you talk about tom daschle. he actually told our dana bash he too was in touch with white house officials during that process involving clinton's and the senate trial there. do you see his connection and coordination with the white house differently than the coordination that's happening between mcconnell and the white house? >> totally different. here's why. tom daschle was not a lapdog for the president. tom daschle consulted with the administration and president bill clinton's team to work out who was going to give the argument. i think dale bumpers gave the argument for president clinton and one of the white house counsel folks, so there has to be some communication. no doubt about that. but mitch mcconnell is taking it up 15 notches and he's basically doing the bidding of the white house and that, frankly, is wrong. >> shan, what's your take on this? >> well, i agree with gene. if this was in a courtroom prosecution it's a nonstarter. it's outrageous, their comments. i guess the critical distinction here is

on the other hand you heard tom daschle who said he was in coordination with the white house. what's been the response to those comments, and is it realistic to expect that he would be so withdrawn from the white house during this process? >> you know, according to them, it's unrealistic to the senate majority leader tom daschle for the clinton administration and now mitch mcconnell. some are saying he should recuse himself from this process tochl be very clear, that is almost definitely not going happen here. so what's interesting is we know that last week the two of them, mitch mcconnell and the white house's top lawyer met together, but they still haven't come up with a plan. however, mcconnell said he will be working step by step with the white house every single inch of the way, and this is how he defended that. take a listen. >> last night you were coordinating with the white house during the impeachment. why is that appropriate? >> it was done during the clinton impeachment as well not surprisingly. president clinton and the democrats were coordinating their strategy, w

. >> and tom daschle is a democrat. he said he never spoke with president clinton, however, his office was in constant coordination with the white house. this is just a necessary for the logistical aspects of peefl impeachment. >> kristin holmes, thank you so much. >> former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and presidential historian tim naftali is with us as well. glad to have you with us. tim, i want to start with you specifically about what we just heard there from leader mcconnell. compare that with what happened back in the 90s with lead aer daschle. is that comparison applicable? >> well, what's really important is that leader mcconnell has to make the same effort that leader trent lott, who was then the majority leader, a republican leader in the senate in 1980, the same effort to create a set of rules that both sides will be comfortable with and the american people will be comfortable with. tom daschle and trent lott worked together to create these rules and then 100 senators voted i

but tom daschle and i had a great relationship.he impeachment trial proceedings in the senate, so that helped an awful lot. i believe that after the house votes and i presume the house will vote for impeachment, these two leaders, senator mcconnell and senator schumer will have to sit down in the next couple of weeks and decide how they are going to proceed. let me just remind people that may not remember it, it took us two full weeks before we could agree on how to proceed in the senate. my first effort to set it up, which would have been about a two week affair, the republican conference rejected it and i had to go back to tom and say we can't do that we will have to go with a full proceeding. the vote on the rules we agreed to was 100 to zero. we did vote on the second set of rules as senator mcconnell pointed out. but, you know, the leaders need to talk together privately. and then they will figure out, hopefully, how to proceed. >> dana: if you don't mind, going to take a little trip down memory lane. in 1999, this is one of t

but i do think tom daschle handled it right back in the clinton impeachment. he was not disloyal to the white house, but he stuck by the idea this was an impartial trial. and at the end of it, at the end of the trial, it was 100-0 among the senators to conduct that trial in a way that pleased both sides. and at the end of the trial, there was a standing ovation from the senators for daschle and for trent lott, the republican leader that they had conducted something that was seen as fair. and that's what i think people are hoping will come out of this process in the next few weeks. >> and that is a perfect place for us to end. we're out of time on this segment, but that would be a lovely thing to see, wouldn't it, gentlemen? thank you, gentlemen. david, stay with us. i do want to get your report on new reporting about a possible shake-up at the top of the state department. that is ahead. >>> up next, more on the president's latest attack on house speaker pelosi and how he is holding up in the run-up to his impeachment trial. we'll also speak with one of the law

tom daschle had to deal with robert byrd every day and robert byrd cared more about the senate than hed about bill clinton, trust me on that. that doesn't exist now. so what now we're going to have is publicly negotiated political deals and i think the democrats might show some willingness to bring in extraneous people to try to force the president's hand. again, it's not mcconnell's hand. again, i think at the end of the day this collapses under the president's unwillingness to. but if you're playing a political game here, and i don't mean game as in something that's not important, then you play this out and this could have an impact on the public. if the public sees the democrats going to great lengths and, you know, putting this out there and the president still saying, you know, doing lucy and the football, then that could have an impact. the other thing i would say is, you know, there's a lot of different equities in the senate right now. not all of them are joe bidens on the democratic side. i think, you know, again, it's not going to happen, but joe biden and hunter biden tellin

