>> brennan: welcome back to "face the nation." we turn now to north dakota congressman kelly armstrong. he's on the judiciary committee, which is where the impeachment process is headed next. congressman, welcome. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> brennan: as we said, you're on the committee where this process moves to next. do you have any indication on what the time line is and what this is going to look like as articles of impeachment are drafted? >> i don't. i think as we continue to move forward, i think the one thing that is strew the democrats will lose more and more control over. this at some point in time

democrats will have to enforce some of the rules they passed in their own legislation, but regardless of how you feel about this, this has been the most narrowly tailored and controlled thing by chairman schiff, both in the depositions which i was a part of and in the intelligence committee. but as it moves over to the judiciary committee, they will lose more and more of that control. >> brennan: meaning what? >> there are rules where the president gets to have his lawyer and those types of things. i get a little concerned because with all of those rules, the chairman has absolute veto power, but if they continue, eventually it will end up in the senate and they're going to go there. i think it's important, they were talking about the poll numbers this morning with emerson and there's a "vanity fair" article out that i think is most important, and this is 62% of independents think that impeachment is more important to politicians. 61% think it's more important to the media. when you come from a state like mine and you continue to work true all of these things, i don't think that it's as a political exercise, i don't think it's been a success for the democrats over the last two

weeks. >> brennan: but the political exercise apart from this, and in terms of what you actually heard testify to, someone whose name came up repeatedly is rudy giuliani. federal prosecutors we now know are investigating his activities in ukraine. are you comfortable with somebody who is not working for the u.s. government being this involved? foreign policy? >> i think your regular channels have been used a lot. i have said this from day one. one of the reasons president trump got elected is because he does things very differently. >> do you know what rudy giuliani was tasked with doing? >> he was working through all of those things. >> because gordon sondland testified it was giuliani who was carrying out the quid quo pro and it was the president who told him to work with rudy giuliani. >> gordon sondland testified that that was his assumption in the third different testimony he gave. gordon sondland has given three different versions, but when pressed by republicans on the committee, he said he never directly heard any of those things and it was only assumptions he was making.

>> brennan: he did testify on may 23rd that the president told him to work directly with giuliani. but ambassador volker, republicans point the his testimony, as kellyanne conway just did, he testified that it was rudy giuliani who was feeding president trump this very negative view of ukraine, and, in fact, he was listening to that more than his own intelligence experts. does that concern you? >> i don't think that's entirely true. "roll calling" was covering it. politico was covering it. we know actively that ukrainian government officials were actively campaigning against the president in the 2016 election. he was very clear. this president is sceptical of foreign aid. he was sceptsd cal of the -- >> brennan: you're talking about people no longer in the ukrainian government who wrote op-eds that just said, then-candidate trump was -- >> not just that. >> brennan: i want the clarify, because we went through this a few minutes ago. are you actually believing the

theory that ukraine and not rush hacked the dnc servers? >> new york i don't think that's y're tto make ts binary choice between russia and the ukraine, that's not what it is. if you listen to ambassador hill's testimony, she had an opening statement. but if you listen to her testimony throughout the course of the day, she acknowledged a lot of these things. not the put too fine a point, but the reason we're talking about ukraine is because we've had two weeks oof impeachment hearings regarding the ukraine. those are mutually exclusive. the republicans on the intelligence committee did a fantastic job of pointing out how russia interfered with the 2016 electionst. >> brennan: would you be comfortable with a democrat or any other president asking a foreign government to investigate a political opponent? >> facts of this thing don't change. that's part. this. this president was interested in how ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. he was interested in the corruption. he was always skeptical of foreign aid. there was no favor. there was nothing that happened. the aid -- >> brennan: so the answer is you are comfowah

talkinthe way he does, a that's president trump. that's why the american people elected him. that's one thing, as you see through all of these conversations that have occurred is these career -- >> brennan: soo o but president trump should be allowed to get away with this? >> new york i just think president trump communication in a way. that's the reason he got elected. he doesn't do the way things everybody else does. you can tell that's a frustration from where we talk about career federal employees versus president trump. president trump said the phone call was perfect. >> brennan: and you accept that? >> i do. i think you have the transcript and you have the two principle tons phone call who have stated that. after that everything else is really just noise. >> brennan: we have to leave it there. congressman, thank you for joining us. we'll be back with our legal panel in a moment.

