attention to get it going to get it corrected. as she was speaking, we are getting reports of another flu virus situation going on potentially in new jersey. here comes "the five." >> dana: i dana perino. it's 5:00 in new york city defending against impeachment and going after hunter biden. we have a reaction but let's go back to the senate floor. >> is that fair? >> yes. >> she's being prepared to come before all of you, all of you, and talk about world issues.

going to be in charge of ukraine. and what did they feel, the only company, the company that it was important to brief her on in case she got a question? burisma. ambassador yovanovitch was confirmed the july 2016 as the obama administration was coming to a close. in september 2016, a ukrainian court canceled the oligarch zlochevsky's arrest warrant for lack of progress in the case. in mid-january 2017, burisma announces all legal proceedings against it and zlochevsky has been closed. both of these things happen when hunter biden sat on the board of burisma. around this time, vice president biden leaves office. years later now, former vice president biden publicly detailed what we know happened. his threat to withhold more than

a billion dollars in loan guarantees unless shokin was fired. here's a vice president. >> we are not going to give you the billion dollars. you are the president. i said, call him. i told you, you are getting a billion dollars. i will be leaving here and i think it was, what, six hours? i believe it was six hours and if the prosecutor is not fired, you are not getting the money. and they put in place someone who was solid. at the time. >> what he didn't say on that video, according to "the new york times," this was the prosecutor investigating burisma. shokin. what he didn't say on the video is that his son was being paid significant amounts by the oligarch owner of burisma to sit on that board.

only then does hunter biden leave the board. he stays on the board until april 2019. on november 2019, hunter biden signed an affidavit saying "he's been unemployed and has no other monthly income since may 2019." this was in november 2019, so we know from after april 2019 to may 2019, through november 2019, he was unemployed by his own statement. april 2019 to november 2019. despite his resignation from the board, the media has continued to raise the issue relating to potential conflict of interest.

on july 22nd, 2019, "the washington post" wrote, "the fired prosecutor general shokin believes his ouster was his interest in the company," referring to burisma. the post further wrote, "had he remain in his post, he would've questioned hunter biden." on july 25th, 2019, 3 days later, president trump speaks with president zelensky. he says, "another thing, there is a lot of talk about biden's son, a lot of people want to find out about that. so whatever you can do with this attorney general would be great." biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, except you can look into it. it looks horrible to me.

." the house managers talked about the biden and reese mona times, but they never did. chris hines, the abc white house reporter. abc, "good morning america," "the washington post," "the new york times," ukrainian law enforcement, and the obama state department itself. they all thought there was cause to raise the issue about the biden ands and burisma. now the house managers might s say, they said everything that they just that had been debunked, the evidence points entirely and unequivocally in the other direction. that is a distraction. you heard from the house

managers. they do not believe that there was any concern to raise here. that all of this was baseless. all we are saying is that there was a basis to talk about this, to raise this issue. and that is enough. i yield my time. >> thank you, mr. chief justice. >> dana: that was pam bondi. presenting a portion of the president's legal defense team case to focus mostly on marie's mama and hunter biden's relationship. also showed a clip of joe biden who mostly brag about his role in carrying out united states policy which was at that time the fire that particular prosecutor in ukraine. we'll take it around the table because we have a lot to get to. jay sekulow will take the table but give you some thoughts about what "the five" is thinking today. you've been up all morning since

the beginning and watched all of this. any opening thoughts? >> degan: we'll get to john bolton shortly but this is a way to put a placeholder in place if the democrats force a vote on calling john bolton as a witness, this is a place holder to press the republicans to call hunter biden, joe biden. i think byron york last week said there is a growing chorus of republican senators talking about trying to call hunter biden, including ted cruz. hunter biden is not only relevant, he's now critical. this is also a political adventure. it has been throughout the house impeachment and now in the trial and the senate, so score some political points and point out the huge conflict of interest that are going on in ukraine with the work of hunter biden. in the meantime, hunter biden the last few days, he's tooling around hollywood on $130,000

