>> the president will be given more than ample opportunity for him to defend his own behavior. that's what due process is, to be able to face those that are bringing this information forward, which we are doing right now. republicans, by the way, are in the room questioning these witnesses as part of these depositions. so the idea that the president has nore representation first o all is flatly false. the process that we just outlined will include the president having thetl ability have representation. but here's the thing. they don't want to talk about the facts. they don't want to try to defend the president's egregious behavior. they want to talk about the shape of theto table in the roo. and we're just not going to let that happen. >> congressman dan kildee, a member of leadership on this busy day, thank you for joining us.bu i want to give special thanks to everyone who is a part of our msnbc special coverage today, that includes gene robinson, senator mccaskill, heidi przybyla, jon meacham, melissa murray, and so many more.

i really appreciate it. weal are more informed because it. that wraps up our special coverage. you can find me, ari melber, at 6:00 p.m. eastern on "the beat." right now we hand it off to an expert on this momentous and historicus day in washington. "andrea mitchell reports" starts right now. and good day, i'm andrea mitchell, continuing our breaking news coverage of an historic day in washington. house democrats and one independents lawmaker passing resolution laying out the impeachment process by an overwhelming majority, final vote 232-196. what does it mean? today's vote permits house committees to move on to public hearings, allowing up to 45 minutes, this is critical, 45 minutes per side to question witnesses for sustained interrogations rather than the usually disjointed five-minute periods of questioning that have so damaged earlier hearings

leading up to this process, particularly in the judiciary committee. the president's counsel and supporters can cross-examination witnesses and raise objections to testimony that has already been givenha and it also gives e committee chair, who will be adam schiff, the right to take actions if the president unlawfully refuses to cooperate. once the evidence is reviewed by the judiciary committee, if necessary articles of impeachment will be reported to the house for a formal vote on the floor on whether or not to send this on to the senate for a full trial. speaker pelosi and house republican leader kevin mccarthy earlier today making their closing arguments. >> i don't know why the republicans are afraid of the truth. every member should support allowing the american people to heart facts for themselves. what is at stake is our democracy. what are we fighting for? defending our democracy for the people. the times have found each and every one of us in this room and

in our country to pay attention too how we protect and defend e constitution of the united states. wetu will do so in a way that brings people together, that is healing, rather than dividing. >> tomorrow is november 1st. we're one year away from an election. why do you not trust the people? why do you not allow the people to have a voice? >> president trump watching and tweeting hismp frustration from the white house, tweeting this morning as house republicans were presenting his public defense. joining me now, nbc white house correspondent kristen welker, msnbc's garrett haake on capitol hill, msnbc political analyst phil rucker, white house bureau chief at "the washington post," and msnbc contributor yamiche alcindor, white house correspondent for "the pbs news hour," and msnbc security analyst matt miller.

garrett, i guess, first, on what we justrs saw, and the white hoe reaction. garrett? >> andrea, you saw an historic vote to move forward with this impeachment inquiry. a number of democrats who had been on the fence about doing so at all said they would be voting to open up this process, that even if they'rehi not willing t vote for impeachment articles yet, of courseor none have been drafted, that it was time to move this process forward. indeed, we could begin to see open hearings t as soon as the week after next. congress is out next week, in fact as soon as they wrap up this series of votes on the floor, many will head to the airports to getan back home. in the case of these democrats, they'll begin selling their votes to their constituents, to explain why they've done so, and what we've learned from these closed door depositions that continue as we speak. whats we'll hear from republics is there was a bipartisan vote against moving forward with this

inquiry, as two democrats voted against the rulinesolution. democrats and republicans are almost completely back in their corners with the exception of those two democrats. this inquiry will continue and the american public will getil see open hearings in which all this evidence that has been gathered in closed door depositions several stories beneath where i'm standing now will come out to the american people.s >> garrett, let me just follow up with what g you said about t recess, because there is a timetable e here. and it's certainly, by the time we get past thanksgiving and into budget deadlines, a possibility of a government shutdown, all of the other problems, and the alholidays, a then 2020, and the beginning of caucuses and primary votes, that calendar is going to really reinforce the white house and the republican argument on the hill, let the voters decide, why are wete doing this in the last waning months of this first term, what they hope is only a first term i for president trum. so with the clock against them,

are they still going to be hearing witnesses, the impeachment inquiry group, in the previous form at next week? >> time is of the essence for the reasons you've described and becauseve of the fact that congress tends to take lengthy breaks for thanksgiving and christmas. thean depositions will continue next siweek. there are four depositions alone.led for monday and then of course the big date on all of our calendars is john bolton, invited to testify next thursday. there isto a hearing in a distrt court here in d.c. later this afternoon that could inform whether or not he shows, we'll get into those details later. but yes, the depositions will continue next week even while the rest of congress is out, the threeou committees handling thi inquiry so far will be working, with the hope to start these

open hearings as soon as possible. er remember, there will be intel committee hearings as laid out in the heresolution, then judiciary will have their own hearings as they draftei an article or articles, plural, of impeachment. there is a ton of work to be done, including funding the government, as you alluded to, all with very little time to do it with just two months remaining this year. >> as you point out, we all know how rapidly congress usually moves although this has moved more expeditiously than people expected. >> it has.ha >> and certainly more quickly than the president expected. kristen welker, the president is playing, defense, trying to counteract this on twitter and a statement from stephanie grisham. what else are you hearing behind the scenes, are they getting concerned that this is becoming formalized and that at least the evidence will be laid out in public for everyoned to see? >> well, we know, andrea, there is a realization here at the white house that they need to have a more robust response to all of that.

