they mocked him. we are not the hate trump media mob. we seek the truth. laura look at that tweet. >> laura: we brought you details of a secret 2016 meeting between obama and prosecutors. the article the "new york times" was going to write was never published. we touched a nerve. tonight part 2 of our expose including how a ukrainian official helped the dnc hurt the trump campaign. first, day 3 of the impeachment

trial is nearing its end. just like last night we will fact check the arguments. we have exclusive insight from congressman jim jordan and a white house spoke man and senator blackburn who sat through hours and hours of oral arguments will tell us why the tone of the house impeachment managers think is really hurting their case. after listening to arguments today, it's clear that house democrats are operating under the assumption they can make tremendous leaps of logic contradict the public testimony of their own witnesses and in some cases just outright lie. their new maxim, if at first you don't persuade. lie and lie again. the rest of the media is not interested in fact checking democrats, we decided we would do it.

first, adam schiff and the impeachment managers took to levelling new charges against president trump. >> it's not every day you get a document like this. what appears to be a member of the conspiracy writing down the object of the conspiracy. >> laura: conspiracy, this sounds serious. but then why wasn't it made into an articles of impeachment. why didn't they move to amend the articles of impeachment? there is a thing called authe authenticating a document. it's called the chain of command. we have no idea what that is all about. adam schiff is trying to intuit the whole thing for us. no thanks. second schiff developed the power to read minds. >> you can say a lot of things

about the attorney general, but you can't say he ever looked to pursue something he thought was not in the president's interest. this is pretty extraordinary where he is saying the moment this transcript is publicly released, i have nothing to do with this scheme. the attorney general can recognize a drug deal when he sees it too. >> laura: that was one of my favorites. i had a hot. -- lot. schiff has been called dazzling. i guess they forgot to mention he is a walking and talking magic 8 ball too. he can read the mind of attorney general bill barr just because barr said i didn't talk to anyone about this. big deal. 3rd, when they failed to have arguments good enough on their own they lean on the founder.

here's jerry nadler. >> hamilton was a wise man. he saw danger far ahead of his time. given the threats they had to anticipate, the framers considered broad ground for removing presidents. >> laura: it sound damning. the "washington post" said that line was from a note that the treasury secretary wrote to washington about tax policy and didn't mention impeachment. anyone can take a fragment of what john jay said or roger sherman said and say, he agrees with me. it's what 8th graders do in bad esays. 4th, nadler also claimed this -- >> the articles of impeachment against president trump rank

among the most serious charges ever brought against a president. since president george washington took office in 1789 no president abused his pour in in way. prior presidents would be shocked with such contact. >> laura: let's check in with a constitutional expert. >> this fails to satisfy past impeachment hearings but creates a dangerous precedent for future impeachments. >> laura: and fifth the president must bow down to unelected bureaucrats. >> vice-president biden went through the official channels to remove the prosecutor that was corrupt. that's the exact opposite of what president trump did. that was not at all u.s. policy.

>> laura: this gets to the point of the entire circus. the impeachment zealots want to intervene anywhere we feel like it. instead of challenging him at the ballot box, they hope to remove him from office. that's what it comes down to. do the american people have a say in u.s. policy through the officials they elect? or we just happy to let career bureaucrats in the state department tell us what is best because they have a ph d at the end of their name? none of them were elected. president trump was. he does foreign policy. if he wants to fire marie yovanovitch he can do so for any reason. even democrats should be alarmed by the stupidity of these arguments. joining me now is congressman

jim jordan and a member of president trump impeachment defense team. do democrats really believe these assertions -- let's focus on one. the number of times the word conspiracy was used. none of this is in the articles of impeachment. they can under the senate rules can say hearsay and get away with it. >> they don't have the facts. they make things up. frankly it should not surprise us. adam schiff told us for two years i have evidence that president trump worked with russia to inplains the election. -- to influence the election. that was not true. adam schiff said the fisa process was just fine. adam schiff said we would hear from the whistleblower.

