he says we can't count on trump to put the american people's interests first. do what's right. he will do what's right for trump. adam schiff making his final case tonight. thanks for watching, everybody, i'm don lemon. our special live coverage of the impeachment trial of president trump continues now with anderson cooper. ♪ and good evening, we are coming to you at the end of the day that saw house impeachment managers the constitutional case that president trump abused the power of his office to extract political favors from a foreign country and the president, they argued, was not fighting corruption when he asked the president of ukraine to investigate the bidens, the president, they argued, was in it for himself and in laying out the evidence they took the potentially risky step of making vice president biden himself and the president's unfounded allegations against him a major part of their presentation, only one item of interest, among many tonight. first, athena jones sets the

stage. >> the most serious charges ever brought against the president. >> house manager jerry nadler started the day quoting a long list of constitutional experts and invoking the framers of the constitution. >> abuse, betrayal, corruption. this is exactly the understanding that the framers incorporated into the constitution. >> democrats cruising visual aid to bolster their case that trump used the power of his office to pressure ukraine to serve his own political interests, using comments from the president's own allies, notably attorney general bill barr, alan dershowitz, a member of his legal team, and south carolina republican lindsey graham. one of the jurors in the trial, to make the point that an impeachable offense does not have to be a statutory crime. >> i think that's what they meant by high crimes. doesn't even have to be a crime. it's skrjs when you start using your office and you're acting in a way that hurts people you've committed a high crime.

>> nadler also hitting trump for blocking witnesses. >> if the president had any exculpatory witnesses, even a single one, he would be demanding their appearance here. instead of urging you not to permit additional witnesses to testify. >> texas congresswoman sylvia garcia arguing trump's motivation for demanding the investigations was the 2020 election. >> but what vice president biden became the front runner for the democratic presidential nomination, and polls shows that he had the largest head to head lead against president trump, that became a problem. >> garcia walking the senators through the investigations trump sought and why they were baseless in pain staking detail, taking aim at a gop talking point about former vice president joe biden. >> vice president biden called for the removal of this prosecutor at the official direction of u.s. policy. >> and using comments from current and former trump aides

to illustrate her point. >> we have no information that indicates the ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election. >> it's not only a conspiracy theory, it is completely debunked, former senator judd gregg wrote a piece in the hill magazine saying the three ways or the five ways to impeach one self, one was to hire rudy giuliani. >> adam schiff made clear the president was in the lead -- >> driving home the point that throughout the pressure campaign trump was acting in his own personal interests, by again pointing to remarks he made about ukraine in october. a clip that has aired some half a dozen times in the trial so far. >> well, i would think that if they were honest about it, they'd start a major investigation into the bidens. it's a very simple answer. >> so here we hear again from the president's own words what his primary object is.

and his primary object is helping his reelection campaign. help to cheat in his reelection campaign. >> schiff, a former federal prosecutor also addressing the reason for all the repetition. >> you will see some of these facts and videos, therefore in a new context, in a new light, in the light of what else we know and why it compels a finding of guilt and conviction. so there is some method to our madness. >> and much as they did on day one, the democrats saved some of their most powerful arguments for prime time. >> read the transcript, president trump says. we have read the transcript, and it is damning evidence of a corrupt quid proquo. this is corruption and abuse of power in its purest form. >> athena jones, cnn, washington. the key question, what if anything will senators decide to do with what they've been hearing and what, if any,

appetite do republicans have for hearing more, jeff zeleny joins us with more. >> that is a central question, did any republicans change their mind today, were they moved by the argument throughout the day about the president's abuse of power in the words of the impeachment managers? they made the case that the president is an existing threat, he's a continuing threat. it wasn't a mistake. it is a threat to have him in office. but watching the faces of those republican senators as i sat in the gallery, it is unclear if any minds were changed. of course it takes four republicans to join with democrats to vote next week for new witnesses, for new evidence, unclear if thereby those four or not. the key republicans aren't saying. susan collins, senator of maine, she said she would allocate to see witnesses, john bolton in particular. lisa murkowski, the republican of alaska has raised questions about is this going to get into a long drawn out fight over

