they've been more unsettled by the revelations in john bolton's book than they've let on. what you hear publicly now is that some of them, like senator lankford are suggesting the contents are so hot of bolton's book that they shouldn't be discussed in an open forum but maybe in a classified setting. listen to this. >> recommending to the house and the white house, turn it over. put it in one of the scifs here. we can read all of it and see it and see for ourselves if there's anything significant there. >> what do you think of that idea? reading john bolton's manuscript in the scif? >> i'm not quite sure what the question really is. i mean, the bottom line is, he can -- >> would you like that idea? if he's -- that's all you could gerkts would you agree to doing it in a classified setting? >> that's something that i would have to visit with the team to see what our position would be. i don't try to get ahead of the team decision. but i think what's important is that the reporting suggests that he knew a lot about this incident. he knew a lot about the ukraine ties. he knew -

john bolton is a complicated witness. i certainly don't think he's a slam-dunk witness for the democrats even though he was in the room. they've certainly had disagreements. but they should be able to say, if he thinks the president is doing something wrong, wouldn't you want john bolton to come forward and say something to you? i did nothing wrong. here's somebody who can prove that. >> remember this, too. there's gambling in the casino and politics in washington. mitch mcconnell is on the ballot this year. mitch mcconnell held the obama administration for more than a year until we had a presidential election. mitch mcconnell is not afraid to play hardball. however, one of his key deputies, fiona hill, did testify in the house impeachment inquiry. they said, this is trump being trump. sure, he brought up joe biden, maybe he wasn't articulate, but it wasn't an abuse of power. fiona hill said she and her boss thought it was. >> john bolton told me that i am not part of this whatever drug deal that mulvaney and sondland are

law and the senators are both, should evaluate john bolton's credibility for themselves. they don't have to take our word for it. he's not on the same policy page as many democrats. they don't have to take john kelly's word for it. they don't have to take the president's word for it, they can make their own judgment, but they can't do that if they refuse to even hear what he has to say. thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> at the conclusion of today's trial, senate republicans met to discuss what's next. following that meeting we heard from senators ted cruz of texas and lindsey graham, judiciary committee

if john bolton says that in the book, i believe john bolton. do you believe john bolton?you do or don't, even if all those things are true, i know professor dershowitz is coming up to be your next guest, these do not raise to the level of impeachable offenses. this impeachment is partisan and political and impeachment wasn't supposed to be done that way. we are at a point where they're starting to vote in iowa on monday. we are in an election year. let the american people decide who they want to be their president. 100 members of the united states senate should not make that decision. and this doesn't just try to overturn the election of 2016. this removes president trump from the ballot in 2020. >> they would have to move to do that obviously in addition to what they've done. can i just ask you the question about alan dershowitz? that is a point. there are some senators in your caucus saying he did it but it's not impeachable. they seize on alan dershowitz's testimony to make that argument. the other constitutional law expert who has spoken for the president as you know

no direct witnesses tying the president's withholding of this aid to investigations and here is john boltons exactly what was going on. >> if they continue to say, as some have, they don't need to hear from bolton, don't need to hear from witnesses, what will that tell you? >> it will tell me republicans are going right along with the president and mitch mcconnell in rigging this trial. it should be a fair trial. the people in our country know they want to hear from witnesses and documents, all of which the president has completely stonewalled. so this called a rigged trial. >> you know susan collins was very upset where jerry nadler when he used similar type of language calling it that on the senate floor. >> my senate colleague should be a heck of a lot more concerned and disappointed about what the president did. we should focus on what the president did as opposed to what our house managers are saying. this trial is about what the president did. >> let me ask you, you will have an opportunity to ask questions of the attorneys on both side. based on this "new york times" report, what que