it should not surprise us what he and nadler are asserting. the facts are on the president's side. the constitution is on the president's side and the unfair process is another great argument the white house can make. what they did in the house was very unfair to the president. >> laura: one thing they alleged is that the president doesn't really care about corruption in other countries. watch. >> the fact that the president only wanted a public announcement and not the investigations to actually be conducted. demonstrates that his desire for investigations was to boost his reelection efforts. >> laura: this is what the president said in 2016 when he was running for president about foreign aid. >> my foreign policy will always put the interests of the american people and american security above all else. i will also be prepared to

deploy america's economic resources, financial leverage and sanctions can be very, very persuasive. >> laura: this has been his entire argument. look at the nato secretary general said nato nations are starting to pay fines. >> yes, he ran on this. a colleague said we don't have to pay people to hate us. they will do it for free. president trump said i am not a big fan of this, but i want other european allies to share in the burden. and ukraine was one of the three most corrupt countries on the planet. the president said let's check him out and see if he is the real deal. after 55 days he was convinced i think he is the real deal and the aid was released. >> laura: and doesn't have the

president have it within his powers to make these calls? >> totally. >> laura: if he wanted to hold up the aid, but he is the chief executive officer of the united states. if he thinks something stinks in the ukraine with biden? >> absolutely. this obstruction of congress. that's what the founders called separation of powers. >> laura: checks and balances. and hakeem jeffries raised another issue rejected by y'all in the house. watch. >> read the transcript president trump says. we have read the transcript and it is damning evidence of a corrupt quid pro quo.

the evidence against donald trump is hiding in plain sight. >> laura: that's very dramatic. that's an l.a. law moment. >> that's ridiculous. there was never any linkage promising an investigation to get release of the money. i asked sonland when did this happen? it never did. they got the money on september 11th and the meeting on september 25th. >> laura: adam schiff said that's because he was caught. >> not true. august 31st, senator johnson on a phone call with president trump. the president tells him you will like my decision. he was becoming convinced that zelensky and the new parliment that they were implementing the reforms they needed to

implement. >> laura: they would have put the quid pro quo in the articles of impeachment, right? >> they received quid pro quo on september 24th. >> laura: they are resurrecting the ghosts of the house impeachment process. thanks for coming in. house impeachment manager made a bizarre legal claim that got my attention. she said that executive privilege can't be used to prevent a witness who is willing to testify from appearing. bolton has a right to testify if he wants to. joining me now is a former independent council and bob barr. this is an interesting area of the law. is in that case that bolton can

defy the president's invocation of executive privilege? >> well, as a general proposition, the congresswoman's state. is preposterous. in practical terms, several of the ambassadors and state department officials who did testify in front of the house were instructed not to. they did it anyway. the president did not go into court. keep this in mind. there has never been a judicial test to my knowledge of executive privilege during an impeachment. >> laura: you are right about that. correct. >> that's very important. >> laura: you are completely right about that. bob, i want to go to you on that. under the rules i understand, there is no rule about executive

privilege and impeachment. it's history and context and we figure it out as we go along. democrats said they thought the chief justice would rule on the executive privilege dispute at the senate trial. the constitutional scholars said no, that's not how it works. the senate actually decides an immunity question at trial. this is fascinating for anyone who believes in separation of powers. would you advise the president to invoke executive privilege? >> absolutely, i would. it's not getting into the weeds. it's a fundamental over-arching question here. does the president's ability as the chief executive officer of the united states of america have the power and the

responsibility to protect information the release of which would damage national security or the president's ability to carry out policies including national security policies? it follows the information not the individual. if an individual purports or is forced or attempts to convey information that is privileged, the president can assert that whether or not the person is currently employed by the government or not. the body that decides that is not the chief justice. it's the senate itself. >> laura: yes, they're need 51 votes. we will move on from this. that's an interesting question. house manager jerry nadler made another claim that was stunning about the strength of their case. >> all of the legal experts who testified before the house

judiciary committee, those invited by the democrats and those invited boy the republicans, all agreed that the conduct we charged constitutes high crimes and misdemeanor. >> laura: we just played the clip of turley saying otherwise. and we have plenty of constitutional schollars. this is not proven at all. >> this is one of those cringe worthy moments. in real life the expert witnesses is not allowed to testify about the facts of the case. that's what jerry nadler is confused about and ignoring turley's testimony. he has a different memory and a different understanding of the law than reality.