new york state is building for the future of your business. with a nation-leading $150 billion commitment to infrastructure, we're creating state of the art, 21st century transportation hubs, constructing new bridges, bringing high-speed internet to every corner of the state, and committing to low-cost clean energy. with infrastructure built for the future, the companies of tomorrow can thrive here today. see your future at esd.ny.gov. of millions of americans during can the recession.day. so, my wife kat and i took action. we started a non-profit community bank with a simple theory - give people a fair deal and real economic power. invest in the community, in businesses owned by women and people of color, in affordable housing.

the difference between words and actions matters. that's a lesson politicians in washington could use right now. i'm tom steyer, and i approve this message. i realized i wanted to study the stars, i want to be a physicist. i had a tenth grade level of education. i find youtube videos on calculus, differential equations, statistics, algebra, trigonometry. i'm now working as a scientist. i can't see a stopping point in me ever doing that. >> brennan: joining us now to help decipher the constitution and discuss what might or might not be technically impeachable are cb legal analyst ans netey and kim wehle

est o so covers the justice department. good to have you all here. i say "decipher," because there is going to be a debate over how do you define high crimes and misdemeanors, which, along with treason and bribery, are how impeachment is laid out. you think there is a case to be made for abuse of power is. that what you think articles of impeachment to be? >> i think you can make a case for abuse of power, but you have to do some changes. you have to reschedule. you have to reframe and repeat e of this testimony. right now this seems designed to fail. it's an incomplete record. you have an audience listening to hear the lines they want the hear. when you step back and look at the whole, it is incomplete. a member would have a good-faith bay stois vote against conviction on that basis. >> brennan: welk you heard will hurd of texas, a congressman, say at the

conclusion that he was not persuaded. he's one of the so-called moderate republicans who people had been hoping might be able to be persuaded to go along with democrats. he basically said, i have not heard the case for bribery. did you hear the case for bribery, kim? >> well, bribery is expressed in the constitution, and the idea is the framers did not want people in power using that power for their own personal gain. so if that's the definition, yes, of course high crimes and misdemeanors is broader than just bribery and treason, and it includes things that can't be defined. so if the president were to move to the kremlin and operate the white house out of the kremlin, that wouldn't be a crime, but maybe that's impeachable some there's someplace in between doing a bad job and crimes and abuse of power. and i think we are squarely in that area right now with this president. >> brennan: you're saying it's not -- when people apply their sort of law and order courtroom scenario to this particular case, you can't do that. it's not the same legal standard. >> it's not the same legal

standard. it's really hard to wrap myarou we need, right, besides directly the president asking for this actual bribe so to speak or $400 million will be withheld, white house meeting will be withheld unless you announce an investigation into my political opponent. so we have interference in the election, again, by the president or with rudy giuliani. that's problem number one. and asking for foreign interference, which is banned by ourrfederal campaign laws. >> brennan: you're sceptical. what would you need to hear to persuade you? >> this is not bribery. the supreme court unanimously directed this type of interpret ration. but you can't invoke bribery and point out it isn't bribery, and then say it's impeachment. you're inadvocating bribery because it's a serious criminal offense. you don't have a complete record. this is like hearing hamlet.