executive privilege. she said she does not have the stomach for that. as she was leaving the chamber this evening she would not talk about the day's proceedings, she said she was simply tired and she wanted to sort of digest. anderson, as we sit here today, unclear in any minds were changed. most on each soid had their minds made up at the beginning. >> it seems like the 2020 election cast a shadow over the arguments being made today. >> they did. the president's own words, so striking to hear his words again and again in the gallery. really a litany of his greatest hits that he's been talking about but it's also joe biden. the democratic managers raised joe biden and hunter biden throughout the day, a prebuttal, if you will, to what the president's lawyers are expected to use. it was a sense here, a preview, if you will, of the 2020 general election campaign. and, in fact, that's what some republicans are accusing chairman schiff of, they believe he's simply trying to alter the

outcome of 2020, he's trying to muddy up president trump, if you will. one more day left of the democratic managers making their case on the second article of impeachment, unclear if any minds have changed. b one thing is clear also, there's another audience for this. democrats are trying to make their case to the american public. they believe they've done a lot on that front. >> david -- takeaway from day two. >> what i thought, if we were in a regular court of law this would be over now. they presented such a compelling case they have lots and lots of evidence to back it up. in a normal court you'd move for dismissal at some point here, they would try to sort of knock it on home. we're not in a normal court of law. we're in the court of politics. and on that, you know public

opinion seems to be moving in the favor of the democrats. but some of the earlier cnn reporting tonight was that actually support among republicans for calling witnesses is actually going down some. that the argument, you know, we're going to have to issue subpoenas and they will be challenged in court, and weeks and weeks of having this hanging over our heads. we have all the information we need. >> you're talking about republicans. >> jeff was just saying there's no evidence of movement in favor of the democrats, i would say there may be some movement in favor of the republicans. lisa murkowski doesn't sound like she's safely on board at this point, at least last two days. >> they have a lot of coverage for reasons they could say they don't want to have witnesses, a whole host of arguments they can make. >> there is. it's interesting, it's who is the audience here? as a lawyer you think about are you speaking to a judge, are you speaking to a jury, are you

speaking to a panel of judges, if you notice democrats today in interviews have started talking about the two juries, right, the public and essentially senators as the jurors. so on. the interesting thing, and nadler touched on this, this morning, he was talking to the public more than the republican is that rights, one of the first things out of his mouth was a, b, c, abuse of power, betrayal and corruption. you run the risk of simplifying what you're talking about but people can't necessarily remember number 65 of the federalist papers but they can remember abc. he's speaking to the public in a way to simplify this a little bit. to some extent you've got to get the public behind you before you can get these republican senators. it all fits together. >> during the one of the breaks, senator john cornyn told reporters that president trump had a mixed motive about holding up the aid to ukraine. that seems about as strong a rebuke as he's going to get. >> yeah, and you could see even

in adam schiff's powerful closing arguments and statements tonight that he sort of gave republicans that option by saying, look, i know how you feel. let's all be honest. we know the president's guilty, whether or not you're willing to come out and admit that, you know what he did was wrong. can question that many of you pose, is it worth impeaching him in an election year? this is a man who he said quoted chose rudy giuliani over his own intelligence agency, and why did he choose rudy giuliani, to benefit himself, because what giuliani had to offer was something that would be beneficial to president trump, and what chris ray in particular had to offer was the truth. he is a man that cannot be trusted to put the u.s.'s interests first and foremost above his own. he laid that out and addressed it because it's something we've been talking about and republicans behind closed doors have acknowledged too, maybe

begrudgingly, that the call could have been gone better, not the perfect call, but not impeachable. >> scott, you don't see any minds being changed? >> i think the president will be acquitted, because of that fact and that fact not changing there is not an appetite to shut down or bog down the senate over weeks or months because it would take away from being able to do other things. i do think -- i thought schiff's final argument tonight, it was a powerful speech. and it sounded exactly like a speech you might give at the convention this year as why the american people should not vote for donald trump for reelection. it was a very political speech. and so -- and so i think that he's making this argument that politically it's too dangerous to leave the president in office and the rebuttal from that from the republicans would be politically it would be dangerous on a 50/50 issue, an issue, and a president that's split the country right down the middle for the politicians in washington to upend the results of an election during the next election and throw him out. so i think what you're going to

