gates detailing how trump himself was allegedly on a stone with wikileaks. remember trump said he didn't know anything like that raising questions whether that at the time was a deliberate lie. i'll be back at 6:00 p.m. eastern tomorrow. and tonight if you're around i'll be filling in for lawrence o'donnell at 10:00 p.m. eastern with a lot of news tonight. don't go anywhere. "hardball" is up next. show time. let's play hardball. er good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. 15 hours from now the american people will for the first time hear the full case for impeaching president donald trump. tomorrow morning at 10:00 eastern the house intelligence committee begins the first public hearings of the impeachment inquiry. u.s. ambassador to ukraine bill

taylor and deputy assistant secretary of state george kent will testify followed by former ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch on friday. republicans and democrats have already begun to lay out their plans for making a case to the american public. and one democratic aide told nbc news the first three to testify are, quote, all strong character witnesses. all three bring credibility to the impeachment inquiry. the aide added that ambassador taylor, quote, is going to lay everything out tomorrow and you von vch is going to, quote, tug at america's heartstrings on friday. according to an internal memo, republicans will try to focus on president trump's state of mind. but one indication recently of trump's state of mind was the latest evidence he just tried to cover up. "the new york times" reports he's discussed firing intelligence community inspector general michael atkinson who he blames for reporting the

whistle-blower complaint to congress that ultimately touched off the inquiry. and like the watergate hearings of 1973 bh former white house council john dean riveted americans, people watching on television, democrats plan to use tomorrow hearing's format and enormous power to sway public opinion. a democratic aide told nbc news if the american people only watch the first hour, they'll hear plenty. the first hour of each hearing is designed to be a blockbuster. for more i'm joined by u.s. congressman eric swalwell of california of the house intelligence committee itself, mimi rocah. i want to start with the congressman. this is big time and maybe the biggest time in your career, certainly the biggest thing we've watched since perhaps watergate. a couple of hearings this week with some headliners, will this turn the american people, maybe

20 million people will watch live tomorrow morning. maybe 20 million more will watch live on the broadcast networks. millions more on this and other networks. how big will tomorrow be, sir? >> good evening, chris. this will force every american who watches to ask the question is this who we are as a people, is this who we are as a country? because the facts are not going to be in dispute. there's no dispute to what the president said on that call inviting a foreign power to involve itself in an election and to investigate his opponent. the witnesses you're going to hear from, these are not friends of donald trump or unsavory characters. these are career diplomats, military persons, people who served on the battlefield who are straight and right down the middle. so we're going to have to ask do we want a president of the united states to act this way? i'm convinced that once the american people hear from these witnesses in the same way that i have and other members have,

that they are going to be very concerned and they are going to want this president to be held to account. >> will they hear and see testimony of a bribe, where a president of the united states, donald trump, tried to get something of personal value in exchange for doing his duty and providing military assistance to an ally? will they hear a bribery as a transaction from trump? >> the american people will hear evidence of bribery, extortion, the president using his office for personal gain. leveraging $391 million of your taxpayer dollars not to benefit anyone else in the united states. solely to benefit himself in an upcoming election. this is still evidence to be tested, chris. there's a time for a conclusion. this is a time to test the evidence, but there's a reason to move forward from what we heard a couple of weeks ago to where we will be tomorrow. >> we'll be back to you in just a minute or two. as a journalist covering this

thing, do you see the clarity and can you see the drama coming together with the clarity? i know nancy pelosi, i think she's been wonderful putting together a focused point of contact. this president sold his office to get the dirt he wanted for personal reasons. it was a clear case of bribery. but i'll give you public service in exchange for it. will that come across to the person who normally watches not this network but an entertainment probe or jeopardy or something like that? will they come in and say let me pay attention to this now? >> there'll be drama, chris, drop drama in a different way than the mueller hearing. because it's not going to be coming from congress members questioning every five minutes but from witnesses. they say it's going to go very quickly. they're going to bring bill taylor in, they're going to establish his pedigree as decor

