obstruction of justice, and i think they had decided he was going to be the sacrificial lamb. >> john deany over his head. and then when he realized this ship is going down, he jumped. >> this morning, without the president's approval, dean issued a statement in which, among other things, he declared some may hope or think i will become a scapegoat in the watergate case. anyone who believes this, dean added, does not know me, know the true facts, nor understand our system of justice. >> do you have information implicating president nixon in a cover-up? >> i have no comment this morning. i'm sorry. >> we started having secret conversations with john dean. he was disclosing this sprawling conspiracy, to put it mildly. >> when i broke rank and started dealing with the prosecutors in early april, i had the naive belief that by breaking rank, they would do likewise. >> john dean kept upping the ante. i want immunity. okay, i'll tell you this. as we were leaving, i just remember this. he said, john has something to tell you. and dean told us that this same group had broken into the office of ell

john dean said it right.third time in america's history that a president is impeached. she did exactly the right thing, letting people see how outrageous the leadership of the senate is essentially laughing at the constitution and laughing at the founders idea of what an impartial trial should be. >> senator, according to an abc news washington post, trump should have allowed his aides to testify in the senate trial. can they fulfill their duty if they don't hear all the sentencing? >> the crew organization put out a report today that confirms that in every single impeachment trial, apparently american history, there had been witnesses. some of them have been judges of course, but there is always witnesses. in the witness case, there were video tapes. there were witnesses that each senator were allowed to watch. what will they are talking about here is possibly not doing it at all. i think john dean is also right that had she sent it over, they would take it out to the senate and dismissed it and thrown it ou

. >> joining us now, john deane, joe lockhart. john dean, the president's attorneys make their case today. they're upset it's a saturday morning it's just a teaser, because the president doesn't like the viewership on a saturday. what are you listening for this morning? >> what i'm listening for, if we have a repeat of what happened during the amendment process and they dissembled. i find it stunning, the house managers corrected them repeatedly. there will be nobody there to check them this morning. and we know a lot of their defense is based on misinformation so i'll be curious to see how that plays. fortunately, i think i think the members of the senate are educated enough to not really think well about that kind of approach, you know. >> they're going to accept, obviously, people are locked into their sides and their own belief systems. i think you pose a really good question, what does happen if the president's lawyers are not fact-based. and we have evidence to suggest in the past they haven't been. if they don't tell the tr

you know, you work with john dean.n. >> right. >> and then you got mark mckinnon here, all the guys i'm on the set with except for catherine. you know them, and you have worked with them multiple times. >> remember, guys, i'm 86. i'm the old guy, el hefe as we say in the southwest. patron. give me some respect. >> tell us this, though. the truth always comes out. there could be new evidence in bolton's book. the republicans have to worry about defending themselves to the american people as more and more evidence is revealed over time. >> i think the republicans who made this pact with the devil are not thinking about the whole american people, they're thinking about their constituencies in their states and how to get re-elected. i think some of them, certainly in the heart of hearts would not be with donald j. trump, but he's there. he's there guy and they decided to sign on. yes, we had seven in the house during the nixon time. and in bill clinton's impeachment in article one, his opponents couldn't get a majority in

but nancy has now answered. >> well, john dean, we appreciate it.s nice to know our relevance. >> we never know where our conversations will go or bhooz who's listening but we're pretty sure it's not donald trump. >> i would not be so surprised. i'll see you next time. i want to bring you the democrat from wisconsin who took part in the impeachment trial of president bill clinton. i really appreciate it. you voted against dismissing targets. do you think any republicans will break ranks this time? >> i want to say what an honor to follow john dean who has enormous courage in the nixon impeachment process. and yes, i was part of the clinton impeachment process. in both cases the members of the senate and the house conducted themselves in a way that showed they respected the constitution and that they understood when you taken a oath to do impartial justice, as the senators have to do, it means something. the problem here, of course, is unlike 1998 and unlike the nixon process, you have senators, leaders of the senate announcing in advance they were g

so, as john dean said, you're going to need some third party information, as john well knows, there'san tapes or a document. so, what the house managers will be looking for and i suspect some senators will want to see is some kind of corroboration of what parnas said. but the fact that parnas has said it is important because he is part of that special corrupt group that giuliani put together to put pressure on the ukrainians. >> it does fit, of course, maggie, with what others have set and fits with rudy giuliani's letter to ukraine saying he's acting with the knowledge of and consent of the president of the united states. you're reporting rand paul is saying president trump is two minds of witnesses, saying he's hoping he wouldn't have any of them, like someone like lev parnas or someone else like john bolton. but you are hearing new reporting on john bolton. what are you learning? >> john bolton is almost done with the book he is working on it. it will come out, i think, well before if not somewhat before the nominating conventions this summer. and he is going to talk about his time