sesa clash of political views, the view that he's politically dangerous to leave in and the view that 50/50, not a single republican vote in the house, and throw the president out for the -- it's an epic argument, one the fall campaign will be all about. >> it's interesting, kirsten, there was talk a while back that republicans may get to the place where they say, look, it wasn't right what the president did but it's not an impeachable offense, it doesn't seem like any republicans are even willing to really go there publicly because of out of fear of what the president will do to them. >> it has to be a perfect phone call. >> right. and so i think that -- i just -- i just think that if we agree, if what you say is true, and this is what the republicans are going to do, then it's essentially saying that in this country it is okay for the president of the united states, no matter who it is, future democratic president, to use, you know, a white house meeting or foreign aid to get another

country to do their personal bidding to help them win reelection. that is a major problem, i think, and to say that while the republicans, you know, 50/50, and this is so political and all that kind of stuff but you're not considering the fact that that's because of the way the republicans are behaving. you're sort of putting it all on the democrats instead of saying that none of the republicans are actually really seriously considering this. they made up their mind before they came in and the lawyers are arguing and it was jay sekulow said the argument they're making tomorrow is that the call was completely appropriate and of course that's ridiculous. this call was not completely appropriate on any level. it's never appropriate for a president of the united states to ask another government to investigate an american citizen. just top level. and then we can go down on all the other problems with it. >> i think that it's not the way the parties are behaving. it's the way the american people are behaving. it's 50/50. the founders set a high bar for

impeachment for a reason and the democrats haven't met that bar, if you just look at the way the country is behaving in the polling and the way it's all gone down. >> hold on. the country now is like 75% think they ought to have witnesses. almost 70% believe that he's broken a law. 70% believe that he's done something that is unethical. we're just going to brush all that aside? do you think that's good for the country? >> in the last cnn poll it was among registered voters a 50/50 proposition for removal. >> you wouldn't bring it up, it's a binary choice and we ought to have a third choice. >> many people would want a different door to go out. this process doesn't allow it. >> we'll have to take a break. how andrew johnson reacted this way to his trial, a tweet that's raising eyebrows. a senator's attack on a witness. on a combat veteran. later, a live report from the

white house from the president's late latest thoughts. for all out confidence... ...depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. life's better when you're in it. be there with depend®.

{tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping] (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can. (dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent.

the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. athat will have you seeingf with adouble.n iphone 11 all on t-mobile's newest, most powerful signal. get twice the deal, with 2 lines of unlimited for $90 and 2 iphone 11s on us. only at t-mobile. because it's tailored to you! ...take the personal assessment and get matched with a proven weight loss plan. find out which customized plan can make losing weight easier for you! myww join for less than a $1 a day. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ don't get mad. get e*trade, dawg. mostly. you make time... when you can. but sometimes life gets in the way, and that stubborn fat just won't go away. coolsculpting takes you further. a non-surgical treatment that targets, freezes, and eliminates treated fat cells for good. discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. some common side-effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. don't imagine results, see them. coolsculpting, take yourself further. save $100 on your coolsculpting treatment. text resolution to 651-90 to learn more.

just because the president of the united states is on trial doesn't mean he continue be on twitter, he's broken a record. how seriously he takes, tweeted out this image of himself at trump tower with president obama, apparently spying on him from outside the window after having climbed up trump tower, sort of a modern day norman rock well kind of thing. back with our late night art critics. i don't know -- not sure where to go from that. the -- what happens -- what do you think the republican argument is going to be? you know, we heard from jay sekulow today who said, you know, the democrats talking about biden and hunter biden, that opened the door to us

