impeachment and this is another part of that. >> hoping if you don't talk about it, just goes away. nerve are the case in washington, d.c. alexis verify canal. >> especially when you're on the record for all your interviews. lots of cameras. >> reading axios a.m. in a bit. you it sign up for the newsletter at signup@axios.com. that does it for us. i'm yasmin vossoughian alongside ayman mohyeldin. "morning joe" starts right now. not a single witness testified that the president himself said there was any connection between any investigation in security assistance, a presidential meeting or anything else. >> jay sekulow, meet john bolton. the "new york times" is reporting that trump told bolton last august that he wanted to continue freezing critical military aid to ukraine until government officials there helped with investigations targeting joe biden, his son hunter, and other democrats.

and good morning, and welcome to "morning joe." it is tuesday, january 28th. along with joe, willie and me we have pulitzer prize winning columnist and associate editor of the "washington post" eugene robinson. and nbc news and msnbc law analyst and editor-in-chief of "law fair" ben minh wittes co-author of the new book "unmaking the presidency." donald trump's war on the world's most powerful office. so a lot going on. we heard jay sekulow's approach to defending the president. namely, pretending john bolton doesn't exist. there was ken starr, who lamented the acrimony involved in presidential impeachments. >> hmm. >> i know. and then alan dershowitz, even if every single thing is true, the president should still remain in office. there was former florida

attorney general pam bondi who spent her time attacking the bidens, and then there was trump lawyer jane raskin who defended rudy giuliani's escapades in ukraine. as joe asked ob twitter, how can it be after three years the republican sycophants drag themselves to new lows still bringing the ability to shock? the argument put forward by trump lawyers and gop senators today were just ridiculous. ah, yeah. sort of a team of, i don't know what, joe. >> well, i mean -- you had a con fed racon -- confederacy of dunces here. and a minor player. shiny object designed to

distract you. of course, earth to trump legal team, donald trump said in that not so perfect, not so transport, that "rudy giuliani is a highly respected man, said to the president of ukraine, he was mayor of new york city. a great mayor and i would like you to call him." it was giuliani, this minor player they talked about? that ran the drug deal? he ran what john bolton called the drug deal. it's just unbelievable. and, willie, where do we begin with ken starr? if irony weren't already dead and buried years ago, it was ken starr yesterday talking about how -- how abuse of power is not sufficient to impeach a president. you need a crime. he literally dragged the corpse of tyranny out of the grave.

he meticulously tied the corpse's neck bone to the back of a tractor, and he ran that tractor throughout the graveyard of stupidity and ran over every headstone! this, before once again kicking dirt on the corpse of irony, again. >> wow. >> and the putting its bones back in the grave, one by one by one! >> whoa. >> good morning, everybody. >> how does ken starr say with a straight face, because i was there when he said "the capstone of impeachment for bill clinton is abuse of power." and then yesterday, oh, he's so sad and mournful. this is so terrible. how could -- like, we're starting to have a culture of impeachment, abuse of pow jer

that's n power? oh, wait. i set it was the capstone. and you are ken starr. you are a flashing billboard, a godly printed, like, sandwich board sign going down times square saying, "we're all dunces." we're all hypocrites. we are all making fools of ourselves. and, willie, willie geist, i haven't even gotten to pam bondi! >> oh, please. please, no. >> i haven't even gotten to pam bondi. the pam bondi argument. >> please, don't. just don't. >> can i get a kleenex? can i have a witness. pam bondi. oh, my lord. >> preach. >> i've been flummoxed. can i get some help up here? >> preach! >> oh, my god. oh, my god. pam bondi -- ah -- says that joe biden bragged about firing a

prosecutor because he was prosecuting burisma, and it was all sort of this inside deal. hey! rupert murdoch's wall street journal called that a farce months ago. every major newspaper called it a farce months ago. willie, the european union. >> they're scared of biden. >> -- demanded removing of the west prosecutor. the western world demanded the removal of the prosecutor. the obama administration told joe biden to go over there and remove the prosecutor. oh, wait. one more thing, pam bondi. just one more thing. and for the entire trump team and for all you stupid people out there -- actually, you're not stupid. you think we're all stupid? you think donald trump supporters are all student, conservatives are stupid? like donald trump, you think southerners are stupid? we're not.

we're not. you have the ukrainians who said themselves that the prosecutor has stopped investigated burisma at the time. it was one of the complaints on why, willie, this guy was in the tank. you know what? you know what? i mean -- i'm like james brown. i've done my thing. >> need the cape. >> i don't need to -- throw this off me and walk offstage and throw it off and come back on. this is all i could handle. this -- these people lowered the collective i.q. not only of america but of the western world by at least 24 points every hour they spoke on the senate floor. >> in the same way you don't want to follow james brown on stage you don't want to follow that rant from joe scarborough but here i am left with that task this morning. >> you can do it, willie. >> i add in jay sekulow's argument to the extent they even

address the defense team, the bombshell from john bolton's book, it came from dershowitz saying that was not impeachable but also saying that's just an allegation in a book. it's not evidence. get your irony metaphor back out again. you can put it into evidence by calling john bolton as a witness, but the white house has blocked him and john bolton has said he would testify. so one more dead body in that irony wilderness you were describing a few minutes ago. back to pam bondi. the job of going after joe biden and his son hunter fell to the former florida attorney general. let's listen to her case. >> when the house managers gave you their presentation, when they submitted their brief, they repeatedly referenced hunter biden and burisma. when the house managers gave you their presentation when they submitted smir brief, they repeatedly referenced hunter biden and burisma. they spoke to you for over 21

hours and they referenced biden or burisma over 400 times. and when they gave these presentations, they said there was nothing, nothing to see. it was a sham. this is fiction. the reason they needed to do that is because they are here saying that the president must be impeached and removed from office for raising a concern, and that's why we have to talk about this today. hunter biden had no experience in natural gas. no experience in the energy sector. no experience with ukrainian regulatory affairs, as far as we know he doesn't speak ukrainian. so naturally, the media has asked questions about his board

membership. why was hunter biden on this board? >> in response to those attacks from pam bondi, the biden campaign released a statement that reads in part -- we didn't realize breitbart was expanding into ted talk knockoffs. here on planet earth the conspiracy theory that bondi repeated has been conclusively refuted. the diplomat that trump himself appointed to lead his ukraine policy has 3w4r56blasted it as self-serving, not credible. joe biden was instrumental a bipartisan and international anti-corruption victory. it's no surprise such a thing is anathema to president trump. and former prosecutor, lit sank litz sank, others worried about that particular prosecutor, this wasn't a joe biden directive. >> he was a notoriously corrupt

prosecutor. and loops back, by the way, into the whole trump world of paul manafort and everything else. part of the previous regime and the fact is, there was a universe demand to push him out. however, this is also one. great master fantasies of the trump campaign, make hunter biden a major issue in the 2020 election and pam bondi played to one audience. that was fox and trump. that's all they cared about. that's all they were trying to accomplish, and, look, she goes way back with donald trump. left office under a cloud when she left the office of attorney general in florida, because she had taken basically a $25,000 bribe from donald trump about the trump university and drop the lawsuit in florida. they go way back. he likes that kind of 1 millimeter deep shallow presentation, and she delivered in spades in that regard, but it was a laughable example of how she was you know, reading from

the trump script that requires you to suspend logic, the ability to read a timeline on a calendar and the ability to look at the global dislike for this guy who was part of the cancer of corruption in ukraine as opposed to the people that replaced him and trying to clean it up. >> all right. ken starr, the independent counsel at former president clinton's impeachment trial tried to unironically warn of the dangers of impeaching a president. >> significantly in this particular juncture in america's history, the senate is being called to sit as the high court of impeachment all too frequently. indeed, we are living in what i think can aptly be described as the age of impeachment. like war, impeachment is hell.

or at least presidential impeachment is hell. those are us who lived through the clinton impeachment including members of this body, full well understand that a presidential impeachment is tantamount to domestic war albeit thankfully protected by our beloved first amendment, a war of words and war of ideas. but it's filled with acrimony and it divides the country like nothing else. >> ben wittes, this is -- >> hmm. >> -- judy collins would sing, "isn't it rich?" this is a man, after all, who -- and i know it's a family show, but hopefully the kids are still asleep, because if your kids are watching, cover their ears right now. so this is a man who put in -- >> joe. >> no!

who put in the impeachment report allegations of "oral, anal contact." >> oh, yeah. >> hold on a second. hold on. that's what ken starr did. that's what a supreme court justice did. that's what they put in their impeachment report. and we're talking now about a president who's not only asking a foreign power to interfere and holding up power, he then goes on national tv a week later and asks china to interfere in america's democratic elections. a risk that donald trump's own intel agencies say is the greatest threat to american democracy, and ken starr is lecturing america about taking impeachment too lightly? when -- i -- i told you what he filled his impeachment report with. it's just -- it's -- it is

preposterous especially on the legal merit saying that there is no way that a president can be impeached because of abuse of power when he called that "the capstone of his impeachment argument" against bill clinton. >> yes. i was sitting with a colleague yesterday watching ken starr's presentation, and she turned to me and said, does ken starr know he's ken starr? and i -- i think that kind of, you know, captured the whole thing, that there was so little self-awareness in his -- in this sort of pious presentation of the dangers of sort of hyperactive impeachment, and you kind of watched it saying, do you know who you are in this conversation? do you know, have any understanding of the role you played? and if there is a single person in the country who stands for

the kind of defining impeachment down it is ken starr, and for him to -- i'm not going to try to replicate your irony as dead rant, but, you know if there's a single person who represented the ills that he's talking about, he is it, and for him to stand up there without any apparent awareness of that is genuinely bewildering. you know, the other aspect of starr and professor dershowitz' presentation that is more serious and also very upsetting is this attack on the idea that an abuse of power can be an impeachable offense without criminality associated with it, and i'd just like to respond to both of them with the following hypothetical. imagine donald trump announced that he was not going to do his job anymore as president.

he was just going to play golf and spend all his time in the white house bowling alley, because that's actually more fun than the presidency. no one would say that he had committed a crime. a president's allowed to play golf. he's allowed to go bowling. they even built an alley for it in the white house, and yet are they really saying that that would not be impeachable? and so, you know, the basic defense here is it didn't happen. it doesn't matter if it did, and joe biden sucks. and that's not, you know, none of those elements are persuasive, and the idea that this material, if true, couldn't form the basis of an impeachment is really a dangerous degradation of the idea that the

president has these awesome powers and we should judge him for how he uses them. >> so, you know to add to this dunce defense, eugene robinson, it seems to me that most of what we heard yesterday especially from ken starr and pam bondi and this description of rudy giuliani's role in all of this is taking on the assumption, is perhaps counting on, that we're stupid and doesn't remember the clinton impeachment and doesn't remember every ken starr wrote in his book? this is a big ask, that they are that stupid? >> well i don't know how big an ask it is, which you feel reall

>> big. really big. >> to go back with ken starr dragging the corpse of irony through the fields of litany. >> amen. >> but let's bring in the crop duster of truth and memory, and sort of -- we need some seriousness here. it was astonishing. absolutely atonnishing to hear ken starr topped only by the astonishment of listening to pam bondi and, which was -- which was absolutely surreal. i've read, by the way that she collected something like $115,000 a month from qatar for unspecified lobbying duties so i guess she's a fluid arabic speaker and much more qualified to do that than hunter biden was

to do what he did in ukraine, but that aside, this is beyond the, you know, throw spaghetti at a wall and see what sticks defense. i mean, because this isn't even real spaghetti. it's just stuff that they're making up, making up facts. making up law. and making up the entire defense, and the republican senators sitting out there, i don't know if they, you know, all had their ear buds in, noise canceling ear buds, or if more likely they're all thinking about the bolton book and wondering and feeling blindsided and wondering what's coming next from the bolton book? so i think that's probably what they were doing, rather than listening to all of this nonsense. >> joe, post-bolton book revelation, we heard from mitt romney saying it's probably time to hear from witness. susan collins, maybe we should hear from witnesses.