. >> a bombshell report in the "new york times" about ambassador john bolton's forthcoming book. >> john bolton may have the smoking gun. >> ambassador bolton is an important witness to hear from directly. >> the chief justice presiding over this trial. if he signs a subpoena to come, we will get that witness. >> this is "new day" with allison camerato and john berman. >> we welcome our viewers in the united states and all around the world. this is "new day." we are tracking two huge developing stories. first, breaking news from the "new york times". the wait for what john bolton says he knows is over. for the first time, we hear what the former national security adviser says he saw and heard from president trump in the scandal of withholding military aid to ukraine. this new information comes courtesy of john bolton's upcoming book. the new york sometimes got their hands on a manuscript. this changes the equation of what could happen in the senate trial today. republican versus complained that there was no first person witness. now, according to this manuscript, there is. in just a few

are still reeling from the revelation of john bolton and what he has to say the very relevant probative quality of the testimony as i'm sure you have seen the president's own former chief of staff general kelly says he believes john bolton and more j importantly that is extraordinary of itself the chief of staff believes john bolton in that implication does not believe the president of the united d states that he worked closely with for such a long time but he also recognizes the importance of calling john bolton as a witness to swear him in and that senators hear from him themselvesst that very relevant testimony. the president's lawyers today and in prior presentations cannot defend the president on fax instead they went through a list of grievances which i'm sure the president was delighted to hear but not relevant to the charges against the president here today to use their time to smear the bidens with the whole ukraine scheme to attack the managers but as far as the facts themselves although at their disposal any agency officials who worked with the president this whole period of

ignoring for now the john bolton elephant in the room. they report that bolton will

bolton manuscript. all right, now, we talked about this earlier. we have johnber, so ross, maybe senator graham was listening to you and saying, i hate him less, let's see this. if we don't get bolton's testimony, that's complicated, but the manuscript. what could be done according to lindsey graham? >> as we said a little while ago, either a subpoena for the manuscript and they change hands and there's no time to get to court, or the administration voluntarily provides the manuscript to the senate. i take senator graham's comment to mean, all right, we'll take the manuscript, then we will decide, first of all, whether it needs to be part of the record, which it probably will be, but then second, do we even need him as a witness? we have his words. we have dozens of pages of his account of things. maybe we don't need him as a witness. i think that's the thing to watch for now. >> jeffrey, how does that play? >> you know, the story gets more and more complicated. i mean, simon and shuster, his publisher, and john bolton himself have under their control the abili

but john bolton doesn't do coincidence. john bolton does calculation. and john bolton calculated that the worst thing he could possibly do to donald trump today is say, i am prepared to testify, and john bolton did that. no one has dreamed of war with iran and regime change in iran more fervently, and the reward that john bolton gave the president today who has brought us closer to that war than any previous president was the announcement, i am prepared to testify in the impeachment trial of that president. does that mean now that war with iran is simmering, john bolton wants the steadier hand of mike pence at the controls? john bolton doesn't want a rerun of the time when president trump called off an attack on iran ten minutes before it was scheduled to take place. john bolton doesn't want a president tweeting that he will commit war crimes by bombing non-military sites in iran, including cultural sites. john bolton wants war with iran done right if it's going to be done. he wants it done pompeo and pence style. in the obama white house, susan rice wa

not just john bolton's book. e information about all of the episodes, will they be shamed by the vote. >> this blanket defense of what he did, even if what bolton says was true, then it still wasn't impeachable. that's where you imagine a lot of the senators, particularly the ones set to vote against these witnesses, which most of them will, obviously, so, yeah, that's why dershowitz was so helpful. >> number one, this isn't going to be the first book that is an explosive book about how donald trump operates in the white house. >> the first one written by somebody who was a top adviser. >> yeah, but -- >> all i'm saying is everyone on the republican side has discounted the way the president operates as something that we knew going in, we have seen multiple reports of how he operates, not a secret to anybody. i think all republicans care about, all i would care about as a republican senator is the point that nia made, on this subject matter, what he said is irreleva irrelevant. even if it is true, it the not impeac

