developed conspiracy charge that we've seen so far. we expect a lot more from some of the charges that are still coming. >> wow. but amazing she was literally sitting there waiting, right? waiting and listening. all right. evan perez, thank you very much. and thanks as always to all of you. we'll see you here tomorrow. "ac 360" starts now. good evening. house impeachment managers have now concluded their case for why the former president of the united states must never be allowed to even contemplate another run for that office. presenting a case that was as much about arguing his guilt before 100 u.s. senators as it was defining his legacy before the american public. tomorrow his legal team before their turn to rebut the house managers' case. however, those arguments to senators appear to have already begun at least behind closed doors. hours ago three of the former president's most reliable backers in the senate, lindsey graham, ted cruz, mike lee, met privately with the former president's attorneys on capitol hill. senator cruz told cnn this about

the private meeting. "we were discussing their strategy for tomorrow and discussing their thoughts on where it should go." again, these three men are jurors in a trial. so ethics aside, it's pretty much an indication that the fix is likely in. and the democrats seem to know that. today they also issued a warning. a warning that this could happen again. a warning for the future of this country and a clear message about what will be the legacy of the former president. the editorial page of the conservative "wall street journal" today picked up on it this evening with a piece titled "the trump impeachment evidence. he might be acquitted but he won't live down his disgraceful conduct." and this is the final paragraph. it reads, "now his legacy will be forever stained by this violence and by his betrayal of his supporters in refusing to tell them the truth. whatever the result of the impeachment trial the republicans should remember the betrayal if mr. trump decides to run again in 2024." again, the "wall street journal" says these republican senators and all others in the party

should "remember the betrayal." time of course will tell if they will or if their constituents will force them to. more now on the day from our congressional correspondent ryan nobles. >> he attacked the first amendment. he attacked the constitution. he betrayed his oath of office. presidents don't have any right to do that. it's forbidden. >> reporter: the democratic house impeachment managers have wrapped their case with hours of time available, hoping a shorter presentation will have a greater impact. >> all of my wonderful supporters -- >> reporter: on day 3 they tied trump to the mob by showing that those who stormed the capitol did so because they believed the president had sent them there. >> you don't have to take my word for it that the insurrectionists acted at donald trump's direction. they said so. >> we were invited here! we were invited! hey, we were invited here!

we were invited by the president of the united states! >> let's call trump! yes! >> reporter: the managers showed several examples of rioters shouting trump's name and proclaiming they were doing his bidding. >> does he not realize president trump called us to besiege the place? >> i thought i was following my president. i thought i was following what we were called to do. >> we're fighting for trump. >> reporter: they then showed how trump offered his support for the mob and demonstrated no remorse for the role he played in inciting their anger. >> my speech and my words and my final paragraph, my final sentence and everybody to the t thought it was totally appropriate. >> we know president trump didn't make a mistake. because you see when you or i make a mistake and something very bad happens we would show remorse. we would accept responsibility. president trump didn't do any of t that. why not? because he intended what

happened on january 6th. and how do we know that? he told us. >> reporter: trump's legal team will get their opportunity to rebut the democratic arguments tomorrow. but they attempted to get a head start today. their lead lawyer, david schoen, left the chamber while the trial was under way to go on fox news. he promised their presentation will show no link between trump and the actions of january 6th. >> i think you'll at least be moved by what you see and get a much better picture of exactly what's going on here and the hypocrisy in some of the positions taken by the house managers in this case. >> reporter: but democrats believe they've provided overwhelming evidence of trump's connection to the crime and warn that it was incumbent upon these jurors to hold him accountable because of what might happen in the future. >> i'm not afraid of donald trump running again in four years. i'm afraid he's going to run again and lose.

because he can do this again. >> and ryan nobles joins us. there's also new reporting, ryan, on the timeline of the trial over the next few days. what's it going to look like? >> anderson, it looks like this could wrap up much quicker than we earlier anticipated. the trump legal team saying today that they intend to only use three to four hours of the 16 hours they have available to them to make their case. that means that theoretically tomorrow they could move quick will i to the question and answer period. now, if everything goes according to plan, that means this could all be wrapped up by saturday. now, there are a lot of caveats to that. we still don't know if witnesses will be called. we don't know if both sides intend to use the full time allotted to them when it comes to questions and answers. but it seems pretty clear that both democrats and republicans are ready to get this trial in the rearview mirror. and anderson, based on what republican senators told us today after they left the chamber, it still seems pretty clear that president trump will be acquitted. >> ryan nobles, appreciate it. what we've seen in this trial and what's to come from one of the jurors, senator chris murphy

