studio audience, sign up right now at fox & friends.com. february 14th, our next live show. you can be part of the audience. i want to see everybody saturday, 8:00, westbury the space on long island. >> sandra: fox news alert, the state department now warning americans to avoid nonessential travel to certain areas of china due to the potentially deadly coronavirus. major u.s. airports are now screening travelers arriving from the chinese province that has become ground zero for the outbreak. meanwhile, college students in texas there were reportedly quarantined with a possible case of that virus. so far it has killed at least 26 people and sickened more than 800 others. so how is the u.s. responding to it all? health and human services secretary alex azar will be joining us coming up. now, to another fox news alert this morning, today is the final

day for house impeachment managers to make their case against president trump. tomorrow the defense gets its first crack at the case. good morning, everyone. i'm sandra smith. >> ed: i'm ed henry. one week in the books. let's keep on going. democrats laid out their case for abuse of power yesterday, arguing president trump violated his oath of office like no other president in history, calling his conduct worse even than that of president nixon. the president's team sharply disagrees and will soon launch their official defense. >> sandra: meanwhile, democrats hoping to convince g.o.p. senators and joining them to call for new witnesses. so far many republicans are unconvinced. >> you can't trust this president to do what's right for this country. you can trust he will do what's right for donald trump. >> everybody wants to convict the president of the united states, and i might add, disenfranchise voters across the

country. because my democratic colleagues think there will is more important than the will of the american people. >> this conduct is not america first. it is donald trump first. it puts even president nixon to shame. >> there will be presidents after trumpet -- he turned over a million documents to the mueller folks, and his lawyer testified. i guess what i'm saying is i thought that would be the end of this, what they did in the house has been partisan from day one. >> ed: the battle is joined this morning. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel live on capitol hill with the latest. >> ed, sandra, good morning to you. i'm told house in between managers have seven hours, 53 minutes left of their 24 hours max to make the case of the articles of impeachment against president trump. this morning, one of the impeachment managers looking ahead says they have a tough case. >> there is no way on earth they can get around the facts, that they can get around this drug deal, if you will, as ambassador

bolton characterize it. that the president and those around him were cooking up to basically cheat in the 2020 election an end extort ukraine into interfering in our election. >> lead impeachment managers house intelligence chairman adam schiff, who led the initial hearings in the house. he's a target for members of president trump's legal team. >> adam schiff, who is the house management leader, has had a problem with the truth since he's been holding these hearings in the house of representatives all the way back to the mueller report. so we will -- it's not a rebuttal, but what we are going to do is attack. attack all of the misstatements. >> president trump's team will get the 24 hours to protect their defensive push up against the articles of impeachment. his attorneys are likely to bless the impeachment managers to bring forward a totally

partisan case, and will likely call it a weak case. that's expected to start tomorrow it will likely be a shorter saturday session. meanwhile, minority leader chuck schumer tries to demand for more information. >> the american people, to each of their senators, democrat and republican, is asking now and will ask on into the future -- "why were you so afraid of witnesses and documents? what's wrong with getting the truth on something so important is this?" >> when the trial resumes at about four hours, the focus will be on article two. obstruction of congress. ed, sandra? >> ed: mike emanuel, things are starting us off. >> sandra: president trump legal team set to make their case tomorrow, house democrats working to poke holes in the president's defense strategy before it even begins. >> the president's lawyers, they were trucking in all these totally false and discredited theories, conspiracy and otherwise. but the house managers sort of

drove a knife through the heart of those false arguments ahead of time. >> sandra: brett tolman joining us, former united states attorney and former counsel to the united states senate judiciary can he pay good morning to you and thank you for being here. >> good morning, sandra. >> sandra: to the democrats first, have the effectively made their case so far? >> if you know, they have an audience that is unusual. they are speaking to the american people and speaking to the four republicans that they hope to gain in votes coming up. on witnesses, for example, if they do it again. but those four have been indicating just the opposite. that their strategy and their technique, which can backfire if you try too hard like the democrat managers are. >> sandra: democrats have made the case time and time again that john bolton is a key witness they would like to bring in. but now they seem to be focusing a bit more on mick mulvaney, as

we saw yesterday. hakeem jeffries called him a "highly relevant witness." where do you see the battle over witnesses go next? >> well, it's interesting. i spent two hours observing yesterday in the senate, and you see a lot of repetitiveness. they are struggling because they are stuck with what they have. they spent 75 days trying to dig up witnesses that would be powerful, that would come in, that might persuade folks. and you see that they don't have that. they are not coming in with bombshells or smoking guns. so now they are lining, "hey, we need witnesses to come in, we need other witnesses." unfortunately when you start you that you open the door for witnesses the republicans want. the whistle-blower, the bidens. that is right now i think where the discussions behind the scenes are. >> sandra: jay sekulow on capitol hill yesterday responding to the democrats making the case that the bidens are not relevant witnesses. and it kind of gives you an idea

of where we might see all this go next, with the white house team making their case tomorrow. let's listen to jay sekulow first. >> what i don't understand is, for the last five hours it's been a lot about joe biden and burisma. the kind of opened the door for that response. we will determine as the defense team the appropriate way to do it. >> sandra: with democrat sort of preempting the white house response, or their defense, and focusing on the bidens, the president's legal team is basically making the case that you have motivated them to dig deeper into the bidens' relationship with ukraine. >> that's right, sandra. they are using language like "always" and "never." they are saying, "everybody looked at this issue, nobody concluded there was anything going on. it's already been investigated." none of those things are true. so you are digging a wedge into the very heart of your defense, and what you are trying to

prevent the american people from seeing in this trial. and that is that perhaps the president was right. perhaps there was something to look at. when you start to use that language, that's when a jury starts to believe that you are hiding something. >> sandra: lindsey graham, who was complement tree of adam schiff's presentation the other day, seemed to say less that with my father that he's got a lot of questions about that relationship with ukraine. he opened the door to exploring that further. i will finish with this, we will hear from the defense tomorrow. how do they effectively make their case? what will we see? >> you know, the prosecution has been trying to anticipate. and you saw senator schumer indicate that the defense is weakened now. the reality is they've only begun. you never want to do that we were presenting a case, as a prosecutor. i was always afraid of that. if the defense stands up, you never know what direction they are going to take. and now they know everything you've laid out. so they have an advantage now. >> sandra: that really sets things up for what we might see.

brett tolman, appreciate you kicking off the show this morning for us. thank you. much more in all of this coming up this hour. republican congressman jim jordan will be joining us, and democratic senator sheldon whitehouse will be our guest in the back half. at 10:30 eastern time, today's headliner, white house press secretary stephanie grisham is here. and wait for 11:00, a bit later on, republican senator tim scott will be joining us, and democratic senator janine shane >> ed: they talk to ten senior staffers in the senate, both parties, and the bedding is that democrats will fall short of pulling over enough moderate republicans get witnesses. speed we will talk to sheldon whitehouse a just a moment about that. >> ed: meanwhile, a massive explosion rocking northwest houston. intense flames lighting up the sky overnight. after the blast at a manufacturing plant, which could be felt miles away. authorities say one person was taken to the hospital with some

injuries. the explosion rattling windows and shaking walls around parts of that city. the cause now under investigation at this hour. >> sandra: meanwhile, we are learning the identities of the american firefighters killed battling those wildfires in australia when they take a plane crash. all of them veterans. from left side of your screen, 44-year-old captain ian mcbeth of montana, and member of the air national guard. 42-year-old first officer paul hudson of arizona, was a decorated marine. 43-year-old rick demorgan of florida was an air force pilot. >> ed: just hours from now, president trump becomes the first ever sitting u.s. president to address a march for life rally in washington. what his appearance will need for antiabortion activists. >> sandra: and it just ahead of a high-profile meeting with israeli leaders, president trump teasing the release of his

mideast peace plan. what could that look like? >> ed: absolutely. new polling has good news for joe biden and bernie sanders, with reports of former vice president may pick up a very surprising endorsement. here to react, democratic presidential candidate tom steyer. that's coming up, as well. wow! that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein.

>> ed: street to a fox news alert, thousands protesting in baghdad today at what was dubbed the "million man march."

demonstrators demanding u.s. troops leave that country after a u.s. drone strike killed a top iranian general in baghdad earlier this month. currently there are around 5200 american troops still on the ground in iraq. >> for my part, if we are going to call witnesses, i think it's now clear we absolutely must call hunter biden. and we probably need to call joe biden. based on the house managers' presentation today, i think we're probably going to need to hear from the former vice president, if you delete all witnesses. >> sandra: that was republican senator josh hawley as the big question still remains, will any g.o.p. senators vote to call witnesses in the president's impeachment trial cannot democrats need four republicans to cross party lines to make that happen. it senator susan collins, lisa murkowski, mitt romney, and lamar alexander seen as potential yes votes. let's bring it the founding editor for "the washington free beacon" and the resident fellow for aei. matthew, good morning to you.

>> good morning. >> sandra: those of the republicans we are looking at heading into all of this, they indicated they would be open to calling witnesses. what indications are beginning that they are being swayed by the democrats' case? >> sandra, i think everything that's happened so far has actually unified the republican conference. it's in the way that a democratic house managers have been presenting the case. sure, they've been laying out their story of shenanigans in ukraine, but they've also kind of taken to task the republican senators. you've got jerry nadler say that the opening votes of the trial amounted to treason. then you had adam schiff suggest that a failure to convict president trump would call into question the legitimacy of the 2020 elections. both of those comments kind of shocked and offended even the moderate senators like murkowski and collins. >> sandra: susan collins even putting out a statement she was stunned by nadler's approach, and murkowski making the case she was even offended. that if she didn't vote yes on

calling witnesses, that she wouldn't part of a so-called "cover up." i want to get to your latest piece, because apparently moderate republicans are not the target of democrats? you write this. "impeachment target audience isn't moderate republicans, his left-wing democrats." nadler's folly? >> that's right. everything we've heard from the floor of the senate suggest that what impeachment is really about is solidifying the left-wing base of the democrats ahead of the 2020 election, head of the possibility that president trump is reelected and the democrats retain the house. if you think about adam schiff's comments just last night, that this president can never be trusted on anything, and this is the moment to remove him from office of the candid nature of the country further, this is not the language that appeals even to independent or center-minded republicans. it is meant for the resistance folks. it's the same with nadler. it's interesting, nadler and hakeem jeffries both represent districts in new york.

and who is the big force in new york politics that is terrifying the democratic establishment can back well, alexandria ocasio-cortez. going after trump on impeachment kind of solidified their left flank from a primary challenge. >> sandra: part of that susan collins statement on nadler, this is a letter that she sent to the chief justice. she said she was stunned by congress nadler's approach, "it reminded me that if we were in normal debate in the senate there would be invoked to strike the word of the senator for impugning another senator in this case. so i did right a note raising the issue of whether there had been a violation of the rules of the senate." and of course lighthouse defense team defense team will have their moment starting tomorrow. so how do they effectively make their case, considering what we have seen so far, matthew? final thoughts. >> they will defend president transactions, but more portly argue that what happened and what the house alleges does not rise to the level of an impeach.

that will convince many republican senators who, truth be told, have been looking at this case and don't believe it amounts to reason to remove donald trump from office months before an actual presidential election. >> sandra: matthew, by the way, before i let you go -- it's a question of your buddies wondering timing of this trial. what is overly thinking about this point? what are you hearing as far as the links this will go? >> it's funny, if the votes take place next week and the vote to call witnesses fails, that means the trial could wrap up by the end of next week, sandra. that would give senators sanders and warren time -- and klobuchar -- about a week in iowa before the caucuses. is not just the republicans that want this and quickly. >> sandra: interesting point. matthew continetti, thank you. >> ed: fox news alert, travel to parts of china as a college student in texas is treated for what may be the coronavirus.