the house should have taken the two years to force john bolton to testify. and what donald trump's lawyers in the justice department are saying not in the senate but before the court of appeals on the subject on the committee of judiciary it lacks article three standing to sue demanding testimony from individuals on matters related to the executive branch official. here they are the president's layers are this duplicitou duplicitous, they come into the senate which they refer to as a court of the house should have sued in court to force subpoenas like witnesses on john bolton they go to court they must not sue in court to compel the witness to testify. if that is the legal duplicity of the president's team. so will we get a fair trial or not? will the senate here as a key and important witness on egregious conduct or are we not? i don't see how the oath of impartiality can be interpreted in any other way to demand a fair trial with witnesses and documents. >>. >> are you confident enough the senate will follow? >> or are you prepared quick. >> we have a lot

new york times" and his publisher launches his book sales on amazon. >> we ought to not only have john boltonestify, but we need to see what he wrote down in his notes at the time. >> this is stunning. ambassador bolton essentially confirms the charges in the first article. >> this is a bam shell. >> open and shut. game over for the president. >> the only way we can discover the truth is to have ambassador bolton testify under oath. trish: they all want john bolton to be called as a witness. even some republican senators are considering it. i have a lot to say about john bolton and the timing of it. you want to know what is so troubling about the democrats? they are so disingenuous. the sham impeachment is about stripping away the votes of 63 million americans. president obama's administration never bothered to provide ukraine with the help it need. the democrats will take any issue they can find to push through their hose tile takeover of the -- their hostile takeover of the u.s. government. you had because intelligence heads saying stuff like this. >> do you still believe the president coul

member of the president's legal team yesterday, the battle with former national security advisor, john bolton over claims in his upcoming book. though white house is bolton's manuscript contains classified information and cannot go to press as is. bones lawyer denies this and is demanding to know what information is in question. democrats are saying bolton must testify on what the president told him regarding military aid to ukraine. meantime, president trump declaring game over, tweeting out a video of bolton from late august where he makes no reference to any attempt at quid pro quo with ukraine. here is a bit of that. >> i will be meeting president zelensky. he and president trump have already spoken twice. the president called him on his election and then his excess in the parliamentary election. they were very warm and cordial calls. we are hoping that they will be able to meet in warsaw and have a few minutes together. >> melissa: we've got to get to this breaking news, though. adam schiff is speaking right now in front of the microphone. let's listen. >> the integrity of our elections.

if now you really want to hear from john bolton, why did they not push earlier in this process to hearon, mulvaney, and others? >> initially he said he would not testify. unless subpoenaed. but i he also indicated somethig about fighting to get it to. don begins case is still going in the courts, might be there for months or years. by that point in time this will be over. i think that's why they didn't subpoena him. >> sandra: we spoke to doug collins top of the 9:00 our east coast time this morning. we asked him about this leaked transcript, asked him if he changes anything. it says this >> nothing we've seen so far, it simply leaked parts of the transcript, has change what we are talking about. they did nothing to the eight and they got to eat. this really doesn't change anything. >> sandra: and so does this leaked transcript change anything for you, senator? >> i think bolton has a lot of credibility. not just among the republicans but on their side come as well. he's notorious no kicker. whatever transcript you are talking about here, the document he has been working on writing, i

john bolton has something to say. john bolton, come out and say it. nobody is stopping him. >> well, there's a lot of hysteria about mr. bolton's testimony. >> sean: not here. >> frankly i think his testimony will be redundant. i speak just for me, sean, but i'm willing to stipulate that mr. bolton will likely testify that the president paused aid to ukraine while asking ukraine to investigate vice president biden. my response to that is, your point is what? that doesn't tell us anything. why do the president asked for an investigation of joe biden? he didn't ask for investigation of elizabeth warren. or bernie sanders or amy klobuchar. he didn't get joe biden's name out of a phone book. he asked for an investigation of vice president biden because he was investigating corruption. how do we know that? four words: hunter biden and burisma. now, we know for a fact -- i'm not accusing anyone of anything, sean, but the ukrainian government is historically and organically corrupt. vice -- rather, president obama placed vice president biden in charge of the