being photographed there, he's got an answer, enough money to rent what's reportedly a $12,000 a month house in hollywood but can't pay child support on his forthcoming soon will have five. >> dana: when i saw the report with the picture, i zoomed in because i knew somebody here would know what kind of car that was, not good in a whole car front but i'm glad to know exactly what it is for jesse, why don't we get some thoughts from you? >> jesse: i think pam bondi establish how much money hunter was making compared to the average family in the united states, how this is not a conspiracy theory. not only president trump but the obama state department, the british, and every single media outlet in this country then and now have said that this gig in ukraine by hunter biden, this arrangement and his father demanding the firing, was extremely suspicious and borderline corrupt. did an excellent job doing that.

she also established the fact that the firing didn't come out of nowhere. it came amid heavy lobbying by burisma and the state department before and after in the firing. it doesn't look good for joe biden and i completely agree that if you are a democrat and you want to start calling witnesses? well, that's a witness. hunter, i did not think he would withstand that kind of scrutiny when they have the bank records, the reporting, and all of what they have. i do not think he's going to ever testify. they are too scared. >> dana: i wonder about that, it's mutually assured destruction. that makes it that there are no witnesses? we don't know. greg, how about you? >> greg: i want to state the obvious that the republicans are digging themselves out of a hole that the dems dog all week. bathe in the drool of media, and

what do the republicans get? saturday morning. when all of us find people are walking home. it's like being a comedian who gets the 3m spot in a telethon, they have to work their way out of this. i think that's why a lot of the polls have been favorable in a way because all you got was that perspective. the bottom line i think is the big point. the previous week was a collection of presumptions of her actions, mind reading, more opinions in fact. the reason why the it was popular, they loved it. and mirror their thoughts. this is going to be something different. this is the fact part of it. that's why they are showing the ambassadors talking and stating the facts, the things that schiff had ignored. on another note, i will say this because we are going to talk about kobe later in the show, but that was a horrible event that happened this weekend. and it kind of makes the stuff in some ways seem really, really

silly and grows. what you saw yesterday was a country essentially uniting in sorrow over a really horrible thing. this is the damage that's devices as ever. >> dana: tragedy can focus the mind indeed. if you can pull up ken starr comment, do you have that they are? i'll play this for you, juan, we were sitting together but didn't have a chance to talk about it. >> we are living what i think in aptly be described as the age of impeachment. in the house, presidential impeachment has become a weapon. to be wielded against one's political opponents. we deal with transcript eviden evidence. we deal with publicly available information. we do not deal with speculation.

allegations. not based on evidentiary standards at all. we live in a cause additional republic that have deep policy concerns and the differences. that should not be the basis of impeachment. >> juan: it's on the one hand and the other, jay sekulow when he started, the business of not addressing the bolton issue which will come to at a moment, people are like, how can you not do that. he goes on and goes, we are going to look at the facts, and when he introduced one of the white house lawyers, that lawyer attempted to look at the facts and that's where i think the trump defense team did its best work which is trying to say, hey, listen, and a lot of stuff that the democrats said wasn't wrong but it lacked context. there are people who said additional things that would put it in a more full picture for you and might, in fact, lead you to think, hey, maybe the president wasn't acting wrong. maybe in fact he was concerned

about overall corruption and it wasn't directly tied to the investigation, therefore undercutting the quid pro quo. you know, get over it, foreign policy is often tied with meeting american demands. of course, then you heard gordon sondland and others say, there was a quid pro quo. what didn't impress me, dana, was ken starr. i guess they put ken starr out there for a reason. >> dana: impeachment is not a remedy that we should use? juan: it's hard coming from penn star. >> dana: he was appointed under the impeachment statute which we do not live anymore. >> jesse: he started off really slowly. you have to warm up to ken starr. at first i got a little nervous but once you start feeling the rhythm of his voice, he's very captivating, and i would agree.