we'll see if they get to that point. they only need a couple votes before that. we've laid out in colorful metaphors all the holes in defense but rick made a very important point, which is if you are a fox news viewer, listen to certain radio or just listen to donald trump as gospel, everything you heard yesterday made sense to you. which is that this is a sham. which is that joe biden is corrupt. this lined up with everything you've been told now for months and months and months. it doesn't line up with the factsance as we've said again, but for roughly half the country the story told on the floor yesterday made sense. >> hmm. yeah, maybe so. i -- i have a little more confidence in half the country. maybe it was 30% of the country. maybe 35% of the country who are so low information voters the only thing they do is watch news shows and you could say fox news, but there are times on fox news, of course, that they get on the president, too. it requires them to watch fox news and then change to oark or

whatever that is. they have to change to that channel and then if they say something, then they, they have to change, you know, have to go, i don't know, to the ouija board. so you really have to work hard to avoid the facts. >> yeah. good point. >> that donald trump, eve's trump's only lawyer said yesterday it wasn't a perfect call! so maybe they had to change the channel at that point. i mean you know they're trashing john bolton now. i mean, by late afternoon yesterday, the president sent out the word i guess to trash john bolton. so everybody's now just trying to destroy john bolton's reputation. among conservatives which this is the thing, johnny boy. just listen to me. if you think you can go half way here, you're kidding yourself. they're going to try to destroy you. >> yeah. >> you're either going to tell the truth, johnny, or you're not. and if you think that you, you know, like, if you think that

you can go half way, you also think that you're going to be able to cover "gq" sexiest man alive next year. you and i aren't making that magazine cover. you with your mustache and me with this. you go all-in and tell the truth or you don't. rick wilson is trying to be too clever. you just lost -- >> darn it. i hate when that happens. >> they're so afraid of joe biden. that's my big takeaway. is this a like unbelievable. their entire day was focused on their number one fear. >> well, that's, willie, exactly what i was going to bring up to rick wilson, when he gets his ifb feed back, we can cover that. looks like a beautiful sun coming up over there. or an apocalyptic glow. think about this, willie. so when i ran the first time, i

prayed that, like, front-runners. that incumbents, the people in power, were going to attack me. i mean, donald trump has shown from the very beginning of this process that he fears joe biden so much, that he is willing to risk impeachment to dig up dirt, and even yesterday on the senate floor they kept attacking joe biden. >> yep that is a godsend for joe biden. oh, and poor joni ernst. i felt sorry for her. she actually thinks what they did on the floor yesterday is going to hurt joe biden. i mean, those confederacy attacking joe biden is only going to help him through the rest of his campaign, because trump has shown one thing through all of this. that he is absolutely petrified of running against joe biden. >> yeah. that's the case that the biden campaign makes. i mean, what is this all amount

to? it amounts to the fact that the president of the united states so fears joe biden that he went to these lengths, got himself impeached, because he didn't want to run against joe biden. that make as pretty strong case. up to capitol hill quick and bring in msnbc correspondent garrett haake and white house bureau chief of the "washington post" and political analyst for msnbc and nbc news phil rucker, co-author of the new book "a very stable genius: donald j. trump testing of america." phil, start with you, actually, here in the studio with us, and talk how the white house is feeling this morning with the revelations from the bolton book and from what they saw on the senate floor. >> yeah. there's a scramble under way. in fact, the white house right now, figuring out how to deal with these revelations from bolton that are in the book. outside of those, the national security council staff people in the white house claimed they didn't know about this book or at least didn't know the revelations what was contained inside of it even though bolton brought that manuscript to the white house end of december and right now there's a recalibration of the legal

strategy and also a scramble to deal with witnesses that the trump lawyers and political folks in the white house assumed that this trial could wrap up this week. that the president could be easily acquitted by the end of this week. by the republicans in the senate. now that's cast into doubt, because there could be these four or more republicans to vote for witnesses extending the trial and present a host of challenges for the president's defense whamplts defense. >> what will be the defense? john bolton not a peripheral player, secondhand knowledge like some other witnesses. the guy in the room called it a drug deal if he testifies to what he's written in this book, what's the defense? >> well, it's really damaging in part because bolton is such a credible mayor yate narrator. took detailed notes, much to the president's chagrin and respected by a number of republicans in the senate. he's been around the block much longer than trump's been president and it's a real challenge for the white house.

>> not just respected by a number of republican senators, he's an idol for the republican hawks in the senate. the lindsey grahams and the tom cottons and marco rubios. i mean, they love john bolton who, by the way, has a pact that gives money to their campaigns. i mean, there's a connection there. so they're not -- a lot of these senators are not inclined to get up and call john bolton a liar. the white house will do that, but these are his friends going back many years, and people who really admire him. >> so, garrett, we had mitt romney up on the hill saying, "it's increasingly likely other republicans will join those of us who think we should hear from john bolton." susan collins put out a statement saying bolton's book strengthens the case for witnesses here. will there be more organ just that small group? if the answer is, no, how do you

not call john bolton if you claim to have an honest and fair trial after what you've read in this man u crypt? >> manuscript? >> interestingly a problem for the defense. mitch mcconnell who said he's been trying to coordinate hand in glove with the white house was not aware about this manuscript being in the white house's possession, we're told. he was caught off guard as well and you saw it come out in the free lancing with reporters. offering trades for different witnesses. talking about different hypothetical scenarios. the mood shifted so dramatically from saturday afternoon when republican senators all left for their short weekend feeling like they would have this wrapped up by end of this week to monday now where nobody really knows where this goes. to gene's point, there's so much general, positive feeling towards bolton among republican senators generally, it's going to be very difficult for them to try to, know, discredit him

prematurely to try to get out in front of this. you're looking at a possibility either calling him or going towards the defense that you heard from some of the white house lawyers yesterday which is however bad you might think this is, it's not impeachable. seems that's probably the only thing you can fall back on if bolton comes out and confirms what's been at the heart of this in terms of the president ordering these investigations. >> so ben wittes, do counterprogramming here. forgetting the miserable display by the trump attorneys yesterday, what would be their best argument today? what would be their best argument moving forward for acquittal for the president? >> you know i think their best argument has always been the one that the president disallowed them from using. which is, hey, this was not best practices. this was not a good show. the president is really sorry, but do you really want to remove a president over this? it would be a prudential

argument, not wholly unlike the one bill clinton made during the bill clin evton impeachment whi was, hey, i'm sorry i did this, it was bad, it was wrong but it's not worth impeaching and removing over. the problem with this argument is that trump has doubled down on it and said the call was perfect. which is a message that you're not allowed to criticize it in any way and by the way, not only should, know, ukraine investigate the bidens, but china should, too. so i'm doing it again in public, and that makes the actually best argument for his position politically, roughly, akin to saying, you know, the president did wrong, which is something that trump has basically disallowed members from doing. so i think they're kind of, they kind of are not allowed to make what is really the best argument in their quiver. by the way, not a good argument.

but i think the best one they've got. >> well, you know, mika, people may be thinking, well, watching the show right now, well, he's going to be acquitted anyway, but if you look at the polls that are out there. even donald trump, a couple days ago, he was reduced to having to quote from a poll that showed a skyrocketing number of independents supporting his impeachment and removal and a majority of americans supporting his impeachment and removal at the same time polls said that we've seen over the past few days showing that support for impeachment and removal in wisconsin, in michigan, in pennsylvania, also starting to go up. in this poll nationally at 50%, in wisconsin 50%, michigan 50%

even ohio, 47%. so just because republicans that are politicians in washington, d.c. may be making fools of themselves and their lawyers may be a confederacy of dunces playing that role on television, it doesn't mean voters aren't paying close attention. >> and even if followers and his folks on fox, this constant, you know, watching people who have broken the loyalty oath, and watch how they get so easily tossed out. i mean, the slandering now of bolton. all of a sudden he's the enemy. all of a sudden you hear people on fox trashing him. it's so unbelievably transactional and shallow i would think that trump followers even some of them might feel a little unnerved watching this people constantly failing the loyalty oath and getting tossed out. >> and again you better believe that there are some people on fox who will actually be defending john bolton. why? because john bolton has been a

part of the conservative movement his entire adult life. >> you would think. >> donald trump just four, five years ago was giving checks to hillary clinton, charlie wrangle, anthony weiner, i mean, you name it. eliot spitzer. gave a check in 20014 to kamala harris. i mean, this guy has been a lifelong democrat supporter. supporter of democratic candidates, and here you have a conservative in john bolton that has been a hero of a certain part of the conservative movement for a very long time. so i -- i -- i think every attack against bolton actually is going to have a backlash in certain corners of the conservative movement. >> benjamin wittes, thank you so much. garrett haake and fiphilip ruck, thank you as well. great to have you all on the show this morning. still ahead, chairman of the house intelligence committee congressman adam schiff joins

us. plus the second ranking democrat in the u.s. senate, illinois's dick durbin. but first, remember this? >> everybody thought hillary clinton was unbeatable. right? but we put together of benghazi special committee. a select committee. what are her numbers today? her numbers are dropping. why? because she's untrustable. but no one would have known any of that had happened -- >> i agree. >> yeah. congressman kevin mccarthy said the quiet part out loud back in 2015 and it sure seems like senator joni ernst just did the same thing. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. (whistling)

(whistling) ♪[ siren ] & doug give me your hand! i can save you... lots of money with liberty mutual! we customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ saving for ava's college. being able to retire on our terms.

taking care of dad. why ameriprise financial? my advisor cares about my personal goals. he gives us comprehensive advice. i feel prepared for what's expected in life and even what's not. she helps us feel confident. we know our financial future is secure. with the right financial advice, life can be brilliant. ameriprise financial. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

wthat's why xfinity hasu made taking your internetself. and tv with you a breeze. really? yup. you can transfer your service online in about a minute. you can do that? yeah. and with two-hour service appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. so while moving may still come with its share of headaches... no kidding. we're doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.

iowa caucuses are this next monday evening, and i'm really interested to see how this discussion today informs and influences the iowa caucus voters.

those democratic caucusgoers. will they be supporting vice president biden at this point? >> oh, my god. oh, my god! >> get over him. >> rick wilson -- oh, my god. are you back, rick? >> yeah. he's here. >> i am back, sir. >> oh, my god. just in time to hear joni ernst say out loud -- i mean, who are these people? she says out loud what she's supposed to keep inside her head, which is that this is all to try to hurt joe biden in iowa, and in the early states, rick, the trump team and republican senators could not have worked any harder if they wanted to do elevate joe biden, and make him look like a giant killer. like they are petrified of him. donald trump even allowed himself to be impeached over his fear of joe biden. >> correct. and, look, yesterday pam bondi

came out by making this about joe and hunter biden and by putting on this very, this performtive act about joe and hunter biden, she made this into an admission, first off, that the president committed impeachable offenses and second off it's the perfect framing. here's the way out. he's not worried about bernie sanders or pete buttigieg. he's worried about joe biden. sent his personal attorney giuliani and camp of minions, and gone through a year now of impeachment. don't touch the hot stove, donald, but i want to touch the hot stove, why does it hurt? they're going to keep doing this. and joni erns had the ani ernst full trump. >> and joni ernst, she came out yesterday rambling on and on,

saying things she shouldn't be saying, admitting that this whole conspiracy, this whole extortion, this whole scheme was to hurt joe biden in the early caucus states and in the election, and this is the same woman who would not answer a constituent in a town hall meeting a few months ago when the constituent said, where do you draw the line? are you not going to criticize the president for publicly demanding that china interfere in america's elections? joni ernst said, no answer. she was mute. >> it is -- the fear they live under of donald trump and of his twitter feed and his followers is so intense, and this idea that if they break from him in any way whatsoever or deviate in any way whatsoever it leaves them to behave like that and behave with a silence yesterday. you and i are both aware that these guy, motivated by fear the primaries, fear of re-election. thankfully filing deadlines are

passed and hopefully they realize they won't get primaried by somebody if they wait a few more weeks, but at this point the republican senators are betting their entire political future and reputations on the fact that nothing worse will come out. until yesterday when the bolton thing hovered over them, thought they might get away with this. i don't think they're getting away with this at this point. >> yeah, but mika, something worse always comes out. and by the way, even if -- >> always -- >> even if they try to finish this impeachment hearing quickly, between now and the election, things are going to keep coming out, and they're going to have to look back at what they did during impeachment and they're going to be held accountable the last week. and people are going say, wait a second. we've learned all of this stuff and you guys wouldn't let witnesses speak? and you wouldn't let john bolton speak? and you wouldn't take more evidence? >> yeah. >> it's just -- it's not a smart

political move. >> it's like they learned this growing up. when you dent your parents car you just say. you don't hide it. and coming up, mark leibovich in a moment. >> thank you, rick wilson. ♪ but where are the clowns send in the clowns ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ don't get mad. get e*trade, dawg.