ambassador to the u.n., john bolton. who better to bring in than american enterprise's ambassador john bolton. >> ambassador bolton, always good to see you. >> ambassador, good morning to you. >> good evening, ambassador, merry christmas. >> we love seeing you each and every day. >> ambassador john bolton is being walked into the studio by steve ducey. >> come on! >> he wants to see if you're in shape. he's watching! >> yay! ♪ ♪ >> trevor: whoa! oh, man! if shakira's hips don't lie, then those hips are pathological liars because look at that. look at that. it looks like his legs are fused directly to his shoulders. it's like warping cp30 trying to twerk. that's what that look likes. and you can tell, you can tell how much people at fox cared for john bolton. you know. he was like the goofy uncle to just wants to have fun and wipe iran off the planet. but now that bolton's allegations could hurt president trump, fox news has made it very clear that he is no longer invited to the family cookout. >> we heard from other peop

john kelly saying he believes john bolton. esident trump loved the fact john kelly had been in the military and his ordererness and, well, he got sick of him and turned on him, too. i worked with john kelly and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great president. stephanie grisham, the press secretary. these are not isolated incidents. this is a few. rex tillerson said the crown jewel of his initial cabinet of secretary of state, dumb as a rock and lazy as hell. steve bannon one of the architects of trump's victory. sloppy. and one of his biggest advocates, he should be attorney general general. and michael cohen, bad lawyer and fraudster. not only does he turn on everyone, we're talking not about small jobs, we're talking about secretary of state, secretary of defense. national security advisor. he trusted these people with some of our nation's most important tasks and now suddenly saying they were always bad. back to you, guys. >> thank you very much. >> i'm wolf blitzer live in washington alongside jake tap

if you talk smack, they will turn on you faster than john bolton on a fit board. l be right back. ( cheers and applause ) introducing the future of fitness. it's every class you can imagine. live... welcome back to the mirror. you've got this, john. .and on demand. it's boxing, cardio, yoga, and more. it's an interactive, goal crushing, whole family, whole body fitness machine. it's so cool! the future of fitness is at home. the mirror. everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile lets you design your own data. you can share 1, 3, or 10 gigs of data between lines, mix in lines of unlimited, and switch it up at any time. all with millions of secure wifi hotspots and the best lte everywhere else. it's a different kind of wireless network, designed to save you money. switch and save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. and save even more when you say "bring my own phone" into your voice remote. that's simple, easy, awesome. click, call or visit a store today. >> trevor: you know, it's easy to forget while impeachment is going on, donald trump i

john bolton, now we revert back to this question about witness witnesses. i don't think there's any problem here. the aide was released, the aide was increased, legal aid, what the president said or didn't say it, what he used in a conversation with an eta, doesn't matter. if adam schiff thought john bolton was so set to impeachment, he would've subpoenaed him, fought to keep that subpoena. just so everybody listening understands, when you are not senate confirmed, congress can't take a white house advisor and say you must come talk to us. because he's not senate confirmed, you have to go to court or go through protracted negotiations to get that collate to testify. you know what adam schiff said? it's not that important to the case. they thought they already had a case. now that they realize they don't have a very good, strong case, they don't the votes, they are about to lose democrats on this question of acquittal. of course they want to bring you more witnesses, they are not trying to find the case. >> melissa: how much do you think it would change thin