did you share john dean's view?hat would a chief justice roberts, who's made a lot of effort to try to tamp down at least on the court side of things this partisanship that has so bubbled over in the country, made a real effort to keep the institution, one, insulated that to the extent that it can be, you've been in washington a lot. i know you don't cover the supreme court, but you know a thing or two about this chief justice. how would he come down on questions like that? >> first of all, that john dean is right, of course, that the vice president who is the official president of the senate doesn't have a role in a trial. it is the chief justice who's there, and the vice president can't break any tie votes. whether or not the chief justice will be the one who will say will be the tipping point, the tiebreaker, to say john bolton will testify or any of the other witnesses democrats want to testify will come forward. that's going to be a heavy lift for him for the reasons you just laid out, jim, because he is so --

but this is something for the ages because the whole idea, trump sitting next to john dean, john dean was the critical witness in water gate. these republicans have been saying they have no witnesses, they have no -- no testimony that the democrats have produced that would show us in the room with the president that he had ordered this quid pro quo. well, they've got bolton, who is the john dean, if they want to have him. >> john dean on this night, what are you thinking? >> i've been thinking about lamar alexander, who i knew from the nixon white house. the lamar alexander i knew would vote for witnesses. so i'm curious to see what all these years have done to him. >> got to go to manu raju. >> susan collins making clear she will vote in support of the motion to move forward for witnesses, and documents, part of president trump's impeachment trial. not a surprise. she has indicated she was moving in that direction. she's making very clear here, in her statement, that she just put out, saying that she's talking about how she worked with colleagues to ensure there's an opportunity to v

he told me that was no problem. >> it was john dean's word against the president of the united states. >> most republicans continued to standby the president but then from a little known white house aide, a dramatic twist. >> my name is alexander butterfield. are you aware of any listening devices in the oval office? >> i was aware of listening devices, yes. >> it was a bomb shell. >> he fought subpoenas after subpoenas. >> i have never heard or seen such outrageous recording. >> even as he tried to convince the american people that watergate was a press creation. >> what is it of television coverage of you in the past weeks and months that arouse your anger. >> don't get the impression that it aroused my anger. one can only be angry of those he respects. finally a drastic step. >> nothing like this has ever happened before. the office had been sealed by the fbi. a mass firing of the men pursuing the tapes. the saturday night massacre. the news calls for a sensation in the white house's courtroom and sent reporters scrambling to their telephones. the president set himself against his

to president nixon who resigned before his likely impeachment and john dean testified, just in termsdifferent from president clinton, the managers were interviewed. >> and yet we still wouldn't want more witnesses because everyone was deposed, interviewed by the fbi front of the grand jury. mr. starr was so thorough, he interviewed window washers, dentists, mail carriers and we had to accept three witnesses, ms. lewinsky. jordan, and sydney bloomenthal. this time around, there's a really limited first-person, firsthand evidence, and it's really striking. we've never had an impeachment trial in history with no witnesses. right now it looks like that's where we're going. and the house managers a are doing a terrific job putting on a case with what they have. >> what was the argument? >> back then? it was that we can't have a trial without witnesses. the record is there, but they had already been interviewed. absolutely. front of the grand jury under oath. as a friend of vernon, i was worried it was a perjury trap. but it wasn't. they didn't perger themselves. monica lewinsky was a star

>> this is where we get into john dean territory. what could they do, exactly? i mean, i don't think -- they would have to get an injunction from a court if he wants to testify. i'm not sure they could get that injunction. if john dean shows up and wants to testify -- >> john bolton. >> i'm sorry, if bolton wanted to testify, i think the white house would have a very hard time stopping him. >> john dean, do you agree with that? as someone who did testify? >> i do. and in fact, it occurred to me it might be an effort to block my testimony, but i was loaded for bear. i was prepared to say that the crime/fraud exception would preclude any kind of privilege that they could claim, and i think there's a parallel, in this situation, i think bolton clearly extracted himself and denied being involved in any conspiracy and that's the most likely offense that was involved here. he also reported the activity to the white house counsel, which is exactly what you should do. they didn't take any action, but he did. so i think he is exactly a very powerful, potential witness. i

john dean, what do you think happens here in terms of this resolution, obviously senator schumer willerything he can to amend it, but it's clear that senator mcconnell has the 51 votes for this resolution. >> i think they'll raise it in maybe less than their primetime hours, they'll hit away at this with the members, try to convince some people, give them some good reasons for why this evidence is really called for and they'll have mutt pl votes on it. they can force some of those. it's not over until it's over. with trials it's unpredictable. >>> next, white house laying out its defense. slamming the democrats' case. but the democrats are hitting back, calling trump's defense, chilling. alan dershowitz's words are coming back to haunt him. >> presidents aren't above the law. president aren't above the law. and etfs. s and fidelity also offers zero account fees for brokerage accounts, plus zero minimums to open an account. and only fidelity offers four zero expense ratio index funds directly to investors. with all of those zeros, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelit

. >> joining me, karen finney, john dean and former u.s. senator joseph lieberman who was a key player in the clinton impeachment process. john dean, counselor, first to you on the process as we see it today. how do you think mitch mcconnell has designed these rules? what are they meant to do? >> they're meant to make the trial go as fast and as limited as conceive believe. whether thaey'll get away with it, we'll find out this morning. i don't know if republicans are going to cross over, but i think those republicans who do not are going to take that into the election this year and it's going to be very tough to defend. >> senator, what mitch mcconnell said, as recently as january 7th, was that this was going to follow the clinton model. we're going to get started in the same way, 100 senators agreed to 20 years ago. not true. >> it's not literally true. he did follow the overall model of the clinton rules. >> the timing is different. they're squeezing it into two days as opposed to four and the evidence the house gathered may be different

whether or not mitch mcconnell will let them is a whole other issue. >> john dean, there's concern aboutality from the get go, and it is expressed among multiple people, and then you have bolton and pompeo and esper. they go to bed minister where the president is vacationing and they try to get him to release this aid. they do everything they can. the defense department has done their tests and studies and says it needs to be released. is there any doubt that the president of the united states did not know that there was a wide belief that what he was doing was illegal? >> i cannot envision him not knowing. who knows what goes on in his mind and what he listens to? but he was certainly told. he was certainly informed and it was certainly illegal. this is something that happened back during the nixon years. they established the law then that you could not withhold spending by congress. so it's well known publicly. i mean, i can't imagine a man would become president and not know that. so there's just no justification for this. >> joe. this comes as the president has been at mar-a-lago. we

joining us now, we have cnn senior political commentator david axelrod and cnn contributor john dean, former nixon white house counsel. okay, david, give us your 30,000-foot view of yesterday. what struck you? >> well, what struck me was that the -- that schiff and the house managers presented a very tight, compelling case that is familiar to those of white house have been paying attention. maybe not familiar to senator kennedy and some of the people in the room and certainly to some who are watching on tv. the question is, does it matter? and is the -- the notion that the president is going to be removed, i think, is very remote. and at the end of the day, the thing that worries me is the case was so compelling that the question becomes, if you don't convict, and there are good reasons why you'd be hesitant to remove a president in this way, what is the message you're sending to this president and to future presidents about what their behavior can be? and are there any consequences for doing the kinds of things the president did? >> i think there's also a message being sent by senato

the idea of purpose, john dean, thank you very much for being with us tonight. because of your experience with nixon, hogan made the similar argument then, that if the president, the executive, is allowed to keep from congress that which might be damning or incriminating or unfavorable, then this power is lost. the same argument was made tonight. in fact, they used sound from hogan during the proceedings with nixon. persuasive then. and what about now? >> persuasive then and real today as it was then. it's more than an argument. it's a fact. you lose the power to compel the executive. and the executive can indefinitely defend itself. so unless they do literally go down 5th avenue and shoot somebody. where you have other outside evidence. hogan was the first republican to break against nixon. so he -- he has a special place in my heart actually. i think -- i think that schiff was very effective tonight in really covering all the key poin points that are going to come up in the arguments we're going to start hearing tomorrow. and i think he's somewhat pulled the s

but everyone believed halderman not john dean until we got the tapes.that every single thing that john dean said happened exactly the way he said it. we also had calendars that supported when he said he had a meeting, he actually had a meeting. lev parnas can show i had meetings, he can show the letters he has on his phone from giuliani. there's plenty of corroboration even though he is indicted and he may be guilty, but he is not lying about this because he has corroboration. >> and ben, let me bring you back in here because one of the issues trump supporters -- steve cortez did appear on our air, claimed ukraine didn't know. if i embezzled money from a company, the fact they didn't know i took it and then i put it back after they finally figured out i did it, i'd still be charged with embezzlement i presume. you also have been following this case minute by minute. isn't it true that state department officials who testify today the house said they did know, they did find out the aid was being held up and they were alarmed by that? >> yes, there was tes