i think that does point to the fact thatin yes, there are mounting concerns. they have beenmo countering thi entire process really on the process of it and not on the substance of it. and you heard president trump just aan few days ago say, hey, wait a minute, we should be arguing this on the substance. that's his sort of approach to this. but his allies, his aides, have been trying to essentially discredit the entireen process saying there hasn'tti been an official vote. today that aschanged. so the question then is, how then does the white house strategy change? i put that question to kellyanne conway, willto they need to tal more about the substance, what the president was directing as it related to ukraine? kellyanne conway told me they would essentially be doing both. when you look at the statement the white house put out, that also gives you a clear view what we can expect to see. i'll read you just a part of it. th tt this was unhinged, it's the unhinged

obsession of the democrats with thisra illegitimate proceeding,t doesn't hurt president trump, it hurts the american people, instead of focusing on pressing issues like reducing gun violence, passing usmca, securing our southern border, lowering prescription drug costs, the democrats are choosing every day to waste time on a sham impeachment. that will be their talking point, w there are all these policy issues the president wants to beid dressing and yet e democrats focus on this. we saw that on display on a campaign ad that went out during the world series last night, unprecedented for an adgh to go out that anearly, but president trump is clearly trying to get ahead of all this. what can we expect to see today? we know president trump isse in the west eswing, they've been monitoring these proceedingsy' throughout the day. he's been working the phones. we expect him later this afternoon to huddle with gop lawmakers and talk policy and next steps, andrea.

>> and when we talk about what the president is going to do next and theis battles on both sides, philat rucker, let's tal about the politics of this. the president has been, you know, supported uniformlyen by e house republicans, perhaps not so much among some republican senators as this proceeds, but what is holding together the republicans on the house, uniformly, despite some compelling testimony, most recently from alexander vindman, the military aide who listened to that call and had such alarming testimony, according to all reports? >> yeah, andrea, the single biggest threat for trump right now is public opinion. and as this impeachment inquiry movesen into a public phase whe you're going to see televised testimony from some of the figures who to this point we've only really been reading about, if r that shifts public opinion that could be a real danger for president trump, because the polling numbers that we're seeing, that is the reason why so manyon republican lawmakers e

standing in lockstep behind the president, because he is overwhelmingly supported by republican base voters out in the country. but if o you start to see suppo for the impeachment inquiry and support fort reducing the president from office continue toom tip upward and break into that republican coalition, that could spell real trouble forn, e president, because it would provide a political rationale for some of these republican senators inme particular to bre with him and perhaps vote to convict him. >> nancy pelosi, yamiche, is the ultimate whip, the ultimate whip vote counter, we all know she never takes anything to the floor where she doesn't know exactly where the votes are. when this all started months and monthste ago and she was saying she would only do this if it were bipartisan and everyone was saying all thosean freshman fro swing districts would vote against her, how did she pull this all together d piece by piece? >> nancy pelosi really showed

here that she has the skills to move forward with hert caucus, knowing where to get the votes from. it's about making the simple case to the american people and also her members, that democrats can make this case that the president unlawfully and unfairly pressured a foreign government to try to interfere in the 2020 election. that's the heart of nancy pelosi's argument. and she realized, as we can all now see, that she could make that argument and thatha this ve could go through. there are a couple of defectors in the democratic party, but the large majority of democrats are moving forward as one. this is a huge moment for president trump's presidency. he's now having to face a formalized procedure for this impeachment inquiry and he's going to have to put together a strategy. sources close to the white house told me they'veur been meeting with gop lawmakers ahead of this vote and are meeting with them after this vote. what you see is the president really trying to line up republicans to get them to have loyalty to him and get them to really have this one-line message, that is the president did nothing. of course the issue is that the president has been pushing an

adjusting message. first he said there was no pressure. then he saidrsai this is second. then now essentially republicans are moving forward with this idea that the president might have done something wrongth in that callme but that it's not impeachable. so the president is facing a real evolving message here. he'll have to huddle with the white house to cement his message and what he wants to do about this impeachmentwa inquir. >> and of course matt miller, the expectation, the nticipation on the mueller probe for two years where there had been no leaks and complete and total secrecy was such a disappointment to democratic partisans and to the president's critics, on the hill and throughout the country,th in fa. and that must have been a keen moment, wherea they were tryin to readjust on their impeachment expectations. but then the president almost handed this to them with the phone call, with the t pressure withth rudy giuliani's continui role. it was the dayul after mueller