says that in the book, i believe john bolton. reaction to that? >> well, i don't know bolton very well. i did have dealings with general kelly. i think that the chances are good that the report of bolton's account is correct. we'll find out for sure if he comes to the senate. he's got to hold up he has right hand and swear an oath to tell the truth and then we'll know whether what he said is true. >> after failing to mention bolton's manuscript yesterday, the president's attorney tried to discount those revelations arguing the manuscript was inadmissib inadmissible. what does that tell you about the president's team? the argument that they are making. >> i heard that and was really flabbergasted. the president's team put that piece of evidence at issue and made it more mandatory for the senators to call mr. bolton as a witness. i thought it was an odd thing for the president's lawyers to do. >> what did you make of their arguments over the past few days including last night, alan dershowitz, you heard all that you are points in t

the last 24 hours, john bolton bolton not all is prepared to testify, but that based on his manuscript and testimony would include a direct conversation with the president of the united states where the president made it clear he was conditioning military aid on political investigations or material that he wanted from ukraine, makes it all the more clear why you can't have a trial, a meaningful time without witnesses and you certainly can't have one without john bolton. i am, you know, please that the senators are reconsidering, some that had i think questions about the utility witness testimony. they appear to be reconsidering and i think that's very positive. positive. because this witness obviously has such relevant information to shed on the most egregious of all of the charges in the articles of impeachment, and that is that the president of united states withheld hundreds and billions of dollar of military aid to an ally of war to help secure that nations help to cheat in the next election. now, let me make one of the point very clear. we already have testimony on this key pernic

after john bolton announced today that he would testify under subpoena. on mcconnell and his caucus now to see if bolton's testimony changes their calculus on how the senate trial should proceed. joining us now, jegeoff bennettn capitol hill. what have you learned? >> reporter: the few democrats i've talked to since this bolton news broke, they've made the case that house speaker nancy pelosi's strategy to withhold articles, they say that strategy is now downright prescient in part because it allowed for new developments to infold that could change this power dynamic as democrats push for a trial with witnesses. at the end of the december there was that reporting to "the new york times" that mick mulvaney and john bolton and others pressed president trump to release the aid but president trump refused. now you have john bolton saying he would testify if he's subpoenaed. we should say there's nothing preventing from john bolton from showing up here tomorrow and talking to members about what he knows if he wants to tell his story. you can bet adam schiff an

. >> john bolton is central to the conversation right now. the president tweets about john bolton helped or hurt him? >> listen, i mean, the media each and every day will critique every single tweet the president puts out and tried to have, be the jury on whether it helps or not. here's what i can say is, is the fact we're having to talk about john bolton at the 11th hour, the fact that we will continue to see leaks, we have a count that a 17 to zero. the democrats have called 17 witnesses. the republicans have called zero. why do we think 18 to zero, 19 to zero will stop my democrat colleagues from making any other assertions? here's what i will say. when we look at the president and his ability to actually conduct the affairs of this nation, it is critically important that those conversations whether it be with the nsc advisor or the chief of staff or anyone else that those need to be protected and they have to be protected for the national security of our country. so as i look at that, the tweets have very little effect what's going to hap

john bolton is a knee so con. >> that's what made their marriage so bizarre. t have what it takes to play. >> if john knew these words with in the manuscript, he should have gotten over there and corrected it. lou: he's being urged to throw away the book, throw away the manuscript, and tear up the check. you figure out based on the way he has behaved how likely that is to come. fred fleitz made the recommendation and i think it's a good idea. lou: the united states supreme court handing president trump another major victory, allowing the administration to enforce the rule that permits them to deny immigrants who use public assistance or welfare or might use it in the future to be barred from entry and status. the rule is being challenged in lower courts. injunction was put in place. that injunction is no more. justice neil gorsuch with a very important statement slapping down lower district court judges who try to supersede administration policies. the real problem he wrote is the common practice of courts trying to treans send the cases -- to transcend the cas