big story. >> ed: president trump said to medic history today is the first sitting president to address the march for life rally. health and human services secretary alex azar will be here to discuss that in more next. >> he has enacted incredible policies, protecting life and global health policy. of course, judges, the supreme court, and coming now to the march for life. this is unprecedented. ♪ limu emu & doug [ siren ] give me your hand! i can save you... lots of money with liberty mutual! we customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

>> sandra: nfl free agent antonio brown surrendering to police last night. he's accused of assaulting a moving truck driver outside of his home in hollywood, florida, on tuesday. tmz obtaining the 911 call from the driver. listen here. >> i'm making a delivery, and the guy is high, he smoked, he is trying to fight, he throws stones at my truck. >> you believe he's on something? >> absolutely, he is smoking something. >> sandra: brown stringer was also arrested when he was released after posting bond. >> my father was a businessman, he travels around the country a lot. he refused to wear the mask. it makes them uncomfortable.

i'm kind of worried about him. >> ed: wow. growing health concerns around the world with the new warning against travel to the chinese province at the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak which has now killed at least 26 people. here in america, federal health officials are screening airline passengers traveling from china at major airports. there is also a word now this morning over texas college student quarantined with possible symptoms. joining us now, the health and human services secretary for the president, alex azar. mr. secretary, thanks for joining us. >> agreed to be with you. >> ed: i appreciate it. let's start with the news overnight about the college student in texas. what do you know? >> we've got several cases of individuals who are suspected, who might have symptoms consistent with this novel coronavirus. but we are doing what we do. we've been engaged early on on this issue. we have been actively and proactively preparing. this is what we do, and the american people should feel confident that we have an approach, this is how we handle public health issues of this

kind. we take aggressive response, identifying potential cases and assuring they are handled separately. the absolute key is to identify people who have potential symptoms, diagnose them, isolate them, and check to make sure any of their contacts are also not infected. >> ed: those are some of the specifics. let's wipe the lens, big picture. look at this graph come over a hundred 30 individual cases worldwide. 26 people, as i mentioned, have died. 26 countries have confirmed cases now. china has over 800 confirmed cases. the financial markets have been reacting, as you know, sir. are you worried about a pandem pandemic? >> it's entirely too premature to speak in those terms are now. but rest assured, president trump and i will take all steps appropriate to protect the american people. it's what we do. we use a multilayered approach to protect america, involving entry screening. we work in collaboration with china as they engage in travel

restrictions and exit screening. again, most importantly, we have been activated, superb public health system in the united states to identify individuals that may have suspect symptoms, to diagnose them and to treat them, isolate them, and to check their contacts. >> ed: it sounds like this is still very active, you're trying to take a lot of action get on top of it. earlier this week when he was in davos, the president did an interview with cnbc. part of what he said is what the situation was "totally under control." based on what you're saying this morning, to the president speak too soon? >> by what the president said here come he meant that this is what we do. america has the most advanced public health system in the world. we have the centers for disease control, the national institute of health. we already have a candidate vaccine. we are working a potential therapeutics. the case we have seen and suspect cases have been identified through the proactive measures we have taken to activate our public health system, to identify cases,

isolate them, get them confirmed if possible, and then treat them. >> ed: mr. secretary, i want to shift gears and talk to he will be speaking at noon eastern about the march for life rally. i want to talk about the big picture. related to that perhaps, the lawsuit journal broke a story a few moments ago, an exclusive saying that even the white house are about to announce some sort of action against the state of california or the requirement for insurers to cover abortions. what can you tell us about that? >> i'm not able to confirm enforcement actions, but the law is very clear. it's a bipartisan law passed every single appropriation that says state and local governments may not require insurance companies and plan sponsors to pay for and cover abortion. it is forbidden to do that. today you mentioned that we are going to be down in the mall. it's a historic day. president trump is going to be the first president ever on the

mall personally, and i'm delighted i'm going to get to be there with him. president trump is the most pro-life president in the history of the united states. >> ed: mr. secretary, as you mentioned, it will be a big day on the national mall. also a lot of important subjects you are tackling in dealing with fears about this coronavirus. we appreciate you coming and ensuring with our viewers what the administration is doing to deal with it. as your secretary, thank you. >> thank you, ed. >> this presidential stonewalling of congress is unprecedented in the 238 year history of our constitutional republic. it puts even president nixon to shame. >> sandra: that was jerry nadler there yesterday as house impeachment managers get ready for the final day of opening arguments. we are going to get more and fresh reaction from the other side, when ohio congressman jim jordan joins us next. managing lipids like very high triglycerides, can be tough.

you diet. exercise. but if you're also taking fish oil supplements... you should know... they are not fda approved... they may have saturated fat and may even raise bad cholesterol. to treat very high triglycerides, discover the science of prescription vascepa. proven in multiple clinical trials, vascepa, along with diet is the only prescription epa treatment, approved by the fda to lower very high triglycerides by 33%, without raising bad cholesterol. look. it's clear, there's only one prescription epa vascepa.

vascepa is not right for everyone. do not take vascepa if you are allergic to icosapent ethyl or any inactive ingredient in vascepa. tell your doctor if you are allergic to fish or shellfish, have liver problems or other medical conditions and about any medications you take, especially those that may affect blood clotting. 2.3% of patients reported joint pain. prescription power. proven to work. now with a new indication. ask your doctor about vascepa.

>> if the truth doesn't matter, we are lost. no constitution can protect us. right doesn't matter anymore. if you find him guilty, you must find that he should be removed. because right matters. because right matters. and the truth matters. otherwise we are lost. >> ed: house impeachment managers wrapping up their opening arguments today in the case against president trump. today focus on obstruction of congress after the defense team gets their say. here to talk less about that as a member of the president's defense team, ohio comes been jim jordan >> good to be with you. >> ed: what to be expecting from the president's team over the weekend? >> 24 hours of talk isn't going to change the facts. facts from the present side.

they've got a strong argument on constitutional grounds, on process grounds, and a strong argument of fact because they are on president side. i think it's interesting that could be played as adam schiff talking about the truth. the same adam schiff who told us for two years that there was more than circumstantial evidence that there was collusion between the trump campaign in russia. the same adam schiff who told us the memo is not accurate. the similar told us the pfizer process was fine. we learned last month from inspector general horowitz that the lies to the fisa court 17 times the same adam schiff that said they have no contact with it was a blur. i was talking about truth of the senate floor. i find that a little interesting. >> ed: on the question of whistle-blower, i'm getting questions from our viewers. why are we not hearing about the whistle-blower at this trail? >> the guy who started it all, the anonymous whistle-blower with no first-hand knowledge who had a bias against the president according to the inspector general and who worked with joe biden. the guy who wrote the complaint where he said on bullet point number one, "over the past four

months more than a dozen u.s. officials have been for me of this effort." who are these u.s. officials? who were they that have the firsthand knowledge cannot get don't know if they exist because we never got to talk to the whistle-blower. we don't know if we interviewed him in 70 depositions we took in the house. so yeah, if they are going to go down this road -- i hope they don't, but if they insist on witnesses and they get a few republicans vote with them, i don't think it's going to happen, but if they go down that road you got to go all the way down it. there was stick come testify. i don't think they should, i don't think that will happen. >> ed: there's another road they went down, which is invoking burisma, hunter biden, joe biden. was that a mistake to drag them into this? >> i assume they are doing some preemptive ne maneuver here. the american people asked dumb i can sing to get it. the idea of biden's son with no qualifications gets hired by a company with a background of your corruption, gets hired by this country gets paid over

$50,000 a month, americans know on its face it doesn't pass the smell test. i assume it's some kind of primitive control there. they understand that there are four coat fundamental facts that will not change that are on the side. >> ed: you said you don't think we are headed toward witnesses. does that mean, bottom line, we are headed for some sort of vote about a week from now to end this trial and potentially acquit the president? >> that would be my guest. the only side that has put on the case so far as the democrats. the prosecution team, the house managers. you see no republican senators talking about the need for witnesses. we haven't even heard from the president's team. they haven't even made their case yet. so i think that the great sign. again, i think it underscores what we all know, which is that these core facts are all on the president side. >> bottom line in terms of the managers, we talked about adam schiff a moment ago. jerry nadler, a few nights ago when he invoked this idea that maybe senators would be part of

a cover-up, complicit in a cover-up. was at a turning point here? because we are now learning that one of those moderates who would be a pivotal vote to get witnesses for the democrats, new witnesses, susan collins is saying she was stunned that natalie made that accusation. and she is the one who sent the note to chief justice roberts saying that something's got to be done. >> i think it's probably real basic. it's never a good idea to insult your audience. it seems to me that mr. nadler's comments were so out of line, that's why the admonishment came from the chief justice. it probably did make senators feel -- it probably did offend them. that's probably why senator collins did what she did. even if he hadn't had that, these facts are so strong for the president, i feel real confidence that hopefully next week we will get this decision over with. and get onto the business of the american people. >> ed: you think, bottom line, this trial could be over this time next week? >> idea, i do. when you have them talking for

this long and not seeming to move anyone, the american people don't seem to be tuning into this mite is too had anticipated, it looks good for the president because these organizers strong for him. they repeatedly said there was no pressure, no push, no linkage of the investigation. they didn't know it was even held at the time the call. and they took no action. >> ed: will be watching today and i'll begin long. we appreciate you coming in. >> you bet. thanks, ed. >> sandra: a response from a democrat, rhode island senator sheldon whitehouse will be our guest next. president trump saying he may release his mideast peace plan ahead of a surprise meeting next week in washington, with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and his chief political rival, benny gantz. mark meredith is live at the white house with more on all of that. good morning. >> good morning to you, sandra. president trump does say he will

host benjamin netanyahu as well as his political rival, benny gantz, here at the white house next week. the meeting expected to focus on what can be done to achieve peace in the middle east. so for the white house has not unveiled exactly what this peace plan will include paid vice president mike pence spoke about the invitation and what it could mean for the region during a meeting in israel on thursday. >> this prime minister, i am grateful that you have accepted the invitation, and we look very much forward to welcoming you to our nation's capital, to continue discussions about a broad range of issues of mutual concern between the united states and israel. also about the prospect. >> they told reporters on air force one that the initiation has briefly spoken with the palestinians, but so far there is no indication they will be participating in next week's meeting. the president also tweeted about the upcoming visit and seemed to throw some water over reports about what the plan will include. this is what he wrote. "the united states look forward

to welcoming prime minister netanyahu in blue and chairman to the white house next week. reports about details and timing of our closely-held peace plan are purely speculative." the visit comes at an interesting time for the white house, of course, as they are dealing with impeachment up on capitol hill. also for the israelis with an election on march 2nd. we will look to see what benny gantz will decide to do about whether he will accept the invitation. sandra, a final decision expected to come on saturday. sandra? >> sandra: mark meredith at the white house, thank you. >> ed: this alert now, a decision has been reached in the case of u.s. diplomats wife wanted in britain after a fatal car crash. details ahead. >> i'm i going to get the money back? >> of course not. >> ed: a father confronting elizabeth warren over her student loan plan. the tense exchange that is going viral, next. sfx: [sneezing] i am not for ignoring the first sign of a cold. i am for shortening my cold, with zicam!

zicam is completely different. unlike most other cold medicines, zicam is clinically proven to shorten colds. i am a zifan for zicam! oral or nasal. art bed. can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. it's the final days to save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 36-months. ends saturday. woi felt completely helpless.hed online. my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. vo: take control of your online reputation. get your free reputation report card at reputationdefender.com. find out your online reputation today and let the experts help you repair it. woman: they were able to restore my good name. vo: visit reputationdefender.com or call 1-877-866-8555.

