>> of course i did. >> and john bolton. >> a lawyer for john bolton says his client has information on the meetings with ukraine. >> these witnesses must testify. call your senators now. >> these witnesses must testify. with me is elise jordan, a former aide in the bush white house, now an msnbc political analyst, and richard painter, former white house ethics lawyer in the bush administration. i want to read some of what ted cruz said as we just played it. he basically said it's certainly possible, and there are a kip couple that could vote that way. but anyone voting on the facts, anyone voting on the law, this is a very easy vote. do you think there is a possible crack here? >> i certainly think senator lisa murkowski was hinting at her displeasure with the process, and she has been known to break ranks in the looking a collins who is probably going to face a tougher reelection battle than she had was willing in '96 with the clinton impeachment -- or actually it would have been '98 by then, to not vote with republicans to impeach bill clinton on one of the impeachment charges. so if

john bolton is pointg at t in c. although i have a lot to say on the subject, the prudent course for me is to decline to comment. he's not saying everything i know has already been testified to by my deputies. there's nothing i did that -- i mean, if you don't want to show up, you say -- because i worked for people who didn't want to show up, everything i know is already in the public record, that's the answer of someone who doesn't want to tell their story leans on. >> no, you're totally right. that is one big tease, as is floating the book and, oh, john bolton has been accused of trying to keep all of the goods for his book. but i tend to lean toward one of the theories that you put out there, that bolton is biding his team and he's building up political cover so that when he finally goes to testify, he looks as though he's been forced. so he's sure if trump is the party forevermore in their political existence, in their lifetimes, or if there is going to be a shift away from it. so he is covering his bases. >> i k

john bolton is pointing at that chair in congress. although i have a lot to say on the subject, the prudent course for me is to decline to comment. he's not saying everything i know has already been testified to by my deputies. there's nothing i did that -- i mean, if you don't want to show up, you say -- because i worked for people who didn't want to show up, everything i know is already in the public record, everything else is privileged. that's the answer of someone who doesn't want to tell their story leans on. >> no, you're totally right. that is one big tease, as is floating the book and, oh, john bolton has been accused of trying to keep all of the goods for his book. but i tend to lean toward one of the theories that you put out there, that bolton is biding his time and he's building up political cover so that when he finally goes to testify, he looks as though he's been forced. so he's hedging his bets in this era where republicans aren't sure if trump is the party forevermore in their political existence, in their lifetimes,

in this inquiry that bolton was so upset by the administration's efforts to get these investigations into trump's political rivals that bolton called this quote a drug deal now it's the senate democrats say that america. in public has a right to hear from these witnesses who have until now been silenced by the white house and that in order to have this be a fair trial in the senate that the american public should hear from these individuals from the well mitch mcconnell the republican majority leader of the senate has said he is in total corded nation with the white house when it comes to the rules for the senate trial and he has said that there is quote no chance that the senate would remove trump from office right thank you very much with the latest from capitol hill heidi joe castro and i want house correspondent kimberly joins us live now the expected vote on impeachment coming up on wednesday and it seems as a the democrats are unified on this what is then the white house's strategy once the vote goes down how will they intend to defend the president. what we haven't heard any o

that includes john bolton. according to our next guest, bolton is dodging having to tell the truth about ukraine. why? joining us now is mark broombridge, a former senior policy adviser to john bolton. thank you very much for being here. we really appreciate getting your perspective as someone who has worked with ambassador bolton -- who had worked with him for so long and knows his thinking. here's what you tweeted out about this. you said ambassador bolton, i was your handpicked senior adviser at state and the u.s. mission to the u.n. you are dodging. the constant is what you know about ukraine. the variable is how you present that information. the only logical conclusion is that you are placing profits over patriotism to sell books. so is that what you think this is about? do you think he's about -- that's what this cat and mouse game is about? >> it is. and that view was reinforced last friday which was a game-changer. keep in mind after ambassador bolton left the white house, he's been tight-lipped, partic