for people who were at john bolton's level of the white house, however, normally they don't show up. ey send a letter saying the president invoked privilege. what's interesting about this is they really don't have any leverage on bolton. all the white house could do is go to court and get an injunction against bolton to prevent him from testifying. but because he doesn't work there, they don't have the stick of being able to fire him if he violates the president's order. in my case i still worked there and didn't have interest in getting fired so i invoked executive privilege as i was directed to do. it's a normal thing. obama did it several times, bush did it, clinton did it. >> when you went, did you invoke it for everything or just specifics or topics? >> in my particular case we invoked it for specific topics. my counsel was there, my own personal counsel, emmet flood, who has been in this white house, was part of that as well. so we invoked it on certain topics. my presumption is, because bolton was the national security advisor, the top level of advisor to the president, that th

so the traction of john bolton commenced. >> go back 15 years, nobody calls john bolton a tool of thes. >> 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

if john bolton said this, it was only to sell a book. the department of justice, while the department of justice has not reviewed mr. bolton's manuscript, "the new york times" account of his conversation grossly mischaracterizes what attorney general barr and bolton discussed. there was no discussion of personal favors or undue influence on investigations, nor did the attorney general state that the president's conversations with foreign leaders were improper. the vice president's chief of staff issued a statement, in every conversation with the president and the vice president, in preparation for our trip to poland -- remember, that was the trip that was being planned for the meeting with president zelensky -- the president consistently expressed his frustration that the united states was bearing the lion's share of responsibility for aid to ukraine and that european nations weren't doing their part. the president also expressed concerns about corruption in ukraine and at no time did i hear him tie ukraine aid to investigations into the

john bolton is fired by the president september 9. ers used to work at the nsc until weeks prior and met with the whistleblower himself. if you ask me, i don't know, maybe a few too many people from the nsc? on the plus side for john bolton, he has gone from being labeled a crazy war monger by the main real media -- >> no one has dreamed of war with iran and regime change in iran more fervently than john bolton. >> i don't know what led donald trump to allow that stupid hawk into his administration. worst yet to make him his national security advisor. but he did. >> john bolton wants war. trish: that was before. this is now. >> we ought to not only have john bolton testify, but we otto see what he wrote down in his notes at the time. >> this is stunning. ambassador bolton essentially confirms the president committed the offenses charged in the first article of impeachment. >> we often use the term bombshell and this is another one. >> this is open and shut, game over for the president as far as the facts go. >> the only way we can disc

if john bolton is called.nd a number of senators, republican senators, saying that it makes it more complicated. it is a very high bar to remove the president, 2/3. why go down the road we heard today. alan dershowitz's argument that the quid pro quo is not improper and philbin's argument recruiting assistance from a foreign government with help in your election is not improper. >> you have to argue that even if you find the president did it, it is not impeachable. dershowitz took it to another level. this was donald trump's richard nixon moment when richard nixon said if the president does it, it is not a crime. the president can orchestrate a burglary but if it is in the national interest he can do it. the 74 watergate congress said no. we are not going to accept that. they told nixon you are not going to have the votes to survive this. right now trump's defense team is betting they have the votes. >> what is the difference from 74 republicans in 1974 and republicans in 2020. >> difference is the congress. y

they failed at the beginning but breathed a sigh of leaf when john bolton got in. inted out someone they have pushed for and advocated for as someone who is credible, strong on foreign policy, issues, who can be trusted. brian, the cost of refusing to allow witnesses in this trial just went up for the republicans. >> maya wiley, no matter the strength of the legal argument, late last week, dana bash from cnn reported man shonn,-- a sen was thinking of splitting the articles. >> it depends how deeply intertwined they are. you have the question of abuse of q power and how anyone doesn believe the earth is round at this point. of course they know the earth is round. they have to support and create a lie of the earth being flat. the second way we're getting to know the earth really is round, goes back to claire's point, not that you believe the dead frog overfr donald trump, that donal trump killed the frog to keep the frog from talking. that's what john bolton believes among others, because john bolton in particular agreed he would testify if subpoenaed. the democrats,