>> ed: the state department now requesting no micro -- a request for a woman charged and won a car crash that killed the british teen. ansa coulis is the wife of an american diplomat. she returned to the u.s. following that crash, claimed diplomatic immunity. the state department says that it would set a very dangerous precedent. the u.k. calling it a denial of justice. >> sandra: the former vice president son and his business dealings with ukraine, anticipating it will be part of the white house's defense. also responding to republicans who called their arguments in the impeachment trial "repetitive." let's bring a democratic senator sheldon whitehouse of the senate judiciary committee. he joins now. great to have you on this morning, thank you for being here. >> good to be on with you, sandra. thanks for having me. >> sandra: sunrise the last couple days, have democrats effectively made their case? >> to the extent you are doing

so with a disability of having a lot of evidence withheld, i think the democrats from the house did a very strong job of bringing the impeachment forward. i thought yesterday was a particularly strong days taking the evidence they had gathered and putting it into the narrative of the story, how the scheme was developed, how it unfolded, how the cover above it took place, and then going back again over that same evidence and showing how that story of the corrupt scheme fits into the constitutional predicates for impeachment. they did a very thorough job of using the evidence to hammer the case into the shape it needs to be, to support a vote of guilty. >> sandra: the white house will get to make their case tomorrow. there's been a lot of talk about the extent to which senators were paying attention to all of this when it was in the house, and the multiple hearings that we all saw. in what way will you be open to

hearing the defense? >> look, i think we are all under an obligation to give both sides a fair listen. i think if the white house lawyers spend their time on a lot of a lot of personal ad hominem invective about the fraudulent nature of the house managers and so forth, we tend to tune that out. we've heard invective before, it's not very convincing. i think we'll be looking to see to what extent they actually try to respond to the house's case on the merits rather than just having their arguments be, "house bad, democrats bad, grievance, grievance, grievance." therefore nobody deserves a fair trial. >> sandra: a lot of the criticism of the democrats' case has been repetition. go ahead. >> that's how you do a case. you tell the jury what the evidence is, and then you go back and you tell the evidence, how it fits into and how it

creates the offense. and then you say how that fits against the law. so a good prosecutor is using the same evidence multiple times in his opening, in the case in chief, and in the closing arguments. so repetitive isn't really much of a sensible complaint, and to the extent the conflict we heard is that there's nothing new, that takes a certain amount of brass when the white house has dedicated itself to making sure that lots of new evidence that is available -- >> sandra: we've heard you use the word "evidence" a lot. i don't need to speak over you, only so much we can get to. i will talk about when this isn't just moment. there were some moderate republicans with whom of course the democrats would like to sway and all of this, particularly when it comes to calling witnesses. who took offense to some of the words, particularly when it came to the use of the words

"cover-up" to describe if you did not vote in favor of hearing witnesses. susan collins said she was stunned at jerry nadler's diatribe this week, when he deemed it a cover up if she would not vote to have witnesses called. lisa murkowski said she was offended by it, as one who is listening attentively and working hard to get to a fair process. "i was offended," she said. how would you respond to those republicans? >> i thought the first day was characterized by comments on both sides that i would not have used and i did not think were helpful. i thought the first shot was fired when the white house lawyers use the word "fraudulent," which is common in many respects, an accusation of criminal conduct, about the house managers. it went back and forth from there. but i do think when the chief justice stepped in and admonished both sides equally, to knock it off and remember

where they were, that had a very good effect and there has been i think no further problem in this impeachment. i don't know if you can call it a trial since we don't have any evidence or witnesses, but in the presentation. we'll see about how -- >> sandra: this was voted on in the house. so when it comes to evidence, i know the democrats want to hear from or witnesses. obviously john bolton has been a target. mick mulvaney was brought up a lot yesterday. so what are you asking for, senator? >> well, the ideal way and the fair way consistent with probably 200 years of american jurisprudence is to let the two parties, the house managers in the white house lawyers, decide who they want to call and then, subject to the presiding officers, the judge's ruling on whether their testimony is relevant, probative, prejudicial, an et cetera come allow that in.

because this is been strange and would have been allowed to do that, we've means a distance to point out the kind of witnesses we want. and these are witnesses directly recipient to the scheme. >> sandra: i have seconds left, but are you okay with republicans then calling witnesses? >> yeah, i think both sides should be able to call witnesses. the white house should be able to call winces it wants and the house managers should be able to call witnesses they want, subject to the usual rules about relevance. >> sandra: we took it as far as we could, senator. we appreciate you coming on, we hope you come back soon. >> thank you, sandra. gladly. >> sandra: we will have more in just a moment. you always drive this slow? how did you make someone i love? that must be why you're always so late. i do not speed. and that's saving me cash with drivewise. my son, he did say that you were the safe option. and that's the nicest thing you ever said to me. so get allstate. stop bossing. where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. this is my son's favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady?

[tina] you're an old lady.

>> ed: a brand-new national poll, the crowded democratic field shows some separation. our man on the ground in iowa is peter doocy come alive in the morning. peter, good morning. >> good morning, joe biden and bernie sanders offering two different options. for biden, to the way that they were before term. for sanders, a political revolution. those are by far the two most popular. there's a new monmouth pool that has biden at 30% ahead of bernie sanders at 23%, but way ahead of the rest of the rebels. sanders and biden both have big leads on third-place warren's support, fifth-place goes to buttigieg, trying hard in south carolina to boost his sports african-american

democrats. kamala harris was the highest pulling african-american candidate. she dropped out after failing to turn debate stage sparring with joe biden into enough support. now she's thinking about endorsing biden, according to a "new york times" report that says if this happens she will probably wait until after the impeachment trial, which is keeping elizabeth warren off the trail, as well. the candidates are just ten days away, and the only candidate on the ground here is andrew yang. >> ed: the voting about to start. peter doocy, thank you. >> sandra: fox news alert come the spread of the coronavirus prompting a new travel warning as the death toll rises. a possible new case here at home. a live report, top of the hour. ♪ ♪

everything your trip needs for everyone you love. expedia.

>> ed: street to fox news alert, possible new case of the coronavirus here in america and china races to stop the outbreak. china now locking down more than a dozen cities, putting 35 million people under quarantine. welcome to a brand-new hour of "america's newsroom." i'm ed henry. >> sandra: i'm sandra smith. a very serious situation ongoing in the united states. one student is now quarantined as possible symptoms after traveling to china. ground zero for that virus. the first confirmed u.s. patient remains hospitalized at this time, near seattle. >> ed: meanwhile, beijing confirming more than 800 cases in 26 deaths. the disease now spreading 27

other nations and the u.s. state department that is she may travel advisory for parts of china. >> rest assured, president trump and i will take all subs appropriate to protect the american people. it's what we do. most importantly, we have an activated, superb public health system in the united states to identify a individuals who may have suspect symptoms, to diagnose them and to treat them, isolate them, and to check their contacts. speech that was secretary alex azar on this program earlier, talking to ed. jonathan serrie is live in atlanta where the cdc is closely monitoring this outbreak. >> good morning, ed and sandra. senior government health officials will be briefing the u.s. senate later this morning on the coronavirus and the u.s. response to this outbreak. chinese health officials, meanwhile, see the outbreak is not responsible for 830 confirmed cases and 26 deaths in that country. that's up from 571 cases and 17

deaths the previous day. the chinese government has expanded travel restrictions on at least ten cities in the province of hubei, which include wuhan or about outbreak first a few years. that affects nearly 35 million people, nearly the size of the population of canada. they must stay home for 14 days to prevent the virus from spreading. both of those cities have close some popular tourist sites including shanghai disneyland and the forbidden city. >> it is predominately among elderly people, and predominantly a serious disease is among those who have underlying conditions. >> such as diabetes or coronary disease. there is one confirmed case in the u.s., a traveler in his 30s who became ill after returning from china, remains under quarantine at a hospital near seattle. however, health officials are testing several potential travel-related cases.

in alameda county, california, and a texas a&m student tube reported mild systems after returning from wuhan, china. >> if there was a confirmed case, contact tracing will begin and all contacts will be monitored for developed of symptoms. speak of the student is voluntarily isolating himself while texas authorities way test results from the cdc. those results expected back on monday or possibly as early as this week. sandra and ed, back to you. >> sandraspeech jonathan serrieg from atlanta for us. thank you. treating the first confirmed u.s. patient, joining us for an exclusive interview. a lot more to learn then. >> ed: absolutely. >> and who benefited from this scheme? who sent mr. giuliani to ukraine in the first place? of course we could rephrase that question, as a former republican leader of the senate, how are bigger, it in 1973.

"what did the president know, and when did you know it?" >> ed: house impeachment manager during either invoking a member or a phrase from the watergate hearings, of course, as democrats zeroed in on the abuse of power article and he said in impeachment trial president trump. nadler also said the presence conduct was worse than richard nixon's. all this coming as the democrats get ready for the third and final day of arguments. >> sandra: let's bring in the 18, jeanne zaino, professor of political science at iona college. tim chapman, executive director of heritage for america. and connell mcshane, from ""after the bell"" on fb n. tim, i believe you are a first time a teamer here. trying to poke holes in the defense case. >> if this is a comparison to a charge of a crime, did thou charge nixon with a crime? no, they didn't. when we saw schiff on the floor of the everyday, he said he was really concerned the american people would get this wrong in

2020. that's why we have to impeach the president. the american people can't be relied on to get it right. that for me showed us the entire game here. at the end of the day, this is about taking the power back. they don't trust the american people to get it right. they are kind of afraid they might tamper with this whole thing. >> ed: what about that can make it seem to be a fundamental question of the heart of this trial. adam schiff and other democrats saying that the american people, we can't trust the vote. and somehow undermining the upcoming election. >> that's an argument democrats have been making. they are making it because they feel that if the president interferes with the election, it's not that they don't trust the american public to vote their conscience, but that their vote may not be counted accurately. i would just say on this issue of whether you need to have a crime or not, that is something that has long been debated. you don't need to have a crime to have an impeachment, and you don't need to have a crime to be

removed from office. but the reality here and the reason i've been opposed to this is because, barring some change, there is going to be an acquittal. so what you see here is a play to the senate and house election in november, versus an actual serious attempt to get a removal. simply the numbers are not there. even if we get two witnesses, unless something else comes out. he is going to be acquitted. >> which everyone is known from the beginning, which makes the process interesting to watch if you're looking at from the point of view of outcomes. everybody keeps asking us when we do segments on fox business, where the markets moving on this? or why does everyone seem not to care? it's not that they don't care, that they know how it's going to end. the end is already written, and to jeanne's point, going into a story like this knowing how it's going to finish is really something we don't do that often. but we are almost differently doing it now. you are right, the debate over witnesses is kind of fascinating from that point of view. because it's not like -- maybe as one or two senators, but

there's not as many senators looking at this and saying, "if we allow witnesses i may change my vote at the end." but they may be making a calculation, "how would that change my political prospects for reelection if i allowed witnesses?" to be a let's hawley on the matter of calling witnesses or not. >> i don't think at this point that there's any need to go beyond the evidentiary record that the house has a mast. we have admitted that into evidence in the senate. that includes their witness statements, all of their evidence. it's all in evidence before us. if the senate does elect to call witnesses and subpoena documents, i am assembling my own list and i think we absolutely need to subpoena and ask for joe biden, hunter biden, the whistle-blower, and maybe adam schiff. >> sandra: where does this go next? >> we are seeing a delicate dance. the republicans know that what they are trying to avoid is what happened in the kavanaugh hearings. line after line being opened up for attack every single day.