the other guy around is john dean. john dean is kind of this voice out of the past.e house managers, particularly nancy pelosi is seemingly relying on john dean's advice. there was an article the other day where her staff said she got the idea, postponing deliverying of the articles from something john dean said on tv. john dean is a disbarred lawyer. he is convicted felon. he was sentenced one to four years in prison for his leadership role in the watergate coverup. you wonder when these other stations have john dean on, as their expert. he has been disbarred for 45 years. stuart: we do wonder. >> yes you do. stuart: historical analysis from jeff shepard, congratulations. that was good stuff. >> thank you. stuart: if you're not careful you will be back, you realize that? >> there is a lot to say. thank you, my friend. good to see you. stuart: democrats, impeachment, circus continues. wyoming senator john barrasso, he was on the senate floor until nearly 2:00 a.m. this morning. he will tell us what it was really like in our next hour. we'll be back. ♪. ♪ hey. hey. yo

again, byron york tweets a to -- a new magazine profile, to withhold impeachment profiles watching john dean always good to get strategic advice from the mastermind of the watergate coverup. >> you mean the whistleblower of the watergate coverup but let's just -- he did blow the whistle on everything. let's be very clear here. the strategy has worked. it took republicans on the defense, every republican senator was asked do you support a fair trial and we got john bolton saying he would testify, the emails that were rejected that showed the president clearly ordered the aid held up after the call. it is driving the president crazy. the speaker should hold on just before the state of the union and then give it to him then. shannon: that may happen, she formally invited him, she knows where he is going to be. >> if she follows chris's advice it will be dumb from a republican point of view i am all for it. shannon: here's what she had to say why she is holding back and needs to know if the senate is going to do about this. >> the investigation and articles necessitate a fair trial for documents

. >> john dean? >> this was not a profile in courage by lamar. and i'm a little surprised. not totally. but i keep thinking this will be the most significant vote he makes in his career and is one of the last votes he'll make. and i -- obviously he's not standing for reelection. he's standing down. i think this is kind of a sad end note for his career. >> you disagree with him but why is it a profile in courage, do you disagree with him? >> no. >> hang on, he's not standing for reelection. >> that's right. >> he's not a maga hat wearing trump supporter, he's a long time public servant, the governor of tennessee, the education secretary under bush 41, worked with you prior to that. he gave you principled statement saying i disagree with the president's behavior, no political reason to do anything other than -- he's criticized by people on this station and all over the media, i think it's a huge stand of courage on his part. he's going to get eviscerated by people like you. >> is it right? i'm talking about on the merits is it the right decision. >> i think it reflects what a

and he knows better, because he was investigated for that very issue. >> john dean, great to have your insights and expertise. i really do appreciate you joining us. >> ana, thank you. >>> breaking news out of hawaii. police on the scene of an active shooter investigation, two police officers have been killed. we'll get a live report when we come back. (sono. (burke) saved by the bolt. seen it. covered it. at farmers insurance, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ (vo) get a quote today. >> breaking news now from hawaii. cnn is reporting at least two police officers are dead. killed in a shootout that might still be an active emergency situation. cnn has not yet independently confirmed that. these are images from a residential area not far from diamondhead outside honolulu. heavy police, fire department presence, you can see there on scene. alexandra field is gathering details. alex, what happened there? is this incident over? >> reporter: chaotic and alarming series of events there. you saw that smoke pouring out. pe

the speaker reportedly got the idea from president nixon's white house counsel john dean who had takenlace in the cover-up. let's discuss. some california harmony dylan, welcome to you both. >> thanks for having us. >> okay, i want to play a little something that mr. dean had to say on cnn about this whole idea. >> there may be something that democrats can campaign on this fall in states where republicans are part of a process to rush this thing through and try to exonerate trump somehow from what the house is charged him with. >> i mean, he goes on from there to say this is actually working the strategy for the speaker. >> yeah, it's working really well, shannon. nancy pelosi had a bad 2019 and 2020 is looking even worse. this is a really dumb idea. it's not playing well with democrats. she's been rebuked by senate democrats as well. and i think it's time for her to face the music. the house did a bad job with the impeachment hearings. and she has to live with that. there's no more control for nancy pelosi. she has to let the senate do its job and put this flawed partisan impeachment