of connecticut joins us now. senator, i first just wanted to get your reaction to the case the house managers laid out over the past two days. >> well, it's a remarkable case. it's a case that is full of loads of impeachable conduct. i mean, i think you could make the case that even if january 6th had not happened the president had violated his oath of office repeatedly simply through his attempts to try to bully state officials into overturning the elections. and then i think the impeachment managers did a good job of showing how january 6th was entirely a construction of donald trump. it wasn't some organic rally that he just showed up to speak at. he in fact was the primary organizer of it. and at that rally he had all sorts of information to know that this was a very dangerous, very violent crowd. and even with that knowledge he equipped them with the information. he incited them to violence that

led i think very knowingly, very predictably to the attack that left many, many people dead and injured. i think today their focus was on making it very clear that the crowd believed they were acting at the direction of president trump but then also making it equally clear how dire the harm is to the united states. these right-wing groups claim that they have had boons in recruitment since january 6th. they are still planning more attacks on the united states. and they also showed how our image and reputation abroad has suffered, that america is less secure today because of what happened on the 6th. it's a really compelling case. i hope there are at least a handful of republicans who are moved by it. we'll see this weekend. p. >> i was struck by a video you posted on twitter talking about a conversation you had ai w. a freshman senator after today's proceedings. can you just talk about that a little bit? >> i think you have to

understand that, you know, these are videos that we're watching showing our lives in danger. right? we watched yesterday for the first time security footage of all of us being rushed out of the senate chamber. we saw for the first time how close we were to rioters who we now know were intent on killing us. who knows how it would have turned out? but i think we have enough evidence to understand that there were a lot of lives in danger that day. so for 100 people and hundreds of staff to be reliving that inside the chamber, you know, it's a little different than the standard trial before a jury. it's certainly very different than the ukraine trial a year ago. and as i walked out with a freshman senator, you know, he was remarking to me, you know, that these are tough things to watch, tough things to process, especially if you just showed up to the senate about 30 days ago. >> it was pointed out today the

president's responses and lack of responses to what happened the day it happened. and one of the videos that he made is, you know, he said this is what happens when in his opinion an election is stolen or if people aren't listened to. but that phrase "this is what happens," it is very telling and it has a double meaning that was pointed out today, which is he knew what would happen if you bring -- if you lie to people and get them riled up and you've seen them attack the michigan state house and then you get them to come to washington and then you tell them to go to congress itself and that you're going to march with them and fight like hell, this is what happens, and any reasonable person would know that. and the president was indicating the day of the attack he knew it, that he knew this is what happens because this is what happens when you do this. >> well, that tweet that he sends out at 6:00 on the day of

the insurrection, that i think he erased some hours later, is essentially an admission of guilt. because as you point out, he is basically telling everyone in that tweet that he knew that violence was going to occur, that everyone should have known, and then at the back end of that tweet he is of course celebrating the violence, applauding all of the individuals who stormed the capitol ending in the deaths of multiple individuals. so more than probably any other piece of evidence, that tweet gives you a very clear window into the president's frame of mind that day. and the managers also did this i think very good job of showing how over the course of four years donald trump applauded violence, rewarded violence over and over again, right? this local official from new mexico who said the only good democrat is a dead democrat. guess what? he gets an invitation to the white house after he sends out

that message. all of it was a predicate to january 6th. and of course he should have known given his celebration of violence leading up to that day that that's what was going to happen when he sent the crowd to the capitol. >> it seems pretty clear the way most republican senators are going to vote. behind the scenes, i don't know how many collegiality there is anymore these days, but do your republican colleagues tell you what they really think? because so much of this, or the things they're saying publicly just seem intellectually dishonest. >> you know, they had a chance about three weeks ago to essentially remove donald trump from any leadership position in their party. and they did not. and so today i think they are faced with the recognition that donald trump is going to be the leader of the republican party, the face of the republican party, the most powerful person in the republican party for the next four years. and just as they lived in fear of him for the last four years, apparently they are now prepared to live in fear of him for the next four years.

i think that continues to drive much of their behavior. they are going to rationalize it by saying that either this proceeding is unconstitutional or that the president didn't give explicit instructions for violence. but i think when it comes down to it most of them watch what has happened to republican congressmen who cross donald trump. they get into a bunch of trouble. and many of them just want to try to avoid that. and that's sickening. that is terrible for our republic. that could spell the end of demo democracy. but i think if you ask me what they're thinking, that's likely what they're thinking. >> what do you think of senators graham, cruz, and lee meeting with the president's defense team late this afternoon? is that appropriate? >> i mean, listen, this is not a jury trial. it's not a criminal trial. there is no rules against members of the senate talking

with the lawyers. frankly, there are democratic senate members who were having conversations on the floor in front of the cameras with jamie raskin and others. so i guess to be honest, anderson, i'm not terribly worried about that. frankly, i'm sure republican senators watched the president's lawyers' presentation the first day of the trial and are panicked that they're going to repeat that very poor, embarrassing performance and are trying to give them a little bit of friendly advice. >> senator chris murphy, appreciate your time. we're joined now by george conway. >> thanks. >> thanks, senator. george conway, well-known attorney in republican circles, frequent critic of the president. george, thanks for being with us again. how much was the house managers' case, how much of it is an effort to convince senate republicans to vote for conviction versus history and defining the president's legacy? >> i think it's a little of both. i mean, i think they must realize that it's an uphill battle to convince 17 republicans.