very good to have you with us on al-jazeera again do you think john bolton will be allowed to testify well it depends on whether the democrats can get a few republicans peeled away from the republican majority in the senate to join them in subpoenaing bolton he said he would obey a subpoena my guess is that's entirely possible the senate majority leader republican mitch mcconnell has already said he does not have enough votes among the republican majority to block calling witnesses so it looks very likely right now as if bolton will be called to testify but bill do you think bolton testimony will be a game changer will make a difference to the outcome of this trial. well we already know the main the thing he's going to say which is that there really was a quid pro quo that the president told him personally face to face that he wanted to hold up the military aid to ukraine in order to extract a concession from the ukrainian government that they would investigate joe biden and his son lot of people think that that is a misuse and abuse of power were republicans have done in response to

that's the big danger. >> and of course, john bolton once again, if what john bolton says is true, that the president told him that aid to ukraine was linked to investigating the bidens, then the president is lying about this. john kelly, the president's former chief of staff, we now learned said quote if john bolton says that in the book, i believe john bolton. in other words, the president's former chief of staff thinks the president is lying. that should always be of note. that should always be curious to any senator of any party. also curious is the president's statement overnight where the argument he makes against john bolton testifying is frankly dishonest, right, the president tweeted quote, why didn't john bolton complain about this nonsense a long time ago when he was very publicly terminated. he said not that it matters. nothing. that's a lie. john bolton did complain about this repeatedly for months. >> according to sworn testimony from witnesses. >> according to sworn testimony under oath have testified, fiona hill, the drug deal, john bolton called this a drug deal. he bro

john bolton is a knee so con. >> that's what made their marriage so bizarre. n doesn't have what it takes to play. >> if john knew these words with in the manuscript, he should have gotten over there and corrected it. lou: he's being urged to throw away the book, throw away the manuscript, and tear up the check. you figure out based on the way he has behaved how likely that is to come. fred fleitz made the recommendation and i think it's a good idea. lou: the united states supreme court handing president trump another major victory, allowing the administration to enforce the rule that permits them to deny immigrants who use public assistance or welfare or might use it in the future to be barred from entry and status. the rule is being challenged in lower courts. injunction was put in place. that injunction is no more. justice neil gorsuch with a very important statement slapping down lower district court judges who try to supersede administration policies. the real problem he wrote is the common practice of courts trying to treans send the cases -- to transcend

i don't know john bolton, i do know kelly. kelly says he believes bolton, i believe general kelly. it's one of those questions, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? general kelly was in that office. he saw how the president conducted himself. if you go to the real issue of general kelly saying this, general kelly is saying i don't believe the president, i believe john bolton. i believe john bolton because i have been with the president, i have seen how he has operated and that's why i'm saying that bolton is telling the truth if he said that. >> and that's significant because john kelly we know chooses his words very carefully and hasn't said all that much yet since leaving. william cohen, secretary cohen, we appreciate you being with us this morning. thank you very much. >> thanks very much for inviting me on the show. i can only say -- well, i can see my time is running out, as they say to the candidates, but i think we put john kelly and say why would john kelly say he believes bolton if he doesn't understan

what happened to the copy of the book is unknown to john bolton's team, but it appears copies of it wereade. bolton's team said it submitted the book quote in good faith, and now feels that process was corrupted. bolton does not intend to speak publicly about the ukraine issue until questions about his potential testimony are resolved f. he were to testify, he plans to do so as a fact witness. >> and mounting pressure for witnesses to be called at president trump's impeachment trial has reportedly led to a potential agreement among republican lawmakers, citing gop officials, "the washington post" is reporting that senator pat toomey has confined to republican senators including mitt romney that proposing a one for one deal with democrats may be necessary at some point, arguing that such an arrangement could force democrats to accept the republican witness against their wishes or else risk having republicans move ahead to acquit trump. according to the post, the proposal came up in private conversations at yesterday's closed senate lunch. instead, mcconnell told senate republicans during