>> laura: saul, something that elizabeth warren said when she did one of the step out of the proceedings today. she goes to the cameras and she is talking about how trump is constantly putting up road blocks to information. let's watch. >> this is the constitutional responsibility of the senate to hold a trial. the president of the united states, the one who is on trial for impeachment, can justify to throw up road blocks. that means it becomes too hard for the senate to hold a trial. then the senate will give up and go home? that violate every principle to the constitution. >> laura: saul, tension among the branches of government. one branch doesn't want the other branch to get information.

we have never seen that happen before. >> that violates the third amendment. no quartering of soldiers. one person's road block is another person's check and balances or constitutional provisions. i keep harping on this. the historical precedents are strong for an argument that says executive privilege doesn't exist in the impeachment context. the house could have done something about that by formerly starting an impeachment inquiry earlier and challenging in court. they didn't do this. incompetence on the part of the speaker. >> laura: the idea that the president gives up his right, that just gets thrown out the door because a bunch of

partisans drag him through an impeachment inquiry? >> that's right. i have a different take than saul. the president has a duty to invoke it on behalf of the separations of powers. how the course will come out on it? in the harriet myers situation in 2008 there was a ruling on different shades of executive privilege and rejecting the proposition it's not absolute. so it's situational and question by question. >> laura: issue by issue. it depend on what is revealed by answering a particular question. john bolton may show up but may not be able to answer the question because it violate executive immunity. we have to go. sorry, running out of time. thanks for joining us. for a question everybody is

asking. what is the mood at the white house? the president is coming back from mime. join -- miami. joining us now is tony the white house impeachment spokesman. what is the president feeling? >> we heard 3 straight days of nothing different. this is the bad sequel to the house hearings. a lot of bluster and claims made by democrats and the witnesses they called. there has been an embarrassing lack of facts in this case. >> laura: they have a lot of sound bites and documents and yovanovitch. >> that doesn't makeup for bad facts. the thing that strengthens our belief we have a strong case, think about the ukraine aid? was it held up? no it was paid when it was allocated. >> laura: adam schiff just

spoke. he had a new comment about the transcript. just said it. >> let me just point out a few things that may have escaped our understanding of the transcript which is not really a transcript because it's not complete. >> laura: they haven't said that phrasing. >> their key witnesses in the house hearings who were in opposition to the president's view testified that that was an accurate description of what happened on the call. >> laura: it's not complete. the conspiracy would have been proven had it been a complete transcript. i heard a lot. that was something. it's late at night. maybe he is dizzy. >> he fabricated what is in that record. what is hurting the democrats they are using the senate trial as a fishing expedition. they know they don't have the

evidence they need. maybe if we bring this other witness. >> laura: you will be back with us tomorrow night. we will take a break. more coming up. a major new development in our exclusive from last night. the white house meeting in 2016. y

young woman: yeah, thanks mom mother: of course and i love these flowers young woman whispering: hey, did you bring the... the condoms? young man whispering: what's up? young woman whispering: condoms young man whispering: what? young woman whispering: condom father: condoms charlie. she wants to know if you brought any condoms.