they know if they given into the democrats will take a mile. they are trying to be strong holding back on witnesses. i actually will be surprised if it ultimately come to some deal on witnesses, but the reason they are not coming to a deal right now is because they don't want that kavanaugh debacle to happen all over again. >> another reason is the mass, they need four republican senators to come over. they talk to senior staffers, they are saying is not looking like susan collins and some of these moderates will support witnesses. so where does that leave us? jim jordan was on a little while ago and told us he thinks a week from today this whole thing may be over. >> week from today this may be over and i think they will be hard pressed -- i, for republicanfourrepublican's over. we don't know what they would testify to even if they are allowed to testify. there's no question of executive privilege. that would have to be ironed out. i have two believe that this will be over with. very few voters out there, iowa

and new hampshire and across the country, is this going to something they're voting on. >> that's a larger point on how it affects 2020. it seems overly cynical, how that affects official political process of the senate. i think it's fair for us to be cynical and look at a process like this. you brought up susan collins. let's use her as an example. there are other moderate senators who could be spoken about in a similar way. if you are a senator from maine who was a moderate in your voting to call witnesses in an impeachment trial, but at the end of that if you don't how you are still going to vote to acquit the president, does not make a political future brighter or does voting against the witnesses knowing you're already going to vote to work with president, is that a better political move? or does it not really matter or thing of the day because all people look at is the last result? i don't know the answer to that. i'm sure that's at least what political advisors are talking about. >> sandra: i want to finish up with this piece, "the wall street journal," "the democratic leader succeeds in

unifying the republican congress." she says she was actions have exposed his real goals with this trial, becoming senate majority leader. while she dotes the trial will end with a cradle and yet, "the senators aren't stupid. they seem hig him hijacking andy resent it." what do you think? >> it's spot on. we saw democrats saying they are going to impeach the blank-blank. they couldn't accept the results of the election. what i'm afraid of here is that we all know the results of this trial, if democrats hold a house in the president is reelected, you could see for the first time in american history a president be impeached by the house twice. they are not going to let this go. that is really concerning to me. the only way to stop that is a full throated rejection of these tactics at the ballot box. >> sandra: to be clear, we don't know the outcome just yet because we don't know what's going to happen next when it

comes to witnesses. to go back to collins saying she was offended by the case that jerry nadler made, saying this would be a cover up, essentially, if she did not vote or the moderate republicans did not vote in favor of calling witnesses. but she said that will not sway her vote one way or another, how he presented that to her. >> yeah, and i would say on this point about the democrats, i have always said, "you need to win at the ballot box." this is why it's not a good idea for democrats. it's in the fund-raising bonanza for the trump campaign. it's energized debate sprayed when incumbent presidents, their bases are not usually this energized. democrats should be making that case and not this one, because they have set themselves up for a challenge. >> ed: we had peter doocy on a couple moments ago, he was getting lonely in des moines. andrew yang is the only one there! [laughter] >> we will all be joining him in a couple of weeks. that's pretty funny, because the narrative going into all of

this, maybe we didn't think about how all-consuming this would be. that joe biden and pete buttigieg would have islets themselves and they would somehow get all of this attention. it doesn't seem like they've been able to capitalize on that. however, as you know, iowa is such a personal campaigning state that maybe they are able to do it in there and all of us in the national media are noticing it. i don't know. we will see. >> ed: look out, peter doocy! your commute join new! speeds by the way, bring your coat. it's going to be chilly. should we end with this? i know we have fresh sound from sheldon whitehouse. he joined us last hour on the idea that he would not oppose to republicans being able to call his own witnesses. here is sheldon whitehouse. >> we've made some suggestions to point out the kind of witnesses we want, and these are the witnesses who were directly percipient to the scheme as it was developed and implemented. i think both sides should be able to call witnesses pray the white house should be able to call witnesses it wants and the house managers should be able to call witnesses they want.

subject to the usual rules about relevance. >> ed: let's go deadline. witnesses were no witnesses? >> i'm in favor witnesses. i don't think it changes the calculus in the end it all. >> ed: ten? >> i'm sympathetic with them holding the line. >> ed: so you don't think there will be witnesses? >> i didn't say that. there will be a deal but they have to figure out where they are. >> i agree that there's a chance they will be a deal. whether they should be or not, i'm probably more synthetic to the argument that yes, there should be, because on either side you can always go back and say, "listen, at least we hurt as much as we are possibly going to hear judging by the fact all seem to agree." >> ed: we will be watching. 12:30 p.m. eastern today. we appreciate you coming in. much more coming at the bottom of the hour. we will talk to the white house press secretary. stephanie grisham, the white house reaction to where we are on all of this, and next hour we will hear from republican senator tim scott of south carolina and democratic senator jeanne shaheen of

new hampshire. both sides coming up. >> sandra: great lineup coming up this morning. meanwhile, this. a new fox news alert coming up for you this morning. we are just getting word now from the centers for disease control that there has been another person in the united states with the coronavirus. according to the government, it is a woman in her 60s, and we are hearing she is in the chicago area. she had traveled to china where the outbreak originally began. the cdc sent a team to illinois now to investigate this. all of this is happening in addition to the report of a possible case in texas. this is a developing story. we will bring you more as we get it. and later today, president trump will be heading to the national mall and become the first president ever to address the annual antiabortion rally, "march for life," in person. kristin fisher live from the national forest in washington this morning.

good morning, kristin! >> good morning, sandra and ed. the people here having to do with much more security than they've had a deal with in previous years. there are helicopters overhead, metal detectors, every secret service presence. you can see the bulletproof glass on stage behind me where president trump will be speaking in just a few hours. organizers of this event say all the extra security is more than worth it to finally have a president of the united states, after 47 years, finally come and speak at this event. >> he has absolutely put his money where his mouth is, so to speak. he has leaned into this issue. again, a week after their inauguration, vice president pence came to the march for life in 2017. that was a historic moment. before that we had only had a person at a much lower level from the white house, and attend the march for life. to put the administration in such a forward-leaning position on this issue has been a huge

blessing and it's very exciting for the movement. >> so the planets for president trump to speak around noon, then organizers estimate about 100,000 people will march to the supreme court where they hope the two new justices president trump appointed will side with them when the high court rules on the big abortion case later this year. these march for life results that president trump has cut funding for planned parenthood, and catoos continues to support proleptic despair that's why you will see signs that say "president trump is the most pro-life president ever." you also can't help but notice on their side of the stages capitol hill hill where the impeachment trial is considering don my continuing at the same time. we are about nine months away from an election. the president's critics and members of the pro-choice movement say the fact that president trump is coming here is purely political, that is trying to divert attention from

the impeachment trial, and rally his base. they say whatever the reason they are simply failed to have president trump come and speak here today. >> sandra: kristin fisher in washington, thank you. >> ed: anymore news this morning, what do you think? fit more in? we are just getting started this friday morning. in the moment, our headliner stephanie grisham will stop on by. we'll get her reaction to the latest in the impeachment trial. take a look at that, democratic presidential candidate tom steyer is going to join us to talk about where his campaign, all that e ad spendin, where it stands in light of his new followers. >> sandra: elizabeth warren confronted by a father who saved and paid for his own dollars college tuition why he feels her student loan plan punishes people like him. moneyman charles payne's fired up about this. he'll join us next. garcy

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.

oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks. download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass.

>> sandra: elizabeth warren there was confronted on the campaign trail over her student loan plan. let's bring in charles payne, the host of making money on fbn. good morning. what a moment that was, it was caught on camera, posted on twitter, went viral. she was confronted by men who said, "i save money to send my daughter to college. what are you going to do for me? >> by the way, his neighbors

didn't. they lived an amazing life because they went on vacations and they bought toys and they had fun. the first time this was unveiled to talk about it on the show and i was angry about it then, because it's essentially a bailout for the higher education complex. eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex. this is sort of the educational government complex. $1.5 trillion, and these are colleges, many of them, with campuses in these amazing dorms, where professors make it like warren, $300,000 a year, and go on 2-your sabbaticals. she's promoting the kind of behavior that would bankrupt this country. >> sandra: there are some families, despite how hard they try to save money, who still don't have enough money to send their kids to college and they do incur debt. >> i went to the air force to go to college, or you go to community college. if someone can't go to college, i should pay for it? i mean, i don't get that. i don't understand the rationale

that someone who didn't go to college, became a plumber, has three trucks right now, doing pretty good, movie making two or 300 grand a year, should pay for someone else's kid who has the luxury of going to college. by the way, she is paying this money to people making $200,000 a year. are you nuts? talk about redistribution of wealth. this morning she was on tv, somehow this one will eventually die will go to $2 trillion, $3 trillion, or $4 trillion if we don't do this. it'll get there if we do this. who would not take out a loan they would never have to pay? who wouldn't do it? >> sandra: she's defending herself in the interview, "we don't build america by saddling our kids with debt." >> but who would not take out this loan if you never have to pay? would you take out a $500,000 loan if i said ed has got to pay it? yeah! where does that end? and then on the other hand, is it worth it for some of these kids?

>> ed: she wants to delimit student debt and create new national debt. $52 trillion to pay for medicare for all. who's going to pay for all that? >> i just don't understand the idea of taking out loans and not being obligated to pay these loans. student loan forgiveness has resonated for a long time. it's been, "wink, wink, will eventually do it." president obama entered to it or alluded to it and even put a few programs in place. it doesn't mean it's a winning message for the economy, though. it doesn't mean it's a winning message for correcting dangerous behavior. we don't encourage people to do things that would harm them, or the country. certainly the idea of, "i'm going to take out a loan for $300,000 because i never have to pay it back." >> ed: the markets are watching closely the coronavirus. all these cases addressing pop up. the oil markets in particular obsessed with china. the sars virus come in 2002.

oil prices went down 20%. about 30 seconds, what are you watching this morning? >> i'm watching corporate earnings more than that. intel, an amazing quarter. the stock market is at record highs. again, today, despite those risks in china, because america is actually on fire. we continue to be on fire. there were always be exogenous risks out there. speech what is the tide of oil markets with the coronavirus? >> less travel, millions of chinese lockdown. >> sandra: 's largest consumers of energy in the world. >> they travel a lot. tomorrow is their new year. if they can't travel, that means less demand for crude oil. >> ed: charles payne, the moneyman. >> i'm sure we will talk about this some more. >> sandra: we got you worked up! >> golly, i wish somebody would have paid my bills. [laughter] >> sandra: i'll go back to school! charles, thank you. 2:00 on fbn. we await president trump's

impeachment trial to resume a short time from now, democrats now claiming his conduct is worse than richard nixon's. so what does the white house think about all that? steel to seven we will ask her headliner, press secretary from the white house, seven aggression. she is here next. >> you cannot trust this president to do what's right for this country. you can trust he will do what's right for donald trump. (janine) ghostbusters!...

of course i'd love to take an informal poll.

i used to be a little cranky. dealing with our finances really haunted me. thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeeper's helping customize it for our business. (live bookkeeper) you're all set up! (janine) great! hey! you got the burnt marshmallow out! (delivery man) he slimed me. (janine) tissue? (vo) get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. the easy way to a happier business. i need all the breaks as athat i can get.or, at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