his foreign policy advisors tried talking him out of it one by one and john bolton and defense secretary, mike esper and secretary of state, mike pompeo, scheduled to visit ukraine later this week, took terms imploring trump not to withhold the aid in august. arguing helping ukraine is in the country's best interests. trump dismissing them saying he does not trust ukraine's new president to weed out corruption. and said ukraine is a corrupt country. we are -- away our money. and within two days of a call, i'm just tying up lose ends. did we ever find out about the money for ukraine and whether we can hold it back? expect congress to become unhinged. according to the "new york times," mark sandy questioned whether freezing money was legal, the white house took the unusual step removing his authority to oversee the funds. nuquestions also emerging tonight about the shadow diplomacy effort by the president's personal attorney, rudy guilliani, that appears to go beyond ukraine. reporting guiliani held talks last summer, guiliani trying to establish a separate line of communication between tr

is asking him to do an donald trump seem capable of doing that. >> bolton is being too much want to go accelerate the situation there. >> this is something that we need to be careful about, the media seem to love conflict including global conflict. >> really? >> extremely concerned about in handling as delicately. >> he's part of the media too now. >> he does have a big book. i don't necessarily think the media would brand it a failure because you can say changing circumstances, kim said he wasn't going to test and we have to respond. i understand the skepticism here about whether the president would get any contract all for that, clarence page, susan ferrechio, thanks, mollie, we will see you later. up next my thoughts on the passing of don imus, how he changed the radio landscape william: 145 over 92. alyson: 180 over 111. jodie: 182 over 100 and i had a heart attack and cardiac arrest, and then a stroke. vo: your blood pressure numbers could change your life. frank: a lot of people don't understand, including myself, i didn't know, now i do, the impact of having a stroke. william

after the 5 will not know what john bolton is going to say it's very clear that he left on bad terms but he also is aware of the fact that he was the national security advisor and the national security adviser advises the president and it is up to the president to make those decisions so i don't know what john bolton will say of call to testify and i don't know that he will be called to testify and if he is it's a gamble on both sides we know they heard i had i had to i just look like you know i didn't like i had john bolton we have heard numerous people say that he said that you know he didn't want to be i be part of that drug deal that sunderland was cooking up and he definitely had the view that what was happening was a problem fiona hill has testified about that is how it is clear john bolton is writing a book about this he has made it clear that he has things to say and that they would indeed be damaged so he does have things to say in fact he went with his attorney into court and said i want the court to tell me i'm having one side that's given me a subpoena another side is it

. >> preet just brought up john bolton. he is somebody outstanding in terms of somebody who made very clear, cryptic, clear he has things he wants to say. his former deputy did testify under oath about his reaction in his disgust to what he saw going on in regards to ukraine and holdup of the aid. he is maybe a prime example of somebody, definitely a prime example of somebody the democrats would want to call, historically speaking and going back to 1998, there were negotiations that senate, democratic and republican leaders, if you have john bolton we will get our witness x. it's more partisan now and a different time and there is more decorum in the senate certainly than in the house, but those kind of gentleman agreements and lady agreements -- >> it comes to a problem with somebody like john bolton, that is his lawyer made it clear he wanted to be forced to testify. just because the senate calls him and just because john roberts is sitting up there does not mean that you wouldn't be back in the same situation again. but

and a short time ago, bolton tweeted this. coat, quote, we say it's unacceptable for north korea to obtain nuclear weapons but that's more rhetorical at this point. more effective policy is required before north korea has the technology to threaten the american homeland. david sanger is a national correspondent for "the new york times." thanks for being with us. >> great to be with you. >> how do the north koreans see bolton's comments? did he just weaken the president's position in your opinion? >> i think he pretty accurately laid out the position that president trump has taken. and he made the same critique, of course, of president obama and before that president bush who's presidency also served. and the essential argument that mr. bolton is taking if you want to denuclearize north korea in his mind, you have to do sanctions. what's interesting is that none of the three administrations that mr. bolton has critiqued on this have been willing to go do that including the two he served in because they didn't want to risk war.