we want the voters to decide this issue. >> john dean, thank you so much.your time. >> thank you, don. >> prince harry, meghan markle, well, they say they're stepping back from their royal duties and it seems to have come to a shock -- as a shock to everyone, including the queen. all the details next. the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network. you don't use this old tno!g, do you? or how 'bout this dinosaur right here? nope! then why are you still using a laser printer? it's got expensive toner cartridges. but this... is the epson ecotank color printer. no more expensive cartridges! big ink tanks. lots of ink. if you don't think this printer's right for you, just pick up your phone... (chuckling) ...and give me a call. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. available at... ♪ tha

and john dean is here. john dean's resume and reputation precedes him.hank you all for joining us. i want to start with you, the majority leader released this resolution on the rules for president trump's impeachment trial. talk about the time line he is laying out. it is pretty unbelievable, don't you think? >> it's speedy. i don't know how you can go any faster while still allowing participants time to sleep and to eat. you said it. both sides or each sides get up to 24 hours over at most 2 days to lay out their case. that's 48 hours. then there's 16 hours for questions from the senators. they'll be asked of either side. through chief justice john roberts then another four hours debate this idea of witnesses and documents. and we don't know how it will play out. we're looking at 68 hours. only a matter of days and if i suppose this is a big if, if the senators do not vote to allow witnesses or documents, this thing could be over by next week or as soon as next week. very fast. and that of course would be right along the line of what president trump wan

john dean, thank you. dana bash, appreciate it.up white house press secretary stephanie grisham making her second appearance of the week on the ridiculist. if you have moderate to severe psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity

president is so frightened of john bolton, maybe john bolton knows about other instances, as did john deanbut we need to hear from him. but this is a cover-up. >> tim, the nixon library, i'm wondering at the trump library, will there be any documents some there seems to be no his, toal record to look book twhong things actually happened. >> i'm thinking about what the museum will be for this trial. i wanted to say something with the letter that we found out about today from the white house. the letter was signed by the senior director of the directorate. signed by he willen knight. i know ellen knight. she worked for me. she worked, she was supervised by my supervisor. she worked on the nixon tapes. she did a brilliant job. she is committed to openness and transparency. after she worked for the nixon library, she went to an entity created by congress called the public information declassification board. which is dedicated to try on on widening access to information. so she's involved in this narrative. she's someone who is committed. >> blumenthal said he's worried. >> with duel respect, i

>> all right, look, everything your panel is saying, everything john dean is saying is of course true. those are the implications, but it's much stronger than that. when dershowitz is saying is complete lunacy, something could benefit the president, well, i think the president would say, it would benefit him to say, shoot joe biden on 5th avenue. there are, everything in the criminal code would be thrown out if a defendant could profer a reason that he thought made sense. the first thing to understand, it's a matter of law. dershowitz is nowhere in the universe of any respectable legal scholar, as a matter of history, it's also the case that as everyone is saying, it means goodbye impeachment and it requires the republicans to stake out a position that we need hear nothing because if the worst motives are alloyed with something good, everything is ko kosher and stop and think about that. if everything that trump said was true. he wanted to shake down the ukrainians and use public money to do it and in some chamber of his mind he a possible benign purpose, it's a walk, there's no justi

he does not want to be the john dean of this administration. they are thinking about the they are thinabout regulatins being rolled back. john bolton does not want to be the guy that is percved as being the traitorous to bl rean . >> we have heard the stories about the senators llg asleep and taking breaks. how have yoviewed your party this week? >> the senate republicans have done fine. s i think the democrmade a big mistake. jerry nadler said something and it turned off susan collins and other moderate republicans. it made it easier for them to push back on democrats and witnesses changing the rules . >> this is a california story. we have people like adam schiffh beinstars from . the sh let's hear from him. this was a speech on thursday night. >> ithink all of us in this room have grown up in a generation where we live withmo freedom than the one cathat before. we had freedom of speech an association. freedom to practice our faith practice was at home and all over the world. i think we came tobelieve this was the law of nature. only tofind it

but john dean, politics makes strange bedfellows. it's interesting to see what's happened inside the beltway of the people who are now considered john bolton persona nongrata. and the people who are defending him. and one of those is the president's former chief of staff, john kelly. these two men did not always see eye to eye, but john kelly was at an event and he said if john bolton says that in his book, i believe john bolton. he also went on to say that john bolton was a man of great character. just interesting to see who is stepping up to take which side. >> from personal experience, i understand this dynamic. from bolton's standpoint. and trust me, he knew this would come before he broke rank. he understood what trump was capable of and still is capable of. and so he calculated that when he made his decision. other people around him know, kelly certainly knows the situation. so i think that trump is actually putting more spine in bolton and his determination to do what he thinks apparently is right or protect himself from -- >>