>> a president who abuses his power in order to make up political opponents and spread russian conspiracy theories, a president who uses his office staff to compel foreign nations to meddle in our elections, is a president who attacks the very foundation of our liberty. that is a grave abuse of power. speed house in between manager jerry nadler there, hammering away at president trump during the second day of the opening arguments, including dumb like accusing the present of abuse of power in putting his personal interests above the country. now they are coming president trumps behavior goes anything beyond richard nixon ever did. >> ed: it's time for a headliner, the white house press secretary seven aggression during this break in morning, thanks for coming end. >> secretary grisham: good morning. >> ed: react to this idea that the president's conduct is worse than richard nixon. >> secretary grisham: it's absurd. they continued to be obsessed

with getting this president out of office. or at the very least, affecting the next election. the facts are that they are the ones abusing their power. they are taking all of this time and going through all of this sham impeachment for something that the president didn't do. i would say also i noticed that adam schiff said yesterday that you cannot trust that this president will do anything right by this country. but when you look at our economy, when you look at everything he's doing for our country, that is absolute just another one of his lies. >> ed: real quick on that, looking at one of the slides the impeachment managers had there, on the record testimony during the house proceedings, ms. hill, "it was improper, it was appropriate. colonel vindman, "the car was wrong, had a duty to report it." ambassador taylor saying there was no good national security reason to hold up the aide. that it was, in his words, "wrong." how can you say there was nothing wrong here? >> secretary grisham: those people are just giving their opinions. those people also admitted that he didn't do anything wrong and

that there was no crime there. those were just opinions by people who didn't feel good about has policies. that's all that was, plain and simple. >> sandra: when it comes to this battle of her witnesses and where the white house stance, i will ask you that in a moment. first, here is chuck schumer on demanding witnesses and why they say that the bidens are not who they want to hear from. >> the witnesses we have asked for our eyewitnesses, like mick mulvaney, to everything that happened. and the few republicans, there are some who are saying, "i don't know if this is all really true, it's also good hand." which it isn't, but still. everyone of these witnesses, these documents will unti answee strictly. enter button has nothing to do with this. >> sandra: what is the president saying today about the battle for witnesses come whether they should be called? 's >> secretary grisham: before answer this question, i did just speak to the president before he came on. he's not even thinking about this. he was talking to me about the fact he speaking at march for

life today. he's very excited he's the first sitting president to ever attend and speak in person. back to your question, he has said he would love for people to be witnesses. but also you have to think about executive privilege, you have to think about that for other presidents in the future. this president is actually trying to protect future presidents against this type of abuse. schumer, again, i've never seen them on tv as much as i have during this thing. i think he is sprinting out in these brakes to get right on camera. they can keep talking about the witnesses, but they should have done more in the house. it's not the senate's job to clean up after what what the house did. >> sandra: they were targeting john bolton, and i we are hearing a lot more about calls for mick mulvaney to be a witness. here is hakeem jeffries, one of the house impeachment managers yesterday, on that. >> certainly we hope we can subpoena john bolton, subpoena

mick mulvaney. >> white house chief of staff mick mulvaney admitted at a press conference that the bogus 2016 election interference allegations were "why we held up the money." eventually, the truth comes out. there was no legitimate policy reason for holding the aid, so the truth came out. >> sandra: so we know the president has not ruled out executive privilege when it comes to john bolton. i would he respond to mick mulvaney being called? >> i think that would be the same principle. that is his chief of staff. there's a lot of sensitive information, national security information, that they discuss. that is something that should be protected, absolutely, for this country. and again, for future presidencies. i would also say they are putting words -- they are interpreting what he was saying. he was simply saying that there was corruption. a country that was known for corruption, ukraine, needed to be looked into before releasing

the aide. that is something the president has said publicly over and over again about his concerns over not only corruption but european countries that just don't share in the costs, that the u.s. constantly shoulders. these are not new things. that's all mick was saying. they are trying to put an interpretation into his conversation like they are doing with the transcript. >> ed: in the white house briefing didn't mick mulvaney also say there was in fact a quid pro quo? >> secretary grisham: i think he was saying, "we want to look into corruption before we would release taxpayer money." if that's a quid pro quo, that's okay. >> ed: a moment ago you mentioned the president excited to speak, the first time ever a president speaks at the march for life rally in washington. he's doing that today, and on tuesday we know he's talking about a mideast peace plan with benjamin netanyahu, and on wednesday he will sign the usmca. canada, mexico, that trade deal, finally send that into law, essentially. bottom line, what is the messaging that you are trying to

put, the contrast between what's happening in congress and happening at the white house? 's >> secretary grisham: will come of this president doesn't stop working. his energy is amazing. he just continues to work for the people of this country. i don't even think messaging is needed, you see it. he's out there every day. in davos he was working every day. he talked about the phase one trying to do he in, he talked about usmca and the pro-growth initiatives and the economy that has boomed under him. so he keeps working, that's fine. they will continue to scream "impeachment." that's fine. we've got a very strong case and an excellent legal team that will come out over the next few days and show that he did absolutely nothing wrong, and hopefully we can just get on with working for this country. >> sandra: stephanie, i don't have this probably ready, but peggy noonan wrote to "the wall street journal" about the idea of the president wanted to call witnesses were not call witnesses. she says history wants

information. data and testimony, as near as possible to know and understand the story. it's going to be surprising, she writes, "if the president doesn't come around backing were witnesses." going back to that battle. "as the democrats make the case against him, he will begin to see, i want more people defending me. i want my guys." how do you respond to that? are you hearing from the president specifically on that? >> secretary grisham: well, yes. the president has said publicly, too. he wouldn't mind mick mulvaney going out, or pompeo or a lot of people going out. he has done nothing wrong. he is the guy he released the transcript, let's remember. so he is being. transparent. he's got to weigh and balance that with national security, and that is something that -- the executive privilege part really does protect national security. there are a lot of sensitive matters that get discussed in this white house and that principle has got to be protected for this president and future presidents. >> ed: 70, last question. jim jordan, a key member of the

president's team, on this program earlier. he predicted that, come this time next week, next friday, we could see this entire trial over with no witnesses called. do you agree? >> i hope so. i hope so for this country. i think, as you see the ratings keep going down every day in terms of viewers, i think the country is tired of this. i think people have jobs to do every day and they are worried about medical care for their family, putting food on the table. i think next week we need to get this over with so we can continue on with the business of the country. >> sandra: finally, stephanie, before you go, i know you will be joining the present for the march for life, so will you go. as far as the legal team in the preparations for tomorrow, what are they? >> secretary grisham: they've been talking every day, obviously. i won't get edgy anything to do with the legal strategy, but they are very well-prepared and they have a strong case. he's got a team of lawyers with decades and decades of legal experience, and we've got the truth on our side that he did nothing wrong. >> ed: stephanie grisham, white house press secretary, things are doing this today.

in the meantime, tom steyer also trading barbs with the president just ten days before i would. what is he hoping to get out of that strategy? tom the stire joins us live. >> it isn't helpful to the rest of us. he's been able to wipe the floor of conventional politicians. here's record-breaking news for veterans. va mortgage rates have dropped to near 50-year lows. newday usa can help you refinance your mortgage and save thousands a year. i urge you to call newday usa now. ♪ ♪ well i'm standing here, looking at you, what do i see? ♪ there's a booking for every resolution . book yours at booking.com woi felt completely helpless.hed online. there's a booking for every resolution . my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. vo: take control of your online reputation.

get your free reputation report card at reputationdefender.com. find out your online reputation today and let the experts help you repair it. woman: they were able to restore my good name. vo: visit reputationdefender.com or call 1-877-866-8555.

>> sandra: the latest national polling showing joe biden and bernie sanders pulling away from the democratic pack, leaving their rivals behind less than two weeks -- can you believe it? before the iowa caucuses. joining us now is presidential candidate tom steyer. welcome to "america's newsroom." >> good morning, thank you very much for having me. >> sandra: it's hard to believe we are that close to the iowa caucuses. it seems to be happening fast. how are things going for you? >> it's going really well, sandra. the way i think about this race

is it is a state-by-state election way don't not, focus on the four early primary states, iowa, new hampshire, nevada, and south carolina. there's a poll out this week that is setting in the states i'm an average of 15% and the third place. it's going pretty well. it >> ed: you are in some ways the menu started those impeachment movements, calling for the president's engagement a long time ago. how disappointed are you that this appears in some ways to be fizzling out? >> ed, what i have been pushing for from the very beginning is a televised testimony by all the people who are directly involved, members of the administration in particular. because my goal in this always was to get the facts directly in front of the american people and trust their judgment about what has happened. i am very disappointed that we

haven't had direct testimony by mr. bolton. i feel as if the people i trust are the american people. i'm not so focused on the senators or the congress people. i am focused on getting the facts on tv in front of all of us, so we can see the truth and decide for ourselves whether we are democrats or republicans or independents, give the american people the chance to see what happened and decide for ourselves. >> sandra: tom, there's a lot we can talk about, but i feel like we have to get this one out of the way. there was that hot mic moment that went viral after the end of that debate, and we saw you and we saw elizabeth warren and bernie sanders, and here's how it all played out. >> i think you called me a liar on national tv? >> what? >> i think you called me a liar on national tv? >> let's not do it right now. if you want to have that discussion, we'll have that discussion. you called me -- >> i don't want to get in the middle, i just want to say hi,

bernie. [laughter] >> sandra: "i don't want to get in the middle, you said. "i just want to say hi. close to each we did after that. you shortly after said, "just want to say hi, america." i think you got 10,000 retreats. [laughter] it was kind moment, i suppose. much as elizabeth warren, bernie sanders. >> it's so funny, that happened, that recording that you got didn't come out for a couple of days. so i was asked over and over again what they were saying to each other. which of course, i could hear. but i also felt like it was a private conversation they were having, and my son -- i have four kids. my oldest son texted me within , whatever you do, don't be a snitch." [laughter] and i just thought, "you know what? that's their issue, i'm just saying good night." >> sandra: bernie sanders, do you have a good relationship with him? can't tell from the video. >> it's funny, i tweeted out a

couple days ago, i think mrs. clinton said something like, "nobody likes bernie." and i think i tweeted something like, "by the way, i do like bernie. let's move on from this stuff." to me this is not about personality. i happen to like bernie. i respect him. i often disagree with him but i also respect him for trying to get to the right place and tell the truth. he definitely tries and i respect that. this isn't about wine caves and personality. there is a dramatically important moment in america going on now. this is going to be the most important -- i know politicians say this all the time, but i think that turnout will show that the 2020 election is the most important election of our lifetime. both sides will take it incredibly seriously. >> ed: voting about to start very soon. we will see if america elects tom steyer or not. >> sandra: did you have a final thought, tom? >> yes, i do. that's this. you can see it today and every day. mr. trump is running on the

economy. any democrat who expects to beat him on the debate stage or the polls has got to beat him on the economy. i built a business over three decades -- >> sandra: how do you do that with wages up, and plumage at a record low, stock market surge in? >> sandra, if you want to have me back, i'll tell you exactly how to do. but i've got three decades running a business and figuring out economics. >> sandra: give it to us right now. speak of the economy is good for rich americans, not for working americans. what he's doing in terms of its taxes, he said yesterday, "i'm considering looking at cutting entitlements." he's obviously doing something -- and secretary mnuchin has said the same thing. number one, cut taxes on rich people and big corporations. number two, go after social security, medicare, and programs for people. >> sandra: we will have you back. >> have me back, i can do this. >> sandra: fox news alert now, we are getting worried about a news conference that is planned about 30 minutes from now. out of chicago, as we mentioned there is now a second known case of the coronavirus in the

united states. that has been confirmed. already we knew about a case in seattle. as we await word on any of that, we will have a news conference for you. stay tuned, we'll be right back. team at newday usa y is helping more veterans refinance than ever. the newday va streamline refi is the reason why. it lets you shortcut the loan process and refinance with no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. one call can save you $2000 every year. call my team at newday usa right now.