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. and my lack of impulse control,, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise.

great having rick wilson on. by the way, his book "running against the devil" actually which is -- >> some are running with the devil. >> yeah. we saw them earlier, but rick wrote a book about running against the devil and a great guide for former republicans and democrats on how to defeat donald trump.

but number four on the "new york times." best-sellers list last week. that's great news. >> wow. >> bring in mark leibovich right now, "new york times" magazine, the grand poob bh-bah. and so much to talk about what ken starr said and i love ben minh wittes. one of this friends asked while watching ken starr, does ken starr even know that he's ken starr? quite a day yesterday. >> hmm. >> yeah. yesterday was, i mean, again, the irony was off the charts. and i mean he was not alone. ben wasn't, just sitting there watching this and you would have this group of people sitting around various tv sets or if you were up on the hill just watching this saying, ah, it's ken starr. i mean, there was sort of an undercurrent of, let's sit this one out, maybe. and, look, the other thing is

ken starr hasn't really been -- he hasn't been doing this in a long time. he's been a university president. had an interesting 20 years, and yet he's right here in the middle of it and sometimes you wonder, i mean, is donald trump, you know, actually trying to cast some kind of post-ironic political sort of narrative here, right? because it is kind of funny, if you've been around long enough to understand where these people were 20, 25 years ago. >> it's preposterous every one from dershowitz, completely changed his position, to ken starr. it wasn't just ken starr in 1999 talking this way. he wrote a book. he went on ari melber's show. like, not so long ago, talking about this very thing. that the capstone, the most important part of his entire case, impeachment case against bill clinton was abuse of power. >> yeah. i mean, the quote from ken starr

yesterday, "like hell" like war, impeachment is hell" is a stunning ref futation of what h did 20 years ago. and you've writ an piece talking about joe biden's strategy, his position in the 2020 race ahead of the caucuses. how does he feel? how does his campaign feel right now? he's sort of bumped along, struggled in the debates, people felt he might fall in the polls. durable is the word people keep using. sitting at the top. bernie sanders sitting well in both iowa and new hampshire, but for all the criticisms taken a bunch of hits beginning with kamala harris and continuing on in this impeachment trial, how are they feeling where they are right now? >> well, i mean, if you talk to joe biden, i spent a little time with him in iowa. his message to some degree is, hey, i'm still here. i'm surviving. then you see someone like joni ernst going to say what she said, saying the silent part out

loud yesterday. she might as well been cutting an ad for joe biden because a lot of what biden's message that been, look, they're terrified of me. look what they're doing. look at the lengths they will go to try not to face me in november. and now look, it's risky. goal all-in with an electability, which has a checkered record in iowa sometimes. someone in iowa, up for re-election, someone who might have a tough re-election race in november saying that and really kind of winking about it while saying it and a weird smile going, i mean, the biden campaign is thrilled about that. >> and, gene, if you go to iowa, the crowds aren't huge. >> yeah. >> at the biden rallies. sort of, as john heilemann described them yesterday, sort of somber retreats or something, where you -- >> right. >> and writes in a piece, joe biden doesn't want a revolution. joe biden doesn't have a movement. joe biden could just win this

thing, seems to be the argument. >> yeah. joe biden has going for him being joe biden basically, and the fact that people know him. people are comfortable with him. and you know -- and mark leibovich, it's easy to understand the sort of theory of how he wins this. right? he does well enough in iowa. doesn't have to win. he maybe finishes second, say, and he does well enough in new hampshire, and survives nevada and then in south carolina, he crushes the rest of the field and then it's quick off to super tuesday, but when you get to super tuesday, you have to deal with mike bloomberg's money and his theory of the campaign. did the biden people, do they worry about bloomberg at all and his positioning for super tuesday where biden also would hope to do well? >> they seem not to talk that

much about bloomberg. i mean, if anything, bloomberg helps them, because, one, he's taking a pound of flesh out of trump to some degree in these states that the biden campaign doesn't really have the resources now to focus on, and also, bloomberg is also hurting bernie sanders to some degree. he's creating kind of an awareness of the race, creating awareness of the importance of an alternative, which is what biden's race is predicated on at this point. saying, look, don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative. his whole campaign is about the alternative. i'm not donald trump and i'm not a socialist. another thing i would add to willie's point earlier about the crowds at biden's rallies. yes, they're certainly not sanders rallies, not trump rallies. pretty quiet. pretty low-key and biden can't move a crowd the way he did 30 years ago, but if you go to enough of them you realize that first of all there's a lot of goodwill for joe biden and these are also a lot of older, know,

non-activist types in iowa who pretty consistently vote in these caucuses. and by a pretty large degree, they are showing up, and this is also a group of people that the media tends to ignore. i mean, when you look at the iowa caucuses, twitter focuses on the activists. they focus on the mobilized left kind of. that seems to be where a lot of the candidates, what they're doing also. biden's running a much quieter campaign and it could be effective. so far shown a certain staying power you have to respect certainliful you're donald trump. >> mark leibovich's new pete in "new york times" magazine is "good enough. candidacy good enough for joe biden." >> by the way, i love the campaign buttons they have, willie, attached to this throughout the article. the art is fantastic. >> old school, yeah. >> joe biden, he'll do. joe biden, you know who i am. these are all very inspiring things. >> uh-huh. >> and with my first campaign, reminds me of mine. joe scarborough, he doesn't completely suck.

it worked. >> what percentage of the vote did you get, joe? >> 62% first time. 73% -- >> rest my case. >> i mean, it works. just saying it. >> mark, thanks so much. turn to steve rattner looking at the race through the magic of charts. good to see you. start with bernie sanders' rise. a recent surge we've talked about, perhaps the early states and nationally, too. >> as much as elizabeth warren's fall and what's happened to her. she reach add pique in popularity back in late october. this is a chart of iowa poms. you see on the chart, she piqued at 23% back in october and kind of sitting there. then announced details of her medicare for all plan. you can see that vertical black line and text and immediately began to fall. then about a week later, announced more -- kind of amended her made karr for all plan, tried to walk back some of it but not enough and not

persuasively and her fall just continued. so i think you can really directly attribute what's happened to her to people finally understanding what medicare for all was. the curious thing, you said, willie, matched by a rise in bernie sanders popularity which is that green line. you can see him climbing right up almost a mirror image to her. so her supporters effectively went to him. one little interesting factoid about her before announcing medicare for all plan she had support of 20% of all democrats who self-identify as moderates. that has dropped to 5% of democrats who self-identify -- >> leave that chart up. a fundamental question. elizabeth warren support drops because she announces details of her plan. bernie sanders wrote the damn bill as he would put it, he's calling for the same thing. med cuell medicare for all, why does she suffer and he doesn't? >> leave that to the political

pundits. that's the curious thing. not only dl he write the damn bill he wrote a it uptougher bip see medicare for all, costs $20 trillion. ship say more. that's her number. his cost $30 trillion to $40 trillion. free college tuition actually in a similar place. $500 billion to $600 billion. eliminate all student debt, elizabeth warren isn't proposing to do that the way brns ernie sanders. when you hear the word wealth tax you think of elizabeth warren. has a 3.75 trillion dollar wealth tax. bernie sanders 4.3 trillion dollar wealth tax. look at the last chart you can sum it ougall up and what that would do to federal spending.

joe biden adds 1.1%. buttigieg, 2%. elizabeth warren 12 percentage points. sanders add 20 percentage points. and look lower right corner of your screen says obama 2008 would have added 1 percentage point. hillary clinton in 2016 half a percentage point. john kerry in 2004, half a percentage point. by this measure you see sanders would have a far more transformational effect on the size and role of the federal government. why has nobody paid attention to this. back to your question. we all have our own theory. i have two theories. one, sanders hasn't put the same level of detail into his plans as she did to hers. harder to pull these numbers together and shoot at it. second, quite frankly, i think until recently, sanders was like everybody's eck ten trick ecce.

a lot of people didn't think he was a serious contender for the nomination and not subjected to the same dissection of his plans and policies and what they would cost as elizabeth warren has. so that is kind of where we are. >> and when he was asked over the weekend how much his program was going to cost, he said he didn't know. but knew it would cost a lot. they did do this programs and for now that seems to be sufficient for a lot of iowa voters who are going to be going to the caucuses next week. so speaking of iowa, go to iowa and bring in a guy who's the star of the circus. the creator of the recount. i mean, this guy's involved in everything. he's probably, like, dean of a law school and also runs the united methodist church for greater north america. but john heilemann, it is a

curious question that willie asked, and i'm curious what you're hearing on the ground. why is elizabeth warren punished for talking about the outlines of her plan and how much it's going to cost voters while bernie sanders doesn't? we all know what he's proposing will cost more, and he actually seems to be rewarded for that same thing. >> well, joe, first let me say in my, that latter role, my role as church elder, god bless you. good morning. >> god bless you. good morning to you, too. >> i think that -- i think part of what happened here in the fall in particular when the moderate candidates, pete buttigieg, amy klobuchar in particular and to some extent joe biden decided to turn on the progressives over medicare for all. the difference for a lot of voters and certainly as it played out on the debate stage, difference between bernie sanders and elizabeth warren was simple. the elizabeth warren position

was, not i'm going to raise your taxes to pay for medicare for all and not i'm not going to raise your taxes to pay for medicare for all. she refused what she would say for a long period of time and took a lot of criticism for that. seems absurd i don't have a plan for medicare for all, i'm for bernie's plan but yot know if i'll raise middle cralass taxes and that left her in position to be criticized for not being up front with the american voter. bernie sanders, you're correct, steve rat fluhrtner is right. bernie sanders hasn't gone into detail about the proposals she has, but he was different from her. he was the originator of medicare for all bill and said from the very beginning, i'm going to raise middle class taxes, and then ultimately medicare for all will pay for itself because it will drive down costs in the system. the fact he was able to answer that first-level question, are you going to raise middle class taxes? how could you do something that

expensive and not raise middle class taxes. his answer, i'm going to raise middle class taxes. putting the discussion in ways behind him and seemed he was being candid and she didn't seem that way. left her vulnerable to criticisms of those in the middle and then you saw her poll numbers go down starting in the fall, and when she fell under assault, put forward the numbers steve and others looked and said, these numbers don't add up and that let bernie off the hook and the other thing that factors in things others have said. for a long time, until the last month or so, people weren't taking bernie seriously in the way they were warren. just past the top of the hour. let's bring in white house bureau chief at the "washington post" and msnbc and nbc news political analyst philip rucker, co-author of the new book "a very stable genius: donald j. trump testing of america." also with us, political writer for the "new york times" and an msnbc political analyst, nick

con confessore and host of "kasie dc" on msnbc, kasie hunt joins us this morning. and white house correspondent for pbs news hour, yamiche alcindor and we kick off this hour with this -- >> everything i do during this i'm coordinating with white house counsel in respect will be no difference between the president's position and our position as to how to handle this. >> mitch mcconnell thought he was in total coordination with the white house. apparently not. now reporters say that the majority leader is angry after receiving no advance notice that national security council reportedly had a copy of john bolton's manuscript for weeks. >> kasie hunt, there were only two options, and neither of them good for mitch mcconnell after we found out about the leaking of john bolton's book.