he said this is a must for bolton, completely clears the way for bolton to testify. what do you make of it? is this a major game-changer? is this clearing the way for him? >> the hard part is going to be getting 51 votes in the senate to approve his testimony, compel him to testify. there could be a scenario in which president trump and his lawyers decide to take this all the way to the supreme court, whether they can compel him to testify. senate republican leader mitch mcconnell has made very clear he is in lock ststep with this whi house. the idea that any dam is going to break open and there will be defections of republicans or some type of star witness, ala watergate that will blow the lid right off of this is probably a bit far fetched at this point. >> it seems, evan, as if john bolton wants to testify. heard him in the npr interview last week where he said, i've got a lot of information, but waiting on the decision with regards to the kupperman case. we got that decision here. it seems as if he's wanting to in a way clear his name. >> first of all, the decisi

would john bolton show up? could he plead the fifth? he has a court case pending about compelling his testimony. it is all very much up in the air. >> the republicans point out the democrats in the house had their chance to try to get witnesses to come in but they decided to not go with it, it would have taken too long to adjudicate in the courts. >> right. and in some cases the democratic argument for why they did that is what they were doing was the fact-finding part of this. the grand jury portion, where they collect as much as they can to bring charges. what the senate is doing is having a trial and there are members of the senate saying we don't have enough information. they're wondering, they're saying i don't see enough evidence to say whether this is an impeachable offense. the democratic argument is that there is evidence out there to be gotten, and you can try to go get it or put your hands over your ears and say i don't want to listen any more. i think it is a different calculus because of what the senate is trying to do. the

take john bolton. he was the third trump national security advisor to resign or get fired when he left the administration in september of this year. on page 80 of today's report we get confirmation that president trump and john bolton met one on one in august to talk about trump's reasons to keep holding up the military aid to ukraine. a one-on-one meeting between the president and john bolton specifically on that subject. what happened at that meeting? we don't know. bolton won't say. refusing to testify. >> additionally it has always been of intense interest to me since we first started covering this scandal, the timing of john bolton leaving the administration. he quit or was fired, depending on who you believe, on september 10th. that was just as congress was starting to stand up and yell about trump holding up that aid to ukraine. it's just as congress was learning that a whistle-blower had come forward to say it wtrup personalitiesly who was holding up that aid and he was doing so for illegal rea

. >> john bolton coming out saying that the white house hasn't been doing us right. another slap on the face. >> when you say it's perfect and i get love notes from kim jong un, there's nothing to be concerned about, that's a lie. feels like the president's bluster is much like the big bad wolf and hasn't worked and sounds like john bolton is compelling him to say so. >> maybe it's a nice present, maybe a present where he sends me a beautiful vase. maybe nice present. you never know. howie: media certainly playing john bolton's comments and other critics of the president's approach to north korea, personal diplomacy, isn't it fair to ask what the president has to show after years with kim? >> when you look at the media coverage, of course, they will take the former national security advisers comments and play them up and donald trump has no one but himself to blame, if he has had any failure in presidency, it is his personnel choices and putting someone like bolton, that was his own decision to do that and so to have the person complaining how would the media not pay

a judge dismissing a lawsuit involving john bolton's deputy john kupperman. let's talk to our experts about this. i want to ask you, michael gerhardt, first, walk us through this because it sounds like the judge is saying because house democrats withdrew this subpoena, the case is moot. is that about right? tell us about this reasoning. >> that is exactly right. so john bolton's deputy had been subpoenaed to testify as part of the impeachment hearings. he then took that subpoena and challenged that in court. but the judge had not decided the case by the time the house impeached the president. meanwhile, the house withdrew the subpoena that had been issued against bolton's deputy and therefore there was nothing to litigate and there was nothing left to decide in the court therefore it is all withdrawn and irrelevant now and it won't become relevant again unless this deputy gets subpoenaed again. >> and what are the chances of that happening, jackie? >> well if you believe the house counsel, doug letter, he said that the subpoena will be no reissue, not today o

john bolton knows. we know when bolton came out, he said -- he meaning trump -- he's not ready yet. that's a crucial conversation. really there's only two people who can tell us what happened there. donald trump who i would not count on ever testifying and john bolton. bolton needs to get serious here. enough with the book deals. enough with the twitter. if he has something to say and he clearly does, let's get him under oath and hear what he has to say. for better or worse for republicans, for democrats, whoever it may help or hurt, let's get some truth here. >> elie, it's christmas so let's take a step back here. do you think there's any chance the democrats and republicans will be able to come together in the new year? >> well, i'll sound a little note of christmas optimism. i do think and hope there's some hope they come together at least on the notion of let's have a meaningful trial here. it shouldn't be that controversial, this idea of let's have some witnesses, let's have some evidence at a trial. that's what a trial is. so i am hopeful that they come together and at least a