he talks about the history of impeachment and right now we are at a fever pitch. in the first 150 years, we had one impeachment. now we've had three in the last 20 or 30 years or something. he said, now traditionally come impeachment is supposed to be bipartisan. it's supposed to have -- i can't say it can't have a crime, but all of the writings in the rulings in the thought about impeachment, there has to be an underlying crime. and due process was shredded in the house. the magna carta shredded in the house. that was really destructive to the democrats' argument. they came in here destroying their own precedent and saying to a commander-in-chief, to a president who was relying on their own office of special counsel in the justice department's opinion, he's not going rogue. he's abiding by the opinion of the office of the special counsel, very talented lawyers, he's being impeached for taking the advice of counsel in the executive branch. that never happened before. they need to walk that back and

realize this is just gross. >> greg: i would add one thing that this just because looking at the stock market today, which i think is about down 450, 460? >> dagen: at lost almost all if not all of its gains this year. >> greg: what it's reflecting is an anxiety over an issue we are not talking about. right? as we do impeachment every day -- >> juan: it's about the coronavirus. >> greg: i was getting there. the question is what would you rather have your government do because it can clearly only do one thing. read impeachment theater for weeks and months on end or deal directly with a global pandemic that could be gobbling every six days. >> dagen: this goes to something about the impeachment and removal, it was this, a threat to our national security. but the coronavirus is, the government has one job which is protecting its people and i do think it will come down to, juan, all the senators, particular the republicans have to look and say, will we vote to

remove a president nine months before an election when a majority of americans are not in favor of that removal. >> juan: wait a minute, we just had a fox poll... >> dagen: average. >> juan: president trump legal team on the senate floor right now making the case against impeachment, as you know. this comes as the fight over witnesses and testifies yet again. this time, it's over claims of former national security advisor john bolton's new book. "the new york times" reporting that in an unpublished manuscript, bolton alleges that the president tied aid to ukraine to the investigation into the bidens. the report building a new battle over testimony among lawmakers. here is the president denying john bolton's claims earlier today. >> i haven't seen the manuscript but i can tell you that nothing was ever said to john bolton. but i have not seen the manuscript. i guess he's writing a book. i'm not sure. >> juan: dana, let me ask you. do you think this moves the

needle on republicans voting to call witnesses? >> dana: if possible. it's possible. but i think we've got a ways to go before you even get to a vote about witnesses, you have another two may be even a day or so, depends how much time the president's lawyers want to use. it could, but maybe we'll find out more about this before then. even if we do get to witnesses, as pointed out moments ago, you can get to a point where it's clear there's going to be witnesses and all the witnesses. it's not going to be just john bolton, mick mulvaney. it's going to be -- you won't get to do the no witnesses like the house dead dead. as far as i know, john bolton, i was his spokesperson when i was -- when the president appointed him to the united nations and the democrats blocked that. caught him a liar and all sorts of things. not calling him a liar now. i'm for people writing books, but i've also long believed that the best way to write a book if

you've had an opportunity and a privilege to work and administration is to do so after a term is over. either when the president is no longer the president, i think folks in the middle of it it looks for personal gain and they are always taken the wrong way and they hurt the very person who gave you the opportunity toe because the media will always try to find a way to see if there is a way to divide. i predicted this on friday, i would not be surprised if by sunday night there is another one of these little leaks because the democrats realize that they know that this president is going to be acquitted but they are going to figure out a way to make it very difficult for them as much as they possibly can and this happens on sunday night. here's what i would also say. that might be wrong, but the white house, any white house, has to figure out a way to get much more coordinated. everybody needs to know that, oh, heads up, everybody, john bolton's manuscript landed in the national security counsel's

desk, who needs to be there to know about it? they didn't do about it for it looks like they didn't know about it, it looks like they were caught a little bit flat-footed today. >> juan: dagen, one thing that strikes me picking up on what dana said in her accurate prediction, we had the lev parnas thing come out, we've had the omb email about the money being withheld after the phone call. we have the gao thing that's as it was illegal. now we've got bolton and he's naming names? it's like a drip, drip, drip. >> greg: exactly! >> dagen: where do you go... do you know why we are laughing? >> juan: tell me. >> dagen: you tell him. >> jesse: it's obviously a coordinated stunned, juan. >> juan: wait, bolton and his lawyers... >> jesse: here's why i'm not buying this bolton stuff. i've been here long enough to know it's not a hatchet it's a hatchet job.