one was that mcconnell had been kept in the dark nap ju. just makes him look stupid. like a guy cow takowtowing to d trump and donald trump completely exposes him, makes him look like a complete fool in front of his caucus. option one. option number two is that mitch mcconnell knows and blindsided his members. that, of course, for any leader of any legislative body especially when the stakes are this high of is an unforgivable political sin. so two varying options for mitch mcconnell. it looks based on reporting, you tell us what you're hearing, that it was actually the first actual fact pattern that ended up being the case. that donald trump just simply ran over mitch mcconnell and humiliated him in front of the republican senate caucus. >> well, joe, i've covered mitch

mcconnell long enough to know that your option two is, i mean, we would be living on planet mars if that's what happened. mitch mcconnell would be insane to not have prepared for this, to have been in touch with his conference. that's where his power comes from. he's not going to mess around with that. they put out, it's a pretty rare thing to hear something like this on the record from a mcconnell spokesman. one-line statement, bcc'd to reporters. they don't typically operate that way but gotten this question over and over again. i am personally stunned that considering how the white house was relying on -- i mean if they didn't understand mitch mcconnell was the only thing standing in between them and this dam breaking open on impeachment, i really have no idea what they were thinking, because they had a copy of this book, and they didn't tell mitch mcconnell, according to it, and you're right. he faced a lot of frustration

inside his conference about this. they were all blindsided. i mean you know better than anybody being in congress, it's really the quickest way to make people angry is to not read them in and make sure that they feel like they're in the know, and mcconnell was willing, as you showed, to do exactly what the white house wanted to do. they just, know, i wrote this on twitter it's like he was drilling -- they were drilling with their cavalry for months and failing to tell them that the horse was going to spook at the gunfire. now they're in the thick of this and gotting in to fight back against it. if you are trying to defend the president, i do not understand why you would keep this back from mitch mcconnell. >> so, kase, the best defense team for the president could muster, jay sekulow saying on the floor, well, this book is just an allegation. it's just a book. it's not evidence. we work on evidence. the way to put it into evidence, allow john bolton to testify, of course. so what kind of pressure do you pick up on republicans? we've heard pat time's proposals, a one for one trade.

so you get john bolton and we get hunter biden. how do you think this ends? and what are republicans saying after post-bolton revelation, what's their defense for not calling him as a witness? >> so it's a pretty complicated and layered question obviously. i still think it could go either way, but the fact that that's where we are now is pretty stunning, considering where we were even on sunday afternoon. before this story came out. i mean, it was widely believed among democrats and republicans that this trial was on a fast track. the republicans were going to figure out a way to vote to acquit probably by friday or saturday. definitely before the state of the union. the conversation has completely changed this morning and it was completely different yesterday. i think that there's still sorting through this, because there are risks for republicans in opening this up, and the way it has been set up means that there is kind of on the table this idea that, well, we got to take this one key vote to open it up for witnesses. then we're not sure what we're going to do. should we call a democrat for

every republican? it's actually trickier than you might think for republicans on the biden question. on the one hand, you have bolton, a lot of people that want to hear from him. i would say bipartisan interest in hearing from john bolton. there are conservative republicans, ted cruz has been out there in public saying this, who want to hear from hunter biden. imagine you're a cory gardner, martha mcsally? you have to run for re-election, a swing state, base would walk down trump even if he were shooting people there and on the other hand trying to win with swing suburban women. can't win without them either. what do you do if you have to vote on whether or not to call hunter biden? become as difficult vote. almost harder than voting for john bolton who was a conservative who worked for president trump. a lot more basis there. they are in a very, very tough position, and i still think that if we see witnesses get called end of the day, it's not going

to be like a fourth republican walking the plank for all of them. a group of four or five whose names maybe we're not talking about every day to go together and make this happen. >> new reserve likes this morning from former national security adviser john bolton in his upcoming book detailing his unease over president trump's foreign policy and not just with ukraine. the "new york times" is reporting according to that unpub lshed manuscript bolton privately told attorney general william barr last year he had concerns that trump was effectively granting personal favors to the autocratic leaders of turkey and china. according to the paper barr responded pointing to a pair of justice department investigations of companies in those countries and said he was worried that president trump had created the appearance that he had undo influence over what would typically be independent inquiries. backing up his point attorney general barr mentioned conversations president trump had with the leaders, president erawan of turkey and xi jinping

of china. nbc news hasn't seen or verified the report citing multiple sources familiar with bolton the account. a doj statement reads this way overnight "the "new york times" account of this conversation grossly mischaracterizes what attorney general barr and mr. bolton discussed in respect was no discussion of personal favors or undue influence on investigations nor did barr state that the president's conversations with foreignimpro" the book as drips and drabs come out points to a former national security advisers in john bolton willing to open it up, willing to glow theo there and reveal everything he knows? >> right. i think the bolton book raised the cost to senate republicans considerably, blocking witnesses and testimony. it was already rising, but this is now a fight over the fate of the senate in november. i think everyone understands what will happen with the president, in impeachment and

conviction. what we're fighting about now, what record is left behind for voters to evaluate what kind of job the senate did on impeachment. and it's going to get harder and harder for senators to walk through congress and give these various excuses to reporters, it was immaterial. how come the house didn't get it? g gets more and more about such when a hawk says i have something here and will come talk. >> predictable but stunning, phil you to hear yesterday lou dobbs calls john bolton, a tool of the left. so the traction of john bolton commenced. >> go back 15 years, nobody calls john bolton a tool of the left. >> or six months. >> even six months. a danger for trump here is that bolton can paint a portrait of the president, a pattern of behavior not only with ukraine but with these other countries and his other actions in office of using the power of the presidency to advance his

personal or business interests or do things that in some way violate not only our norms but our laws. that's the rick. the book goes into much more than just krrn cynthukraine and seems prepared to testify to that. >> i'm struck how this book didn't make it from the national security council to members of the president's team to many, and i'm wondering what's going on in the white house? at this point. might it be that members of the national security council did not pass it on on purpose? is that even possible? because who is left right now sort of helping the president with strategy moving forward? in the white house. >> well, right now what he has is a legal team that's scrambling. from my understanding and sources i've talked to in the white house, the legal team was already setting out this agenda where they wanted to convince senators not to call witnesses and now they understand that

their job is a lot harder and likely will be that witnesses are called. now you have president trump not only having to deal with actually talking about this but you have the actual senate trial now played out. willie talk and the fact the big et thing they could one up with an idea this was an allegation. then alan deschish witts said doesn't matter what bolton said. if everything he says is true that still means that president trump shouldn't be impeached. what we heard from mick mulvaney in october when he said get over it. there will be political influence in foreign policy. you have maybe a mick mulvaney, maybe a secretary pompeo kind of talking to president trump about this. but also you have president trump of course going off on twitter and very, very angry at john bolton, because he understands all of the things that john bolton can say. he understands all of the conversations that he's had with john bolton and this new reporting from the "new york times" says maybe ukraine is the tip of the iceberg and there are a number of other countries the president's been talking to at

least john bolton thought were improper. >> yeah. you know, john heilemann, back to iowa. john heilemann, you've been following joe biden around obviously. been getting a feel for the state for quite some time now. i want to show you three polls. actually, you have a tale of three polls here. the first one is seven news emerson college poll that has bernie sanders up by nine points over joe biden. 21%. klobuchar, 13%. now you have the suffolk "usa today" poll which actually shows joe biden up by six points. and then the third poll, of course, what we showed yesterday that just came out yesterday, has it just deadlocked, actually. sanders and biden are tied at the top. the one thing, and one constant, and something that i always did. i never, in all the polling that i did personally, i never looked

at the bottom line numbers. i always looked at trend line. i only cared about trend lines. the one thing these three polls seem to have in common are this -- bernie's on the rise and joe biden's on the rise. >> right. >> that's great news for both of those candidates. not such great news for elizabeth warren, of course. >> right. i think, joe, if you take all the polling that's come out in this calendar year, after december there was not very much. we came back, started hanging out in iowa, early, right ar the first of the year. the first register came out and then a bunch since then. the two clear things you can see if you took all of it together is factors in margins of error on all of these polls you had essentially a four-way tie for first place n. that any of the four top candidates could win here and any of the four top candidates except maybe bernie sanders no one thinks would finish fourth,

on caucus night, smart people looking at the numbers any of these candidates could finish first and the stack from one to four could be spread, dealt out in pretty much any order. that's the first thing. maybe that is true. look at the recent polling. really recent polling. amy klobuchar may join that group. ma have a top five really who are tied for first. that's one point. the second point is that if you think about iowa as being two races within a race. one race in the progressive lane. one race in the moderate lane. to see who's going to come out of iowa on top in the different kind of bracket its. right? be the leader going into new hampshire of the progressive cause or the moderate cause? the two candidates who seem to be on top in those respective lanes right now and as you say moving in the right direction seem to be bernie sanders and joe biden. the two candidates that feel they are stalled or maybe a little on the down slide are elizabeth warren and the progressive side and pete buttigieg on the moderate side.

i think there's kind of a consensus on the ground among pollsters and smart strategists, people who know the state that those two things are true. >> you know, fascinating about the fact that biden and bernie are both on the right. steve rattner is, that looking through the lens of the bloomberg campaign, you have with these two gentlemen who, whoever wins, you have two completely different results with, i think, pretty significant impact for michael bloomberg's viability moving forward if joe biden wins, it's obviously bad news for michael bloomberg. because biden will certainly, that win will carry him through to south carolinaened mo eneand likely super tuesday. a bernie sanders anyone iowa even by a point justifies in michael bloomberg's mind and the neem would support michael bloomberg exactly what he's doing right now.

so iowa, interesting. iowa could have significant impact not just on the candidates who win but the candidate with billions of dollars who is standing on the sidelines right now. >> no question about that, joe. i agree with that completely. i think to a different degree depending a little whats in iowa same could be said about new hampshire and nevada and south carolina. certainly in iowa, two things that you mention i'll highlight are true. one, the more that bernie sanders rises, the more, and i see this very much now happening already among my activist democratic friends. the more people are getting scared about a brns candidacy for two reasons. first because they think he'll lose and if he wins implement the kind of policies i outline add few minutes ago, which are so far away from the center of democratic party. a lot of activity around trying to stop bernie, quote/unquote, although it isn't called that

yet and michael bloomberg could play a role in that as per bernie sanders. as you point out, biden has to not do as well as people expect. whether second, third or fourth,ed by lan to weaken in the course of the first few primaries. biden wins iowa and new hampshire let say, strong in nevada and south carolina it may well be game over. does poorly in iowa, as john heilemann indicated you have to look at these polls as so far within the margin of error, really to be a four-way tie. maybe better momentum here and there, but iowa is very unpredictable and among those four almost anything can happen, and if something on the lower side, third, fourth happens for biden, that raises michael bloomberg as the possible alternative for bernie sanders and that's exactly the calculus. >> we should actually note here that steve rattner is michael bloomberg's money man, despite

that fact and despite the fact that willie and i are friends with him, we have tried to get some of that money. willie and i have. >> not a nickel. >> for years hasn't given us a nickel. that doesn't mean we're not going to keep trying. so kasie hunt, elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, amy klobuchar are trapped in the united states senate while joe biden and pete buttigieg and others are returning all over iowa. how are we biding their time? have you had any sightings? what can you tell us about their state of mind, trapped in d.c.? >> well, amy klobuchar i will say using it to her advantage to the extent she can. has been very accessible to cameras and frankly all of our cameras are pointed at the senate right now. the number of reporters, people coverage focus on the senate compared to where we would 2340r78 normally focus on iowa is insane to me. elizabeth warren probably most

frustrated and the one suffering most. to a certain extent. bernie sanders has strong celebrity surrogates. ao dplch aoc in iowa. the one heilmann talking about needs a little boost here at the end. suffering for it. can i go back to one thing rattner was just saying? >> yeah. >> what i don't understand about the bloomberg strategy here is that bernie sanders is not going to get out of this race. he is going to be in this race from the beginning until the bitter end. the same way he was in 2016. and especially if he has a one-two nunch iopunch in iowa a hampshire, it's entirely possible and puts him on a war path hard to stop. i don't see bloomberg doing anything but destroying joe biden's ability to take that on in a meaningful way. he's not pulling bernie sanders voters on super tuesday. he's pulling biden voters.