>> tom daschle may have done that. it's not any better when it's done by of course a democrat or tom daschle. but this is a systematic coordination. at the same time in the clinton impeachment trial, virtually every democrat came out and denounced the president's misconduct. and so one big difference here is the senators presumably on the republican side will simply put forward the talking points the white house gives them. >> we know that justice roberts is going to be presiding over this. earlier this morning paul callan was on the air with us and he said he believes justice roberts will be the wild card because he'll be making decisions about the admissibilidismisadmissibil. how do you see the power balance going on between mcconnell and justice roberts? >> mcconnell will have the better part of that balance of power. as long as he can put together 51 votes in the senate to back him up on any ruling -- to oppose any ruling that chief justice roberts makes, then the 51 senators wins. so chief justice roberts understa

tom daschle stood up and said there's not a single vote to impeach -- to convict the president.hen we went into the chamber jeffrey was talking about, it was very clear everybody had made up their mind on the other side. and many of us were saying we want to hear the evidence. so the shoe was on the other foot. the reality is that the party of the president stands by their person. that's what happened 20 years ago and it's happening again now. >> but that's somewhat different. it's one thing to make up your own mind about how you're going to vote. it's another thing for the majority leader to say i'm not going to do anything regarding how this trial unfolds without clearing it with the president first. that's a degree of todying. >> go back to 1999. i guarantee you tom daschle and the democratic leaders were working hand in glove with the president and did not want a trial at all. bob bird moved to shut this thing down and have a vote. that's what the president wanted. i understand you like to make the rks the bad guys. they're doing the same thing that democrats did 20 years ag

but having said that, i remind you that tom daschle, bill clinton, and the like wanted no trial.hey wanted to dismiss this thing out of hand. they were in cahoots with each other from the very, very start about trying to short circuit this pros. the only reason they couldn't do it is they weren't in control. and the difference is that mcconnell and republicans are in control and have the votes to do that. i don't think it's a wise thing for them to do. i think it's better for them to step back. and i think the senators like lisa murkowski but a whole bunch of others, even some of the conservatives understand this is bigger than just getting rid of this and helping the president out. there's the senate needs to look and act like a senate that's responsibly dealing with this issue. and i think in the end they will. >> here are the key senators to watch. these are senators on the democratic side and the republican side that are either in swing districts or have not been in lock step with the administration on everything. and so hilary, do you think that we will see some republican s

tom daschle admits when he was democrat minority leader he was coordinating closely with the white housen the bill clinton impeachment. now democrats are apoplectic along with the complicit media. this is wrong, this is unfair for mitch mcconnell to coordinate with the white house. another example of rank hypocrisy? >> nancy pelosi doesn't want a fair trial. she is scared a fair trial would show what a complete sham this is. there is nothing whatsoever to compare this impeachment and this whole process with bill clinton in the 90s. he was actually charged with a crime. there was bipartisan support for impeachment. and the senate agreed unanimously on the rules for procedure. nancy pelosi is forgetting the constitution. the separation of powers fully we can see that the house then when they put forward an impeachment that is so rankly unconstitutional. then the senate can in its discretion and with looking at the baseless accusations dismiss it outright and say this has been a political impeachment, this is something the founders never intended. is there not evidence to support this. so m

for instance, in the time of bill clinton you had negotiations between trent lott and tom daschle thatactually fairly quick. and by 2019 standards, almost congenial. >> it was a voice vote, 100 senators approved those procedures. >> right. >> if you had told any of us back in the day when we were covering that impeachment that we would look back on it as some golden age of bipartisan shim and comity, we would have told you you're smoking something. >> remember, ken starr was giving news conferences throughout. we talked about no leaks from mueller. ken starr was updating all the time. and then dumped that unedited document, the book. i mean, i remember some of our most esteemed colleagues, bob schieffer on cbs and others on the hill, reading aloud things that you could not say on television. >> indeed. i spent some time last weekend reading through the transcript of the house debate on the clinton impeachment. and some things were very similar. there was talk about coups. there was talk about witch hu s hunts. >> 31 democrats voted to impeach him in the house. >> but there was also a l

