bureaucracy and what nobody has been able to explain is why on the 25th that e-mail was sent from michael duffey after the phone call, and now they are saying it is coincidence, and so omb official is very clear that we are wrong to draw the inference, but the timing is a challenge when you are trying to explain this all. you know, when you are looking at the balance of the morning on all of the talk shows, what we have heard is a couple of things, and back and forth on dingle and one issue, and where the white house is on this time line is one, but the issue of a short or long trial, and when the trial is going to happen, it is clear that the senate democrats believe it is going to be taking place, and nancy pelosi is going to transmit the articles of impeachment, and they believe it is a political winner for them, and view reflected by the president's own press secretary. >> i wanted to make sure that people know, and we will get some reaction in a moment, but i wanted to make sure that people know that michael duffey, his title is associate director of national programs of office and budget,

we're talking about witnesses in the white house, including michael duffey. and we just learned over the last few days that michael duffey, within 90 minutes of president trump's phone call with president zelensky, sent that email to the pentagon withholding the critical u.s. military assistance to ukraine. and at the same time, asking them to keep it quiet, hush-hush. so clearly they understood that this was inappropriate, and michael duffey is exactly the kind of witness that we need to hear from in the united states senate along with the documents, along by the way with the original transcript of the phone call. >> mm-hmm. >> rather than the memo form. >> as opposed to the rough transcript that the white house released. in terms of those emails, because of that foia lawsuit, those were specifically referenced by senator schumer today in his letter to his fellow senate colleagues where he called for evidence to be admitted. he also then later today said that he could and would push for a vote. do you know of any of your republican colleagues who would get b

and this is an email from michael duffey, an omb official, a political appointee at the white house, and his job is to sort of oversee all of the aid, at least in the national security space. and what he was saying was directing both omb and the department of defense to put a hold on that aid until something was resolved. he doesn't really clarify. it's really the timing that's drawing attention of people. then he asked people to say, let's not share this too widely, given the sensitive nature of the request. i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know. so, it gives you a sense of what's happening inside the white house. there's a paper trail. aside from the timing aspect of it, i'm not so certain it really vastly expands our understanding on what happened because we know the president held the aid, we know that he was having these phone calls, and we know some of his own aides have said there was a quid pro quo, namely gordon sondland. so, it's an interesting development, but i think it needs to be taken in the context of all of the information

>> michael duffey, redacted. >> i mean, what more do you need to know? the what happened part has been redacted. >> that's the part that we can't see. >> we would like to know. >> seems to be the relevant part to this particular exchange. >> who gave him the guidance and what did they tell him about why it was being withheld? the e-mails also show that i think back in june, the president was asking questions about the aid, why, because he had seen an article in the washington examiner not because his aides told him there was an issue with corruption, he saw an article that raised questions. so much now that is i think going to put pressure on people to say we need to hear from michael duffey and we need to hear who instructed him and when and what did they say? >> here's been the simple logic of political communications and damage control, a lot of bad stuff has come out. there's been live witnesses, enough to impeach the president of the united states. if the whole story was out, you would dump it all out, dump it all out on christmas eve and maybe ther

what exactly did michael duffey in omb, office of management and budget, you know, say in these newly released e-mails. what can you elaborate for us. >> it is potentially significant because it fills in detail on exactly how the aid was held up and how it happened on the day of the call. michael duffey, the white house official, he sent this e-mail basically ordering the pentagon to hold this aid up, and in it he acknowledged there was a potential for political sensitivity, potentially explosive as minority leader schumer said. duffey said given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction. now, the office of management and budget where duffey works, they down played this e-mail. they said it would be reckless to tie the hold of the funds to the president's call with the ukrainian president. they said they are pulling one line out of this e-mail would be misleading and inaccurate. and we do know broadly, we have known before this, the time line of how this aid was withheld, the decision was

they should inclues michael duffey, associate director of national security at the office of management and budget, and second and just as importantly, the senate should issue subpoenas for a limited set of documents that we believe will shed additional light on the administration's decision making regarding the delay in security assistance funding to ukraine and its requests for certain investigations to be announced by the government of ukraine. the need for the senate to review documentary evidence has received far less attention than the need for witness testimony despite being an equally important aspect of the trial and getting the facts to come out. we don't know what these documents will say. just as we don't know what the witnesses will say. they may actually be exculpatory of president trump or they may be further condemning of president trump, but they should come out. we should see these documents no matter what they say. today, i sent a letter to all my senate colleagues, 99 of them, every democrat, every republican, detailing the specific documents we're requesting. the do