that this call took place. and either he felt emboldened by that, by getting off scot-free, or having the mueller probe lifted off of his back, and then in releasing the transcript, it was almost giving pelosi and adam schiff the weapons to use against him. >> that's exactly right. the argument you've heards ove and over from the republicans, you heard it ytoday, is that t democrats have been moving towards impeachment since the day president trump took office. that's contradicted by the very fact that nancy pelosi was very clearly not going to impeach the president. >> as was adam schiff. >> as was adam schiff, until he took this step to extort a foreign government into a openi an investigation into one of his political opponents. we heard a lot today from the republicans about the process, as we've heard over and over again. that is going to be a more and more difficult argument for them to make as this goes forward, as phil rucker said, we're now about to turn to the point of this investigation where we will

see publicga hearings, and the public will be engaged in a way they haven't so far. witnesses will come h forward a tell their story, and every american can judge whether they believe them or not. at some point republicans who continue to only attack on the process and not engage on the substance when those witnesses are telling a compelling story, do so at their own political peril. and i think that very serious problem the president faces as this moves forward. >> bothov parties, phil rucker, face that problem with traditionalfa hearings. the benghazi hearing was 11 hours andha it was a disaster, turned out to be a disaster for the republicans, except that theyic uncovered the hillary clinton email issue which then became, you know, a fatal blow for her in the ensuing election. but the fact is that this resolution permits 45 minutes of interrogations, of questioning, not thein five minutes and then euro tating to euyou're rotatin to thein next for the cameras.

this permits a sustained cross-examination. >> it does, andrea. and there's a danger for the witnesses and the democrats that trump's allies on that panel, the republicans on that panel can use those 45 minutes to effectively destroy the character andut credibility of some of these witnesses, to pick apart aspects of their biographies, aspects of their public service careers, look for inconsistencies in the testimony that they've given vis-à-vis the testimony-v of other witnesses, and try to you know sort of surgically tear apart the case that's been built to this point. so there is a danger on both sides. it's not only a risk for the republicans. >> and we have today, coming in, tom morrison from the national security council, garrett. consum excuse me, tim morrison from the national security council, who saidun last night he's resignin and he'll clearly be free as

he's testifying today. there's no's opening statement t he's validating what bill taylor testified to, that mr. morrison said he had a sinking feeling after learning about this conversation from ambassador sondland, according to mr. f morrison, that president trump told ambassador sondland that he was not asking for a quid pro quo but president trump did insist thaten president zelensk go to a microphone and say publicly he's opening investigations into biden and thebi 2016 election interferenc. >>16 morrison's deposition he's tighter lid on it than many of these othersan have. his attorneys didn't release his opening statement. it has not thus far leaked out. members whoed i've spoken to th morning have been much more cautious about describing what he has to say. but morrison, fittingly, is much closer to the seat of power than a lot of these other witnesses here. he was at the nsc, a top russia expert. his name showed up i think something like 15 times in the deposition of one of the other key witnesses, ambassador bill taylor. so morrison is a conduit of

information. he's someone who if indeed his testimony alliance with everything that taylor said he was told by morrison, moves all of thesemo accusations one step closer to the president. i'm trying to keep the 30,000-foot view on all these depositions. i know the names and whatnot can get very confusing to people who are trying to followsi this. but morrison removes one level of hearsay, if you will. so many of these witnesses in the early stages were reporting back things they heard from others about the president's behavior, about decisions that were getting made in the white house. as young move to morrison and se of these other nsc officials including john bolton who may or may not actually show up to testifyho next week, you're reducing levels of the game of telephone in the white house and getting closer to what the president was thinking and saying and what other white house decisionmakers were thinking and saying, and that will be so important as we move into open hearings, in trying to convince the american people this isn't justnv a whisper campaign against the president.

>> one of the most compelling witnesses, phil rucker, is alexander vindman. this identical twin, both brothers working at the national security council, both are lieutenant colonels, military veteran, alexander arvindman, w was in fact injured in iraq, his brother, he brought his brother with him to complain about his concerns to john eisenberg, the national security council general counsel. and hisl. identical twin brothe is a lawyer, a military lawyer, specializing in ethics. the two of them went together to eisenberg about problems that they had about the call. he also testified that he had tried to put things back in that had been left out of that partial transcript that was released that the president keeps saying is perfect and for whatever reason, because because it was already put in that deep server which could not then be extricated. so there's a lot in him, and of course he's beennd trashed by

