that. get a plan that's right for you. td ameritrade. get a plan that's right for you. when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com

hey. ♪hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today.

here's jeanne moos. >> reporter: what happens when bernie sanders and larry david happen to be separately booked on the same "today" show? much enthusiasm is shown. >> i'm here with "curb your enthusiasm's" larry david. no, wait. oh, "curb your enthusiasm's"

larry david. >> it's not like they haven't met. >> huge? >> huge. >> reporter: larry has been playing bernie for years. >> so who do you want as president? one of these washington insiders or a guy who has one pair of clean underwear that he dries on a radiator? >> reporter: larry and bernie radiate similarities. >> am i really larry david? >> reporter: distantly he is. >> we're second or third cousins. i feel a familial connection with him. >> reporter: established through dna on the show "finding your roots." >> what the hell? >> you're kidding! >> reporter: they have been kidding ever since. >> if you become president, you've got to be flying back and forth. >> yes. >> to play him. >> it will be great for the country and terrible for me. >> i'm getting you a good job for four years and you're complaining. >> reporter: larry got an emmy nomination for impersonating bernie. >> he does a better bernie sanders than i do.

>> reporter: but here's the secret. >> i don't think you're acting when you do bernie sanders. >> there's not much to it. >> reporter: she didn't even have to beat it out of him. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> and thanks for joining us. anderson starts now. good evening. tonight with house speaker pelosi saying he's ready to hand articles of impeachment over to the senate, there's breaking news about the man who would almost certainly be the star witness, that is if republicans allow it. former national security advisor john bolton. never mind what senators might want or majority leader mcconnell might agree to, when it comes to bolton, president trump made it clear he wants him nowhere near the witness stand. that's what he told laura ingraham during an interview. she said why not call bolton, allow him to testify? this thing is bogus, why not allow him to testify? the president says no problem other than one thing. you can't be in the