michael duffey was subpoenaed by the house intelligence committee and did not appear. he is one of many officials who defied these subpoenas but the house did not go to court in order to pursue that. they said they didn't have the time. it could be held up for months. now what senate republicans are saying if the democrats wanted these witnesses they should have had them during the house trial when they had control. the bottom line is you need 51 senators in the senate trial to do anything. the break down is 53 republicans, 47 democrats. if democrats can convince four senators, michael like michael duffey should testify, they may be able to get them, susan collins, mitt romney. none of those senators have shown indication that's going to happen. they're back this their districts. when they come back in january, that's going to be the question put to them. >> jeremy herb, thank you so much. minority leader chuck schumer isn't the only democrat pointing to these new e-mails to bolster the case to have witnesses testify at the upcoming u.s. senate impeachment trial. here

take michael duffey, he is the omb official that's basically in charge of funding for national security, so that includes a lot of military aid. this is all being housed in the white house through different agencies, whether it's the state department or the defense department. after that july 25th phone call -- and omb says, with he should be clear, that this is basically a coincidence, but basically 90 minutes after that call that president trump has with president zelensky duffy writes an email to dod saying basically put a hold "on the money." what omb is saying is that this decision had been made and that's been -- came out in the testimony a few days earlier, july 18th, and that's just how the bureaucracy works. but you do get a sense that they were aware, at least duffy was, that this could be sensitive because in one of those emails he basically asks people not to share the information and keep it on a need to know basis. then when the funds are ultimately released on september 11th duffy basically is saying i'm glad this is behind us now, hopefully now we can move on. >> that is

this order comes from the white house from michael duffey, who is a political appointee, he's not the of person that would normally order this flow of money. another line that follows up is, let's keep this quiet just between the people that need to know, because michael duffey realized at that point it would be a problematic, offensive issue. omb complained this was taken out of context, and if it was taken out of context it's because that other 50% was redacted. if you didn't get to spend time until midnight that friday reading it, i can assure you a lot of stuff around it was redacted. this is why we see chuck schumer coming out and saying, we really need these documents, because they really do paint a picture of how this phone call set off other actions. >> on the schumer question, you mentioned he did put out a letter to all senators today demanding several areas of documents from the administration. they talk about pressure to ukraine announcing investigations. that's one area he wants information about. also withholding a white house meeting from president zelensky, which was c

michael duffey is already one of the four administration officials who senate leader chuck schumer has proposed as a witness. he said these emails show the senate needs documents as well. >> in the email, the top trump administration official, michael duffey, ordered the military assistance to ukraine be withheld, and he demanded the order be kept hush, hush. why? if everything was on the up and up? if the call was perfect as president trump said, why does one of his top aides, who's a political appointee say let's keep it hush, hush? the new emails from mr. duffey and the trump administration show why it's so important for the white house to produce the documents we have requested. >> these new emails, we got them late friday thanks to a court order two days after the president was impeached by the house. so what else is out there that we haven't seen yet? joining us now, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney who has been following the story. joyce, thank you so much for being with us tonight. there's a lot of news for this week. let's first of all start with what you make of the fact tha

in the emails budget official michael duffey orders a hold on military aid to ukraine roughly 90 minutes after mr. trump had his infamous phone call with the leader of that country. duffey writes based on guidance in light of the administration's plan to review assistance to ukraine, including the ukraine security assistance initiative, please hold off on any additional d.o.d. on gapgss of the funds pending direction from that process. he goes on to say, given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction. democrats now want duffey to testify. >> if there was ever an argument that we need mr. duffey to come testify, this is that information. this email is explosive. a top administration official, one that we requested, is saying stop the aid, 91 minutes after trump called zelensky and said keep it hush-hush. what more do you need to request a witness? >> reporter: in a statement an administration spokesperson insists the freeze was in place before mr. trump's call saying the hold was announced i

