the american people which we couldn't do without such great guests and patient experts who were rolling with us in this unpredictable hour. always appreciate you joining us. i'll be back at 6:00 p.m. eastern tomorrow. but you know what time it is. "hardball" with chris matthews starts right now. history talks. let's play hardball. good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. history walked into the house impeachment hearing today. a panel of constitutional experts argued the case against donald j. trump. for democrats on the judiciary committee, the committee heard from four law professors included one requested by the republicans on the historic and constitutional basis for impeachment. while they're testimony wasn't

academic in substance, the democrats three witnesses were unanimous in their conclusion president trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors. they said trump's impeachment was not only justified but a congressional duty. here we go. >> on the basis of the testimony and the evidence before the house, president trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency. >> when president trump invited, indeed demanded foreign involvement in our upcoming election, he struck at the very heart of what makes this a republic to which we pledge allegiance. >> if left unchecked the president will likely continue his pattern of soliciting foreign interference on the behalf of the next election and force his obstruction of congress. >> republicans were quick with their delay tactics, of course, forcing chairman jerry nadler to crack the whip. >> may i make a parliamentary

inquiry -- >> mr. chairman, before i yield back i have a motion. >> gentlemen was recognized for the purpose of an opening statement not for the purpose of making a motion. >> parliamentary inquirements, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, i have a parliamentary inquiry. >> it's not a proper inquiry. that is not a proper parliamentary inquiry. >> i seek recognition. >> i'm not going to recognize you now. >> mr. chairman i have a motion. >> gentlemen is not able to offer a motion. >> mr. chairman, i seek recognition for a privilege motion. >> gentleman will suspend. >> the democrats impeachment witnesses made their case trump's actions represent abuse of power, bribery and obstruction, highlighting possible articles of impeachment. >> if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no

longer live in a democracy. we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship. that's why the framers created the possibility of impeachment. >> if you conclude he asked for the investigation of vice president biden and his son for political reasons, that is to aid his re-election, then, yes you have bribery here. >> impeachment power requires this committee, this house to be able to investigate frezdential misconduct. if a president can block an investigation, undermine it, stop it, then the impeachment power itself as a check against misconduct is undermined completely. >> republicans used their witness to rebut the case. professor jonathan tirly said the evidence was insufficient for impeachment and urged democrats to keep on holding investigations. meanwhile the president's personal lawyer is out there stel pursuing political dirt from ukraine. you won't believe this.

"the new york times" today reports that rudy giuliani is currently traveling overseas to meet with several corrupt ukrainian former prosecutors who, quote, all played some role in promoting claims about former vice president joe biden. he's still doing it. the fingernails are still growing on this body. the purpose of rudy's trip is to, quote, produce a documentary series for a conservative television outlet promoting pro-trump anti-impeachment narrative. charlie psyches, natasha bertram. >> do you believe those brought to testify today made the case for articles of impeachment particularly abuse of power, bribery and obstruction? >> thank you, chris, for your

question. impeachment is one of the gravest powers of congress second only to our power to declare war. it must always be our last option reserved for those rare times when we can't wait for the next election. today's hearing show we may be at one of those rare times because these professors made a very strong argument that abuse of power and bribery engaged by the president threatens the integrity of our national election. >> do you think they made the point it says duty as well as an appropriate sanction, that the president ought to be impeached? >> they made a very strong point that the trump administration has taken a position that the president cannot be indicted, and therefore the only mechanism to hold the president accountable is impeachment. in this case, the facts show that donald trump withheld critical aid to ukraine, withheld a critical aid to a ukrainian leader in exchange for

leveraging that leader to launch a bogus investigation into the dnc server and into the political rival of donald trump. >> glen, when a president's impeached we usually have a short sentence or so that goes into the history books that complains why, and we can walk away from it 20, 30, 50, a hundred years from now and know this is why he was impeached. >> it would be easy if president trump only committed one impeachable offense then we could keep it tightmi. here's what i thought those experts did so well. they said, list wherein, the founding fathers were concerned with two things. what do we have donald trump doing? both of those things. this really is an impeachable offense on top of an impeachable offense --