in speaking with tom daschle, there was some admitted coordination with then clinton white house sayingmer staff reminded me this morning while i was not in contact with the white house during the trial, they were. there was a need to coordinate on many levels. he goes on to say it wasn't necessarily in "the washington post" reporting this. it wasn't necessarily as brazen per se as mcconnell's coordination saying it on the record, i've already made my decision and here's what's going to happen in the senate impeachment trial. but nonetheless, richard, there is some precedent here that there was coordination as well during the clinton impeachment trial. >> well, the oath is an oath of impartiali impartiality. that was the oath the senators took in the clinton impeachment trial. impartiality in my view means there is no coordination. now there are a number of things going on. it was 20 years ago that i believe that tom daschle and some of the democrats were doing more that type of thing than they should have been, but it was nowhere near as brazen as what mitch mcconnell is talking about

i can tell you that tom daschle, who was the leader of the democrats at the time, working with president clinton, who did not want a trial, who wanted a resolution voted to get rid of this immediately, they wanted no witnesses, they wanted nothing, they wanted an up-or-down vote and be done with this. why? there's not a single democrat vote for peefimpeachment. so they're not acting differently. >> i want to bring in manu raju on capitol hill. talk to me about what we just heard. >> reporter: what the speak ser doi -- speaker is withholding the articles as leverage into moving forward in a trial that they want. what is a fair trial for the speaker? she has not detailed in any way. i tried to push her on that. other reporters tried to push her on that. is there a possibility she may never send over the articles because the republicans may never get to what she wants. she's essentially dangling the articles over the senate saying we're not going to send this to you until the republicans agree to what they want. we don't exactly know what they want. the process is this. they do need to have

you know when trent lost and tom daschle, the minority leader, they did not actually forge their deal until january of 1999, just days before the trial started, the kind of timetable that chuck schumer has laid out is very similar to the timetable that we had in 1999 with the senate trial and they got all 100 senators together and the old senate chamber and agreed te deal. the way that they would have limited testimony on videotape and so forth. so one wonders if they could possibly even get an agreement to this time around, that was something that i asked chuck schumer just a couple of minutes ago, dana. >> dana: this is just breaking right now, chad pergram, thank you so much. let's bring in mo elleithee, the executive producer at georgetown institute of politics. and actually strong, former adviser to paul ryan, and peak communications in montana, beautiful state indeed. let me start with you, the democrats are saying this is what we need to have, one of the things that i thought was interesting, this is the line that you will hear a lot from the senate democrats is that if senator

tom daschle will join us at post nine to break down the industry headwinds. >>> the market, of coursen pace for a best december since 2013 best year i think thins 2010 joining us is chief global strategist david kelly and equities strategist scott wren can this continue? >> david, i tell you, we had a 3030 year end target for 2019. obviously we'll blow that away unless something crazy happens and we expect some positive returns next year but, you know, total return may be something in the mid single digit range and not expecting certainly a repeat of this 30% total return we have seen so far in 2019. >> yeah. it is quite a significant rally off the -- off the lows. if you want to call it that. scott, what do you see sort of becoming more of themes moving into next year >> i tell you. you know, for us, we did expect minor trade positives. if you see a rollback on september, 50% orr whatever, that's a little bit better than the market expected, better than we have been expecting and happened sooner than we expected and i think the theme really for next year it's going to revolve are we

registered you are picky that's the finnish celebration of christmas with unesco so it's only an agreed tom daschle and it is education that is led the way in funny social services the real reason for finland being the happiest country on earth. ellie education and then continuing education through life. i know you wrote the you're head of innovation the the national board for education and from want. to change occasions do spectacularly well by please a standard spent on national measurement. part of those one of them is that phyllis children spend less time in school they do less homework than most comparable countries yet they seem to do better at school so how do you explain the the products that phyllis shows seem to not to be asked to do as much in formal schooling to end up with better results well we believe that it's important that children have time to play and have healthy sense spend time with their parents so we don't believe that by increasing the amount of time in school or by increasing the amount of homework given you can get better results children are children and they learn by p