you just named michael duffey where we have new documents that are very incriminating. there are other key witnesses in the white house and other documents. speaker pelosi is just saying to the united states senate, just let me know you're going to have a fair trial, that we're going to be able to call these witnesses and get these documents, and i'll send this over tomorrow. i mean, i'll do it right now. she's very eager for the trial to begin, but she like i hope every american wants it to be fair. >> you sent a letter today that was interesting to the gao asking for a legal analysis of one of the things the administration did, which was to withhold this aid. talk me through your thinking there. >> so we know from the mountain of evidence from the house that the president abused the powers of his office, right? he withheld the critical military assistance from ukraine to try to extract this personal political favor, interfere in our elections, but i also believe that in doing so he violated the control act, that the withholding was illegal and a violation of the law i

this is from michael duffey. the house democrats wanted him to testify. the president blocked him. the email comes out the other night, july 25th was the call with the president of ukraine. that very day based on guidance i have received in light of the administration's plan to view assistance to ukraine, please hold off on any additional dod obligations to these funds. given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate you keeping that information closely held for those who need to know to execute. so you have an official saying don't give ukraine the money and please stay hush. some people would say the democrats should have gone more closely in the house until they could get evidence like this and then push for witnesses. chuck schumer would say no, this is why we need these witnesses in the senate. does it matter? >> yes, it certainly helps the democrats build their public case for why they need michael duffey, who is one of the four witnesses that they have called to testify before the senate. and also these documents, that conversation gets kind of lost in the chatter ov

and the most troubling aspect for the white house is that one of the e-mails by michael duffey was directedo other omb officials and pentagon officials telling them to withhold the aid. the timing is troublesome because it came 90 minutes after president trump's phone call with zelensky. omb officials are saying it's irresponsible to draw a conclusion between that e-mail and the phone call and that really the decision was made a couple of weeks earlier, about ten days earlier when they made the call to withhold the aid. but it's also the tone of the e-mail. the tone of the e-mail is let's not disseminate this widely, this will be on a need to know basis. we should know that they're heavily redacted. this isn't a complete picture but it's an indication of how much more out there potentially through reporting could be revealed. just real quickly on the timing, mcconnell just spoke moments ago. mcconnell seemed to say there wouldn't be a resolution on this until the senate goes back into session. he said look back at my fox comments but he's got nothing further to add. we could be in a stalema

duffy, and michael duffey and mick mulvaney, the acting chief of staff who have some indication of what took place here, and frankly, a strange trial if they don't testify. and as hans is alluding to how the president is going to say that he is exonerated after a trial like that, i don't know. but that said, alex, i think that a sort of the foreshortened trial is what we will have. it seems there is no appetite especially among the moderate republicans for dragging it out in the senate, and maybe not that much appetite among some democrats for dragging it out as well. so, i am thinking because of the presidential campaign se on and the primary, and the caucuses coming up, and so maybe the senate trial is going to be almost a flash in the pan. >> and yet, the president wants to have the fireworks in the trial interestingly at odds with republicans including mitch mcconnell. and claudia, with respect to the time, and according to mark short he says nothing new about the timing of the request, and is he right? >> actually, this is pretty unprecedented what house speaker nancy pelosi is doi

michael duffey talked about how he received guidance that the foreign aid needs to be withheld from ukraine. and that this is a sensitive request. and so to me that raises a lot of questions. and i think is really suspicious just on its face. >> another witness who democratic lawmakers would like to get their hands on, get on the stand, is former national security adviser john bolton. ambassador bolton sat down with axios earlier this week bashing the stance on north korea. what do you think? what message does this send? >> it certainly tells us that john bolton is not toeing the party line here. obviously he's left the administration. but bolton is the most potential witness out there. we know from the witness testimony from one of the witnesses who testified in the house, tim morrison, that john bolton had a one-on-one conversation with donald trump trying to convince trump to release the aid. we don't know exactly what was said and what happened during that meeting? john bolton knows. we know when bolton came out, he said -- he meaning trump -- he's not ready yet. that's a crucial conver