republican critics and the white house. >> aandrea, he's been trashed the president himself as being a, quote unquote, never trumper, although we should point out to the viewers that there's no evidence's that he opposed trum or would consider him a never trumper. in fact he worked in the administration and was selected for theec job on the national security council. and the reason why he has been such an important witness for the democrats in this inquiry is because of his credibility, because of his career public is service, as you just pointed out. >> phil rucker, kristen welker, garrett haake, yamiche alcindor, matt miller, thanks to all. joining me now is california democratic congressman eric swalwell who serves on the intelligence committee. congressman, you'veve just take an historic vote. part of this resolution isri to give both sides 45 minutes for questioning of individual witnesses. you're giving more powers to the republicans. you're going into open hearings. do you have any concerns that they will use their 45 minutes to try to destroyth the credibility of these witnesses or try to out the

whistle-blower, as has already been attempted? >> good afternoon, andrea. today was a solemn day, it's one that none of us really looked forward to. but you're d right, we did affo, as we move to this public phase, a process, a process for the president as well as for republicans. i can't controlel how they spen their time. but it is time for them to get serious about what is alleged. of course we have seen efforts in the closed proceedings to out theoc whistle-blower. we saw the stunt of storming the secure room. but the american people are going to expect aeo seriousnesso this process. and i hope my colleagues awaken to just what the president did and what it means if we look the other way and don't least seek to hold him to account. >> with all due respect to congress and to your colleagues, we bothyo know what happened in the judiciary committee in the post-mueller hearings. first of all, it took months to even get mueller there, and

legal wrangling, and the stunts pulled by the tdemocrats, the kentucky fried chicken and the rest. what are you doing among yourselves to make sure that you present the best possible posture to the american people given the historic import of all this?mp >> first, recognizing, you know, we have a system of due process in america,st that even the president is entitled to that, despite the way that he judges people without evidence, he's going to be judged with a fair process. but also, e andrea, the speaker reminds us every single day that this is a solemn responsibility, it's nothing to be gleeful about. and if we send something to the senate, it will only be worth the fairness that was put into the process behind the facts. >> and thank you so very much, i know this is a busy day for all of you, thanks for being with us. right now the republicans are speaking. we're hearing from kevin mccarthy ofg california, of course the minority leader. let's m listen. >> a sham that has been putting

this country through this nightmare. that's exactly what this vote shows today. i want to call up our whips, steve scalise. >> thank you, kevin. and when we talk about the vote i think it's important tohe not when you see that not only did every single republican reject this soviet style impeachment processov but we were even join by democrats who couldn't stand it anymore. if you look at where we are right now, we're at an important point in history. clearly there are people that we serve with that don't like the results of the 2016 election. that's their prerogative. but the country next year will be deciding who our president is going to be. it should not be nancy pelosi and a small group of people that she selects that get to determine who is going to be our president. if youo look at the resolution today, they talk about fairness. now, if they really think that they can tell people it's fair that only the chairman gets to

decide whoe the witnesses are, and they give us w an opportuni to call witnesses, but if the chair says they don't like the witnesses, the witnesses don't comene forward. they allow the president to have legal counsel in the room unless the chair decides that they don't want theth president's lel counsel in the room. that's never happened before. with the clinton impeachment, with theli nixon impeachment, republican and democrat alike, both sides were treated equally, both sides could call witnesses. the president's legal counsel was in the room not at the discretion of the chair but because it's fair. and so when you look at this soviet style process, it shows you that they don't really want to get to the truth. they want t to remove a sitting president. in fact thett author of the articlesau of impeachment said they don't impeach theen president, he will get reelected. that's not why we have impeachment. alexander hamilton madee it ve clear,e his concern, when they were trying to promote the

constitution, was that he didn't want to see impeachment used for political purposes. yet that's what happened today. he predicted it. and itre happened today. it's a sham. it shouldn't have happened. it's a tainted process that adam schiff has been t conducting, tt nadler might one day conduct. thect house deserves better. theho people of this country deserve better. we should bede tackling real problems. we could have lower prescription drug prices today but pelosi won't bring those bills to the floor becauseos pelosi is infatuated with impeachment. we could havefa better trade relations with canada and mexico and create 160,000 new jobs today but pelosi is infatuated with impeachment. we deserve better. our conference chair, liz cheney. >> thank you very much, steve. i want to make sure everybody is focused on a couple of things.

you'll hear from a number of of members about this. the democratsou can't fix this process. they created a record with witnesses they d selected. wees know there are circumstanc where chairman schiff told witnesses notwh to answer questions that our members were asking. we know there have been circumstances where our members have at the end of theci to attempted to go read transcripts and they've been told by staff members that they are not allowed to read transcripts. the president has had no rights inside these proceedings. his counsel is not allowed to be present. for them toow claim this proces will open up, which by the way the resolution doesn't do. the resolution says they'll continue doing what they want to do. it gives authority for open hearings but they can't go back and fixhe what is a fundamental tainted and unfair record. the second thing it's very important for thee american people to understand and you heard the laddeader and the whi talk about the things not