young man: yeah i brought some. announcer: eargo, a virtually invisible hearing loss solution with high quality sound and lifetime support. the end might not be as happy as ayou think.end. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke! but the good news is you can rewrite your ending and get screened for stroke and cardiovascular disease. life line screening is the easy and affordable way to make you aware of undetected health problems before they hurt you. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries for plaque that builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and heart disease. so if you're over 40, call to schedule an appointment for five

painless screenings that go beyond annual checkups. and if you call us today, you'll only pay $149-an over 50% savings. read it again, papa? sure. i've got plenty of time. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. >> ♪ >> laura: 24 hours ago we brought you an explosive story. judging by responses it struck a nerve. "the ingraham angle" showed you state department emails from last year that no one in tv brought you before. they centered on a january 2016 meetings between the obama administration officials and ukrainian prosecutors about how the efforts to fight corruption in ukraine might be imperled by

hunter biden's ties to the organization. tonight whoa we have a new development. one of the ukrainians is a man who is a political officer in the ukrainian embassy. his name also pops up in a 2017 piece that detailed efforts by ukrainian officials to undermine trump's 2016 campaign. rin by the same reporter who after pursuing it didn't write that story about that white house 2016 meeting. he aided a dnc operative to hurt trump campaign to find connections between trump and russia.

he didn't do this willingly. he was forced into helping her to go after trump. here's what he said in 2017. we had an order not to talk to the trump team pause he was critical of ukraine and the government. -- because. i was yelled at when i proproseed to talk to trump. she said not to get involved. hillary clinton was going to win. we asked these questions. do they know why ken voguele decided not to publish that story? what was the state department's focus in the january 2016 meeting with the ukrainian officials? why did the person we think is the whistleblower arrange this meeting? as of this moment we have

received no response to your questions. we are not stopping our call for more documents, the emails, the text messages, the voice mails, anything that sheds light on what looks like on the surface to be a concerted effort to save the biden from political embarrassment and hurt president trump along the way. joining me is molly hemmingway a fox news contributor and victor davis hansen. there are a lot of facts to back up the notion of ukrainian election meddling. >> you have a coordinated effort between media and the democrats to keep people from any discussion about ukrainian meddling much less an investigation. the politico article people speak openly.

she bragged about how she coordinated between the ukraine and the democratic national committee to get negative information about paul manafort into the election year. she sourced the dossier to russian officials. and they were fun ling the dnc and the clinton campaign money. they unseated paul manafort. >> laura: that's big. the emails. the state department officials didn't know what to do when they were approached about that meeting. trump was ahead. but you didn't know what would happen. the ukrainian officials were brought into the white house and

checked in by who many think was the whistleblower. it was about their investigation of barisma and hunter biden was on that board. >> nobody thought donald trump would win. they were not shying and the ukrainian officials were writing op-eds about how powerful trump would be if elected. it was matter of fact. then all of these liberal fact checking out fits said it was true. david merkel from the atlantic counsel had ukrainian ties. there was no controversy over this until the russian collusion heated up to remove trump. they got word. we have our foot prints all over

the ukrainian collusion. it begs the question: why would they want to have witnesses called? hunter biden is the key to this. everybody knows he had no expertise in oil or the ukraine. ukraine was corrupt and his dad was vice-president and the point man on ukraine. why would you want him to get out there and testify in this tangle of lies when his father is a front runner in the democratic primary? >> laura: the mother of his child can't even find him. senator graham said this. >> i don't know how many times it was said by the managers that the biden conflict of interest allegations has been debunked. i know a lot about the trump family and their feelings in russia. i don't know anything about,

about the biden connection to the ukraine. so when the managers tell me this has been looked at and debunked, by who? >> laura: it's more than that. the house impeachment proceedings, one of the witnesses testified she was briefed assuming senators would ask her about hunter biden's role at barisma. you have these emails you unveiled. showing there were meetings where people were concerned about hunter biden's role. and the idea that obama's officials were concerned but no questions about it is very alarming. >> laura: victor, when you watch this thing today and listen to adam schiff, insert new charges into the articles of impeachment, which are not in the articles of impeachment. throwing around words like conspiracy. grand conspiracy. the quid pro quo that was thrown out because they had to read the

transcript. there was no quid pro quo. they can defame the president and no one can not. -- object. that's are the rules of the senate. >> i don't know why they have adam schiff out there. they turned the prosecution over to him. this is a guy exposed on so many levels. he read the false version of the phone calls and lied about his contacts with the whistleblower. he could be witness number 1. he is key to this whole thing. this whole mel on drama is one phone call. -- and adam schiff's inspector