over the weekend, democratic lawmakers renewed demands for witnesses, including michael duffey, to testify at trump's senate impeachment trial. this is senate minority leader senator chuck schumer. >> if there was ever an argument that we mean -- need mr. duduffy to testify, this is that information stop this email is explosive. a trump administration official, when we requested, is saying stop the aid, 91 minutes after trump called zelensky, and said keep it hush hush. what more do you need to request a witness? amy: in immigration news, the trumpet administration is considering a controversial plan to deport mexican asylum-seekers to guatemala. the proposal comes after the u.s. has already begun to deport hondurans and salvadorans who have arrived at the u.s. border seeking asylum in the united states to guatemala under a "safe third country" agreement brokered without guatemalan president jimmy morales. they say deporting them to guatemala is dangerous, particularly for female and lgbtq asylum-seekers. guatemala has one of the high list -- highest rates of homicide, the murder of women,

but michael duffey's role has long been under scrutiny because authority over ukraine was given to duffey, political appointee over career officials at the omb. he was blocked from testifying in the house impeachment inquiry. minutes ago, senate democratic leader chuck schumer cited duffey's emails to push republicans to allow witnesses at the president's trial. >> what happened over the weekend with duffey's emails made public has only bolstered the case that documents should be produced and witnesses testify. if everything was on the up and up, if the call was perfect, as president trump said, why does one of his top aides who is a political appointee say let's keep it hush hush. >> i am joined by heidi presley, and jonathan swan, and former congresswoman during watergate. going to heidi on this. tell us what this tells us as a missing piece of the puzzle, the fact this guy, mike duffey, was the one that said no more money for ukraine. >> it is critical because he pushed aside the person who is responsible for writing the notes. that person testified, mark sandy, that he was very bother

that is how we you saw the michael duffey email. we could see subpoenas from criminal prosecutors federal or state, we could see leaks downs line and we could even see future administrations when they take over decide these documents are important, they need to come out. but timing is key. we are week away from the start of a senate impeachment trial and i think that we may see dridrip and drabs but it may well be too late. >> and as the president continues to attack the process, another viewer wants to know if the president is required, from susan, is the president required to attend a senate impeachment trial? >> no, the president is not required to attend the senate impeachment trial. he certainly could choose to do so, but i would not look for donald trump to actually be present in the well of the senate here. john where son and son and clind not to be present. in a criminal trial, the defendant does have to be physically present in the courtroom. this is different. now, the president can and will appoint a legal team to cipollo

well or michael duffey, he writes to the deputy of secretary defense. issuing to immediately release all the aid funds for obligation. i will alert you as soon as i have signed the apportionment. thank you. elaine said, copy. what happened? thanks. he responds, and it's redacted. so we don't know what he says. but then he says still waiting for my staff sending me apportionment. glad to have this behind us. >> exactly. and we know from previous emails there were at least two officials in omb who were so concerned about this freeze, that they said i want out of here. this doesn't make any sense. and he's saying i'm glad this is behind me? come on. when she said what happened, what was your answer to what happened? >> this is also based on the guidance i received? who gave you that and when? and what did they tell you about why it was being frozen? >> kwquickly before we go, nanc pelosi is withholding these impeachment declarations right now. what is her leverage over the senate? >> well, it's -- she -- let's put it this way. she started with no leverage

phone call where he asked ukraine's president to investigate joe biden, white house official michael duffey sent this e-mail directing the defense department to hold off on military aid to ukraine, and that given the sensitive nature of the request keep the information closely held. senate minority leader chuck schumer sent a letter to his colleagues monday saying the e-mail is evidence the white house needs to release more documents and witnesses related to the impeachment case. >> we say to president trump, release the e-mails, let your aids testify. we say to leader mcconnell, a fire trial with the facts. >> reporter: a white house official tells cbs news, the e-mail was one of several related to ukraine aid and the hold was in place before the july 25th phone call. house speaker nancy pelosi took a swipe at president trump on twitter saying he blocked his own witnesses and documents from the house and the american people on phony complaints about the house process. what is his excuse now? >> we can't take up a matter we don't have, so hopefully it will be on the way over at some point.