getting done here. therelk is a long list of thing the american people aren't getting done because of the democrats' obsession with impeachment. think about what speakersi pelo has done for the last several weeks and what she codified today. what she did c today was she sa she is going to take the intelligence committee and the house of representatives, which istt arguably the single most important committee when it comes tomm our oversight, when comes to the national security of thisty nation, and she has td them, stop all focus on any issue that has anything to do with the national security of the nation. you sawf democrats on the floo of the house arguing that somehow it was republicans who were putting politics above national security. done is no one who has that theer way that nancy pelos and adam schiff have done that. history will hold them accountable. history will judge them. we're at a momentud where the nation faces grave, significant, ongoing threats and she has completely neutered the intelligence committee. she has said theyth must be focused on as partisan impeachment process and not

theird oversight obligations tt we have as a body that we have as an important branch of this government. they'll be held accountable for that. now i would like to turn things over to the republican leader of the oversight committee, mr. jordan.ov >> and the other side, democrats are now starting their news briefing. adam schiff, who will be chairing this first phase of the impeachmentrs hearings. >> who would sacrifice the national security, who would fail to s defend the constituti, who would place his personal and political interests above the interests of the country. they understood that might happen. and it provided a mechanism to deal with it. and that mechanism is called impeachment. we take no joy in having to move down this road and proceed with the impeachment inquiry. but neither do we shrink from it. the resolution from the perspective f of the intelligen committee sets out important procedures for how we may conduct our open hearings.

during the depositions that we've conducted thus far, we've used a format that we believe is very conducive to the fact-finding process. those-f procedures will be incorporated into thee open hearing in which staff counsel will be s permitted for lengthy periods of time to do sustained questioning, up to 45 minutes per side, followed by member questioning. we've b used this to great succs for both parties during the course of the depositions, where in the depositions we have alternated oneve hour for the majority, one hour for the minority, 45 minutes for the majority, 45 minutes for the minority. in those depositions, over 100 members have been eligible to participate. i should tellib you that notwithstanding those that have complained about lack of access to the depositions, most of the members who have been permitted to attend have failed to attend, have not made use of the

availability ofe attending eac and every deposition. but those that have, on both sides of the aisle, have had an equal opportunity to question the witnesses andto indeed whene move intode open session, both parties will have an equal opportunity to question any witnesses that are called. the resolution will also permit me as the chair to release, to begin releasing the transcripts of the depositions. and i think that you will see when those are released just what equal opportunity members of both parties have had. we recognize the seriousness of this undertaking. we recognize that we have been compelled h by the circumstance to move forward. when a president abuses his or her office, when a president sacrifices the national interest, whenl a president

refuses to defend the constitution and does so for the purposend of advancing a person or political agenda, the founders provided a the remedy. i make no prejudgment as to whether that remedy will be warranted when we finish these hearings. i will wait until all the facts are put forward. we will undertake this duty with the seriousness it deserves and to the best of our ability. thank you. i now yield to the chairman of the judiciary committee, mr. nadler. >> thank you very much. nodl person, republican or democrat, president or anyone else, should be permitted to jeopardize the nation's security for self-serving political purposes. no president -- >>no and it will be of course t judiciary committee that will make the final decisions about

the articles of impeachment which will then be forwarded to the house floor for yet another vote before this goes to the senate, if it does become a serious impeachment effort that proceeds to the senate. joiningoc me now, donna edwards former democratic congresswoman and a contributor to "the washington post." charlie sykes, political analyst, and rick tyler, msnbc news political analyst. donna, what are the political risks for democrats going into thisde election year? >> i think clearly the conduct of the proceedings that are coming is really important. i think that's why the resolution sort of lays out a process that allows staff counsel to askat questions. we've seenun how that can go aw, it sets about a process that provides for the president of the united states to have counsel, to be able to call witnesses to present evidence. and the same for republican

members of the judiciary committee. and so, you know, whenever you're calling witnesses, you don't know what's going to happen. i think they actually laid out a process that allows to at least control the environment so it doesn't become a circus. >> can they control their own sort of grandstanding, charlie question of we'll seen members of escongress, on chairman nadler's own o committee, reall diminish their political effectiveness p by the way they perform, not following up on questions, just as the republicans dides during the benghazi inquiry. >> and look at what republicans are doing, i think it's striking that not a single republican decided to break with donald trump,to not a single republica is concerned about the verdict of history. think about what their strategy be.going to of they'll be trying to delegitimize and discredit this entire process. this is peak congressional power. under the constitution this is one of the most important things that congress cane do. the congress is in this circumstance more powerful than

the president here. and what we're going to see is that donald trump will g demandf republicans that they try to turn it into a farce. we've a seen this. what did he ask them to do? storm the scif and smear colonel vindman. the question is hownd far will republicans go to discredit this and turn it into circus. >> i was surprised the democrats didn't make more of an issue of bringing cellphones and other devices into the scif which potentially taints thef entire environment, permanently taints it unless it can be cleaned up. let's talk about the white house strategy. the president has been his own communication chief, chief ofs staff. we know -- political adviser. he's now beginning to simplyassa political team. he needs asi strategy, this is serious issue now. >> up to this point the president's strategy hasn't been a veryst good one. they now have a war room that