denying a claim his former national security advisor. >> i can tell you that nothing was said to john bolton. i have not seen him. i guess she's writing a book. >> reporter: bolton writes in his upcoming book that the helped with investigations and to democrats including the bidens. >> we do not deal was speculation. we do not deal with allegations that are not based on evidentiary standards at all . >> reporter: democrats insisted that bolton be called as a witness. >> we have a witness with first- hand evidence and how can senate republicans not vote to call that witness? >> reporter: four republicans would have to break ranks and at least one of them seems open to it. >> i think it is fair to say that john bolton has a relevant testimony to provide to those of us sitting in impartial justice . >> reporter: bolton has told lawmakers he is willing to testify. >>> senator kamala harris says it is imperative that the teimy bolton. >> if it wasn't clear before it is clear today that there is. t reality is that john bolton wants to testify and he has direct evidence about the matter at hand and

trish: and john bolton? point is that i don't know -- i don't believe the democrats know what john bolton is going to say if he was ever to become a witness. and that's the danger for the democrats. you never call a witness when you don't know what they are going to say prior to the testimony. this is a danger for both parties. i'm very disappointed in john for allowing this to be leaked. the timing of the book in and of itself is something he participates in. i'm deeply disturbed by where we are in talking about it. trish: the president's attorneys closing their arguments today by throwing some of the house managers' words right back in their faces. >> i'll leave you with some of those words. >> there must never, a narrowly voted impeachment or impeachment supported by one of the major political parties and oppose about it other. >> by these actions you would undo the free election that expressed the will of the american people. >> the republicans are crossing out the impeachment standard of high crimes and

bolton. >> john kelly, you would want to call and give his remarks about bolton's veracity? >> yes, that would seem to indicate that he has knowledge of what >> bolton is applying to. >> martha: joined me now is congressman mark meadows. >> thanks so much, martha. >> martha: let's start with john bolton and the fact that the president's former chief of staff says if that's what john bolton's book said and we are waiting to hear that if it is in the book exactly, that he does believe him and he was there also. >> obviously what we are all planning on is a manuscript that nobody has actually read so we are all basing this on a "new york times" report, we do have information and john bolton's own words. obviously, john bolton talking about the fact that not only was the call appropriate but it was warm and cordial to quote the master bolton, and when did he record this? this was on august 28th, the day after he met with president zelensky. everybody's talking about additional witnesses? martha, it is 17-0. 17 witnesses have been called, the case does not get better. >> martha:

or whether general kelly believes john bolton, but whether you believe john bolton, whether you will have the opportunity to hear directly from him. this is will be the first impeachment trial in history that involves though witnesses if you decide that you don't want the to hear from any. you simply want to rely on what was investigated in the house. that would be unprecedented. suzanne is a strategist and political analyst and david jolly of florida, he has left the gop, and he is an msnbc political analyst and from washington, matt miller, former spokes person for eric holder and an nbc contributor. thank you for joining us and helping us out to analyze what happened today. matt, i want to start with you, there were a couple of arguments that were made today by allen derschowitz, suggesting that what president did was not impeachable, but was not only not impeachable and not wrong, but in fact would be okay in the course of doing things, as long as they said it was in the country's interest. the fact that he asked a foreign country for help. may have assisted him in an election. w

him shredding his new bff, john bolton. and john bolton's credibility.e a look. >> particularly, given the history, where we've had a politicized nation of intelligence over wmd, why we would pick someone, who the very same issue has been raised repeatedly, and that is john bolton's politicization of the intelligence on cuba and other issues, why would we want someone like that as credibility? i just can't understand. >> sean: now come i also want to show you other breaking news tonight. we have other news that what john bolton describes john he finds almost verbatim directly by president trump's characterization of those calls and there were warm and cordial. yet we've got to deal with the issue in ukraine. >> i will be meeting president zelinsky. he and president trump have already spoken twice. the president called to congratulate president zelinsky on his success in the parliamentary election. they were very warm and cordial calls. they were hoping that they will be able to meet in warsaw and have a few minutes together. because of the success of ukr