because crystal taylor wasn't the only one killed by that bullet. >>> coming up, police drill down in the search for a suspect. >> we tend to focus on relatives or relationship partners. >> the men in crystal's life. one, two, three of them. >> we're trying to find out who would have the motivation to do this. >> when "dateline" continues. (burke) at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. even a- (ernie) lost rubber duckie? (burke) you mean this one? (ernie) rubber duckie! (cookie) what about a broken cookie jar? (burke) again, cookie? (cookie) yeah. me bad. (grover) yoooooow! oh! what about monsters having accidents? i am okay by the way! (burke) depends. did you cause the accident, grover? (grover) cause an accident? maybe... (bert) how do you know all this stuff? (burke) just comes with experience. (all muppets) yup. ♪ we are farmers. ♪ bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum wheyou want relief... fast. only thermacare ultra pain relieving cream has 4 active ingredients to fight pain 4 different ways. get powerful relief today, with thermacare. hi. maria r

. >> reporter: a young mom named crystal taylor, murdered on her way to work, five months pregnant. > breaking me! >> she pretty much gave her whole life just trying to raise me right. >> being a mom was who she was.

i think at this point once you saute lo saw taylor's testimony, i don't think there's a defense. what is the defense at this point? he made crystalclear -- taylor did -- to sondland. actually, he literally complained to bolton. he sent a cable to pompeo. all these people know that there was a quid pro quo. all these people know that it was held up. what's trump's defense going to be? i mean as max said a minute ago, yeah, i mean all this process stuff, that's not compelling. you complain about the process when you don't have a real factual argument to make. and i think really what his better move would be is just to say, yeah, it was a quid pro quo. and, you know, maybe whether it's appropriate or not, he shouldn't be removed from office. i think that's the best place they can go, basically beg for mercy at this point. >> do you think he would ever admit that max? >> no. >> the reports are that he's fuming that they've been able to stop these witnesses from going in. i just want to read this. this is from -- he brought back the criminal defense attorneys jane and marty raskin, right? their return is a late acknowledgement, some w

it's bill taylor's absolutely 100% crystal clear testimony. >> and evelyn, the testimony as he continues, he talks about fiona hill and mr. vinman trying to reassure him that they were not aware of any official change in u.s. policy. let me just read that. he says, despite omb's announcement that they were holding back the funding, he said, but they did confirm that the hold on security assistance for ukraine came from chief of staff mick mulvaney and that the chief of staff maintained a skeptical view of ukraine. so now ukraine policy is turning on what mick mulvaney thinks after the congress has ordered this aid. >> right. i mean, lawrence, the u.s. government's posit why? because if we let ukraine become basically a vessel of russia, then essentially we will have allowed russia's sphere of influence and runs counter to everything we now believe in post-world war ii. borders. the right for peoples to determine their own future. democracy. the young people in ukraine as he's -- as the ambassador pointed out in his testimony, they very clearly said we want a new future, we want a democra

look at text mess annuals that surfaced, sondland said he believes that bill taylor was incorrect and president has been crystal clear, no quid quo pro. kurt volker told congress in opening statement reiterated multiple times there was no mention of joe biden and an investigation into him and additionally, also, there was no quid quo pro he was aware of. kurt volker was involved -- >> i said, adam schiff is selecting certain information to put out there. not putting full truth out there. put it all out there or restrict access. >> harris: here is what the president says or wrote on twitter. unfortunately, sondland would be testifying before a compromised kangaroo court where republicans voice have been taken away. >> great. that is what is happening. >> harris: i'll scoot. we mentioned, lindsey graham inviting president trump's lawyer, "rule britannia: brexit and the end of empire" giuliani to meet. i have heard about corruption in ukraine from giuliani. given the house of representative behavior, time for the senate to inquire about corruption and other improprietys, involving ukraine. melis melissa. >> meliss

quid pro quo, nbc news has identified seven different parts of ambassador taylor's testimony that show the president was crystal clear about what he wanted and what was at stake if he didn't get it. listen up. example one -- taylor says that it became clear to him that the white house meeting president zelensky wanted was conditioned on the investigations of burisma. that is the ukrainian company hunter biden had worked for. as well as the 2016 election. later, ambassador sondland apparently passed that message to president zelensky's adviser, saying that the military aid would not be delivered until zelensky committed to this very investigation. then in september, taylor says, sondland told him president trump took it a step further and wanted zelensky to commit to the investigations publicly. he said that trump wanted zelensky to essentially box himself in. and when president trump tried to argue that he was not asking for a quid pro quo, he also insisted zelensky go to a microphone and announce the investigations. he said zelensky should want to do it. taylor says that ambassador sondland told president zele