you need to talk to the royal family. >> it would be great if the white house would comply with the subpoenas. >> brennan: i had kellyanne conway here saying they're preparing for all scenarios, nat trial or if the democrats don't a with impeachment. what are they actually planning for? >> this is all about the court of public opinion, as kellyanne conway said, the white house counsel's office, the attorneys, they're working on a legal strategy, but for the president, he's approaching this just as he's approached all the other investigation, with aggressive messaging. he is the messenger. our recent cbs news poll showed 56% of americans don't think he's doing a very good job, which is why you saw them bring in pam bondi to help with the messaging, but it's been interesting. this strategy has really divided the west wing. while the white house counsel's office wants to be aggressive, others in the chief of staff's office and elsewhere in the west wing who want to be more transparent. they feel like, look, if we have nothing to hide, let's be more cooperative and the communications staff, the folks who work there every day,

they're not very happy to bring other people inch so it's unclear if this strategy is actually been successful outside or inside the white house. >> brennan: should we read into the fact that the legal team you just described, that communications team is not here or anywhere this sunday. >> absolutely. we saw one membership, pam bondi was on cbs this morning earlier this week. she struggled with the basic facts of this case. so it does not surprise me that we now see kellyanne conway, who is one of the most effective advocates for the president, particularly when it comes to legal investigations. she's now doing more of the messaging. >> brennan: i want to ask you about the other development that we still don't quite have clarity on, which is, a, what rudy giuliani's real role is,. he's been very vocal in the past 24 hours or so. but also the fact that he himself is now the subject of an investigation. is that a part of this story that you think needs to be fleshed out before democrats go any further? >> it is. i mean, the democrats have to decide if they want a real or

recreational impeachment. a real impeachment means call people like giuliani and others to appear and then compelling them to appear. you can't create the shortest period of investigation in history for an impeachment and then impeach a president for failing to turn over documents in that period because he went to the court. if that is obstruction for a president to seek judicial review in a conflict with congress, then you could have impeached every living president, particularly obama, who made the same type of action when he refused documents in fast and furious. so at some point adult supervision has to kick in here. we have to decide, are we really trying the remove this president, and if so, the case has to be made. >> brennan: what is rudy giuliani's role, paula? >> he's still a member of the president's personal legal team. >> brennan: even though he's under investigation himself in. >> yes, but he's gone quiet. then he burst back onto the scene other the last ten days.

i asked him, is this at the direction of the president, and he told me he takes his instructions from his client. so it appears even though he's under investigation by the trump justice department for his dealings in ukraine, the president continues to retain him as one of his personal attorneys, even working on ukraine, and i have heard and the president has said publicly the reason is the president still sees rudy giuliani as he was in 9/11. he believes truly that he brings gravitas to his case and to his defense. >> brennan: well, it definitely keeps us busy. paul

when you humble yourself under the mighty hand of god, in due time he will exalt you. hi, i'm joel osteen. i'm excited about being with you every week. i hope you'll tune in. you'll be inspired, you'll be encouraged. i'm looking forward to seeing you right here. you are fully loaded and completely equipped for the race that's been designed for you.

♪ dancing queen >> brennan: that was bernie sanders doing some more dancing. wonder if he'll be having the time of his life -- dad joke -- with michael bloomberg in the race. billionaire. he talk about them. we're joined by rich lowry, the author of the book "the case for nationalism: how it made us powerful and free." toluse olorunnipa covers the white house for the "washington post." he's also a political analyst. susan page is the washington bureau chief of "usa today." and joel payne is a democratic strategist and cbs news contributor. thank you all for being here. rich, michael bloomberg used to be a republican. >> he did.

