we are back. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. top of the hour here. addressed to house speaker nancy pelosi this extraordinary jaw-dropping letter from president donald trump. in six scorching pages on white house letterhead the president rails against the impeachment process going on right now. calling it a partisan crusade and unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by democrats. let me read you just one graft of this six-page diatribe. he says you are the ones interfering in america's elections. you are the ones subverting america's democracy. you are the ones obstructing justice. you are the ones bringing pain and suffering to our republican for your own selfish personal political and partisan gain. let's go straight to the white

house to kick us up a think of hour, white house correspondent boris sanchez. you've read through the six pages. talk to me about more of what the president is trying to express and why. >> reporter: yeah, brooke. diatribe is certainly the right word to use. this reads as though the president dictated it himself. a lot of the language and sort of vitriol he uses when he speaks about impeachment and democrats. notably, one portion where he takes offense to nancy pelosi saying that she prays for him resulting in recent weeks the house speaker repeatedly said she prays for president trump's health that he succeeds for the good of the country. the president here lining his sights on pelosi saying, you are offending americans of faith by continuesly saying i pray for the president when you know this statement is not true, unless it is meant in a negative sense. quote/unquote. goes on to write "it is a terrible thing you are doing but you will have to live with it,

not i." late in this letter the president says he's doing it so 100 years from now people will look back at the letter and see the difficulties he's faced so no other president has to deal with the level of unfairness in his eyes he is dealing with. our cameras just went into the oval office. the president meeting with guatemalan president jimmy morales. trump saying he in fact will not watch tomorrow's vote on impeachment on the house floor. he's, of course, holding a rally in battle creek, michigan. a merry christmas rally. the president saying he's never seen republicans more unified. this, of course, coming as reporting behind the scenes indicates there are disagreements between the president and between republican senators over what a senate trial should look like, what witnesses should be called, and exactly how long a trial should last, brooke. >> all right. boris, thank you. on this letter, we bring in a couple smart voices here to continue on the conversation. i have with me jen rogers, back

here. cnn legal analyst, but first go to cnn chief political analyst gloria borger and our senior white house correspondent pamela brown. gloria, first to you. when you read this letter the overall tone is defensive and angry and accusatory, and it's not exactly something we expect from someone who has bragged that impeachment is helping him. >> well, first of all, when i read it the first time seemed to me sort of the longest tweet in the history of america. what it is, one donald trump tweet one after the other complete with exclamation points and points to serious issues. this is written by the president of the united states. who clearly has difficult exhibiting any kind of self-control whatsoever. and i think as senators read this letter and they are about to be the jurors if the house votes for impeachment on the question of ukraine and in a larger sense on this president's

fitness for office. i think you have to read this letter in that context. donald trump historically loves to throw hand grenades into real estate meetings and change the terms of the debate or the negotiatio negotiations. i think that was probably his intent here. to put in writing what his thoughts are and to throw this grenade into the process. the question is whether it's going to boomerang on him, because reading this letter, i think you have to ask some very, very serious questions about donald trump and about this administration, and why no one could stop him from putting some of the things in this letter that he chose to put in it. >> when you read, jen, for you, he dismissed the zelensky call back in july. and the ukraine actions quote/unquote as a policy disagreement between two branches of government, and that

"it is no more legitimate than the executive branch charging members of congress with crimes for a lawful exercise of legislative power." like -- what? >> what he's trying to say, and i think someone else wrote portions of this letter for him, because there are parts that sound a little bit more thought through and rational than other parts. you know, what he's saying is, this is the legislative branch, meaning the house, disagreeing with how i acted as president. right? how i decided i wasn't going to give money to ukraine because i didn't like what they were doing. that's my business. you ought to stay out of it the same way i shouldn't have people charged in the legislative branch for doing what they normally do, voting on bills and so on. somebody obviously is giving him arguments to put out there try to get people to think maybe he has a point here. but it's all just patently ridiculous. there are so many witnesses who have testified about why what he did was not a legitimate exercise of presidential power.