>> give me a capsule statement. >> well, it is that this president hit the trifecta of impeachable offenses because he sought foreign interference, abused the office for personal power and covered it all by refusing to acknowledge the power of congress to investigate it. that's a trifecta. >> do you have a sense there was enough people listening intently today enough to get all that? >> probably not. i don't think that most people sat through 8 1/2 hours of hearings, but they will get the sound bites. and i agree with glen absolutely there's no question they made a very compelling case, but will the public actually hear that? my guess is both sides of the sound bites, fox news got the sound bites -- and look, let's be honest about it. if the really compelling first-hand testimony of the trump administration insiders that testified before the house intelligence committee did not

move the needle substantially, a law professor unlikely to do this. i do think this was a worthwhile effort. but i do think in terms of a television show, persuading maybe the unicorns in the senate that might exercise some independence, i'm not sure that changes the game which again underlines why i think republicans need to -- i'm sorry -- democrats need to continue this investigation and maybe need to be more aggressive in pursuing more evidence -- >> wait a minute. it's december. what are you advising democrats to do in terms of the calendar? >> first of all, i'm not sure -- what is the rush? do they really want to do this before christmas because i think that runs the risk -- i think there's a risk you're going to ignore new evidence that might

come out, you're going to let too many people who testified off the hook and -- >> wait a minute. you think -- >> and playing into donald trump's hands. >> which witness will come forward? in your eyes, and you're studying this like we are, who could you foresee a star witness who can come forward and move the needle with republicans? >> we don't know for sure but john bolton has to be on the top of any list. he knows a great deal about this and he needs to either testify before the house or during that senate trial itself. >> well, that could happen as well. natasha, take a look at this. professor carline, the woman professor, she challenged the president's argument that in demanding investigations from ukraine trump was trying to fight corruption. she didn't buy that. it was simply to advance his political interests. she said that the testimony of ambassador gordon sondland that

the president only wanted an announcement of the investigations. he didn't want any investigations, he just wanted an announcement so he could smear biden by saying he's being investigated over in kiev. here's carlan making that great point today. >> there's a lot to suggest here this about political benefit. the most chilling line for me of the entire process is the following. ambassador sondland said he had to announce the investigations. he's talking about president zelensky. he had to announce the investigations. he didn't actually have to do them as i understood it. what i took that to mean is this was not about whether vice president biden actually committed corruption or not. this was about injuring somebody who the president thinks of as a particularly -- a particularly hard opponent. >> and so it is only in the president's interest. it's not the national interests that a particular president be elected or be defeated at the next election. >> natasha, i thought that was

well-done. >> yeah, it's a really powerful point. and she went onto say, look, if this was a legitimate criminal investigation, you don't announce an investigation because that would tip off people and undermine the investigation entirely. and she also noted that that only makes the case for this being robbery even more powerful, the fact the president was clearly doing this in his own personal and political interests rather than the united states national security interests. that was really powerful. and there's also points made about the fact the president didn't raise the issue of corruption at all with zelensky in either of their phone calls. so the argument republicans put forward today just really wasn't credible. >> university law professor jonathan tirly argued the case for president trump lacked evidence and a crime and like many of the republicans he argued against this process.

>> that is why this is wrong. it's not wrong because president trump was right. his call was anything but perfect. it's not wrong because the house has no legitimate reason to investigate the ukrainian controversy. it's not right because we're in an election year. no, it's wrong because this is not how you impeach an american president. >> congressman, i want to ask you about charlie psyches and charlie get in on this, too, do you think any worthwhile process would be worth extending this process beyond this year? >> we cannot allow the president to benefit from his own obstruction of justice and obstruction of congress. but let me just make this very simple. the call transcript itself is very damning. so for example let's say one of my local police chiefs comes up to me and says hey, i'm one of your constituents, i want you to help me, you know, because my mom is not getting her social security check and i say sure, but i want you to do me a favor

though. i want you to announce you're investigating one of my political opponents. if i did that, i'd likely be going to prison. >> glen, i want to ask you about rudy giuliani out there. this process we're covering here as charlie says they need more investigations. maybe he's right in the sense he's still over there digging up dirt on joe biden. >> and i have to wonder if he's really over there continuing to try to dig up dirt on joe biden given that what that has now brought down on top of the president or if he's over there preparing for his own criminal defense. parnas and fruman are -- they're indicted. it is reported that parnas is getting ready to flip and he's got tapes and he's got records. you have to believe he's going to give up giuliani. i bet you, chris, giuliani is over there trying to put his own future criminal defense together. >> thank you. i've got to get back to charlie because i'm an argumentative