>> brennan: he does have a record he will have to explain in terms of policies when he was new york mayor, stop and frisk and the like. the allegation of the nanny state in terms of restrictions on big gulps and things like, that but into the kind of centrist democrat that republicans might be able to warm up to if they're not going to vote for trump. >> i think michael bloomberg is probably seriously annoyed everyone in the country over some particular issue in 2 course of his career, and the theory of this campaign here, and i've been wrong before, seems preposterous. skipping iowa or new hampshire usually doesn't work out well for candidates. the skipping the first four contests and then bludgeoning your way into the race through sheer financial force after that, after it has significantly gelled seems absurd to me and a way the spend a lot of money and make a lot of consultants rich but not win any delegates. >> brennan: and not any

support. you don't think he's got a shot at winning the democratic nomination? >> yeah. prior to this point, in early polling, there weren't warm feelings for him among democrats to begin with. >> brennan: joel, is that also your read? >> i think that's right. i also have the ridiculous hot take that democrats like to vote for a democrat and michael bloomberg is famously not a democrat. he's an independent. i think he's trying to build goodwill with the party, not ads buying to spread his name, but he's also supporting a lot of progressive initiatives. voter administration, he's spent a lot of money supporting gun control and climate change. i think he's eased a lot of concerns with the leadership of the party. we'll see if that actually turns in the vote. tom stier has tried it. it hasn't worked out. we'll see if it works for bloomberg. >> brennan: he also supported a lot of democrats in 2018. >> that did win some goodwill. the bloomberg candidacy is really a vote of in confidence for joe biden. joe biden was supposed to be -- >> brennan: you agree with kellyanne conway?

>> essentially. the theory of the case is joe biden was supposed to be the person that owned that moderate middle lane in the democratic party. it has not worked out yet or at least the people behind joe biden probably don't feel that way quite yet. that there's still time for the former vice president to earn that support, but he's got a lot of competition now with someone like bloomberg. by the way, pete buttigieg and klobuchar, there are other not rats in the race. >> brennan: for people who make the argument that they didn't move the neally in favor of democrats, are they making a judgment too soon and do you think that this impacts the presidential race in any way? >> i think the needle hasn't proved since the election in 2016. the needle has been set for president trump and for the opponents of president trump. >> brennan: it's going to be partisan vote no matter what. >> this is the very reason nancy pelosi didn't want to go down this road. you need it to be bipartisan.

that was going to be very, very difficult. you need to persuade the public. that's very difficult some we end up where we began. the democrats are convinced that president trump is a toxic president and most democrats i think believe that he deserved to be impeached. republicans are standing behind him. that's where we are. and the question of what this does in 2020 is one i think is impossible to answer at this point. i think it is a fool's err rabid to try to look at the clinton impeachment or any other history to figure out how this one l unfold over the next year. >> brennan: because no sitting president hass gone through an impeachment and a reelection at the same time. >> we're in such unusual times where we seem so frozen into tribal camps. >> brennan: so you heard congressman armstrong make the case that no other president really could talk like this and get away with it but that's okay. on friday we saw kind of an example of how president trump

is vocal and unusual and really undeterred by this entire impeachment process when he gave that nearly hour-long interview o what was that? >> that was the president sort of giving his view of this entire impeachment process. and he's embracing conspiracy theories that even his republican supporters are not embracing talking about dstre and talking about ukrainian hacking. it's clear that other republicans are going to make excuses for that and say, this is just the president. he still has a hold on our voters. he is someone who has been able to launch the himself into the top of the republican party and take control of the party. >> brennan: and said he would look forward to a trial in the senate. >> yeah, and for the president, this is a loyalty test. he wants to make sure that he has full loyalty from his party going into 2020. anyone mo who breaks apart from him will suffer consequences from the president's twitter account and also from his primary voters some he's been

able to coalesce his party, and the fact you have republicans saying, this is just the way the president talks, no one else can get away with it means you're not likely to see many politicians break from him, but independents will be the key. >> brennan: congressman himes gave an opening, saying they were holding out hope the white house would produce documents as part of their investigation is. there any change at the white house on that front that we know of? >> i don't think so. i think the president will release the documents that he thinks are favorable to him, like he released the transcript of the second call that happened in april. he'll release documents that may show what happened. the white house has not been able to say why there -- why the aid was withheld. everyone in the administration was in the dark. i don't think they will release anything because i don't know anything exonerates the president to show that this was a sort of well-thought-out plan the withhold the aid for a specific reason and the democrats are saying that the reason was all political.