we have evidence about that. we have even more if they would let mulvaney testify, for example, and john bolton testify. so there's ample evidence to show that what he's saying here is untrue. but this is him trying to bring his case directly to the people, i guess. >> gloria, what about i guess the fallout after -- if you're a republican and you -- we know what's coming up. whether on the house, a big vote tomorrow. of course, looking ahead to january and the senate trial, where do you go from here? like, in all seriousness, will this longest tweet, you know, hand grenade have any impact? >> i can't really answer that question. i think there are parts of this that are so personal and so offensive. for example, when he says to nancy pelosi, you know -- >> questioning her prayerfulness. >> right. questioning her faith. questioning her -- and people of faith will question you. when he said about members of congress as he said in this, any member of congress who votes in

support of an impeachment is showing how deeply they revile the voters and how truly they detest america's constitutional order. when you read this, and you come from a history in this country of honest people can disagree, and you read this, that is not -- that is not what the president believes. the president believes the people who believe you should be impeached ar evil and hate the constitution of the united states. so i have a question. i don't know how members of congress will take this, particularly in the senate, and i don't know how history will regard this letter, because i think it is an historic document that we are looking at. yes, some of it may have been written by his lawyers, but a lot of it, a lot of it, a lot of input here, is real donald trump. >> guys do we still have jeffrey ingle? yes.

okay. jeffrey engle, to gloria's point, i mean, how well history looks at this letter? can you put this six-page diatribe into historic context for us? >> when listening to about, the news about this letter i had the exact same thought i'm sure every american did. reminds me of andrew johnson in 1868. he first of all was one who would go off in diatribes and would, one of my favorite lines from him he made the claim during his impeach innocent no one had ever sacrificed or suffered more fon the you're yin than him. keep in mind his presidedecessos assassinated for it. secondly, critical, one of the articles of impeachment congress passed in 1868 was thatsulting congress. and so there is actually historical precedence for impeaching a president at least discussing the impeachment of a

president whether or not he is actually acting as a proper negotiator with other branches of congress. i have to point out, johnson did not get removed from office. so there's a sense in which congress could at this point come through and say, this is not how you're supposed to act. we think this is not the way a president should be acting, and then the senate could adjudicate it and say it might be true but it's not a high crime. or not something that requires losing office for. >> we have been wondering what a impeached but not removed president donald trump will look like, and just as you talk about his actions and his words and his mindset, gloria, did we just get a preview in this letter? >> we did. we did. i mean in a way, sadly, it's not surprising, but you can also think about after impeachment, whatever occurs as you're pointing out, whether this will be a president full of bitterness and retribution for those who vote in a way that he doesn't want them to vote who

vote for impeachment. for example. he said voting against america's constitutional order and against constituents they would say, of course, they are voting to preserve and defend the constitution of the united states. i mean, i have to -- i haven't deconstructed all of this letter yet. some of it is very familiar to me. some of the anger is very, very familiar to me, but i think that this letter gets dropped into the laps of sitting senators like a grenade. as i said before. >> yeah. >> and they're all going to have to look at it and read it and say, okay. either this is beside the point. we know this is donald trump never mind or this rises to a new level even for donald trump. >> right. goes back to the question i asked and we don't have a crystal ball and don't know how these senate republicans will act. we only have just what based upon what they have or have not done thus far. to the question about getting a

preview of a post-ism peampeach not removed donald trump. let me receipt an excerpt, the president writing declared open war on american democracy. you view democracy as your enemy. you are the ones interfering with america's elections. american people will not soon forgive your perversion of justice and abuse of power. i mean, do you expect him to go after the democrats not just his 2020 rivals, like play it forward through next year. but also do you expect him to go after members of congress? >> one would have to think so. one of the things i think is really unusual about this impeachment. we don't have many xaempexample go by. this is the first xaempl exampl president in their first term. andrew johnson doesn't count. the nomination was go to grant. first time a president is being impeached the same time he is trying to seek re-election.

chr critical abou scandals usually the president's popularity singers. the president essentially defended by his partisan allies, mostly just because it's the right thing to do to defend their partisan ally. not necessarily because they want more of the guy. this is a case where people are going to go, republicans will go to the ballot box i think in primaries and general election coming forward and ask themselves not so much, did the president do something that was impeachable? but, do we actually want four more years of this? there's a real sense in which i think many senators may be of the opinion, who knows h s how they're going to vote but of the opinion president trump did something impeachable but i want him to stay in office. that's what susan collins says in 1999. senator from maine. made the point bill clinton was guilty. i think show remain in omffice.