veteran, someone who served in the foreign service for decades, very credible. and they're going to move really quickly to the meat of it, chris. and i'm told there are three things in particular from his closed door testimony they want to prompt him on that draw a direct line to trump. first, it's that gordon sondland or the eu ambassador told the ukrainians directly they weren't getting any money until they did a statement on burisma. that's that energy company linked to hunter biden. the president -- again, trump's name comes up every single time in this. the president wanted zelensky himself personally to go to the microphone and announce the investigation. he just wanted the announcement so he could muddy joe biden and that everything depended on that. the white house meeting, the military aid, everything. he wanted zelensky, quote, in a b box. these are things you're going to

hear tomorrow in rapid succession. they tell me they're not going to go much further than 20 minutes, 25 minutes before they start hitting the public with these facts. >> it seems to be the republicans latest gambit or latest spaghetti they're throwing at the wall, if you will, to say all these tentacles from the president's chief of staff, to his omb director, the same person, to giuliani, his personal fixer, all these people working together to squeeze, extort this dirt from the ukrainian government, all this was somehow done without the direction of the president. they're going to argue he's not here, he's not on this phone call, he's not making these orders. can they basically get the president on the political equivalent of a rico charge? he was running the enterprise, and it was clear he was? >> look, this is tactic used frankly by leaders of companies, leaders of mob organizations.

they try to insulate themselves. of course they're not usually the ones out, you know, actually having the conversations, actually soliciting the bribe. that's why they have people working for them. but here, and this is where that phone call does become important. i think it is impossible for trump to run away from this because of the phone call. the phone call standing alone i think is enough. but they don't need it to be because that's why you have all this witness testimony about what else was being said, what was going on behind the scenes. but the phone call makes it impossible for trump to run away from this and say i didn't know anything about this because he does the same thing in the call himself when he says we need a favor, though. and he's telling the ukrainian president that he should talk to rudy giuliani who is, you know, the one who's got his hands all over this bribe. >> i'm going to go back to --

congressman swalwell, let's go back to the nixon generation here. in that case we had a tape recording of the president telling his chief of staff go over to the cia and tell them to get in the way of this fbi investigation. say it's a cia matter and not go any further. in this case we have the president of the united states talking to a foreign leader and saying if you want military aid to save your country from the russian tanks, i want this from you, though, i want a favor from you, though. that word though was so powerful i think it was enough for me as a citizen and observer and a commentator to think this was corruption. it was enough, i think, for nancy pelosi, the speaker of the house to spot it. and she'd been opposing moving towards impeachment until this point. it was enough for us. how could republicans worm their way out of this and say you don't have evidence of the president's role here? >> chris, it is worse than watergate in that what you described largely dealt with the

cover-up. what's alleged here, yes a cover-up is taking place, but the leveraging of u.s. taxpayer dollars, asking a foreign government to involve itself and leveraging the white house meeting is much, much more significant. again, the republicans are going to be at a cross roads tomorrow. do they want to continue the stunts and hijinx they showed in the depositions or do they want to bring a seriousness to this and recognize if they're going to say this is wrong but not imepeachable, but does it mean for future pre-s and do they want future presidents, democrat or republican to start going abroad and have help inside our elections? i don't think they want that, i don't think their constituents are going to want that. and when they hear tomorrow from their witnesses they're going to see this went to the very top. this is not just hearsay evidence. there's evidence president trump told mick mulvaney to -- as mick mulvaney called it the extortion

scheme. there's evidence from ambassador sondland the president said everything is on the line not just the white house meeting but security assistance. and there's evidence the president told ambassador sondland and volker, rudy giuliani is our person. so anything rudy does yosh you can attribute to the president. >> yes or no, do you think your republican colleagues as well as your democratic colleagues understand if you let this go as business as usual, this is the way presidents are allowed to play their games, do they understand they're projecting that value in the endless future? the two or three presidents from now can cite this precedent and say they say it was okay back in 2019, i guess it's okay now. do they see the projecting powers into the future of this bad behavior, republicans especially? >> our job is to make them see that, chris, because if we accept this as normal presidential behavior, there's no going back. >> in an interview this morning on the "today" show, a great