>> brennan: the rnc chair, ronna mcdaniel said there was an influx of smaller donations since impeachment ramped that up. is impeachment helpful to the president's reelection? >> i think it will feel like old news two weeks after the impeachment. if these meetings were on bar to iran-contra, hearing to get the facts out, dominate the headlines, they will be a home run. the question is whether this particular episode can bare the weight of impeaching and removing a president for the first time in our history, and for that question i think the answer is no. >> brennan: well, removal. >> right, removing. on the cusp of reelection he very well could win. and i think that's the h ts can't get ey ove i even with mepresen will rd. >> brennan: joel, is the dnc

also successfully fund-raising off impeachment? >> i think there's been a lot of hand-wringing, the suggestion that democrats are on the defensive. this is still a winner of an issue for democrats. it's still a plus five or plus six issue for democrats across the board. the cbs poll that i saw last week had it at plus 50% supporting the inquiry, even with independents less than half of them opposed it. i think that democrats are going to be watching what happens in some battleground states. but broadly speaking, the timing here matters also. the fact that this will likely be wrapped up by mlk or groundhog day, the fact that for ten months publics will probably have to run on the idea that president trump was not impeached or he was impeached but he wasn't removed but you still have to run on a record of trying to take away health care, from locking up kids in cages. that's stale record the democrats will push. plenty of time to that to set in. >> brennan: it will only be wrapped up so quickly because per jonathan turley's point,

they're heaving all firsthand witnesses off the table, which they could secure if they waited a little longer. >> brennan: john bolton you're talking about? >> and mulvaney and pompeo. >> brennan: you think they would be allowed to show up? >> i think it would be decided by the courts. i think there is a privilege, immunity claim in all these cases, but you would have to wait. they don't want to this that because it's a political timetable. so they will send an incomplete case to the senate. >> there's no guarantee by the election day you would get these witnesses. and democrats have made the calculation that they have got enough in their minds to impeach the president so they should move ahead. this helps the president with his base. i think this hurts the president with that small group of independent-minded swing voters in the middle. many of them suburban eat, white, college-educated people who voted for him last time abandon the republicans in 2018. i think it's a,ed bles f bre: what ds a

ial loe?>> for the pnt l li bide inan political opponents to dig up dirt on them. for the american people it could expose some of the things the president was doing, which does not look good even if it may not be impeachable in the minds of

>> brennan: that's going to be it for us today. thank you all for watching. be sure to join us next week. we will be celebrating a "face

the nation" with our holiday book panel. this year's theme is patriotism, politics, and the president. in the meantime, all of you have a very happy thanksgiving. for "face the nation," i'm margaret brennan. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org hey there, california residents on medicare. it may come as a surprise... but medicare doesn't pay for everything. so help bridge the gap with a medigap insurance plan, like an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medigap plans help pay some of what medicare doesn't, reducing your out-of-pocket costs. there are also zero networks and zero referrals needed. call or click now to connect with unitedhealthcare insurance company. find out about the range of aarp medicare supplement plans and rates available... the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. and here's something exciting that comes with

being an insured member of an aarp medicare supplement plan. at your best by unitedhealthcare. an offering of wellness resources and more... to help you live better. so connect with unitedhealthcare today... about aarp medicare supplement plans.

holiday travel nightmare. a strong storm is gripping the northeast. snow and freezing rain is impacting millions. the worst is still ahead in the run-up to thanksgiving. the one-two punch is expected to cripple thanksgiving travel. we're timing it all ou. mike bloomberg for president. >> billionaire candidate. michael bloomberg is making it official he is running for president. his promise to the american people. historic election. a record number of voters line the streets of hong kong. unofficially on the ballot, a referendum on freedom. eye on earth. fishermen find a possible solution for an ocean filled with plastic. and a simple act of kindness. the group hug that went viral.