>> ed: we've got all kinds of fox news alert's coming this hour. the cdc is going to have a news conference in chicago at about 11:30 a.m. eastern time to say there may be another case involving the coronavirus here in the united states. result doll not got all kinds of news conferences on capitol hill, as well. chuck schumer from the democrats come lindsey graham for the republicans, talking impeachment. >> melissa: hear from both sides on impeachment. this news conference in chicago is critical, obviously, because this is a confirmed case in the chicago area. they will give an update to the general public on this ongoing

situation. health preparations that are being made. so we will be listening for that about half an hour from now. we've got a brand-new hour of "america's newsroom." coming up, we will see on the other side of the break. sfx: [sneezing] i am not for ignoring the first sign of a cold. i am for shortening my cold, with zicam! zicam is completely different. unlike most other cold medicines, zicam is clinically proven to shorten colds. i am a zifan for zicam! oral or nasal. i need all the breaks as athat i can get.or, at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty...

cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

ior anything i want to buy isk going to be on rakuten. rakuten is easy to use, free to sign up and it's in over 3,000 stores. i buy a lot of makeup. shampoo, conditioner. books, food. travel. shoes. stuff for my backyard. anything from clothes to electronics. workout gear. i even recently got cash back on domain hosting. you can buy tires. to me, rakuten is a great way to get cash back on anything you buy. rack it up with rakuten, sign up today to get cash back on everything you buy. amanda's mom's appointment hello mom. just got rescheduled - for today. amanda needs right at home. our customized care plans provide as much - or as little help - as her mom requires. whether it's a ride to the doctor or help around the house.

oh, of course! tom, i am really sorry. i've gotta go. look, call right at home. get the right care. right at home. >> ed: brand-new hour with the fox news alert, a second case of the coronavirus confirmed here in america. public health officials at this hour about to talk to reporters after the cdc announced that a woman in the chicago area who just traveled back from the wuhan, china area has the virus. we will bring you that news conference live in mere moments. under their alert now, as we also await two other big news conferences this hour. democrats ready to wrap up their final arguments in the impeachment trial today. >> sandra: welcome to a brand-new hour of "america's newsroom." i'm sandra smith. >> ed: and i'm ed henry! >> sandra: good morning, everyone. senate democrats expected is beginning moment now. a live event we will have for you. then we hear from senate

republicans at the bottom of the hour after house managers spend a lot of time arguing the president has abused his power is like no other commander-in-chief in. the focus will turn to the objection of congress charge, as the president's defense team prepares its arguments, which could get unde underway tomorro. both sides coming they have the stronger case. >> 24 hours of talk isn't going to change the facts. facts are on the present side. they have a strong argument on constitutional grounds, on process grounds, and a strong argument on the facts because they are on the president's side. >> i thought yesterday was a particularly strong day, taking the evidence they gathered and putting it into the narrative of the story, how the scheme was developed, how it unfolded, how the cover above it took place. >> sandra: a chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel is live on capitol hill where a lot is about to go down again. good morning, mike. >> sandra, ed, good morning to you.

today's focus is on obstruction of congress as house managers wrap up making the case for impeachment. meanwhile, republican senators keep facing questions about whether they will ultimately support hearing from witnesses. >> we are going to ultimately make a decision of if we need more information, more witnesses, whether that's joe biden, hunter biden, the whistle-blower, adam schiff himself. whether it's john bolton. you can run a list of names. we will have a chance to vote on that, because we are using the same process that was used in the bill clinton impeachment. >> then tomorrow president trump's legal team has the opportunity to make its case. up to 24 hours over three days. they are likely to defend the president but also argue house democrats have brought a very partisan and weak case. speak of the problem is, for the house managers, it includes an element you have to prove. you have to prove intent. corrupt intent. they don't want to actually have to prove elements, so they didn't include statutes. things like that. but we are not going to just be rebutting them, we are going to

make the case for the president, why the president was totally within his constitutional rights. >> the presidency was also likely to jab at house intelligence chairman adam schiff, who led the initial impeachment hearings, and is now the lead impeachment manager. schiff gave what sounded like a closing argument at the end of last night session. >> here, right is supposed to matter. it is what has made us the greatest nation on earth. no constitution can protect us. right doesn't matter anymore. and you know, you can't trust this president to do what's right for this country. >> house democrats have seven hours, 53 minutes left on the clock for today. the trial resumes in two hours. sandra, ed? >> sandra: mike emanuel on capitol hill, thank you. >> ed: let's bring in a public and senator tim scott, he will

be of course at today's proceedings. senator, welcome. >> good morning, ed. thanks for having me. >> ed: we appreciate you being here. the heads up, we will hear from chuck schumer in a few moments. if i interrupt you, i don't mean to be impolite. >> thank you. >> ed: where are we in this whole process? >> literally we are on the fourth "groundhog day." they presented their case, an opening argument, and they have not added a single fact since tuesday. 18 hours yesterday, 13 hours on tuesday, several hours on wednesday, more hours on thursday, and not a single piece of new information has come forward. there's an old guy named zig ziglar passed away and have an old old saying that said "repetition is the mother of learning." said differently, the democrats have decided to overwhelm the american people with the same information. so if you hear it often enough, you start believing it's true. the good news is the president's team will finally have the first public chance to present their

case to the american people, and i know that will be a compelling change, a sea change for american people. >> ed: we will be covering it live, of course, to mount his defense. on your point that there is nothing new here, there's nothing new because the president won't turn over the documents that they want and he won't allow john bolton, mick mulvaney, and others to testify. >> well, the house manager said on tuesday that the case as it is, it's overwhelming that there was really no need for any new information for the united states senate to come to the conclusion that the president is an existential threat to the country. what we've heard so far is absolutely the opposite. i look forward to seeing some of the same evidence presented by the democrats, framed completely. we heard about some of the comments made during the testimony when they were testifying in the house.

many of the folks were cut off so we would have one picture of what w they were saying. but the rest of the story is the most important part of the story, and the american people actually have the full testimony in a way that the democrats try to frame against the president. so they had facts but not truth. it's a very important distinction. >> ed: perfect transition to the fact the democratic leader as promised has now come to the podium. if you have a moment to stand by, we will try to get back to you on the other side. >> colleagues, senator heinrich, senator gillibrand, senator markey. look, our quest for the truth continues. as you know, this is one of the most solemn and sacred moments we face in the country. when the president abuses of the power of the office. when he strengthens the rule of tothreatens the rule of law. it's our job as senators to get out the truth. just the facts, ma'am, as joe

friday said. and we are focusing on getting the truth. the way to get the truth? have witnesses. have documents, that were very contemporaneous to the charges against the president. and we continue to do that, and the american people continue to be overwhelmingly on our side. every day, the poll numbers, which were high to begin with, go further that even a majority of republicans believe there ought to be witnesses and documents. now, yesterday's argument by the house managers was precise, was dramatic, was emotional. representative schiff gave a commanding closing argument at the end of the day. there are lots of constitutional precedents, legal and factual arguments to make. but he spoke to the american people's common sense, and appealed to the sense of right

and wrong. no senator, democrat or republican, would deny it had an effect on the chamber. and i look around at the republican members, a lot of what they are hearing, they don't want to hear. they don't want to hear the true facts. because it puts them in such difficult positions. we are seeking light in the truth. [laughter] as you see, the truth always prevails, despite a few detours along the way. they don't like to hear it, but at several moments yesterday, the testimony was so compelling that their eyes were focused almost to a person last night on what adam schiff had to say. another moment was when congress member garcia talked about lieutenant colonel denman

vindiman it didn't get all senators, we are at about one of them, what she said yesterday. but when vindman stepped forward, a purple heart veteran, and said his dad called him and said, "aren't you worried this would hurt you?" he said, "this is america, we believe in the truth." the truth matters, right matters. that's what we want. the plain truth. the managers also increased the case even further for witnesses and documents. the granular discussion of the white house meeting, the infamous meeting where bolton said to fiona ill that he didn't want to be part of any "drug deal." it was clear, who was the chief cook and bottle washer in this whole horrible scheme. this whole evil scheme. mick mulvaney.

because bolton said, "mulvaney, you and sondland are doing this. i'm not part of it." why can't we hear from mulvaney? he knew exactly what prompted. he knows exactly what terms motivations were. he knew who else was in on the deal. there seemed to be many of them. it was incredible. and one more thing stood out. the managers were anticipating the counter arguments from the president's council. since the president's council goes second, they wanted to go forward and thought representative nadler did an excellent job showing how the president didn't need to have committed a criminal offense tod removed from office. reflect on what impeachment meant to the founding fathers. representative garcia explained how the presidents insinuations

about the bidens are baseless, anticipating that the president's lawyers would focus on the bidens. and representative shift discredited the absurd idea that president trump cared deeply about corruption in foreign countries. it was a brilliant strategy. if the president's council now get up and make those arguments, every republican senator and the american people will have heard already why those arguments are utter nonsense. so, in short, the house managers have already set a very high bar for the president's counsel to meet. they've laid out a series of facts, none of which are in dispute, as the president's council prepares to mount their defense tomorrow. i hope they don't just sound like president trump's tweets. that they don't simply resort to finger-pointing, name-calling,

and debunked conspiracies. as the american people know, this moment is far too important for that. so, after the very compelling case that the house managers are presenting, boy, oh, boy, the president's counsel has their work cut out for them. as you know, every day we hear a different story from the senators, from many senate republicans, about why they owe post a fair trial and why we can't have witnesses and documents. it's usually some shiny object that has nothing to do with the actual facts and law of the case. so now here's the latest one --dash and that is that it will take too long if we do it later. that is the diversion of the day. they have one a day. so let me say this --dash first, we heard the republicans all vote to delay things.

the mitch mcconnell scheme was to say because he knew that a lot of republicans were seriously thinking and are seriously thinking of witnesses and of documents, he said, "let's not do it now. let's hear the arguments." and then do it. now they are saying they don't have enough time to do it. talk about talking out of both sides of her mouth, holy moly it's a very flimsy excuse. first, as i said, democrats attempted to settle this question at the beginning of the trial so there would be no delay. he warned them. "you say you want to do it later? it's going to take longer. second, it's not going to cause much more of a delay." they point back to the house and say it'll take months and months and months. but if subpoenas are issued from the senate, by definition, the subpoenas will be bipartisan and

they will be signed by the chief justice of the united states supreme court. and people and those who are subject to those subpoenas are expected to comply. mr. bolton has already announced he'd testify up to send it issued a subpoena. he's not in the executive bran branch, it cannot be used against him because it cannot be used to prevent a witness who is willing to testify. but even if witnesses don't comply with a subpoena, and those who work with the president might not despite the bravery of people like hill and taylor, they will be given very prompt judicial review, given the urgency and the stakes of an impeachment trial. finally, there is a simple answer. when our republican friends claim it would take too long, they really want a fair trial, go tell the president not to invoke executive privilege.