taylor said, as i said on the phone, i think it's crazy. sondland said later i believe you're incorrect about president trump's intentions. the president has been crystalr, no quit proquo of any kind. you know william taylor. is it realistic a man who had been an ambassador to ukraine would misunderstand? >> no. i know him. he is, again, dedicated to american interests and dedicated to diplomacy. and he is as bright as they come. he's not going to misunderstand what's going on. his position is extremely revealing to me that he understands that the united states is now trying to make military assistance to ukraine contingent upon the new president saying ta he will investigate an investigation that benefits president trump politically. i'm astounded. >> real quickly before i let you go, we've heard speaker pelosi, even representative jacky spears, refer to rudy giuliani as running a, quote, shadow state department. first of all, do you believe it to be accurate, and secondly, is it uncommon for a president to have a personal attorney be involved in foreign relations as we see rudy giuliani to have been? >> i've never seen anything like this. i confess i

sondland waited and responded more than four hours later telling taylor that trump, quote, has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind and suggest they stop discussing the matter over text message. that last exchange happened september 9th, the same day the intelligence community inspector general told the house and senate intel committees that the whistleblower complaint, the military aid military aid was released two days later. let's bring in josh letterman. i read a ton of text. i know it's a lot for people to digest that the hour of the day. take us through who these players are and what you found significant about what was released last night in these committees. >> we've got these in a document dump and we've been going through them all night to analyze them. what they show is that this effort by trump to get the ukrainians to get involved in investigating the bidesens was bigger than giuliani. it involved a handful of people and really senior diplomats at the state department. there's not a lot of insinuation about what they were talking about, it's stunning to see it laid

the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. and taylor's testimony is still going on right now behind closed doors. he has been with lawmakers now for going on eight hours. taylor plans to return back to ukraine tomorrow. and a source telling cnn, wolf, that he still wants to keep his job. >> let's see if he does. sunlen serfaty. thank you. >>> to the white house now. and the anonymous senior administration official coming out with a brand-new book about the president. our chief white house correspondent jim acosta is joining us with the latest. so first of all, what are you picking up? >> reporter: well, president trump is playing victim comparing the impeachment inquirt the president is saying, republicans and democrats are distancing themselves from the comparison but the tweet is not the only reading material that washington is talking about today. for a president who loathes tell-all books this one might cause mr. trump to hit the roof. the senior official and the writer behind the anonymous op-ed last year is coming out with a book en

gordon sondland and ambassador to ukraine bill taylor, said that the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quo of any kind. but ads i suggest we stop the back and forth by text. >> there was no quid pro quo. that's the whole ball game. >> the new prosecutor general said today he will commit an audit of all the investigations into burisma holdings, the ukrainian national gas company that hunter biden was on the board of. but the audit falls short of the criminal investigation president trump was looking for. bret baier bret? >> bret: john, thank you. behind closed doors, lawmakers wrapped up their hearing with the intelligence communities' inspector general. michael atkinson arrived at the capital before 10:00 a.m. and faced questions from both democrats and republicans over the whistle-blower report. chief correspondent catherine herridge has that story from the hill. >> according to sources, the closed-door session with wall the democrat led house intelligence committee before the mid-august complaint was filed. the sources said atkinson revealed the whistle-blower was a regi

then responded, more than four hours later, telling taylor that trump quote has been crystal clear. no quid pro quo of any kind. and suggest they stop discussing the matter via the text messages. so speaking on the white house lawn yesterday, president trump doubled down on his request for ukraine to investigate joe biden and his son, not only that, though, he ignited a whole new fire storm by this time urging china to do exactly the same. >> so mr. president, what exactly did you hope zelenski would do about the bidens after your phone call? exactly. >> i would think that if they were honest about it, they would start a major investigation into the biden ofs. it is a very simple answer. they should investigate the bidens. likewise, china should start an investigation into the bidens. because what happened in china is just about as bad as what happened with ukraine. >> now that request for china to investigate the bidens came just moments after trump addressed the ongoing trade war. >> china's coming in next week, we're going to have a meeting with them, i have a lot of options on c