interview by the way the president's former ambassador nikki haley backed up the call with the ukrainian president but with a mild criticism. >> the president has said this was a perfect call. do you think this was a perfect call? >> if in his mind he thinks it's a perfect call. >> what do you think? >> i think it's never a good practice for us to ask a foreign country to investigate an american. it's just not a good practice. having said there's no insistence on that call, there are no demands on that call. it is a conversation between two presidents that's casual in nature, and, you know, it's just hard to find anywhere that the president of ukraine would have thought funds were being held and that he had to do this. >> heidi, this is what's maddening about the republican method. i mean not only republicans but they have an amazing ability -- ignore the facts that have been establish asked keep going on with the old talking points. it wasn't just asking for help but conditioning his help.

if you want to save your country from the russian tanks you better pony up. she gets away it. there they go again just repeating the old talking points as if nothing's been established. >> part of this choreography i'm told based on my reporting today is that the book end witness in this whole testimony could be lieutenant colonel vindman. and he was on that call, and he's going to tell the american people that there was no mistake about what no doubt -- those were his exact words, about what the president was asking for, his tone was very dower, very serious. and he will also lay out just how perilously close we came to having ukraine get a significant channel of aid that actually they depend on for their gdp that would have crushed a critical ally that's really our only buffer at this moment if if you look at a map towards russian aggression. that it really was a whistle-blower coming forward

that stopped all this. they were week away from this happening. >> nice building you've got here, nice family you have here, would you like to keep it? that's extortion. in this case it was a country he wanted to keep. as i mentioned the president reportedly blamed the official who reported the whistle blowers and "the new york times" reported according to four people familiar with the discussions trump is considering firing the intel community ig michael atkinson. quote, mr. trump first expressed his dismay around the time the whistle-blower's complaint became public in september. in recent weeks he's continued to raise the possibility to aides firing him. another source adds the president does not understand why mr. atkinson shared the complaint. congressman swalwell, doesn't the president accept such a thing as statutes, laws?

the inspector general is supposed to report that to congress. the president considers obeying the law disloyal. this looks like part of a cover-up to me. your thoughts. >> this is consciousness of guilt. he is america's lawyer. and if the president were to fire him, we would just conclude he's doing that because he's guilty. and again, chris, innocent people do not threaten their investigators with a firing or talk about their investigators in this way. so if the president, you know, does this, you know, we will consider it for articles for either obstruction -- obstruction of congress or obstruction of justice. but there's enough evidence right now to show there was a shakedown scheme going all the way to the top, and we're going to have to answer the question as americans do we want to go there with presidents acting this way? i think most americans are going to say no, that's not who we are. >> well, i think that sizes it up well. thank you u.s. congressman eric

swalwell of california, which are holding these public hearings beginning tomorrow. we should have more time for you. please come back. you're into a legal situation here i'd say at the highest level. we've been down this road before, a country watching live on television as a country holds a president and his appreciation accountable. >> what did the president know and when did he know it? >> i began by telling the president there was a cancer growing on the presidency, and if the cancer was not removed the president himself would be killed by it. >> turns out to be every word true there. those were scenes from the watergate hearings of 1973. can we expect drama like that? plus a white house divided and officials are pointing the blame. mick mulvaney has reportedly said he knows too much to be fired. isn't that a dumb thing to say ini know too much about the boss to be fired?

we've got much more to get to tonight. stick with us. we've got much mo tonight. stick with us. differently? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling numbness or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily. and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planed medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be your moment. ask your doctor about eliquis.

great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ladies and gentlemen mini is a different kind of car. for a different kind of drive. ♪ ladies and gentlemen for the drive to create a new kind of family car, that became a new kind of race car. for the drive to rebel, zag. for the drive that's inside you. and inside us. that's the drive under the hood of every mini. because every mini is... for the drive. ♪

welcome back to "hardball." well, tomorrow house democrats i said will make public their case against the president of the united states. they will attempt to show that president trump tried to extort ukraine, got busted doing it and then tried to hide it. in a memo released on intelligence committee members chairman adam schiff of california who's in charge of the inquiry laid out the three questions they're seeking to answer. this is pretty good. number one, did a president ask a foreign leader to investigate a political rival for personal gain? two, did the president or his allies use the office of his presidency to apply pressure to that guy? and three, did the president obstruct or cover up evidence about the president's actions? democrats will turn to ambassador william taylor and deputy assistant secretary of state george kent to prove that case. in fact, both individuals