he's the 11 delaying, not us and if this is as serious as it should be to them, they go to the president and say, "we don't want executive privilege invoked." the president believes he did nothing wrong, that everything is perfect. he should not have nothing to fear from these witnesses and documents. they are his appointees, written documents written by people who are allies of him. in watergate, president nixon considered invoking executive privilege to prevent white house aides from testifying in the senate, but quickly realized it would be untenable as it is here now. the senate watergate committee, on a bipartisan basis, told president nixon they would not accept an assertion of executive privilege to shield wrongdoing. so the bottom line is, the argument that we shouldn't call witnesses because it would provoke a fight over executive privilege or take too long is

flimsy. if you believe the senate ought to hear all the facts, you can say so and vote so. and if you do, stand by it. well, don't say, "i really want witnesses but it'll take too long." that's not the case. the bottom line, we are seeking the truth, at a momentous time in the american republic. it is on the shoulders of four republican senators to join us in demanding it. we have made the argument forcefully. the american people have made the argument forcefully that they want the truth. will four republican senators, just four, rise to the occasion, do their duty to the constitution, to their country, to seek the truth? who's next. senator gillibrand. >> thank you. over the past few days -- >> ed: you been listening to the senate democratic leader chuck schumer. some of his colleagues will step

up. we've been seeing this, basically a daily drumbeat from the democrats. chuck schumer declaring the truth always prevails in putting pressure on four republican senators to come forward and support witnesses. we were talking to republican senator tim scott a few moments ago, getting his take on all of this. senator, what do you make of this latest gambit from the democrats connects to go well, sandra, ed, let me just say i love the concept of truth. john eight: 32 says if you know the truth, the truth will set you free. the house represented as reserves the right to compel witnesses to come and testify. the facts are very simple. the truth is that our responsibility -- it comes from the house, to figure what to do with it. if they want to expand or improve their case, that is the decision of the house. number two, the fact is very clear. they are trying to put pressure not for impeachment process, but for the election in 2020.

the pressure they are trying to place on those senators, republican senators in arizona, colorado, north carolina, iowa, and maine, to force those senators to deal with the challenge that the house refused to take up witnesses. the house still reserves a right to take up witnesses. the real challenge is that senator schumer and the democrats are not trying to impeach the president, they are trying to remove up to five united states senators who happen to be republicans, invulnerable states. that is what this entire process is about. the notion that executive privilege, having the president's chief of staff come testify, of course he is going to ask you guys don't like to exercise a great privilege and that's why we have courts make decisions. they always use executive privilege to protect his inner

circle. it's one of the ways this nation and the foundation of this nation has been crafted and created, so the president and his closest allies have the ability to communicate without having to talk to lawyers or having to talk to congress within that circle. this is a protection that every single president has used and will continue to use. and that is why senator schumer doesn't seek the truth. >> sandra: senator scott, democrats including nancy pelosi and chuck schumer have made the case -- and he read it many times over the course of this week -- they say this is about the constitution. the white house will be making their case tomorrow. we will see the president's defense tomorrow. we just spoke to stephanie grisham, the president's press secretary. she said they are prepared and ready to go. the president, while we've been speaking, just weeded out, "read the transcripts." what do you expect to see from the president's defense? >> i'm excited about the president's defense. what you will hear from them, i

believe, is information that is compelling and complete, that is totally exonerating the president. i have said several times, as you read through the transcript, it is impossible not to come to the conclusion that the president is actually innocent of an impeachable offense. i have heard nothing in the last four days that has altered my opinion and iota. i look forward to the president's team laying out the facts over the last couple months, and filling in the dark holes left in the democrats' argument as they've brought forth just little frames for us to take a look at. >> ed: senator tim scott also has an op ed piece at foxnews.com about all this. check it out. we appreciate you coming in. >> thank you, ed. >> ed: you heard from a republican senator. we will get a key democrat. jeanne shaheen will join us in the next hour. >> sandra: a second case of

the coronavirus has been confirmed in the united states. all this as robots are being used to treat a washington state man who also has been concerned with the virus. we've got a doctor coming up treating that patient, next. to near record lows. drd the newday team is working overtime so every veteran can save $2000 a year. x) ? we all use our phones very differently. we need a great network all the time. (vo) everyone in your family is different. these two are always gaming and this one is always on facetime. (vo) so verizon has plans to mix and match starting at $35. and up to $700 off the latest iphone. the network more people rely on, gives you more.

can you help keep these iguys protected online?? easy, connect to the xfi gateway. what about internet speeds that keep up with my gaming? let's hook you up with the fastest internet from xfinity. what about wireless data options for the family? of course, you can customize and save. can you save me from this conversation? that we can't do, but come in and see what we can do. we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. ask. shop. discover. at your local xfinity store today.

>> sandra: we just heard from democratic leader schiff. we are now awaiting republican leaders any moment now. a group of g.o.p. senators will be stepping up to the microphones. we'll bring you their news conference as soon as it begins. >> ed: a lot happening on this. more right now, let's go straight to democratic senator jeanne shaheen of new hampshire. she is and patiently waiting to talk to us. senator, thanks for coming in. >> good morning. >> ed: you just heard republican tim scott a few moments ago, giving them a fair shot at this. he basically said he doesn't believe the impeachment managers have made any progress toward

getting those four republican senators that you need to get witnesses. what is your response? >> well, what i'm hearing from my constituents is that people want to see a fair trial. for most people, that means they want to see witnesses who can shed first-person light on what happened, and they want to see documents. i would like to see the full transcript of the july 25th call. we've seen as a read out of that. we haven't seen the exact transcript because that is being held in a secret server at the white house. so i would like to see that, if there are other documents i would like to see, and i would like to hear from john bolton and mick mulvaney. that's what i'm hearing from so many of my constituents. >> ed: senator, when you say you want a fair trial, do you also want to fair process in the house the way adam schiff and others are running it? i'm not sure i've heard you and many other democratic senators standing up for republicans, for example, to get some of their witnesses early in the process.

>> that is one reason i supported the motion by senator van hollan to have the chief justice make a determination of what witnesses might be relevant in the senate and which ones might not. because i think that is a way to ensure to everybody that the people who are being called are relevant to the material that is in front of us. the house did their process, but now the senate is doing hours. my goal is to do everything i can to ensure that we have as fair a process as possible. >> ed: you mentioned chief justice john roberts. republican senator susan collins, your colleague, has revealed it was she who sent the note to the chief justice a few nights ago to say she was "stunned," in her words, by what during other, one of the managers , said. that republicans like her, if they don't vote for new witnesses, they will be complicit at some set of recovery. she says and suggests that may backfire on the managers. do you think that could be a

pivotal moment in this trial? that they went too far, unfair and the rhetoric in going after susan collins another? >> that was a very small piece of the case that has been presented so far by the house managers. listen, i supported with the chief justice said to both sides, both the president's team and to the house managers. because i do think we need to be civil and respectful. i don't support name-calling of my colleagues or of anybody. i don't think that's how we should be making the case to the american people. i think what my constituents, with the american people want to see, is a process that is worthy of the constitution, that is worthy of the framers, who were very concerned and put in the impeachment process because they were concerned that we might get a chief executive at some point who was misusing the office for his own personal gain. >> ed: senator, i have less than a minute. were you hoping to hear in this process when you call for

unified process? what you want to hear from the presence defense team when they finally get a chance to speak on saturday? we had republicans like jim jordan on today saying they think that without more progress on witnesses we can see an end to this trial, maybe a week from today. what say you? >> clearly that a senator mcconnell's goal, and will be further from the white house is that he wants this over by the super bowl. i think we should try and get out the truth. i hope what we hear from the president's team as they will address very directly the charges that have been made and the case that has been built by the house managers. i would like to hear from mick mulvaney, from john bolton. if the president didn't do any of these things, and he said he didn't, let's hear from those people who can really shed some light on that. i don't understand why he would not want them to come forward. >> ed: it's been a long week and it's still going. we know you're busy, we appreciate you stopping in with us today. >> thank you. >> sandra: fox news alert as

we await a news conference in chicago after a second case of the coronavirus has now been confirmed right here in the united states. >> ed: plus, president trump set to make history just mere moments from now when he becomes the first sitting president to appear and speak at a march for life rally. >> it's a historic first. we have never had a president of the united states actually come in person to the march for life. so it's going to be an amazing moment. look, this isn't my first rodeo...

and let me tell you something, i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. it's just a loan designed for older homeowners, and, it's helped over a million americans. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. eliminate monthly mortgage payments, pay bills, medical costs, and more. call now and get your free info kit. other mortgages are paid each month, but with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home.

discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more in aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage loan guide. access tax-free cash and stay in the home you love. you've probably been investing in your home for years... making monthly mortgage payments... doing the right thing... and it's become your family's heart and soul... well, that investment can give you tax-free cash just when you need it. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio, and so much more. look, reverse mortgages aren't for everyone but i think i've been 'round long enough to know what's what. i'm proud to be a part of aag, i trust 'em, i think you can too. trust aag for the best reverse mortgage solutions. so you can... retire better.

>> sandra: fox news alert now, the second confirmed case of the coronavirus in the united states, the latest in chicago. public health officials are talking to reporters in the city of chicago right now. let's dip in and listen as a woman in her 60s has been confirmed with the virus in that city. >> she was not symptomatic when flying, and based on what we know now about this virus, our concern for transmission before symptoms develop is low. so that is reassuring. she has limited close contacts, all of whom are currently well and who will be monitored closely for symptoms. we will also be monitoring the health care workers who have cared for and continue to care for this patient. since returning from china, the patient has had very limited movement outside her home. now that this test is positive,

we will continue to collect and confirm even more information about her activities and contacts. but we know already, for example, that she has not taken public transportation. she has not attended any large gatherings. actually, to our best knowledge at this point, she has not had extended close contact with anyone outside her home since returning from china and prior to admission to the health care system. so this is all very reassuring, in terms of infection risk to the general public. which, again, remains low nationally and locally. any time a new virus emerges, we are reminded of how small our world is and of how critical it is to invest in building strong public health systems. i want to thank the federal, state, and many local partners who have worked together and prepared not just to respond to this case, but over many years to ensure the chicago area is

well-prepared to respond to emerging infectious diseases. i want to handed over to dr. jennifer layton, the chief medical officer and epidemiologist at the illinois department of public health. >> sure. my name is dr. allison arwady. i'm in md and i'm the commissioner of the chicago department of public health. >> thank you, allison. my name is jen layton, the chief medical officer for the illinois department of public health. jennifer, layden. i want to start by thinking our governor, state leadership, and our director, as well as the chicago department of public health, other local health department in illinois, health care partners across the

state, and the cdc for the coordinated and collaborative work on this rapidly evolving situation. it is because of the diligent work by health care professionals that we were able to identify this confirmed travel-associated case of the novel coronavirus quickly while also taking measures to prevent others from being exposed. i.d. ph has been closely monitoring this international outbreak and began proactively preparing in the event it expanded. we began providing cdc guidance, resources, and recommendations to local health departments, hospitals, and clinicians across -- >> sandra: you been listening to public health of fossils offn the city of chicago, confirming the second case of the coronavirus, women in her 60s in the chicago area. she did travel to the speech of area in china in late december. she returned to january 13th. she said she is doing well, she's in her 60s. she did call ahead to the clinic before she went there, which they said is crucial for anyone

experiencing this type of symptoms. she was then -- a mask was put on her face and taken to an area hospital, treated for infectious disease. the other u.s. patient, again, two confirmed cases now, in the seattle area being treated mostly by robots they are. in chief clinical officer and director at st. joseph health. the hospital treating that patient in washington state. really important information coming out of the city of chicago, doctor, about what we just heard there. it was her take away from the situation evolving in chicago >> i am thrilled they were able to treat the patient exactly like planned, that the patient called ahead, they were able to mask and be able to protect not only contacts with the public from person-to-person transmission but also the health care workers from person-to-person transmission here in the u.s. >> sandra: and thankfully they also said she did not get on any public transportation over that 2-week incubation period.