person. there's no middle roaders anymore. everybody knows it's ibt ukraine. we all know the facts about the central case which i believe pelosi's going to push right through this process. do you think anybody's ready to change their mind? >> maybe not in congress but in the public. and, you know, keep in mind you and i have been following this every single day, but there's an advantage to sometimes slowing it down, letting the facts marinate, letting the public catch up. every day that goes by i think there's a chance you're going to see new revelations about all of this. look, the democrats i think have a stronger hand than they think they do. they're winning in federal court and compelling the testimony of don mcgahn. you have world class reporters like natasha out there and

reporters for "the wall street journal" and "the new york times" and "the washington post" were digging into all of this. if in fact they don't vote until say the middle of january, chris, what have they lost? what exactly have they lost by waiting until the new year to have this vote? >> well, as a very smart chief executive friend of my mine said in a recent title, leave something on the table. charlie sykes, i think you're on the wrong schedule. glenn kirschner, great reporter. we saw it all today. delay tactics. they want this to go into next year. did the democrats bolster their case for impeachment? our legal experts will way in just a minute. what is their strategy? they never actually get to the core argument this president needs to be impeached. do they have a defense?

leon panetta joins us live tonight, and president trump abruptly canceling his post-summit press conference and calling the prime minister of canada justin trudeau two-faced after world leaders were caught on video -- wait i will you see this -- talking and laughing about guess who behind his back, the joke of the world and he's ours. much more to get to. stick with us. ours much more to get to. stick with us. we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa

thouwhich is breast cancer metastthat has spreadcer, to other parts of the body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole, and shrank tumors in over half of patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs that can lead to death. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including trouble breathing, shortness of breath, cough, or chest pain. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea,

sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance.

i have in article 2 i have the right to do whatever i want as president, but i don't even talk about that. >> welcome back to "hardball." you just did, mr. president. that was president trump notably two days before his call with ukraine's president on what he

believes are his powers as president, everything. he has uniquely discovered article ii. in today's judiciary committee impeachment hearing democrats called upon the legal experts to explain the legal arguments for congress to impeach president trump under its own powers outlined by the constitution. three of the four witnesses argued president trump had in fact committed impeachable offenses specifically abuse of power, bribery and obstruction. >> drawing a foreign government into our elections is an especially serious abuse of power because it undermines democracy itself. >> bribery had a clear meaning to the framers. it was when the president using the power of his office solicits or receives something of personal value from someone affected by his official powers. and i want to be very clear, the constitution is law. the constitution is the supreme law of the land. >> the third article of

impeachment approved by the house judiciary committee against president nixon charged him with misconduct because he failed to comply with four legislative subpoenas. here it is far more than four this president has failed to comply with, and he's ordered the executive branch as well not to cooperate with congress. those together with a lot of other evidence suggests obstruction of congress. >> the one witness called by republicans, jonathan turley of george washington university pushed back saying democrats should allow the courts to weigh in on subpoenas. >> you're saying article i gives us complete authority that when we demand information from another branch it must be turned over or we'll impeach you in record time. so on obstruction i would encourage you to think about this. in nixon, it did go to the courts and nixon lost. and that was the reason nixon resigned.

>> but harvard law professor noa feldman argued president trump's refusal to cooperate was itself an impeachable offense. let's watch. >> a president who says as this president did say i would not cooperate in any way, shape or form with your process robs a coordinate branch of government, he robs the house of representatives of its basic constitutional power of impeachment. i don't think it's possible to emphasize this strongly enough. a president who will not cooperate in an impeachment inquiry is putting himself above the law. >> for more i'm joined right now by richard, the assistant watergate prosecutor, caroline frederickson, former president of the american constitution society, and of course paul butler, former federal prosecutor. richard, let's go to the heart of this thing. did they make their case, the three professors for the democrats for impeachment? >> i thought they were very articulate and fielded the questions well. and they made the case as to why