talking about. seemed to me that door was already going to be open because that is something that they can really sink their teeth into and it has obviously benefits in many different ways for them. >> it's the thing that they say legitimizes the president bringing it up in the first place, this is a legitimate issue, even the democrats are trying to prebut it because they know it's a problem. i think you'll hear the republicans talk about it. i don't know if it will make up the bulk of their argument. >> do you think they'll take all three days? >> at some juncture, if you think you've got it, why would you keep belaboring it? remember, you know, if you get through your arguments and you think you've got it, all you've got to do is get through the q&a period, go to the witness vote. >> sekulow said he's not going to run out the clock. >> to me, i would be focused on doing what i had to do to get the votes that i need, and really not being so repetitive if it's not necessary. >> quick bit of law school for you, you know, there's a legal

term for what they did by bringing joe biden up today, it's actually called fronting. you do this when you have a witness who has convictions in their record or something and you be the attorney to bring it out and put it on the record so the other side doesn't do it. by saying the name biden, hunter biden, even though it's not relevant, the question of hunter biden's conduct is not relevant to whether the president violated his east of office or, it was legally sound for them to be the ones to get it out there, rather than have jay sekulow be the first one to bang the table. >> they repeatedly said the president never talked about corruption or biden, the only time this came up is when biden became a nominee for president and you saw his poll numbers go up, and repeatedly connected the two, the president didn't care, only when he came a potential adversary is when the president raised this issue. >> even if he had legitimately

wanted to -- let's say it was legitimate, you wouldn't ask someone, a foreign government to do it, you would ask the doj to do it. >> and you wouldn't ask a foreign government, which is a history of corruption, that you're concerned about it. >> and rudy giuliani run it. >> and on top of it you wouldn't ask them and basically say, you know, in order to get what you want, you have to do this. right, so there's a lot of different layers of things you wouldn't normally do. >> when i said not relevant, scott you grimaced a little bit, here's why it's not relevant. it's -- i lost my train of thought on that. it doesn't change the question of whether the president violated the law. >> right. >> it's a relevant question for voters, if they want to ask the question of whether hunter biden is himself compromised or whether joe biden is compromised or his family is problematic, but as a fact for impeachment that's not relevant. legally, factually, constitutionally, it has no bearing on whether the president behaved improperly by

withholding that $391 million. that's not in dispute. everyone is in agreement that it happened. now it's a question of what you choose to do with it. >> well, the republicans would say, "a," it is relevant because just run -- the fact that joe biden's running for president doesn't absolve him from questions about his conduct or the appearance of, you know, conflicts of interest. that's number one. >> question for voters. >> no, it's a question for the president because it legitimizes a reason to bring it up. that's what they would say. number two, they would also say he got the aid over a very short period of time. and by the way this administration's been far tougher on the russians in this whole deal than the previous ones, that's how they rebut. >> if i think you're a bad person, i think you're a lovely person, but if i think you're a bad person, i steal money from you, if i'm then charged with theft because i, you know, i can't then say, well, i was doing it for a good purpose because the guy i stole from was a bad guy. >> he got the aid because the whistle-blower came out -- >> got caught, schiff's words.

yeah, you think that's true? >> yes, of course. >> they're not acknowledging it. >> the republicans might say he got the aid because several republican senators went to him and said you've got to release this, including rob portman of ohio. >> there's a big optic scene next week when secretary of state pompeo is going to be visiting with zelensky, not a coincidence he will be there and pointing to that. >> go back to -- i think, scott, the republicans can go have their exoneration rallies, but remember about half the country is going to be really angry if this is the result he gets, acquittal, and there's nothing else, you know, he can walk off with the exoneration, and i think that the republicans need better arguments than they've presented so far about why there ought to be a case. >> everyone is going to stick around, a lot more to discuss. next, a republican senator attacked the patriotism of -- the recipient of a purple heart responded.

i didn't realize that having kids would be the hard part. so we planned to start ivf treatments. ♪ now i'm ready for someone to call me "mom." at northwestern mutual, our version of financial planning helps you live your dreams today. find a northwestern mutual advisor at nm dot com. that's why it's important to be prepared for anything life brings. at fidelity, we'll help you build a clear plan for retirement. one that covers health care costs, taxes, and any other uncertainties while still giving you the flexibility to make changes to your plan as often as you need. because when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. ♪ here's wishing you the bluest sky ♪

there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. you met on anwhy?. delete it. he's the one. gesundheit. [sneezes] i see something else... a star... with three points. you're in a... mercedes. yeah, we wish. wish granted. with four models starting under 37 thousand, there could be a mercedes-benz in your near future. lease the gla 250 suv for just $319 a month with credit toward your first month's payment.