apparently convenes at 10:00 a.m. after the morning shows have wrapped up their messaging. he will -- it won't matter, because the president is not going to listen to them. and this voteto today is really frankly, remarkable, as charlie wasem saying. it's simply a procedural vote. when you get articles of impeachment, they can always get articles of impeachment and go on the record. but what they've been saying for weeks is, we want a transparent process. they just voted to have a transparent process. we want due trprocess. and they just voted for due process. they're voting in lockstep against transparency and due process. they've just finished what would be the grand jury proceeding. now they move on to public testimony. it's all part of the constitutionally prescribed process. the republican party, which has always touted itself as the constitutional party, is undermining the constitutional process. thesede rules in the house were

written by john boehner and the republican party.oh they're following the republican rulesow of how this procedure i to go. so i don't know how much farther they'll go,w but the republica party has codified its demise. it's the end. >> let's look at a new poll today, "new york times" on impeachment, voters in battleground states,er arizona, florida, michigan, north carolina, pennsylvania, your home, wisconsin, 52% opposing impeachment, and removing him from office, 44% support it. >> the two numbers you look at, theou numbers in the swing stat but also what republican voters are going to say. and as long as republican voters stay with trump, you're going to have this lockstep support of the republican party in the house andbl probably in the sene as well. but havingna said that, the support for impeachment is historically high even before

you have these televised hearings. you're going to have moreed televised hearings. the public will see and hear a lot. more whistle-blowers may come forward, more smoking guns, the evidence will come forward. >> we don't need them. >> we don't needed them, but th there's the wild card of donald trump who tends to become more undisciplined and more unhinged when under pressure and will create more things that senate republicans and house republicans will have to defend. right now they feel we have to be in lockstep, we have to defend the indefensible. but the stakes are going to get higher and it's going to be more difficult asin time goes on. >>im of course the other part o this is that the president has the megaphone. the president can control the agenda. he can go onth television on sunday morning and give details, donna, that have never before been given of an operation, just completed by special forces in syria. buts he can change the narrati as c will and have rallies arou the country andha be tweeting t his 62 million or more

followers. >> i thinkmo that is true. but the president is consistently trying toe change the narrative because he wants to distract from the substance of what he did and the evidence that will be presented. i think here is where these hearings are very important, when they're scheduled, so that the american people caned fully absorb them, the witnesses that they choose to call, the questions that are asked. i think the presentation of a narrative, i mean,f this is wh theis 45 minutes that's allowed for adam schiff to present the testimony is veryif important, because it allows an uninterrupted presentationan of thees narrative, the telling of the story of what happened. and, you know, i think the american people will be hard-pressed to ignore colonel vindman, for example, in uniform,in fully decorated, talking about his background and then presenting evidence. thatg on camera i think is deay for republicans if they choose to attack him, which, you know, certainlym, they've already don.

but again, how this is conducted and the way that democrats behave, and i think to your point, charlie, not allowing it to be turned into a circus, and using theci decorum of the procs i think is really important. and you knowin what, if republicans choose to go off the rails yelling and screaming and attacking witnesses, that's all on camera for the american people to decide. but democrats do not -- >> you have to get rid of the five-minute rule. >> well,ut they did in this resolution. >> the d five-minute rule is stl in there. >> after. >> it could be after the staff counsel. but that's also a choice that has to be made by the chairman. i would urge them to reduce their time on five minutes, yield to the staff counsel, anything that allows the staff counsel to really ask questions in a dignified way. >> and the tactics the republicans used this past week to disrupt the process kind of backfired on them. i don't think people thought that the raid on the scif was a

success. and vourlof course the attempt smear lieutenantte colonel vindn backfired very badly. we'll get to the stage where the defenders of the president say, yes, it was a p quid pro quo, wt are you going to do about it, yes, i dido call the code red. then republicans will have to decide whether to say, yes, this abuse of power took place and, e are okay with ofit. >> and anne gearan joins us now, "washington post" white house correspondent who also covers thee state department and the pentagon, you knowe so many of these owwitnesses, masha yovanovitch, bill taylor, these senior ambassadors who were so credible, alexander vindman, military war hero, these witnesses are going to be very hard to undermine and impeach by republican questioners. >> yeah, andrea, i don't know lieutenant colonel vindman but the others i do, and many others who have testified or whether testify, including possibly john

bolton next week, which would be pretty interesting. the thing about vindman and ambassador taylor in particular that makes republicans queasy is that these are people who under ordinary circumstances, would be considered just c utterly, to pardon the phrase, but unimpeachable witnesses. they are people whobl don't hav to do these jobs. they're public servants. and they are clearly very expert in their subject matter. and in the case particularly of vindman earlier this week, he just filled in the blanks and corroborated a lot of things that republicans had sort of been able to, you know, kind of get around or elide a bit. todaye we saw the defense shifa bit, they're still focused on