>> i'm not sure i understand the last part of your question. >> if bernie's running strong out of the early states, iowa, new hampshire, heading into super tuesday and joe biden is struggling to kind of keep up with him and to be the main alternative to bernie sanders, doesn't bloomberg carpet bombing with money super tuesday pull from biden's support and make bernie's path to the nomination easier? >> bloomberg isn't even in the iowa primary. >> i no that, but super tuesday becomes the issue for biden? right? he's got to win big in the super tuesday states with more diverse voters and a wider electorate but facing mike bloomberg and clearing a path up the middle. not the middle, the left. >> the point is simple. mike bloomberg is doing nothing to stop biden's candidacy. haven't see an ad, a comment, not anything about joe biden. mike bloomberg is fine if joe biden wins. so joe biden will either rise or

fall on his own without help other hurt from mike bloomberg in iowa and new hampshire and ultimately nevada and south carolina. if joe biden falters comes in third or fourth in iowa, people like john heilemann and those who know something will say that's a disastrous outcome for a guy running a long time and all of these people put together et cetera and a weak candidate and somebody has to stop bernie sanders and michael bloomberg is prepared to do that on super tuesday. joe biden comes out of the primaries strong he'll be in a commanding position on super tuesday and simple as that. mike bloomberg is not running against joe biden. mike bloomberg is running in case joe biden can't live up to his needs and finish first or second in all of those early primaries. >> right. so kasie, the feeling now is, in the democratic party especially the democratic establishment, certainly people mika and i talked to over the past couple days are horrified by the rise

of bernie sanders, just like the republican party was horrified by the rise of donald trump. >> sure. >> in 2016. and if with all of his advantages, with the fact that he was barack obama's vice president, the fact he had the big organization, the fact had everything going for him, if he can't beat a socialist from vermont the feeling is that he's going to have a real problem. now, of course, what's interesting and what makes your point so interesting is, if bernie wins the first two and then somehow biden wins the next two, nevada and south carolina, and they're split and the then go into super tuesday, then you are -- >> what's bloomberg going to do? >> there's a chance that bloomberg divides biden's vote and actually pushes a pathway forward for bernie sanders. but, of course, there's also people talking about brokered conventions. hasn't happened in a very long time. doubt it will happen this year but that's what bloomberg's also

hoping. an outside chance of a brokered convention. >> the other thing, too, is, jeb bush if we use the analogies from what happened with republicans and trump. trump had all the excitement. jeb bushes campaign and super pac dropped $100 million into the race, and nothing happened at all. i mean, is bloomberg's team not afraid -- clearly he's got nor money and can use it in a different way than jeb bush was able to do, but i see no proof that millions of dollars is what's moving and electorate moving in a populist direction whether from the left or the right? >> and john heil mauieil maurem can jump in and answer the question. even though not in iowa what you're hearing about bloomberg. what we're at least seeing in some polls are michael bloomberg starting to push towards double digits despite the fact he hasn't been on a, hasn't been in iowa, hasn't been in new hampshire, hasn't been on a debate stage. >> right. >> hasn't done anything but run

some pretty powerful 30-second commercials. i'm wondering is a biden campaign worried about him on super tuesday? splitting the vote with them? and actually helping bernie sanders get the democratic nomination? >> i don't think they are, joe, for this one reason. i think the biden campaign sees the world in a binary way. they feel if they end up here in iowa, with pete buttigieg, ahead of pete, they walk out of here as the kind of, champion of the moderate cause and feel good about their prospects therefore going forward. as the main moderate. they will do relatively well in new hampshire and strong as we've said in nevada and south carolina that allows him to consolidate that moderate space and basically bloomberg will stand down. so they're not worried about that. if they finish behind buttigieg here or and in that case likely third or fourth place, they

won't say it publicly but they recognize i think the race could be effectively over for joe biden in that circumstance. you could see the air come out of the balloon so fast and bernie with his head of steam wins iowa, new hampshire, nevada potentially and now he's on that fast track to the nomination, and then we get to the scenario with bloomberg. the main thing to keep in mind, there is no scenario, imagined by mike bloomberg or anybody around mike bloomberg in which michael bloomberg becomes the democratic nominee winning 1900 nominees. the number you need. if bernie is like a run away train he can pick off delegates, california, new york, connecticut, new jersey, other places that no one gets to 1991

delegates and that's an explicit contested convention oriented scenario where bloomberg, again, doesn't win the nomination outright but keeps bernie from getting to 1991 and then -- >> essentially a jumpball at the -- if that were to happen and, of course, it's highly unlikely, but it could. if that were to happen, how were the rules changed over the past years over super delegates? power taking away from democratic super delegates, right? >> super delegates do not vote on the first ballot at the convention. purely what respective candidates won in the primary caucuses. the second round of balloti supr dell gets get involve. if you get to milwaukee and no one has 1991, establishment retakes control it used or role it used to have favoring obviously a moderate candidate like mike bloomberg or someone else. >> and that would be the

firewall for the dnc against bernie sanders. >> right. >> if they get to the second ballot, which just, again, you can't repeat it enough. the democratic establishment is as fearful of bernie sanders in 2020 as republican establishment was of donald trump in 2016. so as we're moving forward, steve rattner, the question is, will joe biden in 2020 be the jeb bush of 2016? or the john kerry of 2004? >> hmm. >> exactly the question, and the democratic establishment as i said and the activists i spend time with are terrified about the idea of a bernie sanders candidacy for those two reasons. i think, joe, a few minutes you underscored. mike bloomberg is not going to change the fate of joe biden. joe biden is going to change the fate of joe biden. joe biden is either going to win iowa and new hampshire or do really, really well in those two and have momentum going into the two states he's stronger and into super tuesday only three

days after south carolina or not do well there. in which case there needs to be a viable centrist alternative to try to stop bernie sanders. that's the role mike bloomberg sees himself as playing. whether we get to a brokered convention, someone gets majority, that's uncharted waters. see what happens. most important, over 30% of delegates will be selected on super tuesday. if we democrats don't have a viable centrist candidate going into that then the sanders train could become unstoppable. that is the theory of the case. >> phil, we know -- >> if that happens the democratic party will erupt into a civil war like we have never seen. bernie sanders supporters are going to completely lose it. you thought 2016 was bad versus hillary, forget it under th scenario. >> we know the president loves to play, democrats trying to steal this from bernie sanders. got himself impeached trying to

torpedo that effort with joe biden. and how is the president who loves to sit in his office and watch tv and see how this is all playing out, how is he watching this campaign right now? >> he's probably watching right now, but what's going on with the president is he is afraid of michael bloomberg's money at the moment. fretting to advisers and friends the last several weeks about bloomberg's pledge to spend $1 billion or more on this own campaign or to support the eventual democratic nominee and so to kasie's point that bloomberg's money isn't necessarily translating into support at a moment when populism is taking over the party is giving him ability to live rent-free in the president's head because trump is obsessed. >> philip rucker, steve rattner and john heilemann, thank you all. and still ahead, congressman adam schiff will be our guest. plus, two of the senate jurors, 2020 presidential

contender amy klobuchar and the number two senate democrat dick durbin. are they willing to trade a witness democrats want for a witness republicans want? you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. robinhood believes now is the time to do money. without the commission fees and account minimums. so, you can start investing wherever you are - even on the bus. download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood.

♪ ♪ ♪ applebee's new irresist-a-bowls starting at $7.99 for a limited time. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. the best of pressure cooking and air frying

now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

let me repeat. nothing in the bolton revelations even if true would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense. that is clear from the history, that is clear from the language of the constitution. you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like quid pro quo and personal benefit. >> that is alan dershowitz on the floor of the senate defending the president. and joining us, msnbc and nbc news contributor emily jane fox who recently interviewed dershowitz we just saw there in that clip. great to see you. amazing piece, all of yours are. so colorful and vivid. the defense of the president begins actually at a christmas

eve dinner where alan dershowitz is in line at the buffet and up behind him in line with a plate in his hand comes the president of the united states. >> that's how great presidential impeachment starts, at a line in a buffet. alan derschihowitz offered his plate to the president to which the president said, no thank you. i will get my own plate. and mr. dershowitz seemed outcasted because of his association with jeffrey epstein, and the chance to be put in by the president was very appealing to him even though i'm not sure that appearing on the senate floor as he did yesterday will get him the invitations he feels he is lacking, but the president has long looked for a name that dershowitz provides.

long time seeking a tv lawyer with a somewhat good reputation to be able to defend him in the way that alan dershowitz defended him yesterday. i do not think mr. dershowitz had a good argument but his position with fox news hosts and the floor is exactly what the president was looking for. >> and his clients, o.j. simpson, klaus von bulow, the fact alan dersch its howitz and put him on my defense? >> there are people around the president who were like, do we want to associate with someone who represented jeffrey epstein and himself accused of allegations around jeffrey epstein and when i asked dershowitz that he said he had spoken about it with the president and the president didn't believe the allegations against him and he was fine with him joining his word.

>> took his word for it? >> seemed to be as simple as that. >> yamiche alcindor has a question four. >> and except for the last hour when alan dershowitz got in front of the senate saying actually doesn't matter what he did. if all of this is true, then he still should not be impeached. walk me through how he came to that conclusion and why that's such a stark difference than the other lawyers who weren't saying that? >> it's interesting. alan dershowitz came to the senate floor, as i listened to it he made the point several times in his testimony he did not vote for president trump. he was an impartial expert who was coming there to argue on behalf of the constitution, and so there is very, very difficult to circle the square of his argument, and he was the only person to bring up john bolton. sort of the elephant in the room and no one brought it up until alan dershowitz did yesterday. when i asked about the

preparation, dersch whehowitz s was going through tons and tons of dusty law books and cases on his phone. it's unclear why he made arguments no one else was making. perhaps no one else wanted to touch those arguments. >> the problem with the tv lawyers, they've been on tv a lot and more on tv than the books. dershowitz has a long paper trail of contradictory statements over years and years and years. i wonder after he got done talking about all the things the president couldn't be impeached for is there anything he thinks the president could be impeached for at all? >> it's very difficult to get a straight answer out of someone like dershowitz because he's spent many years jumping from argument to argument. i talked how in 1998 he made a completely contradictory argument talking about president clinton and he said to me, i hadn't done the research. haven't done the research at the time. seems almost impossible to me someone like alan dershowitz

spent decades as a harvard law professor just went and made a statement about presidential impeachment in 1998 without do you research, especially talking about all the research he was doing for this impeachment case. take from that what you will. >> so interesting, emily. because in some ways the jeffrey epstein case saga investigation isn't over, and dershowitz represented him. also i believe is accused. >> sure. >> in all of that mess, with the pedophile jeffrey epstein. and the mystery surrounding his death is still causing a lot of questions to be asked. and we've got prince andrew, who is being, you know, apparently not helpful at all with the investigation and is being asked to be more helpful and is accused as well. i just wonder, i mean, what would be the desire on the part of president trump to want to have that whole blaring jeffrey

epstein side of his life out there in the, on the senate floor? >> i think it's twofold. i think we know how the president reacts to people who are accused of rape or sexual assault because the president has been credibly accused of sexual assault many times and attacked the women and made very clear he doesn't want people to believe those accusations or allegations against him. then he's desperate for a tv lawyer to get on the impeachment floor or on fox news to defend him. the two coupled together makes for a president who doesn't care about the moral judgments, doesn't care about the optics of having someone who defended jeffrey epstein or himself accused of things related to jeffrey epstein doesn't matter to him. matters to him someone with a name in the legal community getting up for him. >> the self-pity is astounding. dershowitz says, the worst thing that ever happened to me in my life, meeting jeffrey epstein. can no longer get honorary

degrees, speeches canceled, lost money whenever he's talked about, difficult to socialize on martha's vineyard. what did you pick up off him? did he express remorse or regret for victims of jeffrey epstein or just feeling sorry for himself? >> opposite. i was sweating doss th ining do interview, worked up how ruined his life is i pressed how this ruined so many women's life. to come forward and be brave enough to come forward and say something happened to me and i'm standing up for myself is where the real bravery and sacrifice happens. not getting invited to get an honorary degree or to parties on martha's vineyard, no one's going to say, poor you, alan dershowitz. interesting to me, after we talked how his life has been ruined by jeffrey epstein. an interesting choice to then go in front of the world and defend donald trump in this impeachment trial. is that going to get him invited

baaing to parties on martha's vin vineyard? he didn't care about that. he does care about these accusations of sexual assault. >> imagine thinking the big problem with jeffrey epstein is you wouldn't ghent invited to a party on martha the vineyard. it's breathtaking. thank you for joinings us. >> thank you. and senator amy klobuchar is with us. good morning. >> great to be on. good morning. >> talk about witnesses in this impeachment trial you've been sitting through now for a week or so. do you believe the revelation from john bolton's manuscript made public by the "new york times" puts more pressure on your republican colleagues to say, yes, we at least have to hear from john bolton? >> of course i do, and i think we're starting to hear that. mitt romney has already said for quite a while he wants to hear from him and said it again after the revelations came out. susan collins has said that she