many of them seem to have made up their minds. jurisdictional votes seem to suggest that they don't want to entertain this at all. but i'm grateful for the fact that they're still proceeding in full force and doing such a tremendous, tremendous job of advocacy. really a stellar, a-plus by any stretch, by any legal litigation standard, they are doing an absolutely spectacular job. and i'm grateful for that because i think people need to see this. historically. people need to see the presentations that they made. and people need to know what happened here. and if the republicans don't abide by -- the republican senators don't abide by their oaths, well, that needs to be recorded in history too about what they ignored and the shame upon them that should be accorded them if they refuse to listen to this evidence. >> senator murphy was just saying that the republicans in the senate have chosen to have donald trump continue to be -- it be the party of donald trump

and to have him be the biggest force in the party for the next four years. i do not understand why they are choosing that. i understand why, you know, some folks who believe that are the same people who are voting for them would choose that and they're afraid of going against it. but for a lot of these senators they would like to be president themselves in some cases. why are they allowing this man to have power over them for the next, you know, at least four years? >> i wish i could apply truth serum or a vulcan mind meld and find out exactly what makes them tick. but i think it's a combination of two things. i think it's a combination of for some political ambition and desire for self-preservation, and just sheer cowardice. and what i mean by cowardice is fear of the very kind of mobs that the kinds of voters who have been convinced by the president's lies.

and the irony of this is that the kind of -- the kinds of forces that are encouraging republican senators to ignore the evidence are precisely the forces that the president of the united states unleashed on january 6th. it's evidence that the president should be convicted in fact. and i want to talk about one point that senator murphy made, which i thought was a very good one and one that i've agreed with -- i agreed with yesterday, is that one of the things that the managers did was make a very good case that everything that happened up until january 6th was by itself, the lying about the election, the attacks on our constitutional system, the attacks on election integrity were by itself an impeachable offense or should have been an impeachable offense. in fact, i'd go farther than the senator did. i think there were actually three impeachable offenses, any one of which should suffice to disqualify president trump from holding office ever again.

the first was the lying about the election, the big lie before january 6th. the second was the incitement itself on january 6th. and the third, which they did a tremendous job yesterday and today and particularly today, is basically the dereliction of duty that this all ended with on january 6th when trump basically refused to do anything, refused to say -- you know, trump is always capable of these all-caps tweets with exclamation tweets. we didn't see that on the afternoon of january 6th. it was okay, be nice to law enforcement. and then later he praises them. and he didn't do anything to actually get these people to stop. when these people were actually chanting and repeating his tweets about mike pence, he could have tweeted instead you people need to stop, you need to turn around, you need to get off the capitol grounds and you need to be not violent. and he didn't do that with any emphasis at all. it was a dereliction of duty. >> he's screaming stop the steal, not stop the attack.

you know, this does not represent me, i'm horrified and sickened by what you are doing. >> he said remember this day. what a great day this was for him. that's what he said at the end of the day. crazy. >> and this is what happens. this is -- >> right. this is what happens. not my fault. this is what happens when people think an election was stolen from them. well, who convinced them of that lie? and he did nothing -- >> one thing that was raised by the house managers -- i think it was ted lieu saying he's not worried the former president will run and win. it's that he's going to run again and lose and do this again. it is -- the reality is a lot of the folks who ransacked the capitol are still out there. not everyone's been arrested. and there's a lot of folks who according to these groups have joined up in the wake of it. >> yeah. absolutely. they're still out there. you know, i think one of the problems with the republican party has is that trump is still out there. and yeah, maybe trump could win

by winnowing the republican party down to its most deceived base, its basest base, you could end up with a party that's smaller and trumpier. and that's a disturbing possibility. it should be a disturbing possibility for republicans. and it's a terrible possibility for the nation. even if he can't win a general election with a smaller party, you know, the fact of the matter is we need two normal healthy political parties in this nation to be able to -- this is historically what we've always had. we need that for political balance and for political stability. and right now we have a party, a republican party that's completely off the rails. as shown by the senators' refusal, some of these senators' refusal to listen to the evidence. >> does it matter what sort of a case the former president's attorneys put on tomorrow? >> well, i mean, it should in the sense that i think senators