and sondland after this phone call essentially tried to shut down bill taylor telling him look, president trump says there is crystal clear, no kwid pquid pr and let's not text about it any more. cognizant that they were making a written record. >> but chairman schiff had something to say about it to. let's listen. >> not only is congress being deprived of his testimony, the american people being deprived of his testimony today, but we're aware that the ambassador has text mess ans and e-mails on a dweevice that have been provid to the state department, but we have requested those and they are withholding that now. they are also deeply relevant to this investigation and the impeachment inquiry. >> they are such contradictory defenses. it was all a hoax, he did it, nothing was wrong, none of it happened and it was a hoax, but you're right it will be all of these matters, i think they appreciate the urgency of this, and they will move forward a lot faster than they have in the recent past. >> you see the committee is moving faster than it has moved. the subpoena says be here in a week, give us the documents two days b

the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. taylor's appearance behind closed doors left some democratic lawmakers rattled. >> this is my most disturbing day in congress so far. >> reporter: meantime republicans said they're still waiting to hear from witnesses closer to the whistle-blower who set off the impeachment inquiry. >> these are the people with supposedly the firsthand knowledge who gave the whistle-blower the information that formed the basis of his complaint. >> reporter: now this makes clear, this opening statement, how uncomfortable taylor was about accepting the job originally and how concerned he was about the back-channel diplomatic efforts and in his opening statement he continued to note that the back-channel diplomatic channels through rudy giuliani were the ones that appeared to be taking over rather than what the top diplomat in ukraine was trying to do on behalf of the u.s. jake. >> sara murray, thanks so much. >>> let's chew over this. and phil mudd, let me start with you. is this testimony significant? if so, wh

>> well, considering they have held up the response to taylor saying that the president has been crystal clear there is no quid pro quo and now for him to back pedal and say that is what the president said i had no direct knowledge if there was a quid pro kbquo, he also seems t distance hums because of hunter biden's involvement and he is saying that i actually was unaware entirely of any biden connection to that or that that was really what the president was thinking. he's really trying to distance hums fr himself from the situation when these text messages make it appear he's the most in the know about the what the president wanted with regard to ukraine. >> it soes not a positive development for the president. >> i'm curious about your read on this. for a guy in sondeland, is it plausible to believe that he was unaware of all the pursuit of dirt, if you will on the bidens, hunter specifically but of course to reflect on his father, is it plausible to believe that he did not know what was going on? >> well, that oothe question everyone is asking, alex and i think that's the question th

crystal clear. no quid pro e quos of any kinds. taylor's appearance left some democratic lawmakers rattled. >> this is my most disturbing day in congress so far. >> republicans say they're still waiting to hear from witnesses closer to the whistleblower who set off the impeachment inquiry. zpl these are people who gave the whistleblower the knowledge. >> now u the president has said publicly there was no quid pro quo and wolf, this testimony makes clear that's what the president was saying privately, too, but he was also privately saying he wanted the ukrainian president to be in a public box. he wanted him out there making public statements that he was going to pursue these investigations that would have helped trump politically and only then was the president willing to move forward with this financial assistance. >> they were squeezing him to do a public interview. a tv interview. they mentioned cnn several times. thank you for that. to capitol hill now where bill taylor has been testifying all day long. phil matingly is on the scene for

taylor sent sondland that now famous text message, saying he thought it was "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign." sondland replied that the president has been "crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind." a message sondland has testified was dictated by trump himself. >> all right, so, let's get to mary bruce, live up on the hill tonight. and bill taylor describing two channels of policyaking with regard to ukraine. the official channel and, he said, the one led by the president's personal lawyer, rudy giuliani. >> reporter: and david, the two channels were separate and often at odds. one pushing for military aid for ukraine, the other trying to use that same aid to pressure ukraine to investigate. and taylor says that unofficial channel led by rudy giuliani was, quote, running contrary to the goals of long-standing u.s. policy. david? >> mary bruce on a very busy day on the hill. mary, thank you. >>> meantime, president trump igniting a new firestorm tonight with an angry tweeting a the impeachment inquiry, calling himself a victim of a, quote, lynching. there is fierce reaction tonight from democrats and republicans, and all of it comes amild ano

crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind." adding, "i suggest we stop the back-and-forth by text." >> taylor texted gordon sondland, saying securityonditions and white house meetings are conditioned on investigation. sondland's response, "call me." >> trevor: okay, i-- i don't know if these guys are guilty or not, but you have to admit, those texts look hel-a suspicious. the only time you say, "stop texting, let's talk on the phone" is when something shade segoing down. it's 2019. nobody talks on the phone. the only reason to talk on the phone is to wish your grandmother a happy birthday or to commit criemedz. or to commit crimes with your grandmother on her birthday. "all right, nana, you tell me who wins at bingo and i'll take care of the rest." ( laughter ) at the same time, i don't blame sondland for wanting to shut down those texts because do you see what's happening there? the guy he is texting with is being so explicit, "i don't think it's a good idea to commit this crime." it's like yo-yo. he reminds me of the one guy on the bachelor party group chat and he said, "see you at the cocaine and the hookers." it's like, delete,

taylor voiced his concerns. he called it "crazy" to withhold security assistance. he then replied the president has been crystalar. no quid pro quo's of any kind. and i suggest we stop the back and forth by text. today, house democrats said those messages in taylor's deposition are central to their impeachment inquiry. meanwhile, there was bipartisan backlash to president trump comparing impeachment to lynching. earlier today, president trump tweeted that all republicans must remember what they are witnessing here. a lynching. the blowback came quickly. house majority whip jim clyburn. >> to have the president classify a constitutional remedy to an unlawful, egregious -- as lynching is beneath the dignity of the office of president of the united states. >> tim scott also spoke out. >>tt there is no question that e impeachment process is the closest thing of a political file. i get his absolute ejection of the process. i would not use the word lynching. >> gop leaders distance themselves from the president's language. >> given the history and our country, i would not compare this to a lynching. >> but lindsey gr

sondland then passed trump's assurances along to taylor in their text exchange saying the president has been crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind, as "the washington post" now reports sondland plans to tell lawmakers he has no knowledge of whether the president was telling him the truth at that moment. trump has been citing that text message from sondland as part of his defense. >> the text message that i saw from ambassador sondland, who is highly respected, was there's no quid pro quo. he said that. he said, by the way, it's almost sounded loo ik in general he said, by the way, there's no quid pro quo and there isn't. >> of course when it comes to hill's testimony today and sondland's on thursday, we know what they're expected to tell congress not whether they actually have told congress that. again, that hearing is behind closed doors. it is still continuing as we go on the air tonight. right now i am joined by democratic congressman from colorado, a member of the house judiciary committee, ashley parker a white house reporter for "the washington post," the former chief of staff to cia dire

the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. that last text came after bill taylor sthaent initial message. someone called to the white house spoke with president trump when president trump told sondland no agreement about the exchange for the military aid over that investigation and when you saw him reply there. it's interesting, because it's giving insight as the would us is trying to dismiss this whistle-blower you see they're own top officials in ukraine were raising concerns about their actions. >> tell me about that scramble, after zelensky and trump said good-bye on the call? >> reporter: learning a lot more, brooke. basically it started the minute president trump hung up the phone with the ukrainian president to where officials started raising concerns what he had said about joe biden on that call including to a point where at least three sources tell cnn at least one national security council official reached 0 ut the to white house's national security lawyers to tell them about the concerns about the call. those are the same lawyers who later ordered the t

taylor voiced his concerns. he called it "crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign." sondland then replied, "the president has been crystal clear: no quid pro quo's of any kind," and, "i suggest we stop the back and forth by text." today, house democrats said those messages, and taylor's deposition, are central to their impeachment inquiry. meanwhile, there was bipartisan backlash to president trump comparing impeachment to lynching. early today, the president tweeted that, "all republicans must remember what they are witnessing here-- a lynching." the blowback came quickly. house majority whip jim clyburn: >> well, i think the president classifying a constitutional remedy to an unlawful, egregious act such as lynching is beneath the dignity of the office of the president of the united states. >> alcindor: tim scott, the only black republican in the senate, also spoke out. >> there is no question that the impeachment process is the clost thinof a political death row trial, so i get his absolute rejection of the process. i wouldn't use the word "lynching." >> alcindor: g.o.p. leaders like house minority leader kevin mccart