testified behind closed doors that president trump did link military aid in a white house meeting in exchange for dirt on a domestic political opponent. on october 15th kent told the committee it was made clear to him that the president wanted nothing less than president zelensky to go to a microphone and say three things -- investigations, biden and clinton. he also testified he was cooperating with the committee's subpoena for documents but his personal notes never made it to congress because they were blocked by state department lawyers, a little obstruction there. on october 22nd ambassador taylor told investigators it was his clear understanding that aid would not be delivered until ukraine committed to an investigation of the bidens. he affirmed that if they don't do this, they're not going to get that. and when asked are you aware that quid pro quo literally means this for that, taylor said, i am. republicans have already made clear where their allegiances line and will do everything to dismiss these men and their

credibility. here goes. >> do you believe that bill taylor -- you were in his hearing, deposition, is he a credible witness? >> no, he's not secondhand, thirdhand, no information, in some cases giving opinions. in one case -- >> is bill taylor a credible witness? >> look, one thing we know is bill taylor never, ever talked with the president. >> for more i'm joined by josh letterman, nbc news national political reporter and joshua, former senior director for counter terrorism at the national security council. what do you make of these three things, the chairman wants to get out, that in fact there was attempt to get the dirt, pressure used to get the dirt and followed up by a cover-up of the whole thing. the president showed consciousness of guilt his lawyers say. he didn't want this known. >> they're trying to setup a one-two punch. firs comes the fact witnesses. you have these two long serving

diplomats. >> straight arrows. >> exactly. straight arrows, boy scouts in a sense. they witnessed from the inside the evolution of this pressure campaign, and they're going to lay out this time line. then on friday you have yovanovitch, and her role is really to be the victim in all this. she was scared. she was going to lay out and make an emotional case. >> i don't want to accuse people of this but giuliani was actsing like a henchman here. >> right. he was trying to get rid of an ambassador to a foreign country not for any foreign policy reason, but he had an outside agenda relate today the president. >> as they said in mob movies rub her out, get her out of the picture so they can do her thing. >> and ultimately he was successfully. >> tomorrow this is going to be it basically. i love courtroom movies. i'm not a lawyer -- maybe i'm glad i'm not a lawyer but i love courtroom movies. they're always great. this is going to be a courtroom

drama tomorrow morning with star witness, people like bill taylor and kent and later on you von vch are going to stand up there to the pressure of the other side. >> and to keep the hall hollywood framing it's important for republicans and i think democrats to understand this isn't a sequel, it's a remix. a lot of us have followed the blow-by-blow the past few weeks. the goal here is not to necessarily extend that story, it's to take the best parts of that story, the clearest parts of that story and ensure all of america not just those of us who have been tracking the ins and outs but all of us understand. >> when we hear adam schiff, he's also a guy who wrote screenplays at part of his allocation. he is interested in a good drama and story telling. when he's asked these questions, he will know the answers. >> i would think so. you don't want to ask a question

in front of others you don't already know the answer to. but they know a lot. schiff and those asking questions they know a lot. not just from these witnesses' previous testimony but other witnesses who filled out the story, put these characters in context so to speak. so they should have a firm basis for trying to draw out crisply the evidence of the story. >> congressman schiff said he's already seen a number of national impeachment offenses committed by president trump. here he goes. >> i don't think any decision has been made on the ultimate question about whether articles of impeechlt shouachment should brought. but on the basis of what the witnesses have said so far there are a number of potential including bribery. it was much broader. it connoted the breach of the public trust in a way where you're offering official acts for some personal or political

reason, not in the nation's interest. >> i think language is important here. i think they meant to use a word from the constitution -- bribery. >> absolutely. but they have to really play carefully. do they go too far? overreach is major concern for democrats right now. that's why they've tried to not tack on all these other potential issues democrats want to tack on -- >> including stuff like the emoluments clause. >> because then it makes it easier for the trump white house to say, look, this is just an attempt to throw anything at the presidency that sticks. >> you never give them the weakest link. >> the other stuff is in the background and sets a context of understanding this president inviting, welcoming, amplifying foreign election interference. >> there was a great line in the story paton where paton and another one of the generals said we could still lose this war in europe. do you think the democrats could still lose this fight?