♪ ♪ well i'm standing here, looking at you, what do i see? ♪ there's a booking for every resolution . book yours at booking.com i feelbusiness cards...newg logo...outdoor sign.n . you always get me. now, get free 1 hour in-store pick up... ...at office depot officemax and officedepot.com. same time next week.

yes! or here on a wifi hotspot. lte xfinity mobile has more coverage to keep you connected to what matters most. that's because it's the only wireless network that automatically connects you to millions of secure wifi hotspots and the best lte everywhere else. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, save even more with $100 off galaxy a50. click, call or visit a store today.

you would think that deciding the fate of a president after hearing the evidence against him would be plenty to do for most senators. some, though, have taken a moment here and there to step out of the chamber. some have been doing cross word puzzles. many have used break time to go on television. one has spent her time attacking one of the players in this drama, marsha blackburn, republican of tennessee, firing off tweets about one of the impeachment witnesses, colonel alexander vindman.

adam schiff is -- how patriotic is it to bad mouth our great nation in front of russia, america's greatest enemy. he leaked the command and -- his pal the whistle-blower over a policy dispute with the president. for starters you would not know it from senator blackburn's tweets he is lieutenant colonel vindman. he did not know who the whistle-blower was. late this evening colonel vindman's attorney responded to the senator. quoting from a statement, a member of the senate, at a moment when the senate is undertaking its most solemn responsibility would choose to take to twitter to spread slander about a member of the military is a testament to cowardice. senator duckworth, what do you make of what senator blackburn said today? >> i am just appalled that that is what she has said, that she

would actually attack a veteran, a man of honor, a man who in his remarks, when he testified under oath was that here in the united states right matter. and that is why he spoke up. he did his duty. that's what we expect every single serviceman and woman to do, do your duty and that's what he did. for her to attack him is really quite shameful. >> also for her to be accusing somebody of denigrating or criticizing america in front of russia seems like that's exactly what trump did in helsinki with vladimir putin standing on a stage. >> exactly right. if anybody has denigrated america it's president trump. certainly not colonel vindman. he's talked about huh grateful he is that his father escaped the soviet union to come to the united states, how he and his brothers have served this country in uniform combined for well over 30 years. he has not denigrated this country. in fact, he has served and defended this country for at least 20 years and it is president trump who has actually denigrated our great nation, in

front of a foreign ally and an adversary like russia. >> republicans have said nothing new has been presented to them. the same information repeated and over and over, the more they talk the less convincing they become. >> allow us to subpoena the additional evidence the white house is hiding from the american people, the evidence that we've shown so far has holes in it that the white house can fill. we've got documents that have parts of it blacked out, redacted. we have folks who we know were involved in these decision-making process, such as mr. bolton, that have said they would like to testify. they would testify, we would subpoena them. if they want to see more evidence, allow us to testify. they voted over ten times just the other night against allowing us to bring people in to testify, against bringing on new documents. we can have this additional evidence if the republicans would actually allow us to subpoena it. >> the senate minority leaders are claiming for republicans it's the first time they've

heard the whole narrative of what's happened. they get their news from fox news. do you believe that's the first time many republican senators are hearing about all this? >> i can tell you, anderson, i watched the house trial, and the way that the house managers have actually presented the evidence in chronological order was new to me. it was really interesting to have all the bits and pieces stitched together into a comprehensive narrative that really shows how overwhelming the evidence is of the president's guilt of his abuse of power. even for myself, i've been paying attention. it was really important to have all of this put together in a chronological format so that we are now finally understanding what was happening on the july 25th telephone call when we know all of the conversations that happened before it. >> you know, obviously we still don't know if witnesses will be called, if republicans will allow that but today senator chris murphy said that, quote, mull mulvaney is most important to the testimony. mulvaney is the one talking to

trump on a regular basis. i'm wondering if you agree with that, if you think mulvaney is more important than bolton, if bolton it's not clear what he's going to say. >> i'm not sure what either one of them are going to say. mulvaney has said on record in a press interview there was quid pro quo. he said we do this all the time, get used to it. i also think that mr. bolton is critical, along with many other people the white house is not allowing to testify. >> senator duckworth, i appreciate your time, thank you. >> thank you. just ahead a check in at the white house, the president's defense team, how his team plans to rebut the charges made by house democrats.