senators have a lot of leeway going forward and this is the type of evidence they're instructed to use. >> also -- >> incredible time. go ahead, quickly. >> also puts the senators on notice if they had any notion of saying, you know, the president's phone call was wrong. it was inappropriate, but doesn't rise to the level of impeachment, donald trump will -- this phone call according to his letter was absolutely perfect. and anybody who thinks otherwise is perverting the constitution. so he is not allowing for that kind of defense at all. whereas in bill clinton's impeachment, people said, you know, the president was shameful, disgraceful, et cetera but it doesn't rise to the level of impeachment. that won't be that way for donald trump at all. >> and so much more to discussion. right now reminder to you watching, the final impeachment

hearing in the house is under way. this rules committee, of course, ahead of tomorrow's historic vote, it just got heated. we'll dip back in. that's next. do you have concerns about mild memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

and my side super soft? with the sleep number 360 smart bed it can. with your sleep number setting. can it help keep me asleep? yes, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. don't miss 0% interest for 48 months on all smart beds. ends tuesday

up here at the dewar's distillery, all our whiskies are aged, blended and aged again. it's the reason our whisky is so extraordinarily smooth. dewar's. double aged for extra smoothness.

welcome back. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. today is expected to go down in history as impeachment eve. tomorrow set to vote in favor of two arms of impeachment against president donald trump making just the third time in 243 years the house has done that to an american president. the vote itself is such a serious moment for this country. today the house rules committee is setting up guidelines as far as how the debate on the impeachment vote should proceed. with that back to capitol hill to senior congressional correspondent manu raju. manu, we know we've heard a lot of partisan back and forth first couple of hours. has the rules committee set up the rules, parameters yet? >> reporter: not yet, but it's going to happen soon. this is a process that does take some time. the house rules committee, members have as much time as they want to ask questions of the witnesses. why we have seen extended

questioning from the members of the panel to the two people testifying. the top, one of the top democrats on jamie raskin as well as top republican on that same committee doug collins. extensive back and forth. no question how it ends up. approved, setting the stage for the floor debate. tomorrow's debate by all accounts expected to pass easily. democrats in the swing districts are coming out in large numbers in support of the two articles of impeachment. democrat after democrat falling in line. the moment we only expect two democrats to break ranks, colin peterson of minnesota, although would not commit that to me today he would vote no on vote. saying he will wait until form to announce his decision and jeff van drew, the new jersey democrat said privately he switched parties. i just caught up hi him and asked if he would switch parties and he refused to say so, when

he would make his decision and contended it wasn't about his own political future and the fact he's getting blowback within his own district because of his positions on impeachment. at the moment democratic leaders believe essentially the members are falling in line even though they did not whip the vote and the urge party members to vote expect it to come down along party lines as republicans are expected to vote in unison against the two articles and democrats except for a couple expected to vote to impeach the president, brooke. >> back to the point about calling witnesses looking ahead to the senate trial. manu, we know the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell rejected chuck schumer's request for the four witnesses. all top aides to president trump, who have direct knowledge of his attempts to pressure ukraine. to investigate his political rivals. you see the four here on your screen. chuck schumer fired back on the senate floor moments after leader mcconnell blasted ahead for impeachment.

>> now senate democratic leader would apparently like our chamber to do house democrats' homework for them. we don't create impeachments over here, mr. president. we judge them. that's, speaker pelosi. it's the house's obligation to build an ironclad case to act. quote/unquote. if they fail, they fail. it's not the senate's job to leap into the breach and search desperately for ways to get to guilty. >> the house has built a very strong case against the president. maybe that's why leader mcconnell doesn't seem to want witnesses. at least not agree them now. maybe that's why the president is afraid. because the house case is so strong that they don't want witnesses that might corroborate it. to every senator in this room,