aid by congress and michael duffey adds -- senator amy klobuchar requesting why the secrecy? >> what a great question that's a question i want to have answered. >> reporter: administration officials pushed back. >> there were a lot of emails back and forth about timing of this the aid was released. >> reporter: the white house budget office says the military hold was announced internally a week earlier, july 18th. a spokes western telling nbc news to pull a line out of one email and fail to address the context is misleading and inaccurate democrats argue this new email information should become part of a future senate trial because it shows there are other officials who had knowledge of the when and how behind withholding ukraine aid who could be called to testify as witnesses. but republicans counter that it is not the senate's job to do more investigating after the house already voted to impeach, so the kind of trial that will happen is still a stalemate. >> no agreement in sight thank you, kelly. >>> overseas to north korea where there is new evidence the country could be

mick mulvaney, john bolton, michael duffey and robert blair who all refused to participate in the house investigation. >> i have clearly made up my mind. i'm not trying to hide the fact that i have disdain for the accusations and the process so i don't need any witnesses. >> reporter: democrats slamming republicans for saying they are in total coordination with the white house and arguing senators are supposed to render impartial justice. >> i hope that the senators will insist on getting the documents, on hearing from the witnesses, on making up their own mind. >> reporter: meanwhile a group of freshmen house democrats are encouraging house speaker nancy pelosi to appoint independent congressman justin amash as an impeachment manager to help argue the democrats' case in the senate hoping the libertarian will appeal to a broader portion of the public. as for president trump, he's venting about impeachment on twitter calling pelosi crazy and writing, her teeth were falling out of her mouth during a press conference. the house vote is expected to be held on wednesday. impeachment is expec

. >> reporter: and several witnesses, including white house official michael duffey, who in a newly uncovered-mail, directed the defense department he hold off on military aid to ryraine just 91 minutes after the president's phone call in which he asked ukraine's president to investigate joe biden. duffey also said to keep quiet thout the aid freeze because of the sensitive nature of the request. the white house says the timing of the e-mail was just a coincidence. president trump, who turned his impeachment into a rallying cry this weekend -- >> how do you impeach? you have no crime. >> reporter: -- has also called for witnesses, but senate republican leader mitch ecconnell has resisted that, preferring a short trial with no witnesses. today, though, he opened the door a bit. w what we need to do is to listen to the argument, have a written questioning period, and then decide whether we need .itnesses or not. >> reporter: meanwhile, house eeeaker nancy pelosi is keeping the senate trial in limbo. in a tweet again refusing to transmit the articles of nmpeachment "until we know what sort of tr

that budget official saying michael duffey is one of four white house officials at the center of this roaring debate over an impeachment trial. should those four officials be called to testify in an impeachment trial? that is what the democrats want. republicans say they want a quick trial. that is the wish list right now but no answering that wish list right. congress in break and president is in florida and the debate will likely continue today >> the charges are pretty thin and gruel. i don't see anything impeachable in that. >> if he really believes it's thin, it's thin because president of the united states ordered his top people who were in the room who know how firsthand knowledge not to testify. he ordered documents not to be turned over. >> reporter: no public schedule for president trump today. he did tweet throughout the weekend several times last night, including one saying their case is dead the poll number are horrendous a reference to the democrats as the impeachment trial debate roars on this morning here in washington live in washington, i'm scott mcfarlane. now back

white house chief of staff, mick mulvaney, his senior adviser, robert blare, john bolton and michael duffeyassociate director for security programs at the national security council. duffey is one of the officials who signed off on several of the documents on that aid freeze of $400 million in security aid to ukraine. this is the opening offer we're hearing from chuck schumer. schumer and mitch mcconnell are expected to sit down to discuss these requests from senate democrats and discuss how to move forward with a trial. but again, unless schumer can somehow get four senate republicans to join him in backing these rules for impeachment trial, mitch mcconnell will be the one who decides how this impeachment trial goes forward. mcconnell has made clear that any decisions he's coordinating with the white house. the white house counsel, pat cipollone in particular. there's no indication that the white house would allow any of the witnesses to actually come forward. dave? christine? >> jeremy diamond, thank you. >>> a freshman democratic lawmaker announcing plans to switch parties and becoming re