diplomat in ukraine, bill taylor, writes, "i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign." sondland responds, "the president has been crystal clear. no quid pro quos of any kind." but according to "the washington post," sondland is expected to tell congress that response was essentially dictated by the president. that he'd spoken with trump before replying to taylor's text, and doesn't know whether or not the president was telling the truth. trump has cited ambassador sondland's text to clear himself. >> the text message that i saw from ambassador sondland, who is highly respected, was, there's no quid pro quo. he said that. >> mary bruce with us live up on the hill tonight. and mary, president trump and rudy giuliani were, of course, pushing ukraine to investigate joe biden and his son, hunter, and now we know that hunter biden has given an exclusive interview to our amy robach? >> reporter: and david, in that interview, he is talking about this issue and much more. hunter biden over the weekend announced that he is stepping down from the board of a he is w with any foreign entity if his father is elected president. david?

the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. you, sir, just met with bill taylorhen you were in kiev last week. what did you learn from him about that exchange? >> well, the moment that that became public, we happened to be greeting mr. taylor on our way to the ministry of defense. and it's absolutely clear, he said, yep, that's what i said. we didn't go into it any further. we didn't have the resulting tweet. but we know taylor did the right thing, he pushed back against what was clearly an effort by the trump administration to strong-arm and put pressure on the new president to do the investigations, to dig up dirt on biden. that was very, very clear. i'm very pleased that ambassador taylor is doing the right thing, and he needs to testify, also. all of the exchanges that preceded that text that he sent out needs to be out into the public and part of the investigation. so let's make it all clear, get it out there, get these people to testify. if a subpoena is necessary, then issue the subpoena. let's get on with this. we need to know. >> sir, you were just in uk

crystal clear. no quid pro quos of any kind. the white house quickly attempting to discredit taylor and the impeachment inquiry saying, this is a coordinated smear campaign from far left lawmakers and radical unelected bureaucrats waging war on the constitution. there was no quid pro quo. trump's republican allies doing the same. >> i've been in there for ten hours. i can assure you there was no quid pro quo. >> reporter: but taylor's testimony directly links the president to a quid pro quo. >> you can't just commit a crime and say you didn't and expect it to go away. >> reporter: and applauding him for testifying against the trump administration'sish with us. >> he came forward again at risk of his career at expense to himself. he had no incentive but to tell the truth. i believe that's what he did today. >> reporter: two more witnesses will be questioned this morning. one from the office of management and budget. the other from the pentagon. it is expected they are going to face tough questions about the president's order to freeze that military aid in exchange for political favors. alisyn? >> suzanne, thank you for breaking

diplomat bill taylor wrote, "i think it is crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign." ambassador sondland replied, "the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind." republicans say that the white house was quite right to stop mr. sondland from testifying. >> you think of what the democrats are trying to do, impeach the president 13 months prior to an election based on an anonymous whistleblower with no firsthand knowledge has bias against the president. laura: now house democrats leading the impeachment inquiry are going to issue a subpoena for mr. sondland's testimony and documents. the standoff is intensifying into a constitutional clash. joining us is ron christie, a former advisor to george w. bush. tonight the white hse counsel has written to congressional democrats declining to participate in the impeachment inquiry, saying it lacks a valid constitutional basis. is this war? ron: i think it is war. good evening to you. i think the counsel is right on one key point -- he says the president is being denied due process. that means the ability to call for evidence and read transcripts and have the ranking m

taylor. i think it's crazy to with hold security assistance for help with a political campaign. he says i believe you are incorrect about president trump's intentions. the president has been crystallear, no quid pro quos of any kind. this is the gap of five hours. and then sondland talked to the president. he says then taylor explains, before the text messages, during our call, ambassador sondland tried to explain to me that president trump is a businessman and with a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something, the businessman asks that person to pay up before signing the check. quid pro quo. bill taylor has a lot of -- he seems to define quid pro quo three or four different ways in this testimony, no? >> well, he basically just gives verbatum what sondland told him. and obviously, he's letting the house investigators draw their own conclusions. but you can tell by the kind of record keeping that bill taylor did that he was supernervous about all of this. his tone changes in the text messages as does sondland's. >> let me go to garret. all day today before the washington post got hair hands on the actual opening statement text that certainly reads like