process but now it is essentially saying this -- everything that happened today with the vote and the procedures set in place are fruit of the poisoned tree and the entire process remains illegitimate. i don't expect whoever the other witnesses are that come forward, i don't expect that fundamental argumentt to change. >> and when you talk about john bolton for a moment recall we may have more clarity when his attorney, who is representing dr. charles kupperman, his former deputy, is going to be in court, ins federal court, argug that they can't respond to the subpoena from congressd becaus the white house is tellingre th not to and they want the federal judge to make some decision, which equity trumps the other. could that be a good indicator of how john bolton is going to handle this, and there are reports that bolton would prefer a public hearing rather than a private atsession, if he's goin to testify. >> yeah, i mean, a couple of

things are important here. kupperman and bolton are joined at the ahip, they have worked together for years and years. the same lawyer. whether kupperman is with bolton for all of the things that happen over the next a couple of weeks. it's also true that neither of them isue eager to testify in ts setting or to testify at all, according to our reporting. that does not mean that they wouldan buck a subpoena, and hee the efforta, to go to the court where they aree essentially forcing this issue in a way that other witnessesa have been willing not to do, for whatever reason. in other words, when the white house orre the state department says don't go and then a congressional subpoena says go, they say the congressional -- other witnesses havehe said the congressional subpoena is sufficient and we will testify under those fycircumstances. and it kind of gives them some cover, which in this case

kupperman and bolton are saying, we have two competing directives here which could be of equal weight, federal judge, you decide.l >> and donna edwards, john bolton is an unlikely hero for democrats, a hard line conservative, a hawk against the iran agreement. but he,, t according to other witnesses,g taylor, fiona hill and others, was arguing against the shadow diplomacy of rudy giuliani and the pressure on ukraine as being improper. >> i mean, here's the thing. we have witnesses all around john bolton who validate his role. bringing john h bolton i think important, and will be a signal to other republicans, republicans in the house, and that's important to the process. it also helps to, you know, get rid of this argument that somehow this is a witch hunt. this is a guy who is deeply embedded in conservative

republican -- >> he'sre not a never trumper. >> he really is not. so that will be important to see. in an evidentiary process, you would always want to interview and depose the witness first and then bring him forward in public testimony, so it's not one or the other. i think this might be both. >> what's the political fallout, charlie, if you're a voter in wisconsin which according to poll is one of the battleground states where only 44% support the process. do people have anor open mind a or they locked in? >> i think most people are locked in, but you don't have to move a huge number in a state like wisconsin. if even 3 or 4% of the reluctant trump voters decide this conduct is unacceptable or if they become just exhausted at the prospect of another four years of this president, that will be enough fort, donald trump to lo wisconsin. >> is the best argument for republicans, a rick, that let t voters decide, why go through this, why tear up the country with impeachment in an election

year? >> that's a fair argument. i think it is a fair argument. i think that impeachment is -- has always been a very -- it's a political death penalty, right? you don't want to exercise it, you want toer exercise it very cautiously and very carefully, which is why i think these hearings are important, and in some ways it's more satisfying if the voters were to vote him out. >> and anne, a lot of us have been watching mike pompeo's performance throughout this, on the phone call, refusing to acknowledge whenll he was first asked, validating the president, i was talking to one top official, very highly elected official republican, the other day, who called him now an enabler of the president rather than secretary of state. >> yeah, initially mike pompeo's reaction to this was sort of startling to me because he was kind of nowhere to be found for a while, and when asked directly

about his views on the proceedings in washington and the implication of state department officials and whether or not he had defended them, last week hend called it all noise. thenle he gave an interview las night in which he is completely defending the president. we had no doubt that he would, would have to do so eventually, but he did it last night. he talked about how he was on the call and there's nothing improper about it. then he i also advanced his own separate potential conspiracy theory about hunter biden. >> anne gearan, something to be watching very closely. donna edwards, charlie sykes, rick c tyler, thanks to all. and coming up, it was amazing. they finished the fight. the washington nationals bringing home the world series trophy for the first time inrl franchise history. ande the first world series victory in washington since

1924. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports." we'll have all the celebration coming up next. he celebration coming up next hmm. exactly. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

i felt i couldn't be at my best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions,

and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. hendless shrimp even hotter?s you bring back nashville hot! oh yeah - it's back. crispy shrimp... ...tossed in a spicy rub... ...and drizzled with sweet amber honey. more shrimp more ways. endless shrimp's just fifteen ninety nine. hurry in.