obsessions. they should be the first two witnesses. >> if the whistleblower was involved in this meeting with the bidens and doealing with hunter biden and he was close to biden and these issues, it's interesting that once someone asked questions about the becomes a whistleblower. that's why it's important that we ask questions. adam schiff demanded we hear from the whistleblower until that previse -- precise moment when it was revealed he coordinated with the whistleblower. why was he so concerned about people finding out about hunter biden's role in barisma and why he was not more alarmed by hunter biden's role to blow the whistle on that. >> laura: on msnbc claire didn't think mcconnell wants these two

people to testify. >> in the republicans wanted to hear from either joe biden or hunter biden, nothing is stopping them. mcconnell just has to put it in the rules. but they don't want to do that. it's a total distraction and a total bluff. they ain't got nothing else. >> laura: it's a bluff to find out why there was a conflict of interest with the bidens and ukraine that led the president to asked some questions? >> the proof of the pudding is in the eating. all she has to do is wait a few days and we will see who is bluffing. adam schiff and is the whistleblower as well, but "special report with bret baier" hunter biden, all three i don't think can tell the truth under oath without contradicting prior statements or television appearances. i think it's going to be a disaster. i don't understand why they are so intent on getting witnesses when it's only going to weaken a

weak case. maybe elizabeth warren or bernie sanders is behind it talking about conspiracies. >> laura: yes, this is just a game the democrats are playing. >> it remind me of the anti-kavanaugh operation just trying to drag things out. you only call witnesses if the case is worthy of impeachment. if they not it's not worthy, they won't bother with witnesses. if they bother with witnesses and think they won't call hunter biden and joe biden and the inspector general who has had rough testimonies we don't have words from. let's get a full exploration of the sordid biden drama and how

democrats got us to this. >> laura: if they really go to witnesses, this could last 4 to 5 months. are you all watching? everyone in this room, you've got to be kidding me. 4 to movie months. -- 4 to 5 months. more breaking news today. the justice department made a huge admission about the warrant to spy on carter page. the doj conceding that 2 fisa orders were not valid. the court understands the government to have concluded in view of the material in the statement that the authorization were not valid. victor, here's my question. only two were not valid? this whole thing was not valid.

>> yes, it was all invalid. what is striking we knew that the fbi and members of the doj under obama were corrupt. they were trying to destroy u.s. citizens by illegal surveillance. we thought the fisa court justice is were deloted. they didn't ask who is the opposition. i think the real subtext is the fisa court and the judges involved almost eroded all support for fisa courts. conservatives who thought they were a tool are thinking it's not worth the risk anymore. it's so politicized. >> laura: weapons of mass

destruction, that's all i will say. >> they said two of the warrants were invalid. they didn't make a decision on the other two. it's true. this is way too little way too late. they were informed years ago by david nunes about these problems. they didn't do anything about it. they would have acted earlier and would not put david who defended the russia-gate hoax as the person to help the department of justice clean up. >> laura: an american was surveiled with a material omission in the application. an opponent of trump funded? what happened to the liberals? there are no real liberals left. thank you very much. great to have you both on

tonight. with day 3 of the impeachment trial wrapping up moments ago, what can we expect next? fox news congressional correspondent who is drinking milk is stacked by on capitol hill with all of the answers. >> they wrapped off 10 minutes ago. back at one o'clock tomorrow. the final day of the prosecution presenting their case. there was a lot of focus today on russia, barisma and the bidens. some of the republican senators think the democratic house impeachment managers overplayed their hand. this could back fire on them. this is republican texas senator ted cruz. >> when president trump's lawyers present their defense, they are going to have the opportunity to present the very significant evidence that supported and still supports a serious investigation into corruption at barisma and