because that e-mail came from a trump appointee, his name is michael duffey. he works at the office of management and budget. he's one of the people that democrats have said they want to hear from in an preveimpeachmen trial. you heard chuck schumer talking about why they won't present these witnesses. it gives democrats a stronger case because again the man who wrote this e-mail essentially getting the ball rolling for the pentagon to freeze this aid was one of the witnesses requested here. this is really raising a lot of questions about how this is going to play into the overall effect if it does really at all. >>> as democrats and republicans battle to shape the messaging on the impeachment process, i want to bring in cnn political analysis karen emergen. i have to ask you about those newly released e-mails showing that aid to ukraine was frozen about an hour and a half after president trump's call with president zelensky on july 25th. how significant is this evidence? >> well, it sure raises the imprints of causation. that is that the call with zelensky wa

the folks he's talking about, mick mulvaney, john bolton, robert blair and michael duffey, some of theseolks came up in this very lengthy piece in the "new york times," very instrumental in terms of what happened in ukraine. this is the big question, will there be witnesses? >> absolutely. the beauty of what's about to happen here is if you have 51 votes, whether you're chuck schumer or mitch mcconnell, you're going to get what you want. we know what mitch mcconnell wants, he wants both sides to be able to present and then the right to acquit, which they very clearly have the votes to do, or they can listen to senators. the vote will likely happen. i think the big question right now, it kind of gets to the basics of how are moderate republicans going to vote, how are democra are republican senators going to vote? the reality remains the same, no matter what the first two weeks of the trial is going to be, if you have 51 votes, you can get your witnesses, whoever they may be. whether it's rhetoric or what mcconnell wants or what schumer wants, can you get 51 votes? that will be the main q

his senior adviser robert blair, the former national security adviser john bolton as well as michael duffey, who is the associate director for national security programs. he's one of those officials who actually signed off on several of the documents relating to that aid freeze of nearly $400 million of security aid to ukraine. now, of course this is a request from the top democrat in the senate, and that is because republicans control the majority in the senate. and therefore anything that actually goes through as far as the rules of this trial will require a 51-senator majority. and unless democrats are somehow able to peel away four republican senators to get them to agree to these rules, mitch mcconnell is ultimately going to be the decider here. and mcconnell, well, he has suggested that he will run anything as it relates to the proceedings of that senate trial by the white house, specifcally the white house counsel pat cipollone, and so far there is no indication from the white house that they would agree to have any of these witnesses of course come forward. jeremy diamond, cnn, the

in the july 25th email, white house budget official michael duffey ordered the pentagon to hold the aid. duffey wrote given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction. -- pointing out that omb had previously notified the agencies the aid would be withheld. the emails are being released only now because a judge ordered them turned over to the center for public integrity in response to a freedom of information act lawsuit. we already knew the time line of the withholding the aid. the security assistance was first ordered held in early july and agencies were notified on july 18th. then the aid order was formally sent on july 25th, the day of the president's call. what we've learned from the new emails is the two actions occurred roughly 90 minlz apart. the president got off the phone with zelensky at 9:33 and duffey sent the email ordering the aid to be held at 11:4. the greater context of the email is unknown because he defied a subpoena. the question will now be forced into the senate as to w

mick mulvaney, john bolton, michael duffey and robert blair who all refused to participate in the housestigation. >> i have clearly made up my mind. i'm not trying to hide the fact that i have disdain for the accusations and the process so i don't need any witnesses. >> reporter: democrats slamming republicans for saying they are in total coordination with the white house and arguing senators are supposed to render impartial justice. >> i hope that the senators will insist on getting the documents, on hearing from the witnesses, on making up their own mind. >> reporter: impeachment is expected to pass the house along party lines. not all democrats are on board. some lawmakers are running for re-election in trump district s find themselves in tricky situations. >>> a lot of raisers fans are feeling a double sense of loss. >> first of all, the raiders did not win. second the raiders will not get another chance to win at the coliseum. the amy hollyfield is live with that. good morning. >> good morning, kumasi. coach jon gruden apologized to the fans for not giving them a win at the last ho

mulvaney, john bolton and robert blair and michael duffey. >> to the latest, i want to go to katelyn collins near mar-a-lago tonight. are they working on a plan for the senate trial while he's down there in florida? >> reporter: they still have a lot of big decisions to make. they are making those decisions while the president is here but what's notable is there are people like jared kushner and mulvaney around the president while he's been down here at his mar-a-lago club. people like cipollone has been on this strategy. who's going to defend the president and when they do have that senate trial. there are still questions about who else he could bring in and that kind of shed some lights on the outside influences by the fact that he was golfing with people like trey goudy who has been advisining the president. >> i talked to boris sanchez the last hour, he raised the name of ali dershowitz who had been on air coming up with legal arguments that the president may be able to use. >> reporter: dewhurso he's gett lot of advice from different people and that was indicative today when he