thinks it made a better case for witnesses. and all we need is two more. i literally am sitting a few yards from them and i just keep looking at them and thinking, whatever you do on the vote on impeachment, whatever you think, you cannot deny a fair trial to the people of america. it is right there. i feel like i'm in a parallel universe as the president's lawyers one by one go through bits of evidence, but they're denying the fact that the guy that, to quote his book is in the room where it happens, john bolton, is not coming before us. so that's going to be the big vote for me. do they think of themselves as, know, people that serve at the pleasure of the president or people that serve out of respect for the people that sent them to washington. >> so senator, to the extent you're willing, take us inside the cloakroom talking to some republican colleagues. not the ones we see on camera, on tv, the talking point they're reciting when they come out to the cameras, but when they hear

john bolton, not some prieriphel player, j.b. ohn bolton confirm events in ukraine, the president holding up aid from the ukrainian government. the man who called it a drug deal, how do they dispute that or say no, we still don't want to see him as a witness. how can they defend that now? >> depends on the senator. some saying all of this stuff is circle. i said to one, how do you prove that it is not just circumstance sfascircumstance -- circumstantial. just find out the truth. why not? others look clearly troubled and know the weight of history is on their shoulders and this isn't just coming out five years from. >> now. this is going it come out five weeks from now. if they will have denied a witness and this comes out's i

think they have to do the right thing. >> senator, nicknick. you're pretty far back in the polls in a smaller and smaller pack now. i'm wondering. everyone has right to run for as long as they want. do you have in your mind a benchmark you have to succeed in iowa and new hampshire in order to stay in the race? >> i'm just going to keep doing well, and i don't -- the way that question was asked, like, oh, how long you going to stay in? look at facts. the last poll you put up in iowa, the emerson poll, i was number three. ahead of two of my colleagues that you talk about all the time. on this show. in new hampshire, in the last nbc poll, i was at ten points. i've been endorsed by both papers that have endorsed so far in new hampshire. the union leader, as well as the kean newspaper yesterday.

i'm the one that actually has a receipt. in small states those things matter. as you know i was endorsed along with elizabeth warren by the "new york times" and as well as "the quad city times." we have a strong grass roots campaign. i did not expect to be spending this last two weeks obviously not in iowa, not in new hampshire, but that is when you've got a campaign where people are devoted to you, they're out there helping me. i have the most endorsements of anyone in the race of legislators and former led legislato legislators. we're peaking when we are speciesed to peak. i'm not a pundit, that's up to you guys. i'd be talking about my campaign more. i'll give you that clue. >> no question you're mooshi im and the "new york times" poll 40% of iowa voters haven't even made up their minds yet. >> remember, i have the receipts

i've won those voters everyone has talking points about. won the republican voters and independent voters. brought them in in a big way. and i think that's what you need. as well as a vision for this country that's progressive and practical. and way to get things done. i have proven i have the experience to do that. >> senator, kasie hunt has a question. >> senator, good morning. good to see you. >> good morning, kasie. >> talking earlier on the program about mike bloomberg and reporting in politico this morning about a push from progressives to try to get him on to the debate stage. they're concerned he's avoided scrutiny from his other contenders in that he's able to air these tv ads and not then have to answer tough questions. do you think mike bloomberg should be on the debate stages going forward? >> i'd be fine with him on the debate stage, because i think that instead of just putting your money out there he's actually got to be on the stage, and be able to go back and forth so that voters can evaluate him in that way. certainly being on the debate

stage for me and making every single benchmark put in front of me has been helpful, because then people get to know me. they can see that i'm tough enough to take on donald trump, and they can see how i respond with other people on a a stage, and i think that would be really important. my hope is i think he could have done it if he wanted to get donors, if he wanted to be on the ballot in the early staltes but he didn't want to do that. that means you wait for super tuesday time. i don't know when that debate is scheduled, but there better be one. >> amy, i totally hear you when you say you talk about certain other candidates all the time. i want to get you to talk about them. one rapid thought. why you're bern than elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, and joe biden. why are you better than joe biden to be president? >> because i am from the middle

of the country, that's where we did not do well in 2016. i have a proven record of leading a ticket, bringing people with me in difficult areas. and finally, i am a new generation, i am in between mayor pete and in between joe biden. >> more specifically, elizabeth warren. >> elizabeth warren, i made it clear both with elizabeth and bernie that i have different views than they do. i think my views are more consistent with where our party is and where the people of this country are. i don't want to kick 149 people off the current health insurance in four years. i don't think that's a good idea. i don't agree with their plan. i know it is good on a bumper sticker for free college for all. i think we should be meshing our economy with our education system. we're not going to have a shortage of mbas, we're going to have shortage of plumbers. a million openings for health care workers in the next ten

years. i think my plan makes the most sense. >> senator klobuchar, you passed except for one line part. thank you very much for being on the show this morning. >> all right. see you later. >> take care. coming up, adam schiff is our guest. the california democrat weighs in on developments concerning john bolton straight ahead on "morning joe." john bolton straight ahead on "morning joe." ♪

(sensei) beautiful. but support the leg! when i started cobra kai, the lack of control over my business made me a little intense. but now i practice a different philosophy. quickbooks helps me get paid, manage cash flow, and run payroll. and now i'm back on top... with koala kai. hey! more mercy. (vo) save over 40 hours a month with intuit quickbooks. the easy way to a happier business.

you know, we look at the polls, often iowa polls end up being dead on. seen it a few times before. sometimes there are surprises. amy brings up a great point, we never know. just like elizabeth warren. everybody talks about how badly

she's doing. we'll see how the ground operation goes. she has a great one. maybe she shocks. maybe it is amy that shocks. maybe bernie underperforms. we don't know. >> but we will soon. we'll be there in iowa. >> remember tom brokaw telling us in 2008 in new hampshire, let the voters vote first. still ahead, the president's defense team set to wrap opening arguments today after an interesting day two. plus, lead impeachment prosecutor adam schiff joins us, and senator dick durbin will be our guest as lawmakers discuss plans for a possible witness swap. "morning joe" is coming right back. ng joe" is coming right back get them out of pain fast. we have a new product out there: sensodyne rapid relief. if you use it on monday, by thursday, you'll be enjoying that chocolate ice cream again. they can start it, and 3 days later, i know that they're going to have the results they were looking for. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology,

you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. i had moderate-to-severes rheumatoid arthritis. i've always been the ringleader had a zest for life. flash forward, then ra kept me from the important things. and what my doctor said surprised me. she said my joint pain could mean permanent joint damage. and enbrel helps relieve joint pain, and helps stop that joint damage. ask about enbrel so you can get back to being your true self. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common. or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu.

visit enbrel.com to see how your joint damage could progress. enbrel fda approved for over 20 years. americans come to lendingtree.com to compare and save on loans, credit cards and more! but with the new lending tree app you can see your full financial health, monitor your credit score, see your cash flow and find out how you can cut your monthly bills. download it now to see how much you can save. ♪ limu emu & doug [ siren ] give me your hand! i can save you... lots of money with liberty mutual! we customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ robinwithout the commission fees. so, you can start

investing today wherever you are - even hanging with your dog. so, what are you waiting for? download now and get your first stock on us. robinhood.

n not a single witness testified that the president said there was any connection between any investigation and security assistance, a presidential meeting, or anything else. >> jay sekulow, meet john bolton. "new york times" is reporting trump told bolton last august that he wanted to continue freezing critical military aid to ukraine until government officials there helped with investigations targeting joe biden, his son hunter, and other democrats. and good morning. welcome to "morning joe." it is tuesday, january 28th. along with joe, willie and me,

we've associate at editor of "the washington post" and msnbc analyst eugene robinson. author and former republican strategist rick wilson joins us this morning, and nbc news and law analyst, editor and chief of law fair, benjamin wittus. author of "unmaking the presidency." a lot going on. we heard jay sekulow's approach to defending the president, namely pretending john bolton doesn't exist. there was concern starr that la meanted the impeachment. and alan dershowitz, even if every single thing is true, the president should still remain in office. there was former florida attorney general pam bondi who sent her time attacking the bidens, then there was trump lawyer jane raskin who defended

rudy giuliani's escapades in ukraine. as joe asked on twitter, how can it be after three years of donald trump, republicans sick fants continue to drag themselves to such new lows that their shamelessness still carries with it the ability to shock. the arguments put forward by trump lawyers and gop senators today were just ridiculous. sort of a teek of i don't know what, joe. -- team of i don't know what, joe. >> you had a confederacy of dunss defending him in impeachment. the arguments were stunning. let's start with the argument that rudy, mr. giuliani is a minor player, that shiny object designed to distract you. of course, earth to trump legal team, donald trump said in that

not so perfect, not so transcript, mr. giuliani is a highly respected man, donald trump said to the president of ukraine. he was the mayor of new york city. a great mayor. i would like you to call him. it was giuliani, this minor player that they talked about that ran the drug deal. he ran what john bolton called the drug deal. it's just unbelievable. willie, where do we begin with ken starr, if irony weren't already dead and buried years ago, it was ken starr talking about how abuse of power is not sufficient to impeach a president, you need a crime. he literally dragged the corpse of irony out of the grave, meticulously tied the corpse's neck bone to the back of a tractor.

and he ran that tractor throughout the graveyard of stupidity, ran over every headstone before once again kicking dirt on the corpse of irony again, and putting its bones back in one by one by one. how does ken starr say with a straight face, because i was there when he said the cap stone of impeachment for bill clinton was abuse of power. then he said so mournful, this is so terrible. we're starting to have a culture of impeachment. abuse of power, that's not enough. i said it was the calf's tongue. you are a ken starr, a flashing

billboard, gaudly printed sandwich board sign going down times square saying we're all dunces, hypocrites. we're all making fools of ourselves. and willie geist, i haven't even gotten to pam bondi. >> oh, please, no. no more. >> the pam bondi argument. >> please don't. >> can i get some help here? pam bondi, oh, my lord. can i get some help up here? >> preach! >> oh, my god, pam bondi says that joe biden bragged about firing the prosecutor because he was prosecuting burisma, and it was all sort of this inside -- hey, rupert murdoch's "the wall

street journal" called that a farce months ago. every major newspaper calls it a farce months ago. willie, the european union demanded removal of the corrupt prosecutor. the western world demanded the removal of the prosecutor. the obama administration told joe biden to go over there and remove the prosecutor. oh wait, one more thing, pam bondi, just one more thing. and for the entire trump team and for all you stupid people out there, actually you're not stupid, you think we're all stupid, you think donald trump supporters are all stupid, do you think conservatives are stupid, like donald trump, do you think southerners are stupid? we're not. we're not. you have the ukranians who said themselves that the prosecutor

had stopped investigating burisma at the time. it was one of the complaints on why, willie, this guy was in the tank. you know what, i am like james brown, i have done my thing. throw the sheet off me, i have to walk off stage. i will throw it off and come back. this is all i can handle. this confederacy of dunces, they lowered the collective iq of the western world by at least 24 points every hour they spoke on the senate floor. >> same way you don't want to follow james brown on stage, don't want to follow that rant from joe scarborough, here i am left with that task this morning. i would add to jay sekulow's argument, to the extent they addressed his defense team the bombshell from john bolton's book, it came from dershowitz saying it was not impeachable, also came from jay sekulow

saying that's just an allegation in a book, it is not evidence. let's get your irony met for back out. you can put it into evidence by calling john bolton as a witness, but the white house blocked them, john bolton said he would testify. one more dead body in the irony wilderness you were describing a few minutes ago. let's go back to pam bondi, the job of going after joe biden and his son hunter fell to the former florida attorney general. let's listen to her case. >> when the house managers gave you their presentation, when they submitted their brief, they repeatedly referenced hunter biden and burisma. when house managers gave you their presentation, when they submitted their brief, they repeatedly referenced hunter biden and burisma. they spoke to you for over 21 hours and they referenced biden