do have an obligation, whether they be democratic or republican, to listen to both sides. i suppose the democrats are going to listen more closely than the republicans have been. i would hope that by staying in the chamber and not reading -- going through reading materials. but whatever happens, i just don't think they have the goods. they just don't have the goods. i mean, i think what -- they're only going to use less than one day according to them. you're going to hear distractions. you're going to hear them say oh, black lives matters rallies. they're going to show tape of that and say look, those people committed violence and we don't see democrats being held to account for that even though there is absolutely no conceivable equivalence, especially given the fact that the president of the united states, you know, specifically, unlike any politician on the other side, specifically encouraged the violence, encouraged the march on the hill on january 6th, and had a constitutional duty to preserve, protect and defend the

constitution and to stop what happened on january 6th. there's no equivalence. but you're going to hear that. and then you're going to hear a lot about context, right? they're going to say oh, these videos were out of context. we heard a little about this on the air tonight from another network. and the fact of the matter is the democratic house managers did nothing but provide context for two straight days. the context shows trump is guilty. >> one argument that we do expect from the former president's legal team is there's no direct link between what the insurrectionists did and the former president said. obviously we heard a lot of folks who were inside the capitol attacking it at the time believing that there was a direct link, believing that they were there doing the president's bidding. and the department of justice filed today charges against a leader of the so-called oath keepers named jessica watkins who said -- and the quote is as the inauguration grew near watkins indicated she was awaiting direction from president trump.

her concern about taking action without his backing was evident on november 9th, 2020 text in which she stated i'm concerned this is an elaborate trap unless the potus himself activates us it's not legit. the potus has the right took the vait units too. if trump asked me to come i will. otherwise, i can't trust it. there were certainly a lot of people who felt the president was talking directly to them. >> absolutely. and you wonder why there was all this video. these people were taking video of themselves and bragging about it and posting social media items about what they had done. and the reason is is because they thought they had permission. they thought they had direction. they thought they had been given orders by the president of the united states. that's why they thought they were immune from consequences. and that's basically one of the reasons why there's no question that donald trump did this. and if you also -- one of the other things the house managers did today that was really a very, very good move was to give the context of other violence

and other disruptions that trump had caused over time including the liberate michigan or liberate the states, what they did to governor whitmer after he provoked, he encouraged people in michigan to go after her. i mean, he has a history of this. he knows the effect of his words. he knows them. and that's what he did on january 6th. and to go back to the legal standard, there was a lot of talk by the house managers today about willfulness, that trump was willful. well, the fact of the matter is he was willful but they don't even need to show that. trump had a duty to protect the country. he did exactly the opposite. even if he were negligent or reckless in doing this, he still should be impeached. he was justly impeached and he should be disqualified. and for actually failing to do anything about it after the fact. it only shows that he intended it and also that he committed a dereliction of duty and violation. >> george conway, i appreciate it.

thank you. >> did you. we're going to continue the discussion with how the former president's team is reacting to the case the house managers presented. also their strategy to rebut democrats' arguments when they begin their defense tomorrow. later a conversation with "new york times" columnist tom friedman about where this trial may take the republican party and the country.

feel the cool rush of claritin cool mint chewables. powerful 24-hour, non-drowsy, allergy relief plus an immediate cooling sensation for your throat. feel the clarity, and live claritin clear. what do you look for when you trade? i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. now offering zero commissions on online trades.

daddy, is that where we're from? well, actually...we're from a lot of places. you see we're from here and there and here... your family's story is waiting to be shared. at ancestry.com ♪ ♪ be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief in as little as 4 weeks. and many achieved remission that can last. humira can lower your ability to fight infections.

serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores . don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. (computer beeps) ask your gastroenterologist about humira. (shaq) magenta? i hate cartridges. not magenta, not magenta. i'm not going back to the store. magenta! cartridges are so... (buzzer) (vo) the epson ecotank. no more cartridges! it comes with an incredible amount of ink that can save you a lot of frustration. ♪ the epson ecotank. just fill and chill.

we reported top of the broadcast three republican allies of the former president in the senate mt in private with his legal team today. according to senator ted cruz it was to discuss strategy. this the day before those attorneys are expected to rebut the case presented by house impeachment managers whose job some other republican senators have praised. for more on the former president's defense strategy we're joined by chief white house correspondent kaitlan collins and chief domestic correspondent jim acosta. so jim, i know you have some reporting on what the former president's legal team strategy is. what do you expect? >> reporter: anderson-i think we can expect to see the what aboutism hall of fame, super bowl tomorrow. this is going to be a case where you're going to see the president's impeachment team go in there and essentially say, you know, you can't hold him responsible for saying things like fight like hell as he said on january 6th because they're

going to be pointing to some of these house democratic impeachment managers who have used similar wording in the past. of course obviously there's no equivalence there. those democratic impeachment managers when they've used that kind of rhetoric did not spark an insurrection like former president trump did. but they're going to attempt to make that argument. in addition to that, anderson, we're signaling this today, they're going to say there's no connection, no direct connection between the words that the president was using on january 6th and the actions of the rioters up on capitol hill. of course the house impeachment managers showed video clip after video clip of some of those rioters, some of those insurrectionists saying, sometimes into their own phones, that they were doing the bidding of the former president. one thing i will tell you, anderson, is it almost seems that the president's lawyers are trying to win points with brevity. they are foreshadowing that this is going to be a brief presentation tomorrow. when i was speaking with bruce castor, one of the president's