that is the message in which he kind of shuts down bill taylor, says i think that you are incorrect about the president's intentions, he's been crystal clear no quid pro quo and he also says i think that we should take this conversation off line, stop putting it in text message. >> and so let's just make something clear. the administration did not block kurt volker from speaking last week. we don't know if they are going to do the same with the other testimony scheduled on friday. but to the best of your knowledge, gordon sondland was the only one who was speaking directly to the president regarding ukraine? >> reporter: we also know that kurt volker had occasional conversations with the president and was senl -- ha certainly in with the white house. the white house couldn't really block him from testifying because he resigned, he was no longer part of the u.s. government, so it would be harder for them to direct him not to testify which is exactly what the state department did in a call last night at 12:30 in the morning to ambassador sondland according to his attorneys. and as you mentioned, that other person we're really watching

and that one was not bill taylor, replying, bill, i believe you are incorrect about president trump's intentions. the president has been crystallear. no quid pro quos of any kind. the president is trying to evaluate whether ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that president zelensky promised during his campaign. i suggest we stop the back and forth by text. come on, people. it's all right there. i said ambassador sondland might have been speaking to an audience of one, and that one sure seems to have gotten the message. here it is. >> the text message that i saw from ambassador sondland, who is highly respected, was there's no quid pro quo. he said that. he said by the way, it almost sounded like in general. he said, by the way, there's no quid pro quo, and there isn't. now, for biden there would be. but listen to this. there is no pro quo, and that was the text message that i saw, and that nullified everything. >> no pro quo. he forgot the quid part. there he goes. marcia, marcia, marcia. biden, biden again. the president telling you exactly what he's afraid of with all these attacks on his democratic

taylor over text messages for suggesting that security assistance wasto iestigating th. sondland responds i believe you are incorrect about president trump's intentions the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind adding i suggest we stop the back and forth by text it's that text message from sondland, a trump donor that the president touted but a key republican senator arguing that the president is simply ordering an investigation into the 2016 election >> what he wants is an accounting of what happened in 2016 >> reporter: late sunday the campaign announced that trump would be heading to louisiana to help the republican gubernatorial. it's one of three governor races this fall, all in republican-leaning states that will be a barometer for how strong or soft the president's support is there >> thank you >>> just days after dallas police officer amber guyger was sentenced to ten years for kiaparg ent, police are searching for the killer of joshua brown he was a key witness in the guyger is nbc's morgan chesky. . >> we can take a moment. we're not in rush. okay >> yeah, i need a moment. >> reporter: in the murder trial watched by millions, joshua brown one of

diplomat william taylor texted, "i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign." four hours later, sondland texted back, "the president has been crystal clear. no quid pro quos of any kind." sondland then suggested they stop texting about the issue. according to the "post," sondland is now prepared to tell congress that the language "no quid pro quo" was relayed to him by trump himself. it was in a phone call. and that sondland has no independent knowledge if that was really true. >> let me say i'm delighted he is coming in. i'm anticipating hearing what he has to say because he's certainly key. >> reporter: the ambassador was initially blocked from testifying, but he's now under subpoena. we're told he's going to testify despite instructions to all personnel not to cooperate. >> david, thank you. >>> now to the race for 2020. 48 hours from now, a dozen democratic candidates will crowd the stage for their first debate since the impeachment inquiry began. and today, joe biden answering questions about his son. here's rachel scott. >> reporter: tonight, former vice president joe biden coming to his son's defense. why is he just now maki

this was the second time taylor had said this in this thread, by the way and sondeland says the president has been crystal no quid pro quo of any kind. the reporting is, andrew, that sondeland went to the president. there's a gap in the text thread where he went to trump reportedly and was told that. anonymous sources, you wunt to dismiss them? it's the heart of journalism but that's fine. the acting ambassador had a similar cupcern. >> this is what you hope for, that each step you take uncovers another witness, anath ever tot message. like every day there's been a steady drip of developments along the investigative line. i think the tex it messages are some of the toughest pieces of evidence that the president and the administration are going to have to deal with. they start out with references to rudy giuliani that are remarkable. he plays such an influential role in what they're going to do with the ukrain. they talk about him luke they're going to get his approval and then of course they kind of top off with the references that you pointed to. >> investigatively, when does it become more than style po