or burisma over 400 times. when they gave these presentations, they said there was nothing to see, it was a sham. this is fiction. the reason they needed to do that is because they're here saying that the president must be impeached and removed from office for raising a concern, and that's why we have to talk about this today. hunter biden had no experience in natural gas, no experience in the energy sector, no experience with ukranian regulatory affairs, as far as we know he doesn't speak ukranian, so naturally the media has asked questions about his board member ship. why was hunter biden on this board? >> in response to the attacks from pam bondi, the biden

campaign released a statement that reads in part we didn't realize breitbart was expanding into ted talk knock offs. here on planet earth, the conspiracy theory bondi repeated has been conclusively refuted, the diplomat trump himself appointed to lead his ukraine policy has blasted it as serve serving and not credible. joe biden was instrumental to a bipartisan and international anti-corruption victory. the former prosecutor said hunter biden did not violate ukranian laws, at least as of now we don't see wrongdoing. joe says the imf, eu were worried about that particular prosecutor, it wasn't a joe biden directive. >> he was a notoriously corrupt prosecutor. and it loops back into the world of paul manafort and everything else. this was part of the previous regime, and the fact is there

was a universal demand to push him out. however, this is also one of the great fantasies, to make hunter biden an issue in the 2020 election. pam bondi was playing to one audience, fox and trump. that's all they cared about, tried to accomplish. she goes way back with donald trump. left office under a cloud when she left the office of attorney general in florida, she had taken a $25,000 bribe from trump to cover up his trump university scandal and drop the lawsuit in florida. so they go way back. he likes that kind of one millimeter deep shallow presentation, and she delivered in spades in that regard, but it was a laughable example of how she was reading from the trump script that requires you to suspend logic, the ability to read a time line on a calendar, ability to look at the global

dislike nor this guy who was part of the cancer of corruption in ukraine as opposed to people that replaced him and were trying to clean it up. coming up on "morning joe," lead impeachment prosecutor chairman of the house intelligence committee, congressman adam schiff joins us. and the second ranking democrat in the u.s. senate, illinois's dick durbin is standing by. first, like storming the beaches of normandy, ken starr deplo deploys to the senate impeachment trial while referring to it as war. g to it r do you have concerns about mild memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. saving for ava's college. being able to retire on our terms.

taking care of dad. why ameriprise financial? my advisor cares about my personal goals. he gives us comprehensive advice. i feel prepared for what's expected in life and even what's not. she helps us feel confident. we know our financial future is secure. with the right financial advice, life can be brilliant. ameriprise financial. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems,

serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. 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. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

ken starr, independent counsel at former president clinton's impeachment trial tried to unironically warn of the dangers of impeaching a

president. >> significantly in this particular juncture in america's history the senate is being called to sit as the high court of impeachment all too frequently, and indeed we are living in what can aptly be called as the age of impeachment. like war, impeachment is hell. or at least presidential impeachment is hell. those of us that lived through the clinton impeachment, including members of this body full well understand a presidential impeachment is tantamount to domestic war, thankfully protected by the beloved first amendment, a war of words and ideas. it is filled with acrimony and

it divides the country like nothing else. >> ben wittes, isn't it rich as judy collins would say. this is a man after all who, and i know it is a family show, hopefully the kids are still asleep, if the kids are watching, cover their ears right now, so this is a man who put in -- >> joe -- >> no, who put in the impeachment report allegations of oral, anal contact. hold on a second. that's what ken starr did. that's what a supreme court justice did. that's what they put in their impeachment report. and we're talking now about a president that's not only asking a foreign power to interfere and holding up power, he then goes on national tv a week later and

asks china to interfere in america's democratic elections, a risk that his own intel agencies say is the greatest threat to american democracy. and ken starr is lecturing america about taking impeachment too lightly? i told you what he filled his impeachment report with, it is preposterous, especially on the legal merits, saying there's no way a president can be impeached because of abuse of power when he called that the cap stone of his impeachment argument against bill clinton. >> yes. i was sitting with a colleague yesterday watching ken star's presentation, she turned to me and said does ken star know he is ken star? i think that captured the whole

thing, that there was so little self awareness in this pie us presentation of the dangers of hyperactive impeachment, and you kind of watched it saying do you know who you are in this conversation, do you know, have any understanding of the role you played, and if there's a single person in the country who stands for the kind of defining impeachment down, it is ken starr. i am not going to replicate your irony is dead rant, but if there's a single person that represents the ills he is talking about, he is it. for him to stand up there without any apparent warnls of that is genuinely bewildering. the other aspect of the

presentation that is more serious, also upsetting, is this attack on the idea that abuse of power can be an impeachable offense without criminality associated with it. i would just like to respond to both of them with the following hypothetical. imagine donald trump announced that he was not going to do his job any more as president. he was just going to play golf and spend all his time in the white house bowling alley because that's actually more fun than the presidency. no one would say he had committed a crime. the president is allowed to play golf, to go bowling, they even built an alley for it in the white house, and yet are they really saying that would not be impeachable? so the basic defense is it

didn't happen, it doesn't matter if it did, and joe biden sucks. and that's not, you know, none of those elements are persuasive. the idea that this material if true couldn't form the basis of an impeachment is really a dangerous degradation of the idea that the president has awesome powers and we should judge him for how he uses them. coming up on "morning joe," we go to capitol hill where winds may be shifting when it comes to calling witnesses. garrett haake joins us next on "morning joe." t haake joins us n "morning joe." hey, saved you a seat.

this round's on me. hey, can you spot me? come on in. find your place today, with silversneakers. included in most medicare advantage plans. enroll today by calling the number on your screen or visit getsilversneakers.com the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

as your broker, i've solved it. is complicated. that's great, carl. but we need something better. that's easily adjustable has no penalties or advisory fee. and we can monitor to see that we're on track. like schwab intelligent income. schwab! introducing schwab intelligent income. a simple, modern way to pay yourself from your portfolio. oh, that's cool... i mean, we don't have that. schwab. a modern approach to wealth management.

and with the sxfinity stream app, screen is your big screen. which is free with your service, you can take a spin through on demand shows, or stream live tv. download your dvr'd shows and movies on the fly. even record from right where you are. whether you're travelling around the country or around the house, keep what you watch with you. download the xfinity stream app and watch all the shows you love. let's go up to capitol hill. bring in correspondent garrett haake and bureau chief and political analyst for msnbc and nbc news, phil rut geep ger.

author of "a very stable genius." let's talk about how the white house is feeling with the revelations from the bolton book and from what they saw on the senate floor. >> there's a scramble under way inside the white house to deal with the revelations from bolton that are in the book. outside of the national security council staff, people in the white house claim they didn't know about the book, didn't know the revelations, what was contained in it, even though bolton brought that to the white house at the end of december. right now, there's recalibration of legal strategy and scramble to deal with witnesses. trump lawyers and political folks assumed the trial could wrap up this week, that the president could be easily acquitted by end of the week by the republicans in the senate. now that's cast into doubt. there could be four or more republicans to vote for witnesses which would extend the trial, present a host of challenges for the president. >> what do you suspect will be

d defense, if john bolton, not a peripheral player, secondhand knowledge and everything else with some of the other witnesses, the guy in the room, called it a drug deal. if he testifies to what he's written in this book, what's the defense? >> well, it is really damaging in part because bolton is a credible narrator. understands the bureaucracy, took detailed notes much to the president's chagrin, is respected by a number of republicans in the senate. he has been around the block longer than trump has been president, it is a challenge for the white house. >> not just respected by a number of republican senators, and he is an idle for the republican hawks in the senate, lindsey graham, tom cotton, mark marco rubio. they love john bolton, he has a pac that gives money to their campaign. you know, there's a connection

there. so a lot of these senators are not inclined to call john bolton a liar, the white house will do that, but these are his friends going back many years, people who really admire him. >> garrett, we had mitt romney on the hill saying, i think it is increasingly likely other republicans that will join those of us that think we should hear from john bolton. susan collins says that manuscript strengthens the case for witnesses. will there be more or a small group. if the answer is no, how do you not call john bolton if you claim to have an honest, fair trial after what you read in this manuscript? >> reporter: that's an increasingly tough question. there was a scramble in and around the senate floor on the republican side. mitch mcconnell who said he is trying to coordinate hand in glove with the white house, we're told he was not aware about the manuscript. he was caught off guard as well.

you saw some of this come out in the free-lancing that republican senators were doing yesterday with reporters, offering trades for different witnesses, talking about different hypothetical scenarios. the mood shifted so dramatically from saturday afternoon, republican senators left for the weekend feeling they would have it wrapped up by end of the week to monday where nobody really knows where this goes. and there's so much general positive feeling towards bolton among republican senators generally, it will be difficult for them to try to discredit him prematurely, try to get in front of this. you're looking at the possibility of calling him or going towards the defense. you heard from some white house lawyers yesterday, however bad you might think it is, it is not impeachable. seems like that's the only thing to fall back on if bolton confirms what's at the heart of this in terms of the president ordering investigations. coming up on "morning joe," one of the jurors deciding the

president's political fate, senator dick durbin. and lead prosecutor pressing the case, congressman adam schiff. back with two big interviews straight ahead on "morning joe." s straight ahead on "morning joe." when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage, and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com

i wanted more from my copd medicine that's why i've got the power of 1, 2, 3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved once-daily 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy ♪ the power of 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy ♪ 1,2,3 ♪ trelegy woman: with trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works three ways to open airways, keep them open and reduce inflammation, for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3. ♪ trelegy, 1,2,3 woman: save at trelegy.com.

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. 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. dealing with our finances really haunted me.ttle cranky. thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeeper's helping customize it for our business. (live bookkeeper) you're all set up! (janine) great! (vo) get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. asand achieved new york city'sed cacleanest air quality in more than 50 years. as a leader in the fight against climate change, he helped shut down over half of the nation's coal plants, then led one of the biggest pollution reduction efforts in history.

as president, he intends to reduce emissions by fifty percent within ten years. because if we want to stop climate change, we need to make a change. this is a fight-we can't afford to lose. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

is there any logical reason not to have bolton testify? >> this afternoon was devastating for the house managers. for the first time in the entire proceeding, we have heard just the beginning of the serious evidence of corruption involving burisma, the ukranian natural gas company that paid hunter biden, joe biden's son a million dollars a year, let me answer the question. let me answer the question without interrupting me, please. >> you got it. >> burisma paid hunter biden,

joe biden's son a million dollars a year. i get that the press loves to obsess over the latest bombshell. listen, i don't know what john bolton's book says or doesn't say, i have seen the "new york times" coverage. at the end of the day, it doesn't impact the legal issue before this senate. >> how scared they are of joe biden, winning the election? >> can i just say, willie, we talked about bad acting on capitol hill. >> oh, my god. >> talked about steve, is that what trump calls kevin mccarthy, such bad acting from ted cruz. you wonder if his parents actually -- is that the sh tick he did stealing from the cookie

jar? if he is right about the assassination of jfk, probably catching onto that conspiracy. he defends donald trump more than he did his dad or his wife when donald trump attacked his dad. but anyway, you get the impression when he starts talking that he has purposely surrounded himself with stupid people his entire life. didn't he go to some high fal utilitying school? >> harvard. >> one of those schools i couldn't get into. he had to surround himself with the stupidest people at harvard, he speaks this way as if he thinks people are going to believe him. and he lies. he doesn't know what john bolton said? yes, he does. he is lying. it is a transparent lie. not only does he know what he says, he knows it is the truth

and has known it all along. he is willing to go out and lie for a man who called his wife ugly and who said his father assassinated jfk. >> the chamber was loaded on that answer, regardless what the question from the reporter had been, he was going to turn to the camera, away from the reporter, address the camera like giving rebuttal to the state of the union and make his case. could have asked him what sandwich he had for lunch, he would have started talking about house managers. it isn't surprising. they view their primary job as defending the president, regardless what's put in front of them, including an offer to have firsthand knowledge from the national security adviser john bolton presented to them as jurors in the impeachment trial. let's talk to one of the jurors, second ranking democrat in the senate, member of the judiciary committee, dick durbin of illinois. senator, good to see you. your reaction to senator ted cruz of texas and the argument

he is making it doesn't matter what john bolton is saying, says he hasn't read it, he says that doesn't matter. what's your response? >> i listened to professor dershowitz, this criminal law professor from harvard that dismissed bolton, saying there's nothing he could say that could be of relevance or importance to us on the question of impeachment. obviously they're concerned enough they had professor dershowitz make that statement. i'll just tell you this. if we don't have witnesses under oath speaking truth to the american people, this is not a trial. all that you've seen is a presentation of some political theory, but it is not a trial. >> senator, what do you make of the idea that pat toomey put forward of a one for one offer of witnesses, which is to say we'll have john bolton come and testify to what he's put in the book manuscript, but we want hunter biden.

would you be open to that deal? >> i don't like that bidding war, give us one rudy giuliani and -- come on. boils down to whether they're material witnesses to the issues. let it not be decided by democrats and republicans, but by the chief justice. they won't accept that. bottom line, witnesses are employees, former employees of this president who will be speaking under oath. we don't know what they'll say, we are willing to accept their testimony. this idea of bringing in the bidens or someone else, i'm sorry. i don't think it ought to be a bidding war in terms of who testifies. it ought to be someone important. >> senator, joe scarborough, you had to be relieved when ken starr came out in defense of a political culture that didn't elevate impeachment, through the forefront of political tactics. what was your response as one presidential lawyer after

another came up and insulted the intelligence not only of the senators sitting there but everybody watching, also as ken st starr said abuse of power, what he called the cap stone of his impeachment case against bill clinton, was no longer sufficient to impeach a president. >> in a nation of 350 million people, the president's defense team found one person to come and lecture us on not abusing the impeachment process, and that was ken starr. i was there. sitting in the senate when the clinton impeachment went forward. i remember the details. you recounted some of them earlier in the program. for him to stand before us and make some pie us pronouncement not overdoing impeachment was a golden moment in the senate. >> what about pam bondi getting up there and recounting another conspiracy theory that's been disprove enas i -- disprove en.