how many times relevant been leaked perfectly timed to help the democrats to "the new york times." >> dagen: jim comey! >> juan: are these the same sources that said there was russian collusion? are these the same anonymous people in the nsa who tried to drag his whole whistle-blower complaint? >> greg: we don't know who leaks it. we know why. the timing tells you why, in order to nail the president. but what you need to understand is nobodies actually seeing the actual quote. >> dagen: could defend the actual president! >> greg: people on the right are freaking out about this because it vindicates trim because it tells everybody what trump really thought it's that ukraine was corrupt and on behalf of the dems, but it's like another bomb shell. the media has tbd, terminal bombshell. disease. >> jesse: they lied about what they said their elevation is. they do not get to page four

until they tell you the meat of the conversation that bolton had with the president. this is a direct quote from "the new york times." this is supposed to be the good stuff. he, the president, "preferred sending no assistance to ukraine until officials had turned over all the materials they had about the russia investigation that related to mr. biden and supporters of mrs. clinton and ukraine." this was not about burisma or hunter, this was about them releasing information about election interference against the president there that's why this murky leak was probably from some guy that saw a manuscript, spun it to the times, and they can corroborate because they don't have it. >> dana: can i make a recommendation about something? >> dagen: i was going to say conspiracy theory. >> dana: i never have those. i think when you do a book in the middle of -- especially if you had top-secret clearance,

you have to get it cleared from the president. they haven't cleared it, but the president of united states has the ability to clear it if he wants to. they could release that chapter or they could tell john bolton, we are good with your book, whatever, they could release it, and trying to do that before this question -- >> greg: he was on amazon today. what does that have to do? >> dana: has to do with the publisher. >> juan: they categorically state they absolute he had no coordination with it. but i will point this out, if you think that your author is going to give away what's in the book, you need to presell that book expletive before he actually testifies potentially. this is you striking while the iron is hot and this is the moment. by the way, this is not number

one, kobe bryant is number one. they try to sell it ahead. >> juan: is no question, he tied president trump to a quid pro quo. this is a trump official. >> greg: not breeze mama or hunter though >> juan: up next, the helicopter crash that killed nba star kobe bryant. nine grams of protein and twenty-seven vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. 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. ♪

jesse the >> jesse: we'll bring you any big developments but in the meantime, as the world mourns, we have brand-new information on the tragic death of kobe bryant. we are learning what was happening inside the helicopter before the terrible crash that killed the nba legend, his daughter, and seven others. jonathan hunt is alive in calabasas, california, with the latest.

>> jesse, good afternoon for you. since first light, investigators have been on the scene here in calabasas where that helicopter went around and down, and job one for them this morning was to start the grim process as a look at the crash site of removing the bodies of the nine people who died in the helicopter. working alongside the recovery personnel, ntsb investigators looking for the precise cause of the crash. they are looking very closely as whether as a major factor there was dense fog over a calabasas at time and the pilot ara zobayan requested flight details as he piloted through the flog. listen here. >> special bfr conditions.

>> go 2,500 high five, northbound. >> shortly after that conversation, the pilot made a final turn to the southwest, having requested what's called flight following tracking of his helicopter to ensure that he didn't come too close to any of the aircraft. listen again to the ferry final cut medication from traffic control. >> two echo x-ray, you are still to low level. >> just seconds after that, it is believed that the helicopter slammed in to the hillside here. in the meantime, fans across the sports world paying tribute to a man they considered a legend, a man many consider a brother, a man many of them considered an inspiration. listen here to some of those fans. >> i'm numb.