can they still lose this tomorrow in the next couple of days? >> i supposed it's a bit like a trial in this sense in that you never know how things will play until you see them play. but we have such key sources to suggest improprieties, to suggest a president was trading public trust for personal, political benefit. that if that's a case they want to make, it's there to be made. >> and that word, though, still jumps out at me. he said i want a favor, "though," in other words conditional. thank you. up next, a turf war in the white house just when the president needs a united front. and incredible new reporting tonight. john bolton is knocking his former boss. saying the president's foreign policy on turkey was motivated by trump's personal or financial

interests. in other words, the president here again is being accused by his top security guy of cheating the country because he wanted something of personal worth not of national interest. you're watching "hardball." t of national interest you're watching "hardball. hi honey, we got in early. yeah, and we brought steve and mark. ♪ experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. wh(fake gagging noises) ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. tothe problem is corporationsfix anything. and the people who run and own them

have purchased our democracy. here's the difference between me and the other candidates. i don't think we can fix our democracy from the inside. i don't believe washington politicians and big corporations will let that happen. the only way we can make change happen is from the outside. for me, this comes down to whether you trust the politicians or the people. and if you say you trust the people, are you willing to stand up to the insiders and the big corporations, and give the people the tools they need to fix our democracy. a national referendum. term limits. eliminating corporate money in politics. making it easy to vote. i trust the people. and as president, i will give you tools we need to fix our democracy. i'm tom steyer, and i approve this message. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding?

memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. motor? nope. not motor? it's pronounced "motaur." for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. you have power over pain, so the whole world looks different. the unbeatable strength of advil. what pain?

welcome back to "hardball." nbc news reporting tonight that as the hearings on wednesday have approached trump's mood has veered between relishing the

fight and seething with anger has he focuses heavily on his television defenders. there's also multiple reports out today the president's top advisers are feuding -- i love this part. as "the washington post" notes the outcome of the messy skirmish between president trump's advisers and reporting mick mulvaney's office blames white house council pat cipollone from not stoppingnoters from doing more from participating in the inquiry. >> did he also mention to me in the past the corruption relate today the dnc server, absolutely. no question about that. but that's it. that's why we held up the money. >> what you just described is a quid pro quo. it is funding will not flow unless the investigation into the democratic server happened as well. >> we do that all the time with foreign policy.

i have news for everybody, get over it. there's going to be political influence in foreign policy. >> he's just admitting the whole ball game. anyway, despite mulvaney's performance at that press conference "the new york times" reports mulvaney has told associates in recent days there's no way for trump to fire him in the midst of the impeachment fight, the implication being he knows too much about there president's pressure campaign to force ukraine to provide incriminating information about democrats. let me start with my friend because i know how you cover this stuff. this is incredible, and a chief of staff basically on television with the cameras rolling saying, yeah, there's a quid pro quo here, we were holding up the money and then he attacks cipol cipolllone saying you're not keeping everything quiet.

you gave it away. >> first that press conference was credible. he laid out clearly president wanted the democratic server which was a debunked claim, he wanted that to be investigated by ukraine that he was going to hold up $391 million in military aid. >> he was a witness for the prosecution. >> democrats were smiling when i talked to them after that press conference. then you have the fact mick mulvaney was trying to join this lawsuit that john bolton's deputy was trying to have, which was basically should i be able to testify before congress? how can you do at the same time you're blaming the white house from not -- there are some people who thought that was a message for trump. >> chris, here's my favorite question. why would a guy tell anybody even his most intimate advisers, friends, intimates generally he had enough dirt on the president, the president can't touch him.