democrat and republican, senators who oppose this plan will have to explain why less evidence is letter than more evidence. >> manu, what are senator schumer's options, because it's not like he has the majority party? >> reporter: yeah. and he has limited options. his own hope, try to convince a handful of republican senators to break ranks on the floor and vote to compel some of these witnesses to testify. that's really the only way this will happen. the first step, though, is to actually for schumer and mcconnell to sit down and propose a rules package that could be adopted by the senate. a rules package they can agree to will probably be pretty basic, detail the timeline for how, when the senate will actually be in session to consider the trial. kind of how some of those more nuts and bolts of the trial will play out without getting into the thorny issues of bringing in witnesses. then the question after they dub the rules package will be, how

they bring in those witnesses and that's where we can see key votes. schumer was warning he will push that issue on the floor and put republicans on record on that. so expect a lot of those votes to play out in the coming weeks and some members to be in a difficult spot. >> manu, thank you. discuss this with me now cnn senior without corresponde-- wh correspondent pamela brown along with others. what were she seen so far. talk to me how partisan it's been? >> incredibly partisan and in many ways not a surprise, brooke. partisan all along, that is something you're seeing sort of the white house seize upon. the president says repeatedly as he said in this letter he released to nancy pelosi today that republicans have never been so united.

that is something that certainly allies of the president are looking at ahead of this vote tomorrow, where, you know, it's an eventuality that the president accepted this, look, he's going to be impeached by the house. something he accepted and the would us is very much looking ahead to the senate trial. i'm told this letter today, brooke, that was released, that the president really wanted to send a letter to pelosi in his own words. out in from his white house counsel. in the past white house counsel has been the one to send letters to pelosi and hout democrse dem. the president wanted it in his own words with talking points he made previously. it highlights a president vacillating between feels like hey, this is politically beneficial. aides showing him polls. public opinion isn't moving. then in the polls aides telling him it's good for him rallying the base, but same time vattalavattal

a vas laits vacillates to the other side. doesn't understand the ukraine issue. asking advisers why the ukraine issue is the issue that got him to this point, brooke. >> sure. to this hearing under way, jeffrey, for you, a reminder to everyone. for anyone who covers capit hill, right? there are many rules committee hearings that never seat light although of day on national television, but today is different. and today they will eventually push past the partisan bickering and get to setting parameters ahead of the vote tomorrow. can you just explain to us what those rules will look like what it is they will have to decide ahead of this historic day? >> well, the house wants to take a vote. the senate -- house majority wants to take a vote before their christmas break and so consequently, they are trying to determine at this point how many people will get to speak in favor or against the motion on the floor of the house. how long they will get to speak and how we're going to shut off

the debate and actually take a final vote. this is one of the things that is critical. that democrats having the numbers want to get this done and they want to be able to air the case. i don't think there is anything else to prove in the house at this point. they've proven their case. it has to go to the senate. got votes for it and made i think a plausible case that the senate needs to have a trial. the question then becomes as we saw with senator schumer and senator mcconnell, how robust that trial is going to be. seems at this point senator mcconnell keeps saying it's not the senate's job to make the case for the house. he doesn't make the case. they don't make the case for the house. the house sends over managers to make the case. house sends over prosecutors, if you will, from their delegation to make the case on the senate floor. it's up to the senate to give them a hearing. i think that's something which he is going to have to answer to his own constituents for at some point. across the nation. whether or not this is actually a viable and fair trial or even has appearance of being one.

>> isn't part of the issue, jennifer, to you, thinking about what the republicans are saying, that irsthey're saying democrat marx jorty in the house. you wanted certain witnesses. you maybe didn't fight hard enough and to them you would say, what? >> i would say that they were completely blocked by the white house. you know. they didn't get the documents. even documents that the white house collected and looked at they wouldn't turn over. they blocked every witness they possibly could. every single witness who came and testified in front of the house did so in defiance of an order by the president not to appear. house did all they could. could they have gone to court for every witness? in theory, yes, filed an action for each witness that was to come but wouldn't have been litigated by now. we'd be in the same vote we're in now. up to the senate. republican, held by the president's own party, the senate says, you got to let these people testify. the only way we'll see those

witnesses. >> thank you all very much. continue on. one of the senators sitting in judgment of the president will join me live. talk to democratic presidential candidate and senator michael bennet about the white house letter to the house speaker, next. this is the epson ecotank color printer. no more buying cartridges. big ink tanks. lots of ink. print about... this many pages. the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more. so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com

if your glasses aren't so will we. no we won't. don't forget to use your vision benefits before they're gone. now in-network with vsp. visionworks. see the difference.