i'm very numb. kobe was my hero... i grew up with kobe. he was my age! >> i'm lost for words. i'm still having a hard time today. all i can do is hope that his family wish them the best. i can't imagine what they are going through. >> tomorrow night, the lakers are due to play the l.a. clippers at staples center. so commonly known as the house that kobe build. it will be a deeply emotional evening. jesse? >> jesse: jonathan, thank you. they had the grammys at the staples center, they had the cameras panned up to the rafters anybody came together and saying and there is a lot of love there last night. >> juan: i think there is a lot of love across the country. it's not that he was a perfect man.

he had that terrible case. i think it's really touching how people have reacted to this because he was 41 years old. the idea that his daughter died -- he was coaching his daughter. i think he really, it changed his image for a the better. for you, jessie, 20 year career, 18 time all-star. comes from philadelphia. never went to college, but he was a sensation in high school and a sensation right away in the nba. for me, one of the things that always struck me is everybody talks about him scoring 80 points in toronto, the last game he played he scored 60. but i think he was five or six times all nba defensive gem. the intensity for him as a competitor comes through. that guy cared. >> jesse: that's what everybody was saying. they went to tiger woods as he was getting off 18 yesterday, he just heard the horrible news and they went with them to the microphone and he said, guy is

probably the fiercest competitor he ever met. >> dagen: it also reminded me because he struggled to come with grips with it having lost my mother, it's very raw. it's a reminder of how a sports game or a transformative sports figure not only unites your family but connect you to your friends come and tell you to a community. i do not think people go to talking heads make up for a living to know what this meant to them, you already know and you get that with perfect strangers riding the bus as i did. >> jesse: you mentioned it at the top of the show. >> dagen: we have to >> greg: there were three families devastated. i don't know how you can assess the scale of this misery for everybody involved. it's a devastating event and it puts everything in perspective and reminds you that everything you have can be god in an instant. when i was reading this tragedy,

next to me, next of the article was another article on the website. i want to say paper. the headline was "model remembers trauma of trying on clothes at abercrombie & fitch." it's perspective, perspective. the words trauma place in the right perspective when you see this horrifying, and it makes your life look like, well, maybe i don't have it so bad. >> dana: to wrap it up, obviously grief comes in waves and lasts for a long time. one of the things i've been learning more about and i don't really follow basketball, you know that, he had really committed himself to being a person people looked up to. if you commit to something, you can make a big difference. >> jesse: more of "the five" coming up. stay with us.

parked it right there. male voice: what did i tell you, boys? tonight we eat like kings! (chuckling) you're a genius, gordon! brake! hit the brake! uh, which one's the brake? (crash, bottles smashing) stop! stop! sto-o-op! (brakes squealing) what's happening? what? there's a half of cheesesteak back there. with geico, the savings keep on going. just like this sequel. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. raccoon: i got the cheesesteak! (whistling)

>> greg: the president's legal team on the senate floor. let's listen in. >> look at the transcript of a july call. president trump never asked about any announcement of any type of investigation. and president zelensky tells president trump, "i guarantee as the president of ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. that i assure you." what happened next? that house managers say president zelensky did not want to get mixed up in u.s. politics. but it's precisely the democrats who politicized the issue. last august committee began circling the wagons trying to protect vice president biden and they are still doing it in these proceedings.

they contend that any investigation into the millions of dollars of payment by a corrupt ukraine company owned by a corrupt ukraine oligarch to the son of the second-highest office holder in our land he was supposed to be in charge of fighting corruption in ukraine, they are calling that type of inquiry a sham. but there's never been an investigation. so how could it be a sham? simply because the house managers say so? which brings me to you another one of the house managers's bases contentions, that president trump raise the matter with president zelensky because vice president biden just announced his candidacy for president. of course, it was far from a secret that vice president biden was planning to run. what had in fact changed? first, president zelensky had been elected in april on an anticorruption platform. in july, running on the same