whether or not joe biden corrup. hunter biden is not only relevant. he is now critical. >> democrats contend that republicans are ignoring the evidence presented by the democratic managers. here's the democrat from hawaii. >> i think they are wrestling with their conscience. my republican colleagues should be a hell of a lot more upset by what the president did not only to ukraine but to our own country by not being good for our word. >> we expect the defense to start on saturday. that might be a shorter session and then the question and answer period begins. 16 hours around the middle of next week. there is a question about the questions. a lot of republicans would like to summon adam schiff as a fact witness here. there is some chatter that what the republican senators might do is make him do a de facto

witness during the question and answer session here. directing questions through john roberts towards adam schiff. the question is whether or not he will allow those questions to stand or they might have to vote on whether the questions are appropriate. >> laura: because mcconnell agreed to three days, is it really right or fair to why the white house counsel argue on a saturday when few people are watching tv. they should go 15 minutes after midnight and start up on monday? >> it says session days. that's an important distinction. the senate rules that deal with impeachment, rule 3 deals with saturdays and it says one o'clock. whether you are the prosecution or the defense you can't get

around that. some people think that might be an opportunity for the defense team to make the case to hit the sunday news cycles on sunday. that might be an advantage to them each if they finish up later on monday or tuesday. >> laura: they might go an hour or two on saturday. >> that's right. they might finish up around noon on saturday. because senators have other things to do. they want to get out of washington as badly as anybody else. >> laura: thank you very much. over the past three days we have seen the media tattle tale on senators who are not transfixed by schiff's dazzling floor speeches. >> we are separating the wheat from the chaffe. blackburn the senator from

tennessee was reading a book not making an effort. >> laura: this trigged the "washington post" consecutive jennifer rubin who tweeted blackburn, this is shameful. bla blackburn is here to respond. they are not listening to adam schiff. they are transfixed by your hard cover. what were you doing with that book? >> i would love to. i had kim's book that is all about the resistance. she has a great chapter in there about the acts of destruction. that's what i was reading through. it's very relevant to what we are doing. you have seen other members that have books regarding different impeachment hearings. those are on their desks. everyone is spending their time

well. you have to bear in mind, today there was one particular clip of hill. we saw it five different times. there is a lot of repetition in what they are showing and saying. the point is the senate is going to perform our constitutional duty in the appropriate mary poss -- manner and we will be fair. i already have a notebook full of notes. we are going to get to a summary judgment. i look forward to getting to that point. >> laura: senator, can you do whatever you want during the trial. the house wants to dictate the rules in the senate. the media wants to dictate what everybody understands about the trial and don't know anyone to know the truth about the bidens and now they want to dictate how

you spend your time during the trial? >> we know how to do more than one thing at a time. >> laura: you always criticized a democratic witness on twitter and his lawyer shot back late tonight saying that a member of the senate would choose to take to twitter to spread slander about a member of the military is a testament to coward ice. a member of the military can never be criticized. >> we honor the service of every man and woman in uniform. you look at what his commanders said. he has a problem with his judgment. that's been pointed out. he had one commander who said he is a political activist in uniform. he has had problems with going outside of his chain of command which is what he did here. i talked to a lot of military members on a regular basis.

they have a real problem with some of the things and the manner in which he conducted himself in this matter. what we want to do is make certain that we get to the heart of the issues here. we want to be certain the president is treated fairly. we want to make certain that we move through this and that we get back to the people's business. things they want to see us do like putting more judges on the federal bench. >> laura: we have to pop the liberal left wingballoon during this impeachment trial to expose their tactic. they have a tactic with members of the military who favor the impeachment. if you like trump you can be criticized. but if you are this one, you can

never be criticize them. >> that's right. the liberals, the left are great at situational ethices. they are great at things. and people need to listen to what they are actually saying. adam schiff yesterday in his opening said look, we can't trust that trump won't cheat in 20 2020. it was like we are going to take away yourite to decide who you will vote for in 2020. that's the thing that i hope people are listening to, to see what their real objective is. it is to re-do 2016 and re-ement what will happen in 2020. donald trump has done nothing wrong. we will make certain we move this this process. what we are hearing from tennessee, he is in a better position than ever. he is going to be re-elected

president of the united states in 2020. >> laura: i said a lot of references to political crucifixion today on social media. i have to say senator blackburn, we salute your service for being able to physically withstand sitting through this sham. >> it's nothing compared to the service our military has given. >> laura: i get it. >> nothing what our children would have to endure if we don't protect the constitution and make certain we are a government of, by and 4 the people. it's worth the effort. >> laura: we have a president who exercises his article 1 authority without some bureaucrat questioning his judgment every 5 seconds. thank you very much. when we return, the liberal media wants you to take them seriously. why do they discredit themselves? we expose the hypocrisy.