they perjured themselves -- now, john dean didn't, but h. h.r. halderman, he lied in front of senate. we think about richard nixon cooperating, but he cooperated with the understanding that his lieutenants would not tell the truth about the coverup because they were implicated. go ahead. >> sorry to interrupt. i was thinking about what you said before. didn't george washington say something about documents -- about congress not being able to look at some diplomatic cables except if, of course, it was an impeachment? >> yes. there was an issue involving thor jay treaty, a treaty with great britain. the house, which was controlled by jeffersonian democrats, didn't like it. they didn't want to actually implement it. they requested from president washington the diplomatic record of the negotiations with the british. george washington wrote in response, "you can't have them, you can't have them because in our constitution the senate is responsible for advising and giving consent on diplomatic issues, not the house." however, he woulrote, my answer wou

alan dershowitz according to john dean unimpeached richard nixon.and abusing power all because he thought he was the best person to be president of the united states. seriously, that was his motive. agree with that and impeachment is gone. evaluate alan dershowitz's defense today please. >> all right. look, everything your panel is saying. everything john dean is saying is of course true. those are the implications. but it is much stronger than that. what dershowitz is saying is complete lunacy. something could benefit the president, well, i think the president would say it would benefit him to say shoot joe biden on 5th avenue. there is everything in the criminal code would be thrown out if a defendant could proffer some reason he thought made sense. the first thing to understand is the matter of law. dershowitz is nowhere in the universe of any respectable legal scholar. as a matter of history, it is also the case that as everyone is saying it means good-bye impeachment and it requires the republicans to stake out position that we need here nothin

let's get to the bottom line with cnn contributor john dean, former nixon white house counsel and cnnoe lockhart, white house press secretary during president clinton's impeachment. so joe, i'll start with you. if president trump tomorrow or monday or tuesday is able to claim that he was acquitted and vindication, what does it mean for a president who has already said article 2 of the constitution allows him to do whatever he wants. sdwhat what does it mean for the future of his presidency? >> it's hard to separate the two. i think there's a massive expansion of presidential power and a massive contraction of power. they were shortsided here in saying we want to protect our guy but in the process, they had limited their powers. going forward, particularly given with -- so getting to the trump presidency, there will be no oversight because there will be no cooperation. there's no reason for him to cooperate. the republicans have shown their hand, and i think it has and will upset in a very significant way the balance and the separation of powers between the house and the senate and the

john dean, opposite take for balance with jeffrey tooben. what is another way to look at it?ght it was a great piece. why would she get into the middle of this timely, important question if she wasn't trying to throw some kind of signal as to where she was going. you know, it isn't totally a telling question, but why raise it? and, you know, americans understand this issue. we haven't seen 75% of americans agree upon the time of day since trump has been elected. yet, 75% want witnesses. >> you threw a wild card out there of what if bolton says something between now and tomorrow. what would be the impetus? >> i notice there is a tendency with people associated with this administration to want to be a part of this historic moment. you know, we have the greatest hits of american scandals, bill barr, alan dershowitz who just have to get into it. i think it might be hard for bolton to see this moment pass without at least throwing something in there, even at a quite far enough zoom that, you know, it doesn't implicate anything to maybe throw things off. we didn't expect anything.

so let's bring in now john dean, laura coats is here as well, frank bruni, katherine rampel joins us. wow, john, it's amazing. it has been amazing, i have to be honest, to watch adam schiff through all of this. the house impeachment managers, all of them doing very well to present their case. but to watch adam schiff become emotional and to present his arguments, it has really been a thing to watch, i think. >> he's very strong. they did -- he laid out and started the day with a broad brush of where they were going, and then they went piece by piece, a deep dive into each phase of the abuse of power. and it was very convincing. it's overwhelming evidence. it's awfully hard for anybody who listens and follows this to just brush it off and -- excuse me. >> what has been interesting to me is -- what was interesting to me in his closing, i think what was the most important close and central point that i've been watching all day at home and flipping through the channels and listening to trump allies, conservative commentators, some of them saying what adam schiff said, okay, so he did this

now the test is whether this will have the effect that the john dean moment had. it took a year, a year and a half almost, for watergate to unfold and produce the ultimate result which was the president resigning in the face of not only impeachment, but barry goldwater and hugh scott telling him he probably only had six to ten votes and goldwater wasn't sure he was one of them. that was a moment where republican partisans, end of shoe, might be on the other foot in a different era, so it's not, the fact that the republican is not hugely dispositive here. that was a moment where people were able to take on data that was contrary to their pre-existing interests and make a decision in the national interest, which is what we're supposed to get when we send people to the united states congress and united states senate. we don't get it much. you know. it's been said there's a reason profiles in courage is a one volume project and not very long, and that's certainly true, but here's a realtime test. if you're a united states senator here's a realtime test of whether you