platform, his party took control of the ukrainian parliament. that made at the opportune time to raise the issue because finally there was a receptive government in ukraine committed to fighting precisely the kind of highly questionable conduct displayed by burisma and its payments to hunter biden and his partner just as joe biden had raised years before. two other things. in late june, "abc news" ran a story entitled, "hunter biden's foreign deals: did joe biden's son profit off of his father's position as vice president?" then, just a couple of weeks before president trump telephone call with president zelensky, the "new yorker" magazine, not exactly a supporter of president trump, ran an expose, "well hunter biden jeopardize his father's campaign?" going through some of the facts we do know about hundred biden's

involvement with burisma and involvement of a chinese company. this was in july just a couple of weeks before the phone call, said that some of vice president biden's advisors were worried that hunter would expose the vice president to criticism. a former senior white house aide told a new yorker reporter that hunter's behavior invited questions whether he was "leveraging access for his benefit." the reporter wrote that when i asked members of biden's staff whether they did raise the concern with the vice president, several of them said, they had been too intimidated to do so. everybody who works for him has been screamed at, and former advisor told the reporter. i do not know whether anyone has been intimidated by vice president biden or has been screamed at by him by burisma or

his son's involvement. do we want a type of government were questions about facially suspect conduct are suppressed or dismissed as illegitimate because someone is intimidating or screams at or is just too important? no. that's precisely when an investigation is mostly important. last thursday night, senator senator jeffries provided us with the standards for abuse of power. he said, "abuse of power occurs when the president exercises his official power to obtain a corrupt personal benefit while ignoring or injuring the national interests." mr. jeffries in the house managers contend that under the standard, president trump has committed an impeachable offense. it must be immediately removed from offer office. if the standard applies, where

do the calls for impeachment when uncontroverted smoking gun evidence emerged that president obama had violated their standards? the american people understand this basic notion as equal justice under the law. it is american as apple pie. yet, they house managers want to apply their own version of selective justice here. which applies only to their political opponents. they want one system of justice for democrats and another system of justice for everyone else. but you do not need to take my word for it. let's walk through the facts. on march 26th, 2012, on the eve of the 2012 nuclear security summit in seoul, south korea, president obama met with the russian president dmitry medvedev to discuss one of the pressing issues in the united states national security interests. military defense. how important was the issue of

missile defense to the strategic relationship between the u.s. and russia? as president obama's defense secretary robert gates said in june 2010, upgraded missile interceptors in development "would give us the ability to protect our troops, our bases, our facilities, and our allies in europe." gates continued, "there is nothing on the minds of missile defense. there is no meeting of the minds of missile defense. the russians hate it. they've hated it since the late 1960s. they will always hate it mostly because we will build it and they won't. during the nuclear security summit, president obama had a private exchange with russian president made the that was picked up on a hot microphone.

president obama said, on all these issues, particularly missile defense, this can be solved. but it's important for him to give me space. president medvedev responded, i understand, i understand your message about space. space for you. president obama, this is my last election. after my election, i will have more rocks ability. president medvedev responds. i will transmit this information to vladimir. as we all know, vladimir putin. as you saw in 2012, president obama asked the russians for space until after the upcoming 2012 election after which he would have more flexibility. let me apply mr. jeffries' and the manager's three-part test

for abuse of power. one, the president exercises his official power. president obama's actions clearly meets the test for exercising official power because it is role as head of state during a nuclear security summit after asking president medvedev for space, he promised him that, "missile defense can be solved." what else could that mean but solved in their way favorable to the russians? who were dead set against expansion of a u.s. missile defense system in europe? two, two gained a corrupt personal benefit for president obama's actions were clear for his own corrupt personal benefit because he was asking an adversary for space. for the express purpose of furthering his own election chances. again, president obama said, this is my last election. after my election, i have more flexibility.