tip o'neil used to say the walls have ears. the president now knows as i speak this guy, his so-called top staffer, is out telling people he's got dirt on the boss and the boss can't fire him. trump whatever else you think of him is a street fighter. he now knows this guy is in the street ready to fight him. it's just a matter of time before he gets rid of this guy and makes him pay for that line. your thoughts. >> it's hard to explain anything mulvaney has done over the last 72 hours, but it shows there's no really impeachment defense here. the only constant, chris, is that this white house has no functional white house chief of staff. i was one of john kelly's toughest critics, but kelly was right when he said if you hire a yes man as my successor you will be impeached. he hired mulvaney and he has been impeached. any competent white house chief of staff hearing about this so-called drug deal, you know, this shakedown of ukraine would have walked into the oval office, closed the door and told

the president don't even think about going there, and if you do you will be impeached and i will resign. but to that extent, you know, mick mulvaney has helped to define this presidency. >> chris, you're the expert but just think about how ronald reagan's legacy would be so much better if he had kept jim baker for the second term instead of turning things over to that idiot don regan who didn't even know what he was doing there except thinking he was prime minister. and meanwhile nbc news exclusive reporting right now the aforementioned former national security advise john bolton suggested in a private speech for money some of trump's foreign policy decisions are guided by private interest. according to nbc news bolton said he believe there's a personal relation on dictating with turkey. your thoughts about this. he's saying trump is once again

working for personal interests against national interests. >> and that's the heart of this impeachment inquiry. the idea that the president is using his own personal political benefits to try and -- >> why is bolton doing this for money? >> it's tough to say. because you have also bolton not going to testify before congress. so in his mind he hasn't completely gone over and say i have all these secrets about the public, but he's saying that the president is not just thinking of national security but reel affof his own personal political interests. >> every prelsident, chris, hasa certain way of dealing with his staff. then there are people -- this guy it doesn't seem there's ever a loop. is there a trump loop can you tell of people he actually trusts to keep their mouth shut when axios and daily beast call

up and politico to keep their mouth shut? can he trust anybody at this point to keep quiet? >> i don't know whom he can trust. and obviously there are people he talks to. the trouble is he doesn't listen to anyone with authority and he doesn't give any authority to the white house chief. mulvaney advocated the most important duty of a white house chief on his first day which is to tell a president what he does not want to hear. and what you're seeing now is the logical outcome when you have a white house chief whose philosophy is let trump be trump. none of this behavior, presidential behavior surprises us. what's really surprising is you'd have anyone else not only going along with a drug deal like this as john bolton called it, but to become the chief drug dealer the way mulvaney has. so it's just they are headed into a world of trouble without any discernible defense here. >> the trouble with this president he's never read anything, he's never read -- you

let a small group advise you that respects you, and if you don't have a group you blow it. and general kelly was right and -- was right 500 years before him. up next as house republicans ready their defense ahead of tomorrow's impeachment hearings they're facing new contradictions by the president himself. you're watching "hardball." pres himself. you're watching "hardball. (count) time for one chore of the day! ah, ah, ah! [thunder crashing] ahh! my mower! (burke) the number "one." seen it, covered it. at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. (bert) mmm. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

the unitedllaxin'. explorer card makes things easy. traveling lighter. taking a shortcut. woooo! taking a breather. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. i get it all the time. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle.

and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. you have fast-acting power over pain, so the whole world looks different. the unbeatable strength and speed of advil liqui-gels. what pain?

is acting in a corrupt way, the president can always with hold aid until the corruption is fixed. you're going to have get into the the trump and his advisers to say he didn't believe the bidens were corrupt. i think it's absolutely clever.

>> during tomorrow's first public hearings republicans are preparing to mount a defense the president was acting in national interest by rooting out corruption in ukraine was not digging for dirt on his political rivals. in their 18-page memo framing the defense the republican lawmakers made the argument trump holds a deep-seated jenren and reasonable skepticism of ukraine do to its corruption. only hours after that memo was released by saying it was about the former vice president, his conversation. in a morning tweet trump wrote that he had an obligation to look into corruption, and bidens actions before providing the much needed military aid to ukraine. in fact, if you look at the summary of his july 25th call with the ukrainian president, nuc never uttered the word corruption but did say bieden's name three times. >> what exactly did you hope