i think tom daschle was very uncomfortable with all of that. joe lieberman made some speeches that were pretty tough. one of the ones i was watching bobreaction was barber -- burr. when he started signaling where he was, i knew it was over. they were no democrats could go to bill clinton and say to him what that group of republican senators did and said to richard nixon. trouble,hen you get in i have learned over the years, it is better to be a democrat. republicans will shove you over the cliff if you make a mistake. democrats will surround and protect you. >> let's step back for a moment. there will be some students who watch this 25 years from now. please compare and contrast the constitutional crises of clinton versus nixon. are they the same seriousness? >> i voted for articles of impeachment of clinton. i would have voted for one on. i do think it was more of a constitutional crisis with nixon than there was with clinton. maybe it was the times. break-in andthe the illegal aspects of it. maybe it was what the tapes revealed in terms of hi

that's one thing, but tom daschle, who was the democratic leader, to the best of my that was an individualonscience, so i good es we way and seat. i think it's really interesting. for a number of reasons. whether you're republican or a democrat, has anyone been impartial in this? >> this has turned into a shirts and skins exercise. i think what lindsey graham said the quiet part loud. you're supposed to at least pretend you're weighing the evidence. >> i'm not pretended -- is that sort of a waste of time? we all kind of have seen how partisan this thing has played out. once they're appointed, they're not just democrats or republicans they try to do the right thing and following the law. >> i will go back. >> it can go one of two ways. he was disagreed, impeached, one-term resident -- a partisan line vote. >>> before i let you go, i think that's interesting. what i notice you didn't say in the second outcome, in trump gets reelected is democrats maybe made some mistakes. do you think there will be that intraspecs? >> i aim concerned this may moe play. clearly what the president said was not

she is apparently oblivious that in 1999 tom daschle coordinated closely with the white house. he admits it. it's a matter of record. i wouldn't expect her to know it because she is lisa murkowski and she wasn't paying attention then when her dad held her seat. >> to me what's disturbing is she is voicing disconnect with the majority leader. the reality is -- i'll tell you this, republicans, we give so much. we give in all the time. we are the genteel party. we need to be fighting tooth and nail. the democrats basically emasculated the constitution and the house and the senate for the last three years. so i find it intriguing that somebody would say i'm disturbed there has been coordination or discussion going on. consistently and by precedent, that's the norm. i don't think there should be a problem there. i will tell you you get folks like bill kristol out there going after these people, that's a real problem. >> chuck schumer is demanding that witnesses be called. he apparently he has been stricken with a case of amnesia since he argued against witnesses being called in 1999

tom daschle admits when he was democrat minority leader he was coordinating closely with the white houseplicit media. this is wrong, this is unfair for mitch mcconnell to coordinate with the white house. another example of rank hypocrisy? >> nancy pelosi doesn't want a fair trial. she is scared a fair trial would show what a complete sham this is. there is nothing whatsoever to compare this impeachment and this whole process with bill clinton in the 90s. he was actually charged with a crime. there was bipartisan support for impeachment. and the senate agreed unanimously on the rules for procedure. nancy pelosi is forgetting the constitution. the separation of powers fully we can see that the house then when they put forward an impeachment that is so rankly unconstitutional. then the senate can in its discretion and with looking at the baseless accusations dismiss it outright and say this has been a political impeachment, this is something the founders never intended. is there not evidence to support this. so mitch mcconnell would be within his constitutional prerogative for the members o

what trent lott did was negotiate with tom daschle on creating rules.is doing is negotiating with the white house and cutting out the minority party and that is why it is an appropriate for him to not follow the rules set in 1999. secondarily when we were addressing the question of coordination the senate majority leader has to take m an oath toe impartial and also article 6 duty which is to support and defend the constitution of the united states. mitch mcconnell and lindsey graham and others made it clear they have no intention to carry out their constitutional duties of the concept of a political process is being pushed by many on the far right who have no intention of enforcing the constitutional leverage and power as a duty of the united states senate to hold a trial t which is fair and not be a rubber stamp for the executive branch. rob: joe biden said he would not comply with a subpoena to testify in a senate trial of donald trump. your reaction? >> for joe biden to say he is going not to comply with the subpoena is ridiculous and showing he has

and chuck schumer have to get together to form a deal this is what happened with trent lott and tom daschlen 1999. if you get unanimous consent, all 100 senators to agree, that is the point of the round in the senate, they set up the parameters of debate for the senate trial ahead of time. if you don't have a deal you could have the bidens and mick mulvaney and this could be the greatest spectacle of all time but it is hard to believe after we've been through this impeachment process it is a distinct possibility that you could not have a senate trial if you don't send over those articles despite all this conversation it might not happen so long as nancy pelosi controls them all and she's always looking for leverage and mitch mcconnell might say i'm not going to meet with chuck schumer until we have the articles, why should we meet, we don't have anything to discuss. shannon: we will see, we will always turn to you because you know everything that is going on. attorney general william barr speaks out against impeachment as he faces criticism for his allegiance to the president. next the real