president obama knew the importance of missile defense in europe, but decided to use that as a bargaining chip for the russians, for the russians to further his own election chances in 2012. three, while ignoring or injuring our national interest. as the fencing terry said, the missiles would give us the ability to protect our troops, our bases, our facilities, and other allies in europe. sacrificing our ability to protect our troops and allies would injure national interests. yet president obama was willing to barter away the safety of our troops and the safety of our allies in exchange for space the upcoming election. in short, president obama leverage the power of his office to the detriment of u.s. policy when missile defense in order to influence the 2012 election. solely to his advantage. and we never would've known if

president obama realized that the microphone was on, there was a hot mic. one could easily substitute president obama's 2012 exchange with president medvedev into article one of the house's impeachment articles into president trump. using the powers of his high office, president obama solicited interference of a foreign government, russia, in the 2012 united states per residential election. he did so through a scheme of our course conduct that included soliciting the government of russia to give them space on missile defense that would benefit his reelection and influence of 2012 united states presidential election to his advantage. in doing so, president obama use the power of the presidency in a manner that compromise the national security of the united states and undermine the

integrity of the united states democratic process. he thus ignored and injured the interest of the nation. doesn't sound familiar, house managers? it should. as the case against president obama would've been far stronger than the allegations against president trump. president obama's abuse of power to benefit his own political interests was there and is here now for everyone to hear. it was a direct, unquestionable quid pro quo. no mind reading needed there. where were the house managers then? and that points out the absurdity of the house managers' case against president trump. it was president obama, and that president trump, who was weak on russia and weak on support to ukraine. president obama came to russia and putin on missile defense when he decided to scrap missile

defense in poland, yet he described to senator romney when some of the romney said, russia was the greatest geopolitical threat to the u.s. speed governor romney, i'm glad that you recognize that al qaeda is a threat. if you months ago, when you are as was the biggest year political threat facing america, it was a rush. not al qaeda, it was russia. in the 1980s or now, they are calling their foreign policy back because the cold war has been over 30 years. >> now when it's politically convenient, the democrats are saying the same thing president obama criticized senator romney for saying. in fact, they are basing their entire politicized impeachment on this inversion of reality. this claim that president trump is not supporting ukraine far more than the prior administration. president obama caved on missile defense in late 2009.

his hot mike moment occurred in march 2012. his reelection was eight months later. two years later, in march 2014, russia invaded ukraine and annexed crimea. president trump refused to provide -- i'm sorry, president obama refused to provide lethal aid to ukraine to enable it to defend itself. where were the house managers then? the house managers would have the american people believe that there is a threat, an imminent threat to commit to the national security of our country. for which the president must be removed immediately from the highest office in the land. because of what? because he had a phone call with the foreign leader and discuss corruption? because he paused for a short period of time, giving away our tax dollars to a foreign country questioned mike that is their

theory. it's absurd on its face. not one american life was in jeopardy or lost in the short delay and they know it. how do we know that they know it? because they went on vacation after they adopted the articles of impeachment. they did not cancel their recess. they did not rush back to deliver the articles of impeachment to the senate because of this supposedly terrible imminent threat to our national security. what did they do? >> the urgency is really being driven -- speaker urgency -- because nothing could be more urgent -- >> urgent. >> there is an urgency to this. >> we must move swiftly. >> we have no time to screw around. >> and house speaker nancy pelosi still holding onto articles of impeachment... speaker urgency

urgency? for where you want immediately to remove the presidency of the united states? you sat on the articles for a month. the longest delay in the history of our country. they adopted them on friday, december 13th, 2019. friday the 13th. went on vacation and finally decided after one of their democratic presidential debates had finished and after the bcs football championship game that it was time to deliver them. what happened to their national security interest argument? wasn't that the reason they said that they had to rush to vote? it's urgent, they told us, no due process for this president. it is a crisis of monumental proportions. our national security is at risk! every additional day that he's in office, they tell us. the house managers also use the same excuse for not issuing subpoenas for testimony. they had no time for the normal

judicial review. they even complained about the judicial review process sitting in this chamber before the chief justice of the united states supreme court. a judiciary review in which the judge agreed to an expedited schedule. even that was not good enough for them when they issued the subpoenas. one of the managers wrote to the house general counsel, we are dismayed that the committees seeking resolution from the judicial branch of this momentous constitutional question as expeditiously as possible. he continued. important to get a definitive judgment from the judicial branch determining their constitutional duty in the place of conflicting demands of the legislative executive branches. isn't that the point? isn't that how our system of government works? isn't that how it's always