( ♪ ) hey there! i'm lonnie from lonnie's lumber. if you need lumber wood, lonnie's is better than good.

we got oak, cherry, walnut, and more. and we also have the best selection of plywood (clattering) in the state... hey! (high-pitched laughter) man: dang woodchucks! (wood clattering) stop chuckin' that wood! with geico, the savings keep on going. just like this sequel. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. (whistling) robinwithout the commission fees. so, you can start investing today wherever you are - even hanging with your dog. so, what are you waiting for?

download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood.

talked earlier how the president's legal team is signaling they intend to make hunter and joe biden part of their case. ca kaitlan collins on reaction to that. >> you're seeing the president's legal team sit in the room silently. we're being told they're waiting back, watching to see what it is their argument is going to be because they say they've got this affirmative argument they're going to have but they're also going to need to push back on what the democrats are saying so the question is, essentially, how they're going to do that, whether or not they're going to try to match the democrats with the videos, the sound clips that you've seen them playing from the house portion of this impeachment.

the legal team has been meeting every day at the white house before they go to capitol hill, a little bit of a prep session and then they go over there and they're listening, waiting to see what they're going to do. right now, anderson, we're told they're only expected to take two days, not three days like the democrats are expected to do starting tomorrow to make their case. some people say that's fluid. but they aren't expected to go for the full 24 hours they'll have to make opening statements right now. >> it seemed clear by the sheer volume of tweets and retweets from the president that he is certainly focused on this, whether or not he's actually himself watching it all, do you know how closely he's actually watching? >> no, he's been watching it pretty closely and that's based on what people who have been speaking with him have been saying, the president watching to see exactly what these democrats are saying and a lot of this material the president has seen before because he also watched very closely during the impeachment hearing and he is irritated the fact that his team

is not able to make their argument. that's what's so interesting about the fact that there is this possibility out there the senators will make saturday a short session and then come back monday for the president's legal team to make their full argument. a lot of people don't see how the president will think about, he cares a lot about the sunday shows and the coverage. that will be a question. if they only have an argument for a few hours on saturday compared with how long the democrats went for today. something else that will be interesting when you see the president's legal team come forward, ken starr and alan dershowitz are expected to join jay sekulow and pat cipollone. they have not been involved in any kind of formal prep session. it will be interesting to see how they make their arguments, rather than how the democrats are making theirs, coordinating together. >> thanks very much, kaitlan collins. jay sekulow says that the

democrats' presentation today, a lot of details about ukraine opened the door on the bidens. do you buy that? >> no, i don't. again, this gets back to what we were talking about earlier, this question about hunter biden's conduct, if voters wish to consider it, if voters wish to consider whether joe biden is compromised. that's not a question for voters. >> you could make the argument -- >> sure. >> you know, that if there was, you know, real corruption, the the involving hunter biden and joe biden, then that justifies the president's -- that it wasn't a political, purely political and personal benefit to the president. >> if that's the case you have a state department that can gauge -- >> now you're thinking rationally. >> i try, i do my best. you have a justice department that can do -- frankly, you have many other avenues besides calling the leader of a foreign country to engage that person and that government. and frankly, and violating the

law as the gao has found. >> in fact, if you wanted to investigate corruption, the last thing you would do would be to announce an investigation into it. you don't usually do that -- >> particularly if you had never expressed an interest in investigating corruption, particularly in ukraine. for all of those reasons this is incredibly suspect. >> the other thing is, he didn't just ask them to investigate, he tied it to something that they needed, right, he tied it to a white house meeting and foreign aid. so if you take all these separate things, each of them by themselves are problematic, put them together and that's where we get to where we are today. >> lev parnas, it wasn't even to investigate, just to announce the investigation. >> to announce, right. but it's the extra -- all he had done it would be inappropriate. but that's not all he did and so he added to it basically, you know, bribing them. >> do you think if -- to the extent that the republicans