tom daschle says his staff did coordinate with the white house.ertheless, the optics for mitch mcconnell aren't great. >> imagine if you have a murder trial and the head juror was in bed with the alleged murderer. would we view that as the way the criminal justice system is supposed to work? we would be outraged. >> then there's the difference in how the two presidents handled impeachment and discussed their own conduct. >> nothing was done wrong. >> i don't think there is a fancy way to say that i have sinned. >> president clinton sought to get on with the job of being president. that doesn't mean wind the scenes he wasn't obsessed with the impeachment. by contrast, president trump's understanding of being president involved taunting his enemies and being aggressive. >> and while the intensity of the media coverage hasn't changed, that could, in fact, lead to impeachment proceedings. >> analysts say the political divide in america now seems even more harsh than it was 21 years ago. >> we are lively in a tribal era in our politics. you've got repu

so he had an interest in working with tom daschle, who was the democratic minority leader. mitch mcconnell seems to feel much more comfortable with the antics of house republicans, which gives him one less reason to deal with chuck schumer. unprecedented if he didn't deal with chuck schumer but he might go down that loop. >> see which way he goes. he'd preserve to cut a bipartisan deal, he says. mcconnell rejected schumer's request bringing forth trump officials. the ones they want to testify. take a listen to mike johnson. >> if we look at precedent and procedure, what happened in 1999 in the clinton impeachment trial is that both sides put on their cases. they called them opening statements but that was the rules agreed to. 100-0. put on their cases. questions were asked by the senate and then decided which witnesses to put on. we have to cross that bridge when we come to it. that's what leader mcconnell is suggesting should happen. i'm not sure why schumer would oppose that since he voted for that in 1999. >> and, frank, if they end up with no witnesses, not allowing wit

back in the impeachment inquiry for clinton, tom daschle said that he had no coordination with the white house. of course he did say that his staff had some coordination at the same time. but i do think that this is just so problematic that it does seem that there is very little objectivity here. you saw lindsey graham's statements earlier saying that he's not even going to pretend to be an impartial juror in this process. i mean imagine a court of law in which you have the foreman of the jury communicating directly with the defendant. no one would say that that is fair. no one would say that that's impartial, but that's essentially what we have here going on, or it looks like what's going to go on in the senate. >> all right. meantime fox news put out a new impeachment poll. they released it sunday, and it shows that half of american voters want donald trump impeached and removed from office. 41% oppose that, and 4% say he should be impeached but not removed from office. of course that poll is from fox, who the president depends on for support, and they've been very much aligned with hi

in 1998, 1999, trent lott and tom daschle went away, worked out a plan to do the trial that we were veryry with in the white house. >> that was the democrats and the republicans. >> and the house managers were upset with them, the white house were upset with them, they did it because they felt the sense of the senate was different, the senate was different than the house, and the senate had this special responsibility. mitch mcconnell is not an institutionalist, as much as he tries to say he is. when he held up merit garland, he made a decision. when he invoked the nuclear option on supreme court justice. what he cares most about is staying senate majority leader. he has six vulnerable members. he is going to do at the end of the day what's in their interest, we're not exactly sure yet. i think the big scuffle will happen over what the rules are, what kind of trial this is, whether there's witnesses, whether it is a show trial or sham trial. people that se mentioned like cory gardner, tom tillis, susan collins, may need to do more than something the country laughs at. the senators want t

anyway, to be fair, tom daschle, senate minority leader during the clinton impeachment -- so he wasn't, but he was the ranking member of his party. he tells cnn he didn't personally speak to the president during the process, but his team was in constant contact with the white house coordinating the moving parts. what's the difference? one, he wasn't in power of the process, right? he wunts in control. the idea that, well, they all stink, no, not here. there's a big difference between letting the white house know what's going on when you're not even in control and asking the white house what should happen. that's what republicans are doing, and they are continuously subordinating their oath to oversee just to be loyal to this president. now, look, it's not illegal, but there's another word that keeps seeming to fit so much of what this president and his pals do -- dirty. trump's alleged payoffs to the porn star and the playmate. not illegal, especially since no one seems to care about campaign finance violations. not worthy of impeachment, i don't think. but dirty. #dirtydonald. his con