president is so frightened of john bolton is maybe john bolton knows about other instances, as did john deanbut we need to hear from him. but this is a cover up. >> tim naftali, you were in the nixon library. will there be any documents? there seems to be no historical record we're going to be able to look back on to know when things actually happened. >> i'm just thinking about what the museum exhibit is going to be for this particular event for the trial. i just actually wanted to say something about the letter that we found out about today from the white house. the letter was signed by the senior director of the directorate in the white house that oversees the management of records. it's signed by ellen knight. i noelle enknight. i don't know her personally and i haven't talked to her for nine years, but she worked for me in the sense that she was supervised by my supervisor. she worked on the nixon tapes. she did a brilliant job. she is committed to openness and transparency. after she worked for the nixon library, she went to an entity created by congress called the public information d

to be a john dean.aybe a lev parnas, a truth teller that has that ability to wake these republican senators up and say you know what, the truth will be known. where do i want to come down when history tells the story. >> lev parnas is describing a criminal enterprise. >> lev parnas was an actor in a criminal enterprise and is a charged criminal. he has been charged with felonies by southern district of new york. you know what happens if he lies to congress? it is a good bet whatever he said to rachel maddow matches what he said to congress. because if it isn't, he will be charged with more felonies. i feel today the cool front is the tradition and history for the third time in our country's history, a president will stand trial for high crimes and misdemeanors. wow. that the hot, tropical sweaty front colliding with it is all of the dirt that lev parnas revealed yesterday, the implications of john bolton's knowledge and efforts to sound alarms by going to the lawyers. the implications of a sitting attor

his report you didn't have the dynamic that you had a nixon's case with regard to live witnesses john dean john mitchell ehrlichman hall the minute cetera and their hope is that you let these opening arguments and the the recitation of what the house has gathered persist for a week or 2 weeks everyone will be bored there's nothing there there's nothing new and then at that point people say we just need to get over with it now this is the other element however that comes into play and we saw it i believe in the assassination of mr soul the money in my judgment there's no doubt that in the next days if not even sooner we will see an escalation of a crisis over iran someplace in the middle east against hezbollah in order to create a theme that we can afford prolonging the impeachment process we have our national security is at stake oil coming out of the strait of hormuz and all sorts of things that will be used to try to frighten the senate and the american people we need to get this over now we can't afford to have time for witnesses and we already know that mr trump was planning to go beyo

they told the people involved there that they had to testify, gordon liddy and john dean, that he had to turn the tapes over. to me, that is a precedent. again, if don wants to prove his in essence, come up with some facts. so far, and these are the facts, they did do what they say he did. the other part i would like to talk about -- so, i have sons that started out working, and i got them jobs because of my last name. they didn't really necessarily know how to work in construction, but they were willing to learn. their dad got them jobs. guess what? they still have them jobs. biden helped his son get a job. the other part i would like to say, if there was so much corruption going on with biden, the republicans had every chance to start its investigation and they didn't. you know why? because they get their sons jobs, too. that is how the world works. we help our children get ahead. this idea that he was totally trying to get one over on us, that is just republican smokescreens. i guess i would like to end that -- got fired because everyone in the world wanted him fired. that governme

>> what happens, john dean, if this changes and bolton is like, you know what, i didn't think it wouldp the manuscript. to laura's point, it all becomes free which is a great twist of the knife by trump at bolton, but what happens? would the manuscript be enough? >> it's hearsay, clearly. that hasn't been a big prohibition in this case so far, but that certainly is in regards to his testimony. all it is is a suggestion of his testimony and hearsay of what he might say. >> even if the manuscript reads, this is what he told me, the manuscript in and of itself can't be as competent as his actual testimony? >> exactly right, certainly not the best evidence. that's the first problem. secondly, bolton, as jeffrey has been saying, as a patriotic manner, hold a press conference tomorrow, today, come to your show this evening, whatever, and put the word out. here's what i know, here's the relevance of it, here's why i signalled i had vital information, and he should do that. why he would want to withhold that now that it is so clear he has this information is a mystery. >> i think about strateg