bring up the bidens and go down that -- does that -- does that help -- does that -- i mean, it must hurt joe biden. >> it muddies the water, for sure and there are plenty of people that you talk to that don't really know much about the details but when they hear the bidens were involved and what was his son doing on the board, and most people would agree that it's actually not kosher for somebody to get a job like that, just because of your last name. it does become a bit murky. like we said before this is not something the president had taken up before, not something the president expressed interest in by going to his justice department, by seeking an investigation. the reason he was so frustrated with zelensky is they had gotten to a certain point, via rudy giuliani, with his predecessor. and por shen co was willing to play ball a bit more than zelensky and therein lies the issue. >> giuliani was mentioned 200 times today, i think. do republicans try to defend giuliani or just not touch that. >> don't touch -- the lawyers

may try to touch it but republican senators i don't think are going to touch this because there's no way to argue that this was a smart idea. getti getting rudy and lev and igor involved, it's the single worst thing he's got going for him, to your all's point. there were official channels if you wanted to investigate this. clearly could have done it. so, no, i don't think you're going to see senators jumping to rudy's defense. you might see them jumping to the defense of, it was legitimate to look at the bidens but i don't think any of that's going to involve jewgiuliani. >> david, before we go, i want to talk to you about jim lehrer. >> it's a sad day, one of the finalest journalists of his generation. he was a model of integrity, fairness and decency that made such a difference. he was so committed to being

impartial as a journalist he didn't even vote, it was the reason he was selected to moderate 12 presidential debates. 12 presidential debates. we've never seen that and will never seen that again. on a personal basis he was the one who invited me in to television world 35 years ago and made a home for me at public television for almost a decade and we became close friends. my wife and i and he and his wife had dinner about a week ago and he was in high spirits and he was so grateful for the life that he had had, a life in journalism. and he went out with flags flying. i have enormous admiration for him. we've lost one of the people we need to remember people like that in journalism. he made such a difference. >> extraordinary man, and just incredible legacy and contribution. david, thank you for that, i appreciate it. we'll be right back.

things you can do with schwab: you can earn more when you invest your cash. you can get a satisfaction guarantee. you can also wonder why our competitors don't offer that. schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. don't offer that. ...it's almost like a challenge mywweveryday to see how welley. i can eat and still enjoy myself all day long, i wake up every morning to see how much weight i've lost and how much better i look. myww join for less than a $1 a day.

{tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping] (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can. (dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. and my lack of impulse control,, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby!

wyou can see relationships.gy, connections. patterns. you can see what others can't. ♪ ♪ ♪girls on the floor gotta thirty point lead and a minute left♪ ♪queens on the team in real life not just on the internet♪ ♪all strength, we ain't stoppin' believe me♪ ♪go straight till the morning look like we♪ ♪won't wait, we're taking everything we wanted we can do it♪ ♪all strength, no sweat ♪all strength, no sweat

athat will have you seeingf with adouble.n iphone 11 all on t-mobile's newest, most powerful signal. get twice the deal, with 2 lines of unlimited for $90 and 2 iphone 11s on us. only at t-mobile. as another long day on capitol hill comes to an end, the impeachment managers come to the end of their presentation. if the schedule holds, friday would be the final day for the democrats to make their case. saturday it will be handed over to president trump's lawyers and his republican defenders. during the house impeachment hearings, noah feldman argued in favor of the president's impeachment. now that the senate trial is underway, no better time than tonight to check in with the professor for his take on what's happened so far.