lawyers, earlier today, he said they were cutting their presentation as we speak to shorten it. so i think their approach at this point is less is more. just trying to get everybody out of there in the hopes of maybe earning some votes that way. >> kaitlan, earlier this week we learned the former president was unhappy with his lawyer bruce castor's opening argument, screaming at the television. you're reporting that there was tension within his orbit over castor and calls for him to actually be fired. i just want to remind viewers this is after the original legal team backed out days before the start of the trial. >> yeah. when everyone was widely panning that opening argument, you had to keep in mind these two attorneys have only had a little over a week to actually prepare for this. which is pretty extraordinary given they are defending the former president of the united states. but that's what happened because the other team left. they departed over differences with former president trump. and so now you've got this other team that's coming up. the president was deeply, deeply unhappy to say the least with how tuesday went and those opening arguments.

and bruce castor has defend td by saying he wasn't expecting to speak that day and then he started to go, they swapped speaking places. basically, what that boils down to is there's concern over what tomorrow is going to look like. because jim is right. they do believe it's going to essentially be a home run and you can't really mess it up because a lot of republicans have signaled they are going to acquit him. but there's still some concern over what the arguments are going to look like. apprehension in trump world just because it's been so disorganized so far. i think that's actually a part of the reason why you saw those republican lawmakers in their meeting with the team earlier today. because if you watched last night lindsey graham was giving them advice in a sean hannity interview, basically telling the team what they should be doing. so many people had gone to the president on tuesday and told him he should just get rid of bruce castor because he wasn't an effective attorney. i'm told the president did briefly consider that but he didn't ultimately go through with it. we've still seen him come up to capitol hill. so he will still be there on the team tomorrow as they are

presenting however short that presentation may be. >> and jim, the former president we know obviously likes to see people defend him on television. apparently he's not happy with what he's seen so far. >> reporter: that's right. i talked to a source who has been speaking with the president, familiar with his thinking on all of this, who said that essentially former president trump believes he is not seeing enough legal voices out there on the airwaves defending him. and you know, this explains why we saw david schoen, one of the president's impeachment lawyers, break out of the impeachment trial earlier today. he actually left the trial to go do a live shot on fox news. evidently, he didn't think he needed to be in that proceeding as it was under way to help defend his client. but according to the source i spoke with, that's because the former president believes he just doesn't have that many people out there. it just goes to show you, anderson, even though he has left office he still wants the people working for him performing for that audience of one. >> and kaitlan, ow colleague

pamela brown is reporting the former president's having conversations with his advisers about moving on from the stop the steal lie once the trial ends. >> i think this is a wish of the president's advisers, as pam noted in her reporting earlier. they would like for him to move on from this. but as we also noted, former president trump is planning a return to the public eye once this is over. he's kind of been sitting back and waiting just really golfing and having dinner with old friends so far in the meanwhile. but i'm told it is going to be paid speeches overseas and he is going to be holding domestic rallies here at home targeting those who he believes have crossed him politically. so this idea that he's going to return back to society and drop these claims that the election was stolen from him just are divorced from reality. and maybe his advisers, it's just wishful thinking for them that he would do that and he would move on for the sake of his public image. but remember, one of the reasons he departed with that initial defense team was because he wanted them to go to the senate floor, make the claims that he had actually won the presidency,

that the election was stolen from him, and they did not want to do that. >> why would he give up on a lie? he's going to ride this for the rest of his life. kaitlan, appreciate it -- >> he never will. >> yeah. jim acosta, thanks. perspective from ross garber, who teaches impeachment law at tulane law school. cnn legal analyst gor gloria borger. lura coates, former prosecutor and norm eisen, former counsel to house democrats during the first impeachment. ross, yesterday you said you were waiting for that last little bit from impeachment managers to prove intent. did you hear it today? >> i thought what they did today was actually brilliant. they laid it out. and i thought they did it very convincingly. and then they volleyed the ball to the president's lawyers' court. and they said all right, we think we've laid this out. if you think there's anything we said that isn't accurate or that doesn't sort of tie it up, you know, now it's on you. it was very interesting. i watched senator cassidy, republican from louisiana,

ton tonight. and he picked up on that message. and he said you know what? i want to hear some things from the former president's lawyers tomorrow. for example, i want to hear their explanation for what he was doing during the siege. >> that's one of the -- >> yes. >> jamie raskin ended it essentially with several questions that they would have asked president trump had he agreed to testify and that the lawyers need to answer. so cassidy was picking up on that. >> exactly right. so yeah, the managers really did kind of lay it out today. they strung it all together. and now it's up to the president's lawyer to -- lawyers to -- former president's lawyers to try to rebut it. >> gloria, i think it bears repeating what some republican leadership was saying in the wake of the attack compared to what we're going to be hearing. let's just play that. >> the mob was fed lies. >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress. >> they were provoked by the