here they are. one strike waway, one out away. 3-2. there it is! the washington nationals are world champions for the first time in franchise history! >> and it's a true cinderella story. the nationals making history last night. after 6-2 win over the astros, game seven of the world series. the win bringing the championship back to america's capital for the first time since 1924. the first time in this franchise history. it was the jubilant celebration after the game, the champagne flowing in the locker room. the nationals returning back to washington tonight. of course, their fans were all celebrating in the rain in the bull pen at nats' park last night. they're promising a bananas celebration tomorrow -- or rather, a parade set for saturday. joining me now, "washington post" sports reporter, neil greenberg. neil, i don't know if you've gotten any rest, but this was such an amazing win. back in may, they were 19-31. they had only a 2.5% chance of

winning, according to -- the astros going into the series were 2-1 favorites according to the oddsmakers. how did they make this happen? the oldest team, i should point out. >> they did it with great pitching and getting some big hits from both their stars and some of their lesser-known players, but this is a team that just never give up. like you said, they were left for dead in may. there were talks about breaking the team up. the trade deadline, firing their manager. but they ended up getting healthy. their big three at the front of the rotation, matt scherzer and patrick korzben did a lot of the heavy lifting and so did their young guys like juan soto and antho anthony. >> scherzer could not walk on monday. this was a guy who pitched through pain, when a ball hit him in the face and he had this incredible black eye midseason

or in the run-up. so here he is, he couldn't move, he got cortisone shots, couldn't pitch on tuesday when he supposed to, and he was able to start last night. he held them down to 2-0 and made it possible for them to have another one of those seventh inning rallies. >> yeah. talk about a gutty performance, like you said. all the trials and tribulations he had leading up to that point. it was obvious, his out pitches weren't working, but he relied on that great fastball, was willing to hit some of his spots. and like you said, two runs in five innings against the astros. nats will take that, especially from their starter, who was less than 100%. but just an absolute gutty performance by matt scherzer, who gets paid to pitch in these big games and he didn't disappoint. >> and explain to people outside washington, the significance of stephen strasburg as the mvp and how he has changed, how he's evolved since he started, i guess as a teenager. >> and this was the first

big-name free draft pick that the washington nationals had. they selected him in the first round. he had so much buzz around him when he was drafted. they would televise his minor league games, his opening performance for the nationals was huge. national news and then he had some injury problems, so they had to shut him down a couple of years ago before they even made it to the playoffs. that was controversial. but talk about, like, your whole career arcing to that one moment in game six of the world series. i mean, he pitched his heart out. he had, obviously, one of the best games of his career. he's the only pitcher to go 5-0 in a single post-season. and that's why he was the mvp. i mean, just had everything working and just like he was the workhorse for this team during the regular season, the team relied on him during the playoffs and he just came up huge for them every time he took the mound. >> you've got a guy like juan soto, who couldn't even legally buy a drink a week ago when the series was already underway.

just turned 21. but howie kendrick, one of the older guys, 35 years old, i think. and you've got others who are -- zim and others who were 36. but howie kendrick coming through again with a two-run homer in the seventh. >> yeah, huge at-bat. when you're talking about game seven, when you're talking about the playoffs in general, it was a top ten most valuable play in post-season history. and that's across all major league baseball going back to the 1900s. talk about a big at-bat. here he is in the seventh inning, getting the national on the board, taking the lead. and this wasn't the first time he was a big hero for this team. so, you know, you talk a lot about -- we hear a lot about these baseball teams going younger. but like you said, they had a couple of 30-somethings that came up big. and howie kendrick was at the center of it all. >> we've got to love them all. i haven't felt this great since i was a new yorker and the 1969 amazing mets. thanks so much.

you've got to believe, neil greenberg, we believed, we fought to the finish. and we'll be right back. fought to the finish and we'll beig rht back. they're america's biopharmaceutical researchers. pursuing life-changing cures in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.

when your v-neck looks more like a u-neck... that's when you know, it's half-washed. downy helps prevent stretching by conditioning fibers, so clothes look newer, longer. downy and it's done. (mom vo) it's easy to shrink into your own little world. especially these days. (dad) i think it's here. (mom vo) especially at this age. (big sis) where are we going? (mom vo) it's a big, beautiful world out there. (little sis) whoa... (big sis) wow. see that? (mom vo) sometimes you just need a little help seeing it. (vo) the three-row subaru ascent.

love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected.

call, click, or visit a store today. and wishing everyone a happy and safe halloween from our amr family. we're talking about daffney, jasper, nate, eleanor, and ella, our stars. and here is ali velshi for "velshi & ruhle". >> i was quite shocked when i looked up to see you on tv today after the nats' victory last night. i definitely thought -- >> i'm -- >> that would have been -- >> i could not miss this show. >> i know you don't. you don't miss anything. that's why every time i complain about working too much, i look up and see andrea mitchell there. i'm like, okay, velshi, shut up. good to see you, as always. congratulations and happy halloween to you. hello, everyone. it is halloween. it's thursday, october 31st. we cannot overstate the importance of this date and today's news. coming up this hour on "velshi & ruhle," for just the fourt