when it comes to using data, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. save up to $400 a year when you switch. plus, unwrap $250 off a new samsung phone. click, call or visit a store today.

as the house debate, the rules for tomorrow's historic impeachment vote the senate is looking already ahead to the expected trial in january. democratic senator and presidential candidate michael bennet is with me and serves on the senate intelligence committee. senator, welcome back. >> thanks for having me back, brooke. appreciate it. >> we have a little bit to discuss today. i do want to begin, of course, as the senate prepares to hold this impeachment trial on the president next month, i have to get your reaction to this six-page letter that the president sent to speaker pelosi. let me just read part of it for folks watching if they haven't heard about this yet. he writes, there is far too much that needs to be done to improve the lives of our citizens. is time for you and the highly partisan democrats in congress to immediately cease this impeachment fantasy and get back to work for the american people.

while i have no expectation that you will do so i write this letter to you for the purpose of history and to put my thoughts on a permanent and indelible record. what did you think when you read this? >> i thought it was absolutely pathetic when i read it and i thought history is going to judge donald trump very harshly as it should. you know, he has pursued an approach to the presidency where he starts lying first thing in the morning and lies all day long and the next day it's another series of lies and the day after that, just the way he ran his real estate business in new york. but history will not be kind to him on this stuff, because it will catch up to his lies. he's relied on a social media environment and a cable news environment where from day to day he just changes the subject. just the discussion about ukraine alone in there where he says you know i did this and you know i did that, and he refers to president zelensky. i mean, my first reaction was,

maybe he should invite president zelensky to be a character witness in the trial in the senate and ply second reaction, maybe invite vladimir putin to be his character witness in the trial. people that are republicans and democrats are, in the senate, are not going to buy what he's saying in this letter. >> that's what i wanteded to ask about senator. hone in on colleagues across the aisle in the senator. how will this letter sit with them and when it comes to the trial in january, will this change anything? >> well, i don't know. i certainly don't think it's going to have a positive effect for the president, because it really does show he's -- existing in some completely alternate reality. there are people on the other side who are saying, well, he shouldn't have done what he did with ukraine but it doesn't rise to an impeachment offense. i wonder if they think the president continues to believe that what he did in this attempt to extort a foreign leader to get them to involve themselves

in a presidential campaign if he can't understand how wrong that was, maybe that will lead hthem to reflect and change their vote. i just don't know. what i do know is that the american people are being really poorly served by the guy that's in the white house right now. >> hmm. we've learned over here at cnn that the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell and some over at the white house are nervous about republican senators who may support democrats, right, in having perhaps some of those witnesses come to trial. how valid of those concerns? what are you hearing from some of your colleagues? >> i believe that the list that chuck schumer put forward was a very reasonable list. i support that list and i think trump should be saying, let me have these witnesses. you know, they're the people that work for him. but as you know, he's completely stonewalled the house from its ability to be able to hear the witnesses, and as your earlier

guest said, the courts would take too long. so we're trying, again, in the senate to put witnesses in front of the american people in part so they can also make a judgment about what happened here. so -- it says a lot -- >> what about coloradan cory gardner? >> i haven't been able to talk to him about it in the last couple of weeks. so i don't know where he is but i do think it's going to be very hard for some republicans to vote against having some witness testimony as part of this discussion in the senate. >> over this past weekend senator bennet, you told a town hall, assuming facts don't change, that you will vote to convict president trump. is that first of all still the case? has anything changed in the last 24, 48 hours? >> the only thing that's changed is he's underscored the fact he has absolutely no idea what he did what he did was wrong, which is staggering to me. i mean, if any ceo in america had done what donald trump has