this is serious enough offense to imply the constitutional remedy of impeachment. i thought it somewhat disingenuous of professor turley argued there wasn't enough evidence, that there were witnesses yet to be called. this is a most amusing argument when you see that the president of the united states has ordered the very witnesses that mr. turley's talking about not to cooperate. this is like a defendant who's convicted of poisoning his parents, throwing himself on the mercy of the a court because he's on orphan. >> paul, let's get back to this key question. turley's argument which was congress can ask for the president anything they want to ask. it can be frivolous or stupid

and he doesn't want to give them the information or document or witness to testify. that doesn't mean grz has just caught him in an impeachable act. the courts must rule you have to testify before congress has to say you violated the constitution here. do you buy that argument the courts have to intervene? >> i don't. so the words that kept coming up today are king and monarch and we don't have those in the united states. we do not have a president who is above the rule of law. and one of the reasons he's not is because it's the responsibility of congress to do checks and balances, to do appropriate oversight including demanding documents that are relevant to his fitness to remain in office. >> caroline, i love your article today because i agreed with it, about the need to keep the focus here as pelosi said from the beginning, you caught this guy on a matter of national security, you caught him trading away the public trust -- he has commander in chief trading it

away. what do you think was the strongest case made for impeachment by the three democratic professors? >> well, i mean i think they all did an exceptional job and i agree with richard that they laid the case out very thoroughly and thoughtfully. going to a foreign government and saying we're not going to give you money unless you investigate my political rival -- >> say you're investigating. >> say you're investigating. >> just give me some dirt to throw. >> it's absolutely the essence of an impeachable offense. what i liked about the hearing today is that it was so focused. as i said in my article, there's a lot of other stuff. there's so much stuff and in fact that's one of the dangers of this impeachment process is that every day there's something new, and you could have jonathan turley saying well that means you need to keep investigating. the fact of the matter is you need to tell that story why is

he impeachable so people out in the world and the united states get it. and this is hey, hello, ukraine investigate my political rival or you don't get your money. that's like the definition of a bribe, quid pro quo. >> i thought the democratic called witnesses also hit the point of, well, ukraine finally got the money in september. i'm laughing because you're laughing because under that theory nixon did not succeed with the cover-up. by definition the watergate cover-up didn't work. he still was pushed out of office. >> here's a bank robber with a bag of money in his hand. the cops walk in, oh, excuse me, you need more evidence. let's find the get away driver. he's off in argentina because he ran away. let's wait until he get -- >> actually he's over in ukraine right now. let me ask you about this because he always says i can shoot somebody on fifth avenue.

now, fifth avenue is the most beautiful street in the world and imagine the president of the united states or anybody coming out and the republicans are arguing in all seriousness that the president of the united states or anybody is shooting at somebody and misses them. they're clean. they're clean. let them alone. that's an insane argument. >> it's insane. it's an extreme view about executive power and it's unsupported by the constitution. in terms of the argument, the new defense that the democrats are going too quickly, guess what, this inquiry is going to take longer than the clinton inquiry for impeachment and way longer than when andrew johnson was impeached, so this is going to be the most well-developed impeachment inquiry in our history. >> what do you think of the motives -- why do people want to run this thing into next year? i see the calendar. next week more work by the judiciary committee combining

all the reports from the various committees, foreign affairs, oversight and of course intel to the articles of impeachment. the following week they vote on the articles. the people don't like this schedule for some reason. what do you make of it? >> obviously there's a concern the election is coming up, and that's a concern for both the democrats and republicans. i think one of the values of the testimony today was to answer the very important question, even if trump is corrupt, why not wait less than a year to the election so that the people can determine whether he should be removed? and what these three esteemed legal scholars said that the democrats called is that we cannot afford to wait. every day that trump remains in office is a threat to our democracy in part because if he's open to as a candidate getting help from russia to subvert the election and as president he orders or shakes down in professor karlans words,

strong arms the ukrainian president to open an investigation. >> i think there's so much work and let's not forget we had the mueller report. there is a lot in there. i think they have so much to proceed on, and i think they should go forward. >> what i liked about today is calling a spade a spade in the sense that here is the president asking for an announcement. box him in. a smear campaign and you can see historically and i know you get this, chris. joe mccarthy, the master of the smear campaign. roy cohn, mccarthy's acolyte and teacher of donald j. trump. >> by the way, the republicans not they're as guilty as mccarthy, i wouldn't say that about anybody, but point of order was mccarthy's favorite ta tactics. there was a point of order about