professor, looking at everything you've seen thus far, do you think the house managers are making an effective case? is there anything you think they should be doing that they're not? >> i think they are doing a good job. you know, their first goal was to try to draw the country's attention to the fact the senate doesn't want to call any witnesses. they were very effective than that, maybe even more effective than they expected. then they had to switch and pivot and start focusing on telling the story. they've had two days to do that now. they've done it in pretty deep detail. and that's an important thing to do, not only for the public, but also for the senators. and last but not least, they are also trying to make an historical record. they know this impeachment isn't just about now. it's about the long run. >> there's multiple audiences, not just the public, not just the few senators in the room who might actually be willing to call for witnesses. it's also history. >> absolutely. and i think everyone who is involved in this impeachment process has to understand that

even if the outcome is the one that most people predict, that's actually not what really matters at the deepest level. it would be nice if the senators would come around and recognize that trump isn't just impeachable but deserves to be removed from office. even if they don't, it's important for the future of american democracy that others in the future, future generations be able to look back, watch this footage, watch the commentary, read the transcripts, and see exactly what donald trump did and that he was impeached for it, to send the message this kind of conduct just isn't okay no matter what two-thirds of the senate decides. >> the frightening thing about that is if, assuming he is not actually removed from office or the senators don't even vote on witnesses, what message that sends to future presidents. >> it's true. you know, one of the great dangers of the fact that the president could get away with having stonewalled congress and the house of representatives during the impeachment inquiry and get away now with having

republicans choose not to call witnesses is there is maybe a lesson that a president is best served just to refuse to play along, you know, just to thwart the entire constitutional process. that's a terrible outcome not just for this president, but for future presidents. but that's only the glass half empty view. there is also a glass half full possibility. and that is to remember that just being impeached is not something that happens every day. donald trump is only the third president to be impeached. and there was one other, richard nixon who quit because it was so terrible to imagine being impeached he would rather resign. and so in the long run, there can be a sanction just associated with the fact of impeachment. and that i think is meaningful and has historical significance, too. >> you wrote a piece earlier this month saying the impeachment trial doesn't need more evidence. that while witnesses would clear up a few things, the case has already essentially been made that the president abused his office. do you really think that the bolton's testimony or mulvaney's testimony aren't necessary? >> my own view is that the house

was right to impeach on the evidence that it did have. there was more than enough evidence to determine that what the president did was an abuse of the office of the presidency to cheat in the elections. the call records alone tell you that in no uncertain terms. now, in terms of knowing the whole story, will we know the entire story without bolton and mulvaney? no, we won't know the entire story, and it would be very good for the country and it would be good for history to know exactly the details of what happened. but even without that, it's clear that the senate ought to remove donald trump from office, and it's clear that the house was right to impeach him on the basis of the evidence that it did have. and, by the way, the house managers, they're in a bit of a delicate position. they are saying correctly that we need this evidence, but they can't be saying that without this evidence, you can't remove the president because the house has already voted to impeach. >> professor noah feldman, i appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> thank you. we'll be right back. ♪ when we see you enter through our doors. we don't see who you're against, or for.

whether tomorrow will be light or dark. all we see in you, is a spark. we see your kindness and humanity. the strength of each community. the more we look the more we find the sparks that make america shine. ♪ but when we found out our son had autism, his future became my focus. lavender baths always calmed him. so we turned bath time into a business... ♪ ...and building it with my son has been my dream job. ♪ at northwestern mutual, our version of financial planning helps you live your dreams today. find a northwestern mutual advisor at nm dot com. ♪

♪ country roads, take me home there's a booking for every resolution. book yours at any price, at booking.com book yours at any price, as parents of six, this network is one less thing i have to worry about. (vo) why the aceves family chose verizon. we all use our phones very differently. these two are always gaming and this one is always on facetime. and my oldest is learning to be a pilot. we need a reliable network because i need to know he's safe. as soon as he lands, he knows he better call mama. mama! (vo) the network more people rely on, gives you more. like plans your family can mix and match starting at just $35. and apple music on us. plus, up to $700 off the latest iphone when you switch. that's verizon.

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.

cnn's impeachment trial continues. want to turn things over to chris cuomo. chris? >> thank you, anderson. hello, everyone. i am chris cuomo. day two of democrats' opening arguments is in the book. house impeachment managers made their case, again, about eight hours today. different, though, than yesterday. how? it was more structured. they laid it out more with what they call sign posting. here's where we're going to go. here's why we're going to go there. and it seemed to work. the main points, though, were also some of the most provocative ones. president trump abused his power, how? pressuring ukraine to