i mean, when trent lott and tom daschle negotiated during bill clinton's impeachment, they did it privatelyt publicly. the senate agreed on the rules. they all met in the old senate chamber and agreed on the rules 100 to 0. that's not going to happen this time. they agreed on the rules by the way, and afterwards they decided about witnesses. that's not the case this time. so schumer isn't going to get everything he wants. i think he probably knows it. will we get any witnesses at all? we don't know the answer to that. by the way, we don't know whether they say okay, you have to show up, what they would do. would they show up? would john bolton show up? could he plead the fifth? he has a court case pending about compelling his testimony. it is all very much up in the air. >> the republicans point out the democrats in the house had their chance to try to get witnesses to come in but they decided to not go with it, it would have taken too long to adjudicate in the courts. >> right. and in some cases the democratic argument for why they did that is what they were doing was the fact-finding part

. >> our dana bash talked to tom daschle who was the senate majority leader, a democrat, during the clinton impeachment. he said while he did not talk to clinton at the time, his staff was working very closely with the white house staff. they were trying to get all the logistics, the moving parts in place. he said that was a necessity. >> kristen, when you talk about witnesses and the president wants to call some. that would make them in his camp vulnerable. we understand his personal lawyer rudy giuliani was at the white house. what do we know about this. >> this is an act of a defiance by president trump. this is the day that these articles are being voted. and the man who is at the center of all of this impeachment is here showing up at the white house that. is president essentially saying i don't care what happens. like this is what i am doing right now. this is my tragedy. that is all part of the not retreating strategy. keep this in mind. the entire impeachment is centered around this idea that president trump and giuliani together were running this pressure campaign on ukraine to try

this key difference, i want to hone in on when trent lott and tom daschle did in 1999 with approximatelapproximatelyot together forged a deal got all senators to agree to something, you can imagine that happening in this toxic environment. >> chad tremendous reporting. let me ask you, gets past impeachment now, it looks like a done deal, are democrats going to run on this politically. and is president running away from it? reporter: you know pretty -- for president trump to have that albatross. you know to be you know the third u.s. president to have this but in some respects, you know, things work in reverse for president trump. he might embrace this. and try to you know turn this on democrats, in politics you need a foil. this is an opportunity for him to turn it on them, you can see liberal democrats maybe over playing their happeneds in liberal district -- hands in liberal district that could backfire on moderate democrats, impeachment is so muscl muscula. >> chad is one of the best in business. i think chad summarized it perfectly, no one knows how it will play out, i don't believe that democra

within 1999, clinton's impeachment, in '99 both senate minority and majority leader, trent lott and tom daschle in agreement clinton should not be found guilty had not commit add high crime. a crime, yes, but not a high crime against the state. we won't see agreement of that kind between the senate, in the senate today between republicans and democrats. this one one the partisanship will be not just for show but really vehement. >> we are in a whole new hyperpartisan reality. jeffrey ingle the man who wrote the book the senate leader is reading's thank you, sir, having you on, all your expertise. >>> all of you watching, speaker nancy pelosi will be on cnn tonight in a special cnn town hall taking questions from the audience. jake tapper moderating this evening at 9:00 eastern right here on cnn. >>> a federal investigation and facts cannot stop rudy giuliani on a new in addition to pursue debunked conspiracy theories in a pro-trump news network. what exactly is he up to? >>> and joe biden confronted by a voter calling him a quote/unquote damn liar and challenging the guy to a push-up contest. p

. >> in the clinton impeachment, tom daschle said his staff was in constant coordination with senior white house officials. is this different? >> i've heard that, but i haven't read that so i'm not sure. people have said that wouldn't accurate and what they could coordinate on was some timing, but clinton did cooperate with the house which trump didn't and i'm not sure what the connections are with daschle and mcconnell but the republicans are saying and lindsey graham is saying is it's going to be dismissed immediately. there's not going to be -- they're not even giving a fig leaf to justice and they're saying we've got the vote, we're going to stick together. i guess mitt romney's the only hope for an independent vote. but the facts are clear. he has violated his oath of office and he has jeopardized the election and it's an ongoing intenterprise enterprise. >> what if he keeps doing it? if he's acquitted, what are democrats going to do? >> well, i hope we just, i hope we get together our convention and come up with the best nominee that can win and we get together, put our shoulde