that. great column today. still ahead, if the white house has an impeachment defense strategy they're doing an excellent job of keeping it under wraps. they don't seem to be getting to the heart of the charge against the president. former white house chief of staff leon panetta joins us next to share his insights live, what's going on behind the scenes perhaps in the white house right now. you're watching "hardball." in house right now. you're watching "hardball. so we know how to cover almost anything. even a "three-ring fender bender." (clown 1) sorry about that... (clown 2) apologies. (clown 1) ...didn't mean it. (clown 3) whoops. (stilts) sorry! (clowns) we're sorry! (scary) hey, we're sorry! [man screams] [scary screams] (burke) quite the circus. but we covered it. at farmers, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

we chose eleanor. it was great-grandma's name. so we're in this little town near salerno and everyone has dad's eyebrows. help your family discover their unique story, with a gift from ancestry. help your family discover their unique story, doctor bob, what should i take for back pain? before you take anything, i recommend applying topical relievers first. salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu. we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh.

what they're doing is very bad thing for our country. it's of no merit. these people, you almost question whether or not they love our country, and that's a very, very serious thing. do they in fact love our country. they schedule a hearing. it's a hoax, it's a total hoax. the word impeachment is a dirty word and it's a word that was only supposed to be used in special occasions, high crimes and misdemeanors. in this case there was no crime whatsoever not even a little tiny crime. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was president trump in london attacking democrats just as the house judiciary committee was beginning its hearing today on capitol hill. and no one from the white house was present in that hearing room by their own choice. upon an invitation to attend they set their regrets.

>> i note that this is the moment in which the white house would have an opportunity to question the witnesses, but they declined their invitation. >> politico reports the white house's impeachment strategy goes something like this. refuse to engage unless certain demands are met, blast democrats from the outside then meantime and wait for a friendlier senate landscape. for more i'm joined by leon panetta, former director of the cia, former secretary of defense who was also chief of staff to president clinton. what did you think of the white house strategy not sending any witnesses, not really challenging in the committee, not even challenging the court charge the president traded public trust for cheap political gain? >> well, it goes against his own acknowledgement he did nothing wrong. if he did nothing wrong then the

president should go out of his way not only to have counsel present but also have witnesses testify on his behalf. but the fundamental problem here, chris, is that the president did something wrong. and as a result of that, he's going to use every other tactic to try to avoid the impeachment. so he's going to do rallies. he's going to go to his base. he's going to try to as much as possible attack the credibility of what's going on in the hope that somehow that will give support to the republicans who he hopefully is going to push in order to acquit him on the senate side. so he's engaged in a political attack rather than a legal defense. >> well, president trump weighed in on the damaging revelations from the house intel report yesterday showing multiple phone calls between his personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, the office of management and budget

and the white house during key moments of the pressure campaign against ukraine. here he is. >> i don't know anything about it. somebody said he made a phone call into the white house. what difference does that make? is that supposed to be a big deal? i don't think so. >> giuliani has not indicated why he was spoking with the omb, the officer responsible for freezing military aid to ukrab. he did respond with a tweet writing the mere fact i had calls with the white house does not establish any specific topic. remember i'm the president's attorney. mr. secretary, i don't know how many people called up the omb when you were there i mean why the president's lawyer and fixer would be calling out from ukraine, wherever he is. i said it's last night it's like picking up a rock when you're a kid and seeing all the bugs underneath. you have a pro-trump guy named george solomon with these pipe, nunes on the phone, they're all

checking in with each other like the menendez brothers. they're all in this thing together. anyway, what did you make of those phone calls? >> well, what we found out is this a president who loves chaos. he operates by chaos abroad. he operates by chaos in the white house. and so there's nobody really in charge to provide any order to how you approach these crises. there's nobody who's telling him right or wrong. and so he's in contact with his so-called personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, who's doing all of his dirty work in the ukraine. and so these calls only make clear that there was a close connection between the president and giuliani in the effort to try to be able to somehow produce an investigation on joe