worked? isn't that how it's supposed to work? democrats defended other administrations who fought judicial review of congressional subpoenas. >> dana: we will break back in. this is "the five." eric harshman has been presenting the president's legal defense continuing to talk about burisma, the bidens and the abutment administration. final thoughts from "the five" before we turn it over to bret baier. jesse, let me go to you before we wrap it up here. chassis: that was a good inversion of reality by the defense counsel there. they are saying the most corrupt company in ukraine and is paying millions of dollars to the vp's son. and the vps in charge of looking into corruption in ukraine and fires a prosecutor. and you have the obama about flexibility with the russians to

buy himself time to get political advantage in an election year and they played the sound bite of the debate of barack obama scolding mitt romney for saying, how dare you say that russia is our number one foe. and the democrats saying this is such an urgent threat, they go on vacation after they launch impeachment, they wait another three weeks until after the super bowl -- what is it, the ncaa championship game. i learned this and i thought i knew everything. >> dagen: [laughs] >> jesse: donald trump put holds on afghanistan, central america, south korea, pakistan, regarding corruption, not doing what's in america's best interest. this happens all the time for this time, they thought they could nail him on it. >> dana: there's a slight difference. if they can tie other people to all these other countries in asking for an investigation, but... >> jesse: hunter and james

biden working in a lot of different countries! >> dana: juan, to that point, president obama and his team had gone to the vice presidents office and said, we have some concern here because of their instincts, this doesn't look good. speed to correct. nobody argues that. the argument said that there was nobody who said there was anything on wrong dell neck wrong, legal, and joe biden sait he's not playing this game because he dit do anything wrong and the wind has accused him of doing wrong. that's why i think this is the weakest part. it's stronger when they try to confront the facts and say this is what the democrats left out. but this stuff looks like you are trying to pull people's minds away from the fact that this is an impeachment of president trump, not joe biden. >> dana: look ahead a little bit if you could, dagen mcdowell done that, tomorrow for the president's legal defense team still having time of the clock so they might not use all of their 24 hours, but they'll continue this tomorrow. speed through their audience,

the defense team's audience, it's the american people and particularly the senators, it's also president trump. can we expect a little more is as another performance, like sekulow or pat cipollone? they are present in facts, but a little more passion defense. >> greg: hoping to hear a little more from alan dershowitz. thought that was today, but apparently not. hope they continue to frame the story that when trump asked to investigate in corruption, that's actually election interference but that's the way they will present the story. problem is bolted and has just backed it up trump has always been concerned about the ukraine meddling in 2016, so that blows that to shreds. although we don't know because we haven't seen the book yet. >> dana: you have all this other breaking news happening, additional cases around the world, not just in the united states, but the coronavirus, the stock market taking a look at that,

kobe bryant and the death of nine people in the helicopter crash. everyone is covering that. of course, there are other things happening. we haven't even talked about it today. it is a week from today that iowa will have its first caucus of the nation for the 2020 election. >> jesse: is an bernie sanders ahead in iowa? you can see a bernie win in iowa, i had in the new hampshire bowls, and one is going to start sweating bullets. going to be a civil war and we are going to love every minute of it. >> jesse: you'll get some points of disagreement at this juncture but i must say, i think you'd be fretting for tuesday after, state of union union paid can you imagine trump giving state of the union? >> dagen: i can button up the bernie sanders phenomenon. having not learned anything from the republicans? the more you go after, the more

you target -- >> dana: the more you say he can't win? set your dvr is. never miss an episode of "the five." "special report is up next >> bret: we are covering for major stories. at this hour, the president's legal team defending the president on the senate floor as the republicans are facing a pivotal moment in the presidents impeachment trial following a report of a revelation from former national security advisor john bolton that may undercut the white house defense. crash investigators in california trying to determine the cause of that helicopter crash that killed kobe bryant, his daughter, and seven others. we are one week away from the first ballots in the 2020 2020 presidential election primary season. we will be at iowa,