you don't want to miss it. bottom line is,

moms love that land o' frost premium sliced meats have no by-products. [conference phone] baloney! [conference phone] has joined the call. hey baloney here. i thought this was a no by-products call? land o' frost premium. a slice above. i thought this was a no by-products call? doctor bob, what should i take for back pain? before you take anything, i recommend applying topical relievers first. salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu.

>> it was a virtuoso performance. a stunning recitation of the facts. >> he laid it out very clearly. >> i thought it was dazzling. >> it is really formidable. >> this is a speech that kids are going to be given at university projects and

stuff like that. >> laura: give me a memorable line. they wonder why americans think so little of the american media. joining me now, match lab, charlie kirk, founder of turning point usa and author of the book "the maga doctrine." they are making a change here? >> in 60 years people will be giving the speech -- what is her name? she says it was a recitation, yes. he knows the material so well because he's been saying the same alliance. this has been going on for years. we watch this in the house. he is reading the same stuff as the senate. it's like, please. >> laura: i was watching this live. i went to the senate chamber, was it yesterday? it's all a blur. i had to be prodded by the

capitol police because i fell asleep. there is a rule you can't sleep. i'm not making it up. i did fall asleep. there is a melissa phyllis way he speaks, very soothing. just moving the needle. >> not at all. you can see the ratings have dropped tremendously. you even have some people in the media completely misrepresenting and making up. you had a cnn political analyst who said that he heard two republican senators saying, adam schiff is doing, he's changing my mind. of course that was made up. that's completely made up. that shouldn't surprise us because everything about this has been made up. he went with the whistle-blower and lied about it. not to mention the entire media narrative and the way the bed representing this has been one lie after another.

it's hard to watch our founding institutions early disrespected like this. >> laura: the great speeches in american political history, we think of reagan, tear down this wall. we think of the gettysburg address. now we are thinking of adam schiff on marie's moment and the conspiracy with joe biden? take it away. >> first of all i think that this appeal to history is very interesting. in a strange way i think it's a confession of rhetorical defeat. essentially what they're saying is listen, a hundred years from now people will be really convinced that this guy was telling the truth. when you can convince the jury that is sitting in the room. you can't convince the people watching on tv, you've got to appeal to the jury of people not yet born. hoping that maybe they will go along with you and see the wisdom of your words. >> laura: come on. the thing about this that i

love, bernie and amy klobuchar -- when i was watching them, i was awake. they are shifting in their seats here they're listening with one year. they want to get to iowa. these democrats know how this will end. they want to get to campaigning. bernie is on the rise! >> it's a game and when you get to see what those senators are doing, i remember during the clinton impeachment, they're not paying attention. there is no drama here. there is nothing of interest. it is what it is. they've been trying to get trump the whole time he's been in office. by the way, this will happen the whole year. they will lose more and more americans who think this is a waste of time. >> laura: it's going to keep going. the democrats get power back in november. if they retain control of the house them up if president trump

wins, it's never happening again. thank you so much. shannon bream and "fox news at night" take all the breaking developments from here. see you tomorrow night. >> shannon: this is a fox news alert. hello, and welcome to "fox news at night." day two of arguments. the impeachment manager's hammering president trump on abuse of power. democrats get one more day. are any senators being swayed? democrats need for go to subpoena witnesses. we will ask senator mike brown if he thinks they will get them. first, we go to kevin corke with key moments of day two. >> you don't hear it often, at least not allowed, but in washington people know the deal that if you lose a senator like lisa makowski, if you're a senate democrat, you have pr