zelensky would do about the bidens after the phone call? >> well, i would think if they were honest about it, they'd start a major investigation into the bidens. it's a very simple answer. >> it's the bidens. the president's concern was truly about the level of corruption in ukraine, why not take the word of his own government? in may of this year two months before his call with zen lensky. they recommended the military aid go forward to that country. around the same time that letter was sent, the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani, however, told "the new york times" he was pursuing ukrainian investigations into the bidens because, quote, that information will be very, very helpful to my client, president trump. republicans in congress are showing no signs of holding this president accountable, however, for ukraine or anything. it was a different story during watergate when at least some

republicans were willing to speak out. and that's next. you're watching "hardball." speak out. and that's next. you're watching "hardball. con liberty mutual solo pagas lo que necesitas. only pay for what you need... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liber♪y

it's how we bring hope to our patients- like viola. her team treated her cancer and strengthened her spirit. so viola could focus on their future. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. cancer treatment centers of america. what do we wburger...inner? i want a sugar cookie... wait... i want a bucket of chicken... i want... ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it he vitin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. oback, steak & oh no, it's gone.ck. phew, it's back with lobster mac & cheese. it's gone again. oh, it's back with shrimp now! steak & lobster starting at only $15.99. hurry in before these three are gone again. outback steakhouse.

hey allergy muddlers... achoo! ...do your sneezes turn heads? try zyrtec... ...it starts working hard at hour one... and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. zyrtec muddle no more. ♪ work so hard ♪ give it everything you got ♪ strength of a lioness ♪ tough as a knot ♪ rocking the stage ♪ and we never gonna stop ♪ all strength, no sweat. ♪ just in case you forgot ♪ all strength. ♪ no sweat secret. all strength. no sweat. could another come aroundot, the corner. or could it play out differently? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot. almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding.

don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling numbness or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily. and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planed medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be your moment. ask your doctor about eliquis. welcome back to "hardball." we have breaking news tonight. right now in fact democrats on the house intel committee announced eight additional witnesses to testify next week. on tuesday the committee will hear from four people including ambassador kirk volker and lieutenant colonel addicksder vindman. on wednesday three more

testifying with gordon sondland. and dr. fiona hill, the former national security official who quoted her boss joen bolton calling the efforts in ukraine a drug deal. even while faced with thousands of pages of witness testimony depicting a clear case of impropriety by the president. it's a stark contrast to what we heard from some republicans when presidenten nixon was facing his own likely impeachment. >> it isn't easy for me to align myself against the president, but it's impossible for me to condone or ignore the long train of abuses to which he has subjected the presidency and the people of this country. >> and the facts on the president's side, the truth is on his side. those four facts will not change, will never change. >> these things happened in our house and it's responsibility to do what we can do clear it up. it is we not the democrats to

demonstrate we are capable of enforcing the high standard we would set for them. >> this is political vendetta. i find the whole process to be a sham and i'm not going to legitimize it. >> i more i'm joined by the bureau chief of mother jones. gentlemen, why do they back the president on these things? >> i remember being on this show in january with maxine waters saying we're going to do anything to impeach this president. wait a minute, that was january of -- that was 2017 before the president was even -- >> i'm not going to do this. >> any witness that's going to stand there in this testimony and say the president said to me with hold any money for ukraine until they do this investigation -- >> john, you are breaking my heart, john.

i gather you haven't read the thousands of pages of -- >> tell me who that witness is. >> no, but i can tell you the story. the story line is that when top diplomats went to trump to try to get him engaged with the new ukrainian president who's fighting a war against russia, they wanted him to engage on this front on many different issues. and what did he say? he said you go talk to rudy. this is mob boss saying i've got a guy out there, he's taking care of it. what did rudy say? we need an investigation. >> they have the president directing them to rudy to cut a deal the way a mob boss would put the pressure on.