biden. it's unheard of that a white house would operate with this kind of chaos. >> you've probably studied all the books on how to run a presidency, and where a president like jack kennedy would point to different people and assign people different directions. fdr used that method. eisenhower used the strong where everything went through sherman adams. what would you call -- what's this presidency all about with all these moving parts all working as kind of a syndicate. i don't know. what would you call it? >> it looks more like how the mafia operates in terms of having one central individual and a lot of other people basically catering to that individual. and that's the fundamental problem in the white house right

now is that there are no grownups in the white house to tell this president when he's going to do the wrong thing. the only kind of people you have around the president now are people who basically empower the president. they do what he wants them to do. there isn't anybody who's willing to stand up and tell him when he's doing the wrong thing. and so the end result of that is that the president's basically operating on his own, operating through tweets and producing the sense we have in this country we do not have a president of the united states facing the

problems here and abroad. >> nobody is a good guide for themselves. you need to be listening to people around you because you make mistakes. thank you so much. it's great to have you on, sir. up next london brawling. president trump splits the scene as we said in the old days in the '60s he split the scene after cameras captured world leaders talking about him behind his back. our president's response after the video went viral. this is fun for tonight at least. we need a little fun. you're watching "hardball." least. we need a little fun you're watching "hardball. woman 1 oc: this is my body of proof. man 1 vo: proof of less joint pain and clearer skin. man 2 vo: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2 vo: ...with humira. woman 3 vo: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections.

serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3 vo: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 4 vo: go to humira.com to see proof in action. 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.

we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh.

the world is laughing at us. they're laughing at the stupidity of our president. our country is a laughingstock all over the world they're laughing. we're not respected. we're laughed at all over the world. how stupid are we? the world is laughing. we're going to be respected again. we're not going to be a

laughingstock like we have been. everybody's laughing at us because we're led by people and it's not going to happen any longer and that's why i'm doing this, folks. >> looked younger back then. welcome back to "hardball." that was president trump campaigning as a candidate on the promise under his presidency the world would no longer laugh at america. but last night at a reception, there it is at buckingham palace the world's leaders canadian president justin trudeau, france's president and british prime minister boris johnson appeared to be laughing at president trump. >> that was prime minister trudeau confirming today he was talking about trump and that his comment about jaws dropping as he demonstrated referred to trump's announcement that next year's g-7 summit would be held

at camp david. >> last night i made a reference to the fact that there was an unscheduled press conference before my meeting with president trump, and i was happy to take part of it, but it was certainly notable. we were all surprised and i think pleased to learn that the next g-7 will be at camp david. i think that was an unscheduled announcement, and i think everyone's team -- every different leader has teams who ever now and then have their jaws drop at unscheduled surprises like that video itself, for example. >> well, president trump was scheduled to meet with the nato secretary-general yesterday for 20 minutes but that turned into 53 minutes of remarks including an unscheduled press conference. president trump predictably took the opportunity to attack trudeau today. that's up next. you're watching "hardball." u to. that's up next you're watching "hardball. before we talk about tax-smart investing, what's new?

-well, audrey's expecting... -twins! grandparents! we want to put money aside for them, so...change in plans.

alright, let's see what we can adjust. ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. okay. mom, are you painting again? you could sell these. lemme guess, change in plans? at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. ♪the beat goes onp for heart failure look like?? it looks like emily cooking dinner for ten. ♪the beat goes on it looks like jonathan on a date with his wife. ♪la-di-la-di-di entresto is a heart failure medicine that helps your heart, so you can keep on doing what you love. entresto helped people stay alive and out of the hospital. heart failure can change the structure of your heart, so it may not work as well.

entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ♪the beat goes on ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure yeah! entrust your heart to entresto. ♪the beat goes on we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh.