she has had basically no contact outside of her own. we will continue to get an update on the situation on that second confirmed case in chicago. meanwhile, to seattle, where you are taking care of this patient who has the first confirmed case of coronavirus here in the united states. how do you do that with a robot? >> welcome of the robot is incredibly helpful to facilitate communication while keeping health care workers safe by minimizing contact. the robot is mostly for communication purposes. we have been working on using it for diagnostic things like listening to the heart and the lungs, but we still actually have people go in and out of the room. it just reduces the number of times we go in and out of the room. they reduce the potential exposure. >> sandra: first, what can you tell us about the condition of that patient, doctor? >> well, like every patient, if you came to our system we would make sure we protected your personal health information.

i can say that this coronavirus appears to be significantly less deadly so far, knock on wood, then other coronavirus' that caused things like sars or mers in the past. >> sandra: are you able to share with us the type of symptoms that patient was experiencing that led to the hospital visit? >> well, the symptoms that most of these coronavirus patients exhibit are very flu-like in nature. so they are fever, cough, often respiratory systems like shortness of breath. if you've traveled to china and if you have any of those flu-like symptoms, please do what these two patients did and called. because we want to hear from you and we want to make sure we can treat you appropriately while minimizing the risk to everybody around you. >> sandra: i know that you point out the coronavirus is scary because it's new and it's exotic. it sounds like, by your description, the cases can vary a lot. is that fair to say?

from deadly to treatable? their airport screenings happening across the country right now. jfk here in new york, lax, los angeles, san francisco, atlanta, chicago o'hare. how do you do that considering the symptoms vary so widely? >> well, the symptoms really are fever, cough, shortness of breath. people that are coming in, particularly from the affected area, from wuhan, are being screened for those symptoms. fever, cough, shortness of breath. if any of those are present, that's when contact isolation -- so, preventing exposures for others -- happens. and then testing occurs. that is how we do it. it really is based on symptoms. >> sandra: i am sure you have a lot to learn about this virus as you go on your way. we spoke to a doctor yesterday, who is already talking about an immunization for the coronavirus. it is a quickly-evolving situation as those officials in the city of chicago just said.

doctor, we appreciate your time this morning, thank you. >> thank you so much. >> sandra: bested the patient you are treating. thank you. >> ed: fox news alert, vice president mike pence making a special stop during his overseas trip, getting a chance to meet pope francis in vatican city. that happened earlier today. all is the president prepares to make a historic appearance as a first sitting u.s. president to attend the march for life rally in washington. jonathan morris joins us on that, next. i have huge money saving news for veterans. mortgage rates just dropped to near 50-year lows. one call to newday usa can save you $2,000 every year. and once you refinance, the savings are automatic. thanks to your va streamline refi benefit, at newday there's no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. activate your va streamline benefit now.

i need all the breaks as athat i can get.or, at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ >> sandra: republican leadership now at the microphone. lindsey graham speaking a moment to go. now to senator john barrasso of wyoming. >> already that have been diagnoses that they have been to that region, and it sounds like the incubation time could be up to 14 days. so in terms of what we would do, since there are the symptoms of the flu and there's a lot of flu going around, this is a virus that is a respiratory-transmitted virus.

coughing, sneezing, are ways that it's transmitted. certainly cover yourself if you are doing any of those things. [laughter] additionally, wash your hands. if you are sick, stay home. if your kids are sick, don't send them to school. we certainly don't want transmission from person to person to person. this is an evolving disease and virus similar to the sars virus that we've had previously. i just ask people to take the appropriate precautions. now, with regard to the impeachment, and adam schiff's closing argument last night about president trump's not doing what's best for the american people, only doing what's best for him, since he has come into office we have new jobs in america. numbers came out on consumer confidence, highest they've been in this country in 20 years. the amount of wages have gone up, better jobs, better opportunities, the country's much better. i would say let the voters decide. we've heard from adam schiff's he doesn't trust the voters.

he didn't trust him in 2016 and doesn't trust them 2020. which is why he doesn't want to just eliminate and remove president trump from office. he also wants to remove him from the ballot in 2020. you're going to ask four democratic senators who are still running for president to vote on that. to me, that is the conflict of interest on their part. with regard to the trial and lindsay talked about what we'ves one of the managers back in the clinton impeachment trial. they were given 24 hours, they used fewer hours than the democrats have used up until today. and how they are going to go with another full day of arguments about this. it seems to me their case is weaker today than it was yesterday. there is so little brought out, every hour and a half, bring out the same thing. they've rushed through the house, and now they say they

want witnesses because we didn't have time in the house. after the president's defense gets to present their case tomorrow and then monday and tuesday, we will have 16 hours for questioning. then we will have a vote in the senate. do we need more information or have we heard enough, so we can go to final judgment? we have heard plenty. the managers for the democrats have said there is overwhelming evidence. "there is a mountain of evidence." they said it's "rock-solid" evidence. they should need any more information to make a final decision. we are happy to take your questions. >> reporter: senator graham? >> you will be next. >> reporter: sir, regarding the foreign policy that you spoke of earlier, what legitimate foreign policy interest could be served by having the president of ukraine go on cnn and announce an

investigation into one of the president's political rivals, without any -- what is the -- >> here's what i don't buy. that if you are running, if you are former vice president and you are in charge of the ukraine, nobody can ask you about what you did because you are running for president in 2020. what trump is frustrated with, including me, is that nobody in her business has spent 15 minutes telling us about what dr. biden did in foreign policy. he is frustrated because he believes there is a double standard. here's what i think is good foreign policy. for him today to keep insisting that we know what the vice president and his son did in the ukraine, did he do it? did enter biden do it in such a way so he is compromised? i just don't buy the idea that it's wrong for the president to

insist that the ukrainians cooperate with us on investigation. i would say this, three democratic senators, leahy, menendez, and durbin, wrote a letter that is they did not assist mueller to find out what trump may have done regarding the 2016 election, -- >> respect we come i want to confirm that what you're saying. you're saying it's okay for the president to ask that the present of a foreign country make an announcement about investigating an american running against him because he thinks the media is unfair? >> i think the president believes there is a double standard. i believe the president believes that he went through holy hell. and i believe the same thing. >> reporter: to balance it out? >> no, what he wants to do is get to the truth. can you imagine if a republican

had done this? you need to ask yourself this question. as an institution, as the media, as an institution, would you not have people on the ground wanting to know what mike pence's son did when he contacted the state department the day they rated the burisma president's home? the president is frustrated i am frustrated that we live in a country where only one side gets looked at. and i am telling you now that i am going to look at this if nobody else does. that doesn't make me a russian agent. >> reporter: senator, you talked about the house managers over trying the case. how much or how little do think the president's lawyers need to do to make sure he is acquitted? >> about the fourth time you tell me the same thing is twice too much. here's with the president's lawyers, i think, should be doing if i were them. i would go to the argument very quickly, "did donald trump betray the united states

interest by withholding the aide for a period of time?" "did he have a corrupt motive when he says somebody should look at the bidens and what they did in the ukraine today?" he is not asking for the ukrainians to investigate all of his political opponents. he is asking somebody to look at the former vice president, who has chosen to run for president, who allowed his son to be a member of the most corrupt company in the ukraine, received $3 million, and expects nobody to ask questions about that. that is what he's asking for. i think that is bad foreign policy. i think if a republican had done this there would be no debate anywhere in the country that somebody should look, how did this happen? and if you didn't know your son was doing this, how seriously were you looking at corruption? >> reporter: it sounds like

you're suggesting the white house attorneys should make the bidens' history and ukraine part of their defense of the president? >> here's what i think, i think they should tear apart the narrative presented by the house managers. this has been debunked. i think they should make a compelling case based on the public record, there is something based on good government and good foreign policy to look at here, and just when this is over to look at it. >> reporter: senator, moments ago senator kirsten gillibrand said, "you don't get to bury her head in the sand and complain it's dark." she is calling you all hypocritical for complaining about repetitive, you said "mind-numbing," nature of the democrats' testimony so far. at the same time voting against additional witnesses and documents. your response? >> very quickly, i like her a lot, i think they did a good job laying out their case. just like yesterday was too much. i've seen the same video seven

times. you know it's mind-numbing? the manager said there's not one piece of evidence to suggest that hundre hundred biden did anything wrong. there never will be if you don't call any witnesses. they tried to call hunter biden and people associated with burisma in the house, and they were shut out. i was pretty offended by the idea that there is a record here and there is not one scintilla of evidence that hundred biden did wrong, when you stop the house from calling hunter biden. that is having a head in the sand. but here's the thing, i don't want to call enter biden. i don't want to call joe biden. i want somebody to look at that when this is done. i think i've got enough from the public record to believe that their assertion that there is no there there falls short. that we didn't leave the country. i think i know enough about the president's worldview. he is still pissed we give them

10% of the military budget. >> this isn't only about the president of race, it's the presidential race, if you look at chuck schumer statements, this is about susan collins. this is about thom tillis, this is about martha mcsally, this is about cory gardner. chuck schumer has said as much. only part of it is removing president trump and taking his name off of the ballot. it is also about chuck schumer trying to make himself a majority leader of the united states senate and there is no way to deny it because he himself has confirmed it. >> there should be more witnesses and documents because new evidence has come out. showing that president trump wasn't in favor of taking the u.s. ambassador to the ukraine.

can you respond to the idea that in a trial there has to be evidence and witnesses and documents as they come to look and to have a fair trial. >> there will be new evidence every day. there will be something new that comes out every day and the house has said we are going to continue to investigate these things. house members have said we may bring additional articles of impeachment. there is nothing to stop the house from continuing along that line but when the house managers say the evidence is overwhelming, it's a rock-solid case and a mountain of evidence, when they say all those three things, i don't believe there are any democrats who need additional information to make a decision on how they are going to vote and i can't imagine there are many republicans in the same situation. >> if he is innocent, why not bring those documents? >> number one, the president can fire any ambassador they want.

i will give you a lot of examples for ambassadors who have been removed because they lost the confidence of the president. i can't answer the phone anymore, they refused to call him in the house. back to your question. >> senate republicans have been making their case, we will have more special coverage. >> martha: we will see from the president's defense team tomorrow, it is going to be quite a weekend. quite a week. >> we didn't even get to eli manning. wanted to put a button on his career, how do you think we did? >> so great to work with you. >> you can come back monday. >> i am super excited about not working this weekend. >> our coverage will continue on the fox news channel.

"outnumbered"'s neck stand up bright and martha will come on h special coverage in the afternoon. have a great weekend, everybody. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> harris: president from such a take the stage at the march for life rally in washington, d.c., moments from now. he will become the first sitting president to address the annual pro-life gathering in the nation's capital. those remarks will be live right here when they happen. and then there is this. house democrats wrapped up their impeachment argument, that will happen today. allowing trump's defense team to kick things off tomorrow. the democrats have less than eight hours left on their allotted 24 hours and today's focus will be on the second article of impeachment, obstruction of congress. the president's legal defense is chomping at the bit. ready to attack the democrats

presentation.