house chief of staff, mick mulvaney, former security adviser john bolton and micharo blair and michael duffey round out the lists. we wait for the two leaders to try to negotiate the trial rules. >> i don't know what they'll say. maybe they'll say something exculpatory about president trump. no one, no one has given a reason why these shouldn't testify. if president trump is so certain that he did nothing wrong, what is he afraid of? what is he hiding when he says mulvaney or bolton or the other two witnesses shouldn't testify? >> schumer today also criticizing leader mcconnell saying it is, quote, totally out of line for the senate leader to promise to coordinate every trial decision with the trump white house. manu raju live for us on capitol hill. manu, republicans will have the vote, we think, responding to this proposal from schumer. >> reporter: there's not been an official reaction from the majority leader's office yet, mcconnell saying they'll have these skudiscussions with chuck schumer behind the scenes. but the argument to the proposal is starting to take shape. what republicans i'

as a top aid to mick mulvaney, rob blair and the top office of management and budget official, michael duffey, who declined to appear before the house impeachment inquiry. the republicans are arguing it was the house's job to do that. it was the house's decision not to go to court to secure their testimony and what the republicans are planning to argue is their job is not fact finders. that's the house's job and because the house did not go that route they're not going to request witnesses who did not appear before the house committee, so expect republicans to make that argument bullet th ultimate question is will republicans agree. just four senators can break rank and support democrats in a majority vote. that is unclear how that will happen. there will be drama on the senate floor as democrats call for witnesses and votes take place to see if they will actual testify, kate. >> manu, thank you so much. joining me right now, former republican governor of ohio, john kasich. good to see you, governor. >> thanks, kate. >> i was in that great state just yesterday. ohio doing well. okay, you've c

at the same time though it appears that white house budget official michael duffey was ready to blame white house for the hold up. duffy emailed the pentagon suggesting any failure to release the aid should not rest with the white house. but in a stinging rejection, a pentagon official shot back with this: you can't be serious. i am speechless. late today, senate minority leader said the recording further highlights the need for witnesses to testify at the president's trial. >> simply put, in our fight to have key documents and witnesses in the senate impeachment trial, these new revelations are a game changer. the story makes the choice even clearer. will the senate hold a fair trial, or will it enable a cover up? president trump, if you're so confident you did nothing wrong, why won't you let your men testify? >> all right. i'm joined now my democratic congressman steve cohen of tennessee, a member of the house judiciary committee. charlie savage. this reporting from the "new york times," at the very least it's more evidence that president trump personally asked for this aid to ukra

. >> we just found out this weekend that someone who works for mulvaney, michael duffey, had sent an email 90 minutes after the president made that critical call to the ukrainian president. this guy sent an email, i have it here. we just found it. it says given the sensitive nature of the kwft i appreciate you keeping this information closely held and said, don't release any of the funds. this man should testify. >> i wish that it had not been just a partisan vote. somebody will yell at me for saying that. i don't think this is a good time until our country's history, but we do all take an oath of office that requires us to protect our democracy and our national security. >> the case is thin that the house is sending over to us, if they ever send it over to us. >> what speaker pelosi is doing is focusing attention on the need for a fair trial and a fair trial means you get to call your witnesses. every american knows that that's what a trial is all about. >> turn now to nbc's kelly o'clonl live in west palm beach, florida. kelly, i want to ask you about the new reports regarding the

and schumer is now saying that the white house budget official who sent the email, michael duffey, that he should testify. does this give democrats even more ammunition? are we too late now for that? >> laura, i think it was a good thing that those -- that foia, that freedom of information material surfaced, and i think chuck schumer is making good use of it to point out that there is a lot of evidence that's not being released or made available by the white house. and this just makes that point. and it makes it rather vividly. it says first of all, it concedes that this is not -- this is an extraordinary document by the sender asking it be kept quiet and sensitive. so that kind of shows that they know this isn't quite cricket what they're doing. and it also, to me, shows there's just so much more of this in the chain, in the related documents of this scheme that went on for months that would sink a president if it ever came out, even against the will of the republicans. >> well, take a look at this tweet that came from senator lindsey graham on the speaker. he says, if she refuses, sen