in 1998, republican trent lott worked closely with tom daschle, the minority leader.nnell has not coordinated. mcconnell did say previously he would try to coordinate rules with the democrats and says he was not the only one. president clinton coordinated it and we're on the same side. while he didn't coordinate with the white house, his staff did. critics say the optics for mitch mcconnell at the moment aren't great. >> imagine if you had a murder trial and the head juror was in bed with the alleged murderer, would we view that as the way the criminal justice system was supposed to work? we would be outraged. >> then, there is the difference how the two presidents handle impeachment and discussed their conduct. >> nothing was done wrong. zero was done wrong. >> i don't think there is a fancy way to say that i have sinned. >> president clinton sought to go on with the job of president. that doesn't mean he wasn't on set about being impeached. president trump's involved being aggressive and taunting his enemies. >> while the media coverage hasn't changed. >> that could

remember in 1998, trent lot and tom daschle worked it out and sold it to them. >> that meeting hasn't it has not. >> schumer and mcconnell. but both sides believe it will and probably within the next few weeks. thank you. >>> now to this story. a murder/suicide at the pearl harbor navy shipyard just days before ceremonies to commemorate the 1941 attack. we have a live report on what happened next. we're reporters from the new york times. this melting pot of impacted species. everywhere is going to get touched by climate change. ( ♪ ) introducing the marilyn monroe collection of fine jewellery. exclusively at zales, the "diamonds are a girl's best friend" store. woman: friction points, those obstacles that limit a company's growth. i try to find companies that turn these challenges into opportunities. but by going out in the field, and meeting management, suppliers, competitors. in the end, it's these unique companies with creative business models that will generate value for our investors. that's why i go beyond the numbers. >>> developing overnight, the u.s. navy investigating a murd

to the senate trial with president clinton was that the minority leader and the majority leader, tom daschletrent lott, they got together and forged a deal. they weren't going to have witnesses on the senate floor. trent lott i spoke with him recently. he indicate having witnesses testify on the senate floor during an impeachment trial is risky. >> if they don't do this in the right way, if they have witnesses on the floor, i think it takes on a context that could be, could be harmful. it is bad enough. if this turns into an absolute mudslinging process, it will make things even worse. reporter: this is what schumer said about that he said we don't even know the evidence that these witnesses would present. it may be exculpatory, it may be incriminating. i followed up asking about the 1999 model with president clinton. this is what schumer said. 1999 was a different case. there were reasons we did not want monica lewinsky to testify. tomorrow morning, 11:00 they go to the house rules committee to set up parameters of debate in the house. they won't actually debate the articles of impeachment

here are senate minority leader tom daschle and senate majority leader trent lott emerging from a meeting negotiating rules for the impeachment. looks like they're getting along. the deal they worked on would later pass in the senate by a unanimous vote. fast forward 20 years. here we are with the articles of impeachment that are being held in the house while democrats wait to see how senate republicans intend to run the trial. house speaker nancy pelosi saying today, quote, the house cannot choose our impeachment managers until we know what sort of trial the senate will conduct. the impeachment managers act as prosecutors during the trial that takes place in the senate. in the senate democratic leader chuck schumer is pushing for witnesses, specifically schumer wants to hear from four administration officials who were blocked by the white house from testifying in the house. the list includes the acting white house chief of staff, mick mulvaney, and the former national security adviser john bolton. majority leader mitch mcconnell sounded reluctant last week about calling witnesses. today

the result after that 100-0 vote, trent lott working together with tom daschle, they settled on three. that process led to three witnesses. is that something you believe the senate majority leader is genuinely open to? >> well, i think he's open to hearing presentations from both sides and seeing where the case goes at that point. i think this is a purely partisan exercise because even if you end up trying to compel witnesses, i'm not sure they'll ever show up. the house didn't have much of a chance or much of a success getting people to show up. i don't know how long you want this impeachment to go on. if you wouldn't show up in the house, why would the white house ever allow people to show up in the senate? if the court did compel them, i'm not sure their lawyers would advise them to answer questions. to me, i think a lot of people want to go through this exercise to drag this out. but the result is going to be what it's going to be. the president is not going to be removed from office and the american people are going to decide how they feel about this in november. >> alice, thoork