>> washington post writer called it joe peshi as john dean.ghter] >> there's something to that, he's not pedigreed legally educated guy from dc central casting, he's a brooklyn guy, real estate hustler but he also has a lot of knowledge of inside workings of independent operation that giuliani was running, he can tell us a lot about it, a lot emerged and he can back it up with documents, to dismiss him as not a torpedo aimed at trump world is underplaying what he brings to the table, whether he'll ever be heard under oath in this process remains to be seen. howie: he certainly has been heard on television and we know what he would say, i guess, you know, maddow did this in a lot of questions, so rudy giuliani is a proven liar used by trump haters but when he says, look, i told president zelenzky's unless they announce investigation of biden, pence wouldn't go to inauguration and steps would be taken, he's offering documentation, i think that makes a bit of a tangle. >> a lot of it is known and has been known by a major of democratic officials

i remember listening on tv as john dean testified before the senate watergate committee. he was the president's lawyer. president nixon didn't block him. not only did president nixon allow his staff to testify before congress, he publicly directed them to testify and without demanding a subpoena. actually, with the senate watergate investigation, president nixon said, and this is a quote "all members of the white house staff will appear voluntarily when requested by the committee. they will testify under oath and they will answer fully all proper questions." now compare to president trump. he publicly attacked the house's impeachment inquiry, calling it constitutionally invalid. he ordered every single person working in the executive branch to defy the house impeachment inquiry. in the letter to the speaker of the house, the white house counsel said that president trump "cannot permit his administration to participate." no president ever used the official power of his office to are prevent witnesses from giving testimony to congress in such a blanket and indiscriminate ma

>> i think john bolton will not be the john dean to this but i take issue with two things. there is a fiction that anything about this had to do with foreign policy. every piece of evidence points to the fact that all donald trump wanted was an announcement about an investigation it if you wanted an actual investigation of the bidens wouldn't he turn to the department of justice and the fbi, not to a country he says is corrupt? secondly - was there any harm? yes. 15,000 people have died because russians have killed ukrainians, the department of defense cleared this money months before donald trump was caught red handed on september 10th. >> it got to ukraine before the deadline. >> would have gotten there months before, that is the point. >> no investigation a number of people came forward to rebut. >> because they got caught. the linsky was going to go on cnn. >> it arrived in the prescribed deadline. go ahead. he picked up -- >> it is flatly wrong that all he wanted was an announcement. he thought the announcement would lock zelinski into doing the investigation and if yo

we have the plumbers and john dean. there's a lot of similarity. >> stick around. i want to talk about why republicans are afraid of the testimony and what mcconnell probably telling his caucus. >>> >>> the republicans fundamental president is that president donald trump is guilty of what he's accused of, that all the evidence has been compiled shows that, and more evidence is certain to show that more indisputably, particularly in the person of a respected lifelong right wing republican like former national security adviser john bolton. he said he's willing to go under oath and testify. apparently, according to his new manuscript, he's prepared to say the president said it was a quid pro quo. the problem for republicans is having him say that will make their obvious task of acquitting him more difficult. that's the conundrum they're in. from your descriptive standpoint, it was interesting to me to see that reporting that the most imperilled senators, they're the ones who are like don't vote for witnesses, don't open the can of worms, don't drag this out. we don't

i remember listening on tv as john dean testified before the senate watergate committee. nixon didn't block him. not only did nixon allow his staff to testify before congress he publicly directed them without demanding a subpoena. actually with the senate watergate investigatio investigation, president nixonsa said, quote all members of the white house staff will appear voluntarily when requested by the committee to testify under oath and will answer fully. now compare that to president trump who publicly attacked the house of impeachment inquiry calling it constitutionally invalid and single person working in the executive oubranch to defy the house impeachment inquiry. as just t discussed to the letter of the speaker of the house the white house counsel said that president trump , quote cannot prevent his administration to participate. no president ever use the official power of his office to prevent witnesses from giving testimony in such an indiscriminate manner. there's no telling how many government officials would come forward if the president had not issued this o

john dean, the former white house counsel, testified for multiple days pursuant to a subpoena. h.r. haldeman was subpoenaed and testified. alexander butterfield, revealed the existence of the tapes, testified publicly before the senate and so did several others. president trump's complete and total obstruction makes richard nixon look a choir boy. two other presidents have been tried before the senate. how did they conduct themselves? william jefferson clinton and andrew johnson did not block any witnesses from participating in the senate trial. president trump, by contrast, refuses to permit relevant witnesses from testifying to this very day. many of president clinton's white house aides testified in front of congress, even before the commencement of formal impeachment proceedings. during various investigations in the mid 1990s, the house and senate heard from more than two dozen white house aides, including the white house counsel, the former chief of staff and multiple senior advisers to president clinton. president clinton himself gave testimony on camera and under oath. he als