well, he's too fast and honestly with trudeau he's a nice guy. i find him to be a very nice guy but the truth is i called him out on the fact he's not paying 2%, and i guess he's not very happy about it. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was president trump today calling the canadian prime minister two-faced after he appeared to mock trump's

impromp impromptu press conference. i'm joined now by jason johnson, politics editor at theroot.com. he made a point during his campaign we're not going to be -- we weren't laughed at. obama was adored across the world. and now we have this picture that's going to be haunting this president at least through "saturday night live" at least of the boys club, all these heads of state chuckling about our president. >> this isn't the first, second, third or even fifth time this has happened with this administration. you have the video of ivanka trying to get into a conversation and everyone pretending how did you get in here, what's your guess pass? this entire administration is embarrassing abroad. if you could be laughed at by

boris yelson who's considered a joke in his own country then clearly -- >> the president had his own hot mike moment this morning. >> and then you know what they'll say, he didn't do a press conference. he didn't do a press conference. that was funny when i said the guy's two-faced. >> that was funny. no, you took a shot at the guy. i didn't see the humor in it. >> that's the thing. trump doesn't have a sense of humor. >> that's right. i do agree with that. have you ever seen him laugh? i don't think he actually laughs. >> he doesn't have the humility and self-reflection to laugh. he can't be made fun of like most other powerful people can. he can enjoy mockery and donald trump gets furious. it's the same thing with world leaders. he can't chuckle and joke with

other people because everything is so thin-skinned. >> humor is based on truth and self-awareness. but i do think this is worth thinking about. i'm not a shrink, but i just wonder a president mocks peoples looks, disabilities, mocks their gender, he knows how to be a schoolyard that kind of person at the expense of people. but true wit is foreign to him. >> true wit, true engagement, the ability to have other people laugh with you. even george bush was able to do that. and here's the great challenge, trump has done exactly what hiss greatest fear was. he's empowered world leaders to look powerful and stronger. who would think justin trudeau, he squeaks back in bt now he looks strong. everybody looks stronger in comparison to a president who

looks so week. >> boris johnson, he's the straight man. >> the man who intentionally tussles his hair to look ridiculous somehow seems a more -- >> we have a president who's looked down upon by our allies. >> so at a practical level it's why they don't -- our european allies don't want to share intelligence information with us anymore. but it's also a prestige issue. everyone sees that the emperor has no clothes, everyone sees you're not impressive anymore, and the moment he is not president of the united states he will get nothing and nowhere. >> one of the things you and i and everyone else in the world knows you only got one reputation. up next, one final task for the democrats. you're watching "hardball." the democrats. you're watching "hardball. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out

before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa

in connemara. right! connemara it is! there's one gift the whole family can share this holiday season, their story. give the gift of discovery, with an ancestrydna kit. for a limited time, get a outb4-course meal your holidays even better! give the gift of discovery, starting at $15.99. treat yourself to the perfect gift today, because the aussie 4-course won't last long! and now, get a $10 gift with every $50 in gift cards.

we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh. when it comes to using data, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. and now get $250 off when you buy a new samsung phone during xfinity mobile beyond black friday. plus, you can save up to $400 a year. click, call or visit a store today.

the democrats have done a good job so far in the impeachment drive. they have focused the charge sharply on the president's shaking down of a foreign leader, pressuring him to smear one of the president's political opponents. secondly, they've presented fact witnesses of sterling credibility to certitestify to president's corruption. a definitional case of corruption. and then today they established that moving to impeach this president on these particular grounds fits with the historic intent of those who wrote the constitution.

there remains one more argument in the can and should be brought forth, that is the national interests. there's a reason that the republicans in congress have held back from defending the president's kusconduct in this particular matter. boss no republican wn will say it's okay to deny military help to an ally in the face of territorial aggression? can you walk into a town meeting and go on fox and say he's proud or she's proud to support donald trump's holding up of arms aid to ukraine with russian tanks threatening his country's survival? is there one of them willing to defend this selfless reckless dereliction of duty. that's why it's here that the democrats need to make their final case because it's not just about donald trump being an embarrassment, being laughed at by world leaders yesterday. it's not him wanting to throw a handful of political dirt on joe biden but throwing out his

country's security to get ahold of it. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. tonight on "all in." >> when president trump invited indeed demanded foreign involvement in our upcoming election, he struck at the very heart of what makes this a republic to which we pledge allegiance. >> the case for impeaching donald trump. >> if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy. we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship. >> what we learned from the day long lesson in constitutional law. >> if what we're talking about is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable. >> tonight the big take-aways from today's judiciary hearing. >> did president trump commit the impeachable high crime and misdemeanor of abuse of power? >> we three are unanimous. >> the weak defense ofhe