in one email, senior budget office staffer michael duffey wrote to the pentagon's comptroller about the hold on that aid on july 25, about 90 minutes after trump hung up the phone with ukraine's president. duffey closed with this. quote, given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute the direction. senator schumer called that proof that subpoenas are needed and issued a warning to senate republicans. >> if everything was on the up and up, if the call was perfect as president trump said, why does one of his top aides, who's a political appointee, say let's keep it hush-hush? we at the very minimum will require votes from all the senators on each of the witnesses and about each of these sets of documents. and i don't think my colleagues, democrat or republican, are going to want to vote to withhold evidence in such an important trial. >> schumer will need 51 senators to force votes to compel witness testi testimony or to produce documents. with 47 democratic senators on his side, schumer needs four re

adviser to the acting chief of staff robert blair, and office of management and budget official michael duffey. these are folks at the center of what democrats allege was a presidential direction to delay the aid in return for a politicplitt political favor. let's bring in suzanne malveaux live on capitol hill. what's what chuck schumer is asking for. will he get it? >> this really is kind of setting the marker, if you will, the starting point of the negotiations. it's not clear at all that he's going to get any of those witnesses, highly unlikely, but at least putting pen to paper and letting senate majority leader mitch mcconnell know what the wish list is, also should let you know that he added an event, a press conference today at 2:00 so clearly trying to get his message out in a very public way, trying to undercut the republicans' argument that we didn't get any primary witnesses so trying to call those primary witnesses, at the same time expanding the scope, the scale of the trial and also accelerating the timetable if you will so we're looking right after the holiday. this is what he's

the last person on this list is michael duffey, someone else who has refused to testify in the houseceedings. he's a current omb official, and he was in an odd position because he was a political appointee who helped hold back this money for ukraine. normally that's a job reserved for career staffers, again, someone we have not heard from. none of these folks are going to show up willingly. they're all hiding behind this white house demand that they not show up and testify, so we'll see if it's any different when it gets to the senate, dana. >> hard to believe it will be. thanks so much for laying that out. joining me from capitol hill is democratic senator holland from maryland. thanks for joining me. i want to get to the quote you said last week. you said what the president did is, quote, an attack on our democracy, and you also said, quote, that you have to hold the president accountable for this kind of misconduct. it sounds like you've made up your mind already on impeachment. have you? >> well, dana, it's good to be with you. here's where i stand. i think it is houthe house has

: but democrats have fresh ammunition an a court ruling prompted the release of email showing michael duffey calling for the treason military aid to ukraine just 90 minutes after the july phone call in which trump urged the ukrainian president to investigate former vice president joe biden. schumer demanding duffy's testimony. >> if there was ever an argument that we need mr. duffy to come testify, this is that information. this email is explosive. >> reporter: yet republicans remain relukt abts to criticize any part of trump's conduct. >> president's make mistakes and i don't know if this call was a mistake and there have been plenty of mistakes regarding ukraine. >> reporter: when the trial starts the focus is on whether four republicans will break ranks and vote with democrats to compel witness testimony but no one is revealing how they'll vote yet. and even one in a potential tough race johnny ernst didn't want to hear from mick mulvaney or bolton, saying that should be the house's job. >> that is an interesting revelation right there. thank you. appreciate it. >>> as we look at where we

michael duffey who is the -- who was the person who was tasked with trying to freeze this aid, he's the society director of national security programs. he says, given the sensitive nature of the request, i appreciate your keeping that information closely held to those who need to know to execute direction. in other words, he knows that the idea that his freezing these aid that was congressionally approved and signed off on by the sick tear of state and secretary of defense, he knows this is trouble. >> oh, absolutely. and listen. look, first of all, credit where it's due. the senate for public integrity that asked for these documents and kind of went to court and pressed the administration. that's the only reason we have these emails now. the reality is that, lots of people knew immediately after that call was over as we now know from a lot of the testimony that led up to the impeachment. national security staff started contacting lawyers. people started locking up information. and now it appears that budget information as well, budget officials immediately recognized that there was som