>> your premise is -- if i hear it -- is that all these people from mulvaney down, the president's fixer or lawyer, whatever you want to call him, consigliere, giuliani, all these guys were working to extort the new president of ukraine all on their own? this is all a rogue operation, the president isn't leading it? >> the president on everything he said is this is about corruption. there is nobody that's going to testify that says the president directed me not to release funds until -- >> did the word corruption cross the president's lips during that conversation on july 25th with zelensky? did he ever say the word corruption? >> what he did say is -- he went immediately and said you guys -- >> how many times did he say biden? >> john, i really respect you and i want to like you, but if you read the transcript, there are three quid pro quos and this is only one of three.

when zelensky says we'd like to buy more javelin missiles the president says i want you to do us a favor, though. and the favor has nothing to do with corruption. the favor was i want you to turn up dirt to prove a crazy conspiracy theory that gets the russians off the hook and show they didn't help me in the election. and then he says and there's another thing -- he says the other thing, you talk to rudy, you talk to bill barr, it's about investigating the bidens, and everybody will testify that trump wanted a public announcement -- >> let me ask you a question, john. was he conditioning u.s. military aid on getting dirt on his enemies was he conditioning it by saying i want a favor from you though? it sounded like conditioning to me. >> that's your whole point, you're saying it sounded like it to you. you have a president you don't particularly like -- >> no, that's not true with me. that is not as simple. i am not maxine waters.

there's always out liars early on who want to impeach everybody on the other side. pelosi opposed this thing until she had this bit of evidence and said this is against the national interests. >> wait a minute, when he fired comey all of a sudden it was obstruction of justice. then it was going to be about russia. you wrote a book on it and nothing happened there? so we're going to find a way to impeach this guy unless you have a witness who's going to stand there and say he directed me to do this, how do you impeach him? >> thank you, david cornyn. i'll have to speak for you right now. up next, democrats bring their case for impeachment to you, the american public. you're watching "hardball." ricac you're watching "hardball. hi honey, we got in early. yeah, and we brought steve and mark. ♪

experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn? our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition... for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-seven vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy.

you ever wish you weren't a motaur? sure. sometimes i wish i had legs like you. yeah, like a regular person. no. still half bike/half man, just the opposite. oh, so the legs on the bottom and motorcycle on the top? yeah. yeah, i could see that. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive.

♪ work so hard ld see that. ♪ give it everything you got ♪ strength of a lioness ♪ tough as a knot ♪ rocking the stage ♪ and we never gonna stop ♪ all strength, no sweat. ♪ just in case you forgot ♪ all strength. ♪ no sweat secret. all strength. no sweat.

14 hours from now we will begin to see how high stands the case for this president's impeachment. also but perhaps as important how solid in their judgment are those who are arguing for it? i remember the sobriety with which members of the house judiciary back in december 1974 voted articles of impeachment against richard nixon and today we face a very basic case that donald j. trump sought a bribe from the country of ukraine, that he demanded that in order for it to receive critical u.s. military aid it must undertake a

public investigation of trump's politicalvivals. it is a classic definition of corruption to trade public trust for private benefit. the purpose of tomorrow's testimony from bill taylor and george kent is to exhibit the experience of two seasoned federal employees as they confront a hijacking of u.s. security policy to advance the president's personal agenda. 20 million people could be watching these two gentlemen testify tomorrow, an equal number watching on evening network news, millions more in the prime time hours here and on other networks tomorrow night. it'll be helpful from people who watch from their homes or listen at their workplaces to make their own judgments. if we believe trump's behavior representing this country and this matter departs from what we hold saepacceptable, this is whe need to say and say loudly. if we think trump is pressing this leader for political dirt is business as usual swroesh be it because if we say this kind

of conduct is predictable, i predict we'll get a lot of it in the future. and that's why we think of tomorrow hearings and those to follow truly matters, because it locks in our destiny. and that's "hardball" for now. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. tonight on "all in." >> most americans i don't believe are tuned, they will be now. >> the eve of the public first impeachment hearing between president trump and ukraine. >> the president abused his power, and this is coming from the mouth of patriotic diplomats. >> tonight what to expect tomorrow. just who is testifying and what are they going to reveal? >> we've got some lawless people in some very high positions. they're lawless. >> then john bolton spills the beans on what he thinks motivates trump's foreign policy. >> john wasn't in line with what we were