president and other powerful people. >> he should have immediately denounced the mob when he was unfolding. >> trump and i, we've had a hell of a journey. i hate it to end this way. oh, my god, i hate it. >> they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government. >> where in there does it say mike can say i don't like the results, i want to send them back to the states? >> these facts require immediate action by president trump. >> all i can say is count me out, enough is enough. >> accept his share of responsibility. quell the brewing unrest. >> to the conservatives who believe in the constitution, now's your chance to stand up and be counted. >> i mean, that is stunning. >> now's your chance. >> it's like lindsey graham, he just can't quit trump. that was his big moment of just letting his flag fly. >> yeah. >> and then the next day he's heckled in an airport and he goes scurrying away and now he's

meeting with trump's lawyers, giving them advice on how to get the client off. >> yeah. it was the big break-up and now they're back together again. >> yeah. >> and i think that -- >> count me out. >> yeah. it's about his political future. look, is this the first time -- >> he just won re-election. i mean, he's got six years guaranteed. i know he doesn't like to be yelled at. no one does. >> are you saying you've never seen hypocrisy -- >> no, but it's particularly extraordinary. >> yeah. this is of a different level. >> especially to someone who used to follow john mccain around. >> i cannot explain lindsey graham to you other than to say that these people are craven and that mccarthy got in a lot of trouble after he said that on the floor. >> was that basically just testing the winds and they realized oh, wait a minute week -- >> yes. >> we're out too far. >> i think it was testing the winds. he had some problems with his staff. they were objecting to the way he had behaved and he was --

he's got liz cheney out there saying you know, this is -- he needs to be impeached. and i think mccarthy was trying to play both sides, which never works well in an issue as clear as this. and i think these people are going to be judged in history. they're talking about the next few years of their political career. that's why ted cruz and graham were meeting with the lawyers, because they don't want to be embarrassed -- >> they're guaranteed the next four years their political career is going to be beholden to this person in mar-a-lago. >> but he's also had 74 million voters. but that's the problem for the republican party. and you are seeing these people reflect it. >> laura, i'm wondering what you thought of raskin's -- and we were talking about it with ross. asking the questions that these defense attorneys should be able to answer. >> i thought it was perfect given that for the better part of four years including the last impeachment this president, then president, had never answered for himself.

it had always been vetted through lawyers. he had been able to weasel his way out of having to be forthcoming unless it was on his terms and crafting a narrative. so essentially they said we need you to answer for him. and answer the questions that are out there that we have been able to provide. answers like why did he let the insurrection go on? why did he not do anything for two hours? why was there not reinforcements sent by the national guard or otherwise? did you have your thumb on the scale of all these things? those are questions at the very least he has to address because it's out there raised by his defense team, saying that there was a flurry of activity he was actually doing, trying to rebut the statements that he did nothing. and they're going to have to come up with more than a flurry. it will have to be an avalanche of information to try to counteract what the house impeachment managers have done because essentially they have laid out this case methodically but they've also shown the members of the senate that they are getting ready to transform a

lame duck presidency into the duck hunter. if they allow people to be able to run amok, abuse power at the precise time when it's most enticing to do so, when you have to cede that power and relinquish whatever pseudo-throne you think you have then at what point will there be effective checks and balances? i remember weeks ago when the discussion was with the impeachment oh, my goodness, this is going to divide the nation. they bent over backwards to show that it was an us versus them. but what they meant by us was congress, democracy, and the them were the insurrectionists. and the person that was leading the them was the president of the united states. if you're fighting for anything, that's the core value. that's the future of america. >> norm, they spent a lot of time today showing the president -- or the former president had a complete lack of remorse. >> anderson, the picture that they painted of donald trump, like an oil painting, brush

stroke by brush stroke over the past three days. and in particular filling the gap, that we've talked about so much this week. did he do this knowingly? those three powerful questions from today. the bookends. neguse posing the questions that they had answered. then raskin posing questions that will linger in the air tomorrow as the president's lawyer presents. the neguse questions. was violence foreseeable? check. they proved that. did he encourage violence? no doubt about it. we heard his words. and then the key question -- and did he do so knowingly? we saw tweets. we saw video. we saw the inaction. we saw the terrible behavior with pence that when he knew pence was fleeing he tweeted attacking him and the mob repeated it with the bullhorn. i think they proved their case.