. >> where do we stand on rudy giuliani, mick mulvaney, john bolton? i'm just looking at one specific page here and they're mentioned half a dozen times. you've got an sbir subset here. the president's agents pursued a drug deal. a drug deal aed coing to both fiona hill and colonel vindman is how bolton described this shadow foreign policy that giuliani and sondland had cooked up. these are central characters in this inquiry. any word on whether they're showing up at any point here? >> well, so far, there have been subpoenas defied over giuliani. there was a subpoena for documents which he's not followed up u on. the one from mulvaney wasn't followed up on. i don't believe pompeo was subpoenaed, but democrats have been weary from the get go. if you wait for any of these individuals to fight this out in the courts, sort of a proxy fight for getting john bolton to come testify, you could drag this out for months. the courts have moved quickly in part because of the seriousness of an impeachment inquiry, the judge has said as much in her decisions. there

bolton's right about that. but what trump is doing is probably trying to give kick an opportunity to sort of create this generous atmosphere. but trump has been much too patient. >> when you say maximum pressure, you mean economic sanctions. pressure from the u.s. would look like? >> well, basically we have -- up until may last year, we cut off 50% of the international revenue to the kims. now the kims are getting all that they need. not all that they want, but all that they need. and china is openly violating those sapgss. and we're not doing anything about it. so bolton is absolutely right. we are not enforcing sanctions. and i think the american people need to have more candor out of the administration. because they say, oh, yeah. we're enforcing sanctions. no, they're not. >> as you will remember, what president trump has said is that he and kim jong-un, quote, fell in love over their beautiful -- quote, beautiful letters. what's the point of having a great pen pal if they continue to test their nuclear ars

mulvaney, bolton, a couple others. they should know a lot about why aid to ukraine was held up and they've all been silenced by this president and they may be kept quiet by senate republicans who seem intent to hold a trial with no witnesses. nevertheless, the house judiciary committee found enough to send up two articles of impeachment and in their new 658-page report out just today, they describe the behavior underlying thing alleged abuse of power as part of a criminal plot involving this president and crimes of bribery and wire fraud. now, the big vote in the full house on both articles of impeachment is just days away. today another moderate democrat announced what her vote will be, impeach. let's bring in chrissy houlahan from pennsylvania, a foreign affairs committee member. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> why declare tonight? why did it take you so long to decide? >> sure. it took me a long time to decide. none of us want to be here making this decision. i'm a veteran and an engineer. i

bolton never agreed with that. if you remember, i mean, this is not exactly an issue that he's been shy about. in the past he advocated for preemptive strikes against north korea, military action. it's something he feels pretty strongly about. you could speculate about why he's coming out now, and i'm sure some people will be cynical and that's fair enough. i just don't have first-hand knowledge of his motivations. >> all right, jonathan swan, has always good reporting. thank you, my friend. you can sign up for the newsletter at signup.axios.com. >> that's a wrap for us on this monday morning. "morning joe" starts right now. >>> we'll have an economy based on wind. i never understood wind. i know wind mills very much, i've studied it better than anybody, i know it's very expensive. they're made in china and germany, mostly. very few made here, almost none. but they're manufactured tremendous if you're into this, tremendous fumes, gases are spewing into the atmosphere. you know we have a world, right? so the world i

. >> and john bolton. >> a lawyer for john bolton says that his client has new information on these meetings with ukraine. >> these witnesses must testify. call your senators now. >> so, jonathan, pretty clear who that is aimed at. i guess my question is, is the theory that these senators go home to their districts, hear about this from so many constituents that they start to feel hot under the collar? or is it that it shakes their moral conscience? >> i think that the democrats