done he'd be gone. by the way, not even the impeachment stuff. a ceo in america, spent all their time, no offense to you, brooke, watching cable television and tweeting as a result of it 24 hours a day we'd find something else for them to do. that's not a reason to impeach him but a reason to be a one-term president and unless the facts change, i will vote to convict. unless -- unless he actually treats congress with some respect here, because we're representing the american people in this process. it allows witnesses to come forward instead of stonewalling the investigation, which he's done from the start. >> let me ask, push you a bit pbit. i hear you vote to convict, how can you say that voting to convict without having sat through the trial? >> i said if the facts don't change. so if the trial doesn't show anything different than what

we've learned in the house of representatives, then what we're going to work on is a set of facts that looks like what they developed in the house of representatives. hard not to convict on the facts since it's a pretty ironclad case. the president's admitted to behavior in front of us and made it impossible for the ho us to hear these witnesses and to have a full airing of -- if you were innocent, send the witnesses forward to testify. should have done it in the house and in the senate. instead every step of the way he's tried to avoid the responsibility, or the accountability that a president should accept. >> last question, senator. going back to the six-page diatribe from the president. do you think this is a preview of a impeached but not removed president trump? >> i do. i think that he will spend the

next, you know, howeverble months in office, until the election, lying to the american people about his lack of accomplishments and trying to say that he's been a victim somehow, when the reality is he's the one that's disgracing our democracy every day. he ran for office saying i alone can fix it. since president of the united states, he's completely disregarded our first amendment freedoms, independence of the judiciary, importance of separation of powers, the democracy itself. i for one don't think the american people want to have another four years of this chaos in the white house. that doesn't mean that it's going to be easy to beat him, but it does mean that i think somebody who runs for the presidency is saying we're going to restore opportunity to the american people and we're going to restore integrity to this government, able to win in purple states, beat donald trump and move the country forward again, which is what we have to

do. >> let the american people be the judge come next year. for now, senator michael bennet, thank you so much. we'll talk again. >> thank you. also today, add this to everything else percolating. rudy giuliani is speaking out and he says that he still has the full support of the president for his international -- not so secret mission in ukraine. what he told cnn about digging up dirt. ♪ spread a little love today ♪ spread a little love my-y way ♪ ♪ spread a little something to remember ♪ philadelphia cream cheese. made with fresh milk and real cream makes your recipes their holiday favourites. the holidays are made with philly. the ones that make a truebeen difference in people's lives. and mike's won them, which is important right this minute,

because if he could beat america's biggest gun lobby, helping pass background check laws and defeat nra backed politicians across this country, beat big coal, helping shut down hundreds of polluting plants and beat big tobacco, helping pass laws to save the next generation from addiction. all against big odds you can beat him. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. i'm mitintroducing the new approbraava jet m6 robot mop. with an adjustable precision jet spray and advanced pad system braava jet breaks up messes and gets deep in corners. braava jet. only from irobot.

enjoy your prime rib! anyone ever call you, "meat santa"? no, that's... weird. happy holidays. enjoy. next customer?

male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to find out. male anchor: beats the odds at the box office to become a rare non-franchise hit. you can give help and hope to those in need.

right now in other nation the capitol, the president's personal attorney is at it again. in a phone conversation with cnn rudy giuliani said that the president has been "very supportive of his copted efforts to dig up dirt on his political rivals in ukraine." that admission fueling the democrats central argument pressing forward with impeachment. this is happening after a stunning accusation earlier today. giuliani tweeting the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch was, to quote him "obstructing justice." hours ago he sold "the new yorker" he needed yovanovitch out of the way to dig up dirt on his client's political rivals. michael warren is all over this. michael, despite all things impeachment, the president is still very supportive? what does that mean? what do you make of that? >> well, it suggests what giuliani is telling cnn, if it's true, that through all of this ordeal, the whistle-blower

report, the vinvestigations, th president doesn't feel chastised and continues to move ahead status quo using his personal attorney, expecting his personal attorney to continue to dig up dirt. recently we saw giuliani returned to ukraine telling us, re-emerges this week to tell us as well as other outlets the president's behind him right before, a day before the president is likely to be impeached by the house underscore xo s that. >> in the phone conversation giuliani emphasized he and the president are on this. >> it's clear the president and his team around him sort of view the result of impeachment as sort of already played out. democrats are likely to impeach him in the senate.