"the wall street journal" said it was a discredited theory to say hunter biden worked for burisma, his father fired the prosecutor to stop the investigation of burisma, and there's pam bondi spewing this conspiracy theory. again, on the senate floor. >> they went even further, joe. they presented some video to make the case for the impeachment of barack obama. they can't get out of their heads whatever obama did or said is clearly worse than this president would consider. it was surreal to hear that presentation yesterday. >> senator, i watched hours of the trial, have seen a lot of attacks from republican defenders on the case brought by house managers, attempts to poke holes in the evidence by democrats. my question is has the president's team offered to bring new witnesses, testimony,

documentation of any kind that would support the president's point of view in the trial? >> well, to quote an old buddy of mine who used to say that so and so hates this as the devil hates holy water, the president's defense team hates the notion of witnesses and documents and evidence in this trial, bringing it for the american people. that's a shame. it is not a real trial without real evidence and witnesses. >> senator, i just want to ask you finally about the story with the dustup with the npr reporter. now the state department seemingly retaliating, not allowing npr on the trip. what do you make of this, do you think it matters? >> you consider the audacity of the reporter to raise the question of ukraine with the secretary of state. she was doing her job. clearly secretary of state

pompeo lost it and went after her personally in his office afterwards. it just is unprofessional. it reflects the emotions behind the scene as secretary pompeo sees this ukraine story unfold. he would be an interesting witness as well in terms of what he knew, when he knew it. >> senator dick durbin, thank you very much for coming on the show. we turn to the lead impeachment prosecutor, great to have you, chairman of the house intel committee, democratic congressman adam schiff from california. congressman schiff, we would like to start off by asking you what your response is to what we saw yesterday from trump's defense team. >> well, it is hard to know where to begin with arguments that rudy giuliani is a bit player here, even though the president brought up rudy giuliani more than anyone else in the phone call with zelensky, talk to rudy when he met with

the three amigos, the ukranians understood what a central role giuliani was playing, now the effort to say he is a distraction i don't think was the least bit credible. as you point out, bringing in ken starr, i was leaning to staff counsel and saying this is the same ken starr we're talking about, right, the same ken starr, and then you've got the debate between 60-year-old alan dershowitz and 81-year-old alan dershowitz. i think at the end of the day, it boils down to this. they're reading between the lines of their defense. it is basically yeah, he did it, we know he did it, the president knows he did it, we just don't want the american people to see more evidence that he did it. and clearly that's what john bolton represents. he would tell in a captivating way the public would watch the

most pernicious part of the scheme, withholding of hundreds of millions of dollars of military aid to an ally at war to coerce sham investigations. they don't want the country to hear it. just want to sweep it under the rug, don't want to have a real trial, and thankfully there are senators of good conscience who are wrestling with this, do want witnesses to come. recognize they don't want to be in the first impeachment trial in history with no witnesses and no documentary evidence. the question is will they prevail, because if they don't, no one can call this a fair trial. >> mr. chairman, willie geist, good to see you this morning. i wonder what your level of frustration might have been when you saw an excerpt of the manuscript made by "new york times," john bolton is a witness you would like to have in front of you when you conduct your proceedings in the intelligence committee. how hard did you try to get john bolton to testify and what was the answer back? >> well, we would have loved to

have john bolton testify. we invited him to testify. he refused. we always begin by inviting people to come involuntarily. many wanted subpoenas, we would subpoena, they would come in and testify. bolton's lawyers said if we subpoena him, he would sue us, we would be tied up in courts we knew for months or years, just as we're tied up with don mcgahn. that didn't seem to be a good remedy when you talk about a president trying to cheat in the next election. i have to say it is vexing that he would refuse to come before the house because he claimed he needed basically a court blessing that he could do it, now he can come before the senate. he will have to answer questions about that. why is it that only now he is willing to come forward. i think it is pretty clear the book has a lot to do with this. but whatever his motivation was for not coming before the house, now willing to come before the senate, at the end of the day what matters is that the

american people get to hear the full truth, and i don't think the president's team can credibly argue that there isn't sufficient evidence that the president himself directly in his own words made it abun da t danltly clear, even though mulvaney did, sondland did, there's no quid pro quo, here's the quid pro quo the president outlined. zelensky has to go to the mike, announce investigations, even though other witnesses said with all of the evidence it was simple as two plus two. if the senators don't find that there are enough direct witnesses of the misconduct, there's one volunteering, almost begging to come in, instead, many of them want to bury their head in the sand. >> congressman, a few days ago you had audacity to quote a cbs news report on the floor talking about a threat that someone in the white house made to republican senators who go against the president on this.

and there was fainting all around, shock that you would bring this up, as if anyone in the conference would be afraid of the president. now the president is out there on twitter saying you should pay the price. is it time for colleagues in the senate to reconsider in kre dult about the hold on their conscience? >> look, in terms of the president's comments towards me, that tweet is not in isolation. he was meeting with the president of guatemala and talking about me, saying guatemala used to have a way of dealing with people like that, something along those lines, said the whistle-blower should be treated as a traitor or spy. this is part of a pattern by the president. i don't think it ought to surprise anyone. my point in the senate is that yes, this will require moral courage. and that's difficult to muster, particularly when that's in the

form of disagreeing with your own party. i think it is something the public is often not widely aware of. joe, you understand this, the times that call for political courage are not when you disagree with adversaries. when you disagree with your friends in your own party and subject to calls of betrayal. that's when it is gut check time. at the same time if you're not willing to take that oath seriously and rise to the occasion when the country is at risk, then what's the point of being there? >> you know, the thing that's interesting, sometimes taking that political risk seems challenging at the time ends up being the best thing you could possibly do. i always go back to 2004, 2005. i wrote a book criticizing

george w. bush for foreign policy and deficit spending, big massive debts. i like the guy personally, but he was not conservative, especially the second half of his term. and i get crushed by the same people crushing me now for criticizing donald trump. second he leaves office, suddenly everybody is saying the same thing about george w. bush in conservative circles that i was saying. this idea that donald trump two, three years from now, that somehow it will look like a good move in conservative circles to defend the elevation of vladimir putin, the protection of vladimir putin and the shake dounlz of the democratic ally invaded by vladimir putin seems fairly short sided, not exactly astute. >> i completely agree. i think it doesn't require great

impressions to know history will not be kind to this president, and why folks would want to so seamlessly tie themselves to this president with all of the misconduct, i mean, the idea that they basically put out yesterday, that you heard from senator cruz, that even if all of this is true, even if the president as we have shown said i am not going to give military aid to an ally fighting the russians where people are dying every week, our allies are dying every week until they agree to help me in the next election by doing an investigation of my opponent, they would have you believe that hunter biden was picked at random, that this president in particular has a passionate concern about potential business conflicts of interest of presidential or vice presidential children, and it was happen stance that joe biden

was running for president. i give the president's team credit for making that argument with a straight face, but the american people know better, and you know, at the end of the day, the american people know if the senators don't call witnesses, it is not a fair trial. it is not a trial at all. >> chairman adam schiff, thank you very much. you reminded me of my professor in university of florida law school saying your argument has to at least pass the straight face test. and of course, none of these arguments yesterday did. chairman schiff, thank you so much. speaking of an argument that doesn't pass the straight face test, the argument that joe biden, there was a great conspiracy that joe biden was running, not only elevates joe biden but makes the republicans look ridiculous. bringing that point home last night in a dramatic way, our own chris hayes.

>> there's a few things about the hunter biden burisma thing that bother me. first of all, it is fair to say as an ethical matter, if ari mel beb was solicited to say should i take this gig, you would say no, don't do it. i would say no, don't do it, i don't think it was the right thing to do. he is a grown ass man. you don't control the actions of your adult children. if joe biden could control the actions of his adult son, hunter biden, there are a lot of things he would have him do differently than he has done. second of all, he is an american citizen, america first presidency. we do not sick people on american citizens. we do not have the chinese go after americans and do not seek ukranians. we have an american system of justice. if there's a predicate for some investigation, there are processes by which that is

pursued. we simply do not pursue it the way we do. the third thing, the crowning disingenuousness, senator, you'll join me on this, i think republicans had majority of both houses in 2015 and conducted zealous oversight of many issues, including benghazi. how many hearings on burisma? zero. how many in the house? zero. how many in the senate? zero. how many raised objection at the time it was happening that joe biden was doing something corrupt? zero. that's the ball game. if it was a good faith effort by republicans who certainly were no shrinking violets about corruption or misdeeds by the obama administration, they would have said something at the time and they didn't. that's how you know the entire thing has been retroactively reverse engineered solely for political purposes. >> three great points. one, if you don't have adult children yet, you'll understand, you don't control adult children. they have their own lives, that's the way it should be.

and also, a last point, republicans controlled both chambers in 2015, not a word about firing of a corrupt ukranian prosecutor. suddenly they're shocked and stunned and saddened. >> and every republican senator who rushes to the camera like ted cruz yesterday and feigns how upset about hunter biden, corruption in ukranian, no one believes the president was concerned about corruption broadly in ukranian. everyone knows based on the facts he was concerned about running against joe biden. >> one final thing, mika, second point, it is unamerican to sick foreign government, system of justice on american citizens. it is unamerican. but donald trump does it. he did it with ukranian, he did it with china in front of the cameras, did it to ambassador mcfaul when he was trying to

throw mcfaul into putin's arms to prosecute him. it is unamerican, yellow light we have an american president that continues to do it. >> special thanks from biden campaign to president donald trump. thank you for the 24, 7 coverage on how big and powerful joe biden is and what an impact he could have on the 2020 campaign. that does it for us. chalk todd, ari melber, chris matthews lead special coverage of president trump's impeachment trial after the final quick break. trial after the final quick break. you try hard, you eat right... mostly. you make time... when you can. but sometimes life gets in the way, and that stubborn fat just won't go away. coolsculpting takes you further. a non-surgical treatment that targets, freezes, and eliminates treated fat cells for good. discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. some common side-effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. don't imagine results, see them. coolsculpting, take yourself further. go to coolsculpting.com for a chance to win $25,000.

coolsculpting, take yourself further. [happy ♪irthday music] ♪ don't get mad, put those years to work with e*trade. seaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in... ...as little as 2 1/2 days when used at the first sign. abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. abreva acts on it.

so you can too. nothing will rise to the level of abuse of power or impeachable offense. >> the call for witnesses gets more intense after john bolton's revelation. >> increasingly apparent it will be important to hear from john bolton. >> we want the truth. we want the facts. >> this could be a turning point in the impeachment trial of donald trump. good morning. i am chuck todd. welcome to msnbc special coverage of the impeachment trial of