taylor was rebuked by the eu ambassador who replied he was incorrect and trump has been crystal clear and no quid pro quo of any kind. after that message they recommended they stop putting their conversations in writing. how's that? let's go quiet here. i was joined by a member of the house intelligence committee, thank you, congresswoman. heidi, an msnbc correspondent, joshu joshua. >> what is going on with the president of the united states basically saying oh, yeah, okay, i did it? i was trying to extort this guy for dirt on a political rival and i used my power as president to do it? >> and not just that, then turning around and publicly stating on the south lawn of the white house, hey, chinafurb you're listening we'd like your help here too which reminded me so much of that moment in 2016 where the president called out to risha saying, hey, if you have hillary's e-mails, we'd like to see them. this is president who doesn't seem to think he's done anything wrong here, believes there's nothing wrong with him using political power like this to help his presidential campaign. and us

taylor. sondland replies, bill, i believe you are incorrect about president trump's intentions. the president has been crystalar. no quid quos of any kind. now according to the "washington post," sondland will testify it was the president who spoke with him on the phone and told him directly there was no quid pro quos, but get this, sondland will say if he doesn't know if the president uwas telling the n fact, sondland, according to a person familiar with his thinking, told "the washington post" it was a quid pro quo, but not a corrupt one, so that will certainly be interesting if that's the rationale that sondland gives to house democrats on thursday. >> yeah, potentially explosive testimony by sondland on thursday. we also know that there has been requests by house democrats made to ambassador bill taylor, who could also have a lot to say. that has not yet been scheduled. jeregjere diamond, thanks very . so if you're like any of us, it's understandable that you've got a lot of questions about the impeachment battle like what's next for the president and congressional democrats. cnn legal analyst ellie honin

confirmed earlier reports that sondland replied to taylor after talking with president trump, and he texted back in part, quote, the president has been crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind. he added i suggest we stop the back and forth by text. another state department official, the former ambassador to ukraine, is scheduled to testify to congress on friday. she, too, a career diplomat. not clear, however, whether she will be allowed to appear. meanwhile, the "new york times" is reporting on new details about that ukraine/trump call back in july. according to the whistleblower's memo of the call, a white house official described the conversation as crazy and frightening, that the official was, quote, visibly shaken by what they had witnessed. that official also reportedly described the call as, quote, telling nbc news the trump administration is consulting with former republican congressman trey gowdy of benghazi fame about impeachment-related matters. earlier today senator lindsey graham, chair of the judiciary committee let's not forget, invited trump's personal lawyer rudy giuliani to testify about his role in trying to get ukraine

messages revealed by a different diplomat where after bill taylor said i think it's crazy to withhold assistance, said the president has been crystal clear to quid pro quos of any kind. i suggest we stop the back and forth by text after speaking with president trump. how important is it to hear from him? >> this guy sondland, he's the fixer. he's the guy that the white house and probably secretary pompeo -- >> although we don't know what the interactions have been with secretary pompeo. >> i'm reading a little between the lines. but he is a guy who is trusted by pompeo. because even in the message he sends back to the current ambassador in ukraine, he says if you have a problem with this, check with s. s is secretary, secretary pompeo. so he's doing everything with the knowledge, he seems to indicate, of secretary pompeo for president trump, working this deal with the ukrainians. i think we really have to go back again to this point that my colleague here made, you know, about what's going on here. because the american people need to really step back and understand that what the president was doing with giuliani and these ukrainian

crystal clear, no quid pro quo of any kind. except sondland later revealed that his response, this response to taylor, came shortly after he spoke with president trump on the phone dwrektd phone directly. and what else taylor will discuss is anyone's guess. but axios revealed that taylor was hesitant to take the role at first because he had concerns about rudy giuliani's hshadow involvement in ukraine. joining me is garrett haake and ayesha. what else do we expect to come out of taylor's testimony today and how relevant or important is this testimony to lawmakers right now? >> taylor's testimony is something that democrats on the committee have been looking forward to getting ever since his text messages surfaced a couple weeks ago. remember, day already was brought into replace maria yovanovitch former ambassador to ukraine after she was pushed aside. he was called out ofar. he is appearing under a subpoena and if he loses his job for it, so be it. in talking to folks who know him well, we know taylor was widely respected within the state department, he has searched in a number of dangerous places and known to be a meticulous n

crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind. and then he writes he suggests that they stop going back and forth over text and that if taylor has any issues he should reach out to a couple folks on the phone oo r so that is something that members on the hill are going to zero in on. that will be a big day and that will be interesting to see how sondland explains all of this. >> i want to bring in jamie reuben. the former secretary of state under secretary clinton. good to see you. in your view what are the consequences from the u.s. secretary of state missing a deadline. >> there is clearly a struggle going on between the trump white house and the officials that work for the president. and congress. it is unusual when we're dealing with specifics like this, the state department and the justice department frankly are supposed to be depoliticized. certainly anything related to campaigns, and an effort was made to depot lit -- depolitici them. he says are you saying it is okay now that we withhold aide for political purposes? how else does a dip low math -- diplomat to get a question for clarity so there is some record. >> >> this is

taylor riggs there on everything google, alphabet. louis vuitton, bidding to take over a jeweler. for war -- for more on what this let's go to crystal luxuryrmed tron of the- vol various brands. how does tiffany's fit in? >> if you look at them at the moment, it's a lot of luxury brands. how tiffany would have fit in is that it opens up the mass market for lvmh, which they previously didn't want to do. but maybe now they want more high street that luxury. are there cost savings? what is the deal? crystal: it would help lvmh base. the client and on their side, retail is not doing great. rent is high. with property consolidation they could potentially put the shops together. more importantly, tiffany hasn't been performing extremely well. it's like their biggest one-day gain for them in forever. know, there have been previous proposals in the past and tiffany has not taken it. if this is sweet enough we could see the lvmh empire growing even bigger. caroline: analysts seemed to like it. they say it could accelerate growth with marketing synergy. but there are other players. is this why we saw such a rally in the stock? that perhaps th

sondland then replied to taylor's message, "bill, i believe you're incorrect about president trump's intentions. the president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind." and added "i suggest we stop the back and forth by text." nbc news confirmed today that sondland spoke with the president before sending that awfully on-message reply and adds that there are more text messages between the officials that haven't yet been released to the public. and if the substance of all those communications were something that white house lawyers felt so good about seems to me sondland would be up on capitol hill right now telling that story and donald trump would be live tweeting his own exoneration. but he's not. and that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. with us at the table, white house reporter for the "washington post," ashley parker. former acting solicitor general neal kathyal. national political reporter for ox yo axios, jonathan swan. and chuck rosenberg. let me start with you, neal. it seems we already have a lot of evidence from this witness. all of it pretty incriminating for th

taylor, crazy to withhold security assistance for help for a political campaign. he responded 5 hours later. the president has been crystal-clear no quid pro quo of any kind adding i suggest we say something back and forth by text and wall street journal's for us to reports, confirmed by fox news the centigram images from private account suggest ukrainian american recently indicted for campaign-finance violation was close to rudy giuliani and had access to the president. two weeks ago the president said lev parnas and igor fruman. >> if possible i have a picture with them because i've a picture with everybody. >> reporter: chuck schumer sent this letter to the nation's intelligence she that the intelligence community's internal watchdog asking what steps are now being taken to protect the whistleblower after threats to reveal his or her identity. >> thank you. donald trump telling sean hannity he supports attorney general william barr's efforts to investigate hillary clinton's possible ties to ukraine and the steel dossier and the origins of the fbi investigation against him. >> i assume the attorney general i would like

sondland responded more than four hours later telling taylor that trump, quote, has been crystal clear text messages. well yesterday we learned that before sending that response, sondland spoke directly with president trump on the phone. that is according to a person with knowledge of the call who also said taylor was urged to stop texting about his concerns. that source along with two congressional aiding tell nbc that sondland and taylor and former u.s. envoy to ukraine kurt volker used the messaging app what's app along with text messages to discuss the trump administration's ukraine efforts. the use of what's app has raised questions about potential compliance with federal record-keeping requirements. joining us now, member of the house appropriations committee democratic congressman mark pocan of wisconsin. thank you for being on the show. >> thank you. >> first of all, what is going to happen? what is the plan? given the fact that the white house is just said no, there is no impeachment. we're not participating. >> yeah, this is just the white house's newest attempt to try to thi