very likely to acquit him. so seems offense is meant to redirect the conversation away from impeachment. really frankly will be a very bad, difficult day for the president, and refocus it on, you said, marie yovanovitch. refocus it on joe biden. a real focus of giuliani's work to dig up dirt in ukraine and really kind of, again, as giuliani says, play offense moving forward past what, it's clear the team views as sort of an already figured out decision. >> all right. michael, thank you. move to more breaking news now. we just learned of a rare move by the usually secretive fisa court now slamming the fbi after that inspector general report. straight to . >> reporter: well, that inspector general report details

mistakes. the fisa court is reacting to that. they are saying the fbi has toby january 10th provide some kind of explanation of what they plan to do to change the way they do things and here's the quote from the ruling. it says the frequency which representations made by fbi personnel turn out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession and which they withheld information detrimental to their case calls into question whether information contained in other fbi applications is reliable. essentially the judge here is saying that when can we believe the fbi if they didn't do their job properly in this most high-profile of circumstances. this is one of the -- they knew this would be one of the most scrutinized cases in fbi history and yet they still screwed it

up. the judge said come back in early january and tell me what you're doing fix these problems and make sure it doesn't keep happening. it's a most unusual thing for this court to even speak out and to speak out publicly and here they are taking the fbi to task. >> here they are. evan perez, thank you. judge just decided if an indicted associate of rudy giuliani will remain free until his trial. his explanation for taking $1 million from a russian account. adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. so, can it help us fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. and will it keep me in the holiday spirit? yes! with comfort and joy. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. don't miss the final days. 0 % interest for 48 months on all smart beds ends tuesday.

i

. an indicted associate of rudy giuliani's who helped dig up dirt in the ukraine on the bidens is trying to stay out of jail. he just got a big reprieve. a federal judge declined to revoke lev parnas's bail. prosecutors wanted him behind bars alleging he concealed a million dollars that he received from a russian bank account and lied about his assets. you are saying he looked quite relieved. back to the million dollars.

what do we know about the source of the million $. >> we learned from the government and parnas' attorney the million dollars was a loan from one of dmitri's lawyers. it was from a swiss lawyer. they had given, according to parnas lawyer a $1 million loan to parnas wife and it was a down payment for a home and personal experiences. % are taking issue with it saying it doesn't smell right. it doesn't pass the smell right. why would this lawyer give parnas' wife a loan in that amount of money and then they said parnas was using it as though it wasn't a loan, just a payment, with no intention of paying this back. so prosecutors using this as just another example to say they don't really understand parnas' source of financing, where his money is coming from. he they said they had to do a

lot of leg work to get to the bottom of that. this is a big issue here with parnas saying he burnt all his bridges. when his lawyer inquired about the loan with the swiss lawyer who had given it to his wife the lawyer said this is too much bad publicity, he wants to take the loan back and is recalling it. not clear where all that money has gone because what we've learned is parnas' bank account had this once $1 million loan now it's down to $94,000. the judge even said it's a little suspicious to have your bank account run down that quick. >> so what about -- push it forward on the investigation. house investigators resisted talking to him even though he said he had useful information for them. do you think that they might change their mind? >> it's interesting because we see the house moving along on this path, they are on a quick speed to get to the impeachment. adam schiff chairman of the house intelligence committee

said they are thinking it over. >> thank you very much. in just one other quick piece of news i want to pass along. the senate today passing this historic measure, it marks a big win for both president's daughter and senior white house adviser, approving a provision of the national defense act approving 12 parental leave for all federal employees and provided money for the space force. the vote was 86-8. final deal struck with only a handful of days left. i'm kate bolduan. thank you for being with me.

"t"the lead with jake tapper" starts right now. >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. welcome to the lead. i'm jake tapper. we begin with president trump ahead of the historic impeachment vote in the house tomorrow has sent a stunning and scathing stream of consciousness letter to house speaker nancy pelosi. it appears to be something dictated 2700 word rant almost as if it's 60 angry tweets co cobbled put together. about 40 references to himself. and four to northwestern people. a letter that president trump says he wrote for the quote purpose of history.