and the republican counsel for donald trump are not even going to try to rebut it. they're cutting their time down. they know they can't. >> thank you all. appreciate the insights. up next, with the outcome of the senate trial for all intents and purposes perhaps preordained sadly, what does that mean for the future of the republican party and its allegiance to the former president? i'll talk to "new york times" foreign affairs columnist tom friedman when we continue. lease the 2021 rx 350 for $429 a month for thirty six months. ♪ ♪ experience amazing at your lexus dealer. yesterday's thinking is done for thirty six months. new ideas we have a ton so keep pushing forward toward a better world for everyone. make a different future start different at godaddy.com

and in an emergency, they need a network that puts them first. that connects them to technology, to each other, and to other agencies. that's why at&t built firstnet with and for first responders the emergency response network authorized by congress. firstnet. because putting them first is our job. at fidelity, you get personalized wealth planning and unmatched overall value. together with a dedicated advisor, you'll make a plan that can adjust as your life changes,

with access to tax-smart investing strategies that help you keep more of what you earn. and with brokerage accounts, you see what you'll pay before you trade. personalized advice. unmatched value. at fidelity, you can have both. ♪ more than this ♪ look at this human trying to get in shape. at fidelity, you can have both. you know what he will get? muscle pain. give up, the couch is calling. i say, it's me, the couch, i'm calling. pain says you can't. advil says you can. at weathertech i'm very proud of the work that i do. it also helps a lot when you know you're appreciated for what you're doing. i can be proud of where i work. like, i love telling people i work at weathertech. i would wear my weathertech shirt anywhere. (laughter) i love that it is a team and family mentality here. they gave me the chance to prove that i'm good at what i do. working hard and using your talents

still means something here in america. weathertech. want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile you can. how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too.

all on the most reliable network. sure thing! and with fast nationwide 5g included at no extra cost. we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. and get a new samsung galaxy starting at $17 a month. learn more at xfinitymobile.com or visit your local xfinity store today. as lawyers for the ex-president prepare to take their case before the senate tomorrow one former administration official tells cnn that if house managers can't convince republicans of his guilt "you are not listening or you don't want to listen."

one congressional republican emphasized to cnn this trial is about the future of his party. something my next guest has been writing and thinking a great deal about lately. joining us "new york times" foreign affairs columnist tom friedman, author of "the world is flat." among a whole range of best-sellers. tom, thanks for being here. the manager presented obviously a riveting case the last two days. the former president's legal team expected to present theirs tomorrow, perhaps in as little as three hours. i'm wondering what you've heard of the case so far, what you make of this. >> well, really this has been from the republican side simply a political exercise of escaping responsibility for rendering a judgment on this president, for doing what mitch mcconnell said he did, which was to assemble that mob and set it on the capitol. so you know, i think what the republicans don't understand, anderson, is today trump is on trial. every day after this they are

going to be on trial. for two reasons. one is everywhere they're going to go people are going to ask, now, wait a minute, that evidence, i mean, you didn't think that was important? you ran away from that on some legal argument? but more importantly, trump is just lying low, as kaitlan collins noted. he's just lying low right now. when this is all over, empowered by an acquittal delivered to him by these senators, he's going to be out there saying crazy stuff every day. attacking biden, attacking other republicans. and as he does, that microphone's going to be in the face of every one of those republican senators. do you agree with that? do you not agree with that? they're going to be on trial every day. it's so tragic, anderson, that their first instinct, you heard that in mcconnell's statement, he set the mob on the capitol. the first instinct was this is the time to get rid of him. and they blinked. and they blinked and now they want to go back to just a statement that donald trump jr. made. i don't know if you showed it. during that rally before the mob set on the capitol.

he said, this is not the republican party, this is donald trump's republican party. he was basically saying to these senators and congressmen, don't you guys understand? we put our name on everything we own. this is not -- >> he also said i believe in that same part of his speech, and i can't believe that i remember anything donald trump jr. has ever said, but he essentially said, you know, we're going to come after each and every one of you who doesn't remember that this is trump's party. >> yeah. and i think the good thing out of that is that there will be principled republicans, there aren't many but there clearly is a gathering. we read today about a potential third party being formed by republicans who don't want to go down this route. >> which is exactly what you wrote about weeks ago. >> yeah. and i predicted that would happen. and i hope it will happen. they're thinking of calling it the integrity party among other names they were considering, which seems rather appropriate

in contrast to donald trump's republican party. third parties are notoriously difficult to get organized. but actually all i hope for, anderson, honestly is that they bleed off 10%, 15% of republican votes because there's one thing for me, just one overriding takeaway this party, as presently constituted and presently led must never, ever, be entrusted with national power again. because we are seeing craven behavior, so unprinciples that the thought of these people being in power. that why i love the last impeachment manager's point -- what if donald trump is elected and loses again? imagine what he would try. >> it's interesting you say that, because you -- i know you believe that it's important that there be a republican party. or a conservative party, that there be a balance and that there are debates and there is a debate debates of idea and an

exchange of ideas. so for you to say the current gop the way it's formatted is not responsible enough to have national leadership is, you know, that's a lot. >> yeah. and i think the only way we'll get a responsible gop is if they have to sit out of power. there's nothing that cures madness in a political party more than being in the opposition for a long time. and this party, if this were kindergarten, they need a time-out. they need to be in the corner. anderson, there's no symmetry. if you look at what the democrats did in the last election -- the democratic party is 80% center left and 20% farther left. it's the center left that runs the democratic party. they elected joe biden. the republican party today is presently constituted is at best 90/10. what's doubly scary is they only seem to be able to tell the truth in secret. when they had the secret vote about liz cheney they recognized

what she was doing is great. but a party that can only tell the truth in sket becret becaus donald trump and sean hannity, that is not the republican party. >> i keep thinking of the police officer yelling into his radio, we've lost the line, which we heard yesterday for the first time. i think that's so chilling not only for what he and the capitol police and the washington, d.c. police were going through, but just on a bigger picture. like i feel like we've lost the line. we've lost the line between right and wrong and good and bad. we've lost the line that connects us to the founders of this country and who we were. it just seemed so -- we've lost the line and we've lost it to not some foreign enemy that, you know, has gotten inside the wire. it's from americans attacking americans. what i said was so powerful he's

just speechless. obviously that froze. hopefully we'll get him back. if not, we appreciate tom being with us as always. more breaking news next. new and frankly frightening information of former vice president mike pences escape from the mob. we'll be right back. introducing fidelity income planning. we look at what you've saved, what you'll need, and help you build a flexible plan for cash flow that lasts, even when you're not working, so you can go from saving... to living. ♪ let's go ♪

cyber attacks are relentlessly advancing. to end them, cybereason built a cyber security solution so advanced... it can end attacks today -- on computers, mobile devices, servers and the cloud. and deliver future-ready protection, keeping you sharp for tomorrow. join us, the defenders, in our mission. cybereason. end cyber attacks. from endpoints to everywhere.

we were able to reconnect can tom freedman from "the new york times." right before you disconnect i was saying the line, "we lost the line" it's such a bigger idea to me than what it means on the face to me. >> i think you hit on what is so profoundly depressing to so many people. as we speak right now, there are american young men and women on century around the world defending our freedom. afghanistan, iraq, the border of russia, seas outside of china.

and they're actually ready to make the ultimate sacrifice to protect our freedom. and i think of these republican senators who won't make the smallest sacrifice, won't make the smallest sacrifice of a salary of $174,000 and free parking at the national airport to defend our freedoms. and that's what's so profoundly depressing. if they had been at normandy beach we'd all be speaking german today. if they had been on the western front we'd all be speaking russian. you might want to tutor your son in mandrin. if they're going to -- the future, we are in serious, serious trouble. there's no defense of freedom from these people. >> one of the house managers use the example of the plane that went down in shanksville, that it was heading toward washington, d.c., supposedly toward the capital. and were it not for 44 people, i believe the number was, on board that flight, who rushed the

cockpit, the capitol would have been attacked. the capitol could have been destroyed. those people sacrificed for an idea, for people they didn't even know. and the cravenness of the senators who are sitting there with their feet up on desks, doodling, not even really willing to face up to the fear of being heckled in an airport like lindsey graham was. that was enough to send lindsey graham scurrying back into the embrace of the former president. >> afraid of sean hannity and losing their free parking, and it really isn't more than that. >> where does -- i think what you said before, too, about the president, he's just laying low right now, and the former president. and he's going to be out there again. kaitlan collins says raising money overseas, making speeches.

i'm sure if he can make speeches in america, he will. he's going to be having has many as he can. >> they're lived on borrowed time, but you have to give a shout-out to president biden. every day comes down to the oval office, does his work, goes home. keeps himself behind the scenes. so all the other people can be out there, their voices can be heard, acting on behalf of the country. anderson, i don't know how this administration is going to end, but i know one thing right now -- we are so lucky to have this president who's someone impossible the hate, who doesn't have to occupy every screen, doesn't have to have his voice out in every story. he's just showing up, working every day. we're going to get vaccinated faster than ever. that is the best answer to donald trump and the antics going on on this capital. >> i forgot who was on election day, maybe it was van or van was quoting somebody.

america chose the kid who stuttered instead of kid who was the bully. these republicans sitting there, they're choosing the bully. they're still scared of the bully and they're still chooses him because they're scared. and it's incredibly sad. thanks very much. >> appreciate it, anderson. we'll be back. now let's go to chris for "cuomo primetime." >> thanks, anderson. the prosecution rests. can they convince you that trump didn't want what happened? that he didn't say what he said on january 6th and on so many other occasions leading up to the farce of the stop the steal rally? that it's okay he did nothing to stop the insurrection for hours? that's their task for the open minded. and that last part is most important. the best shot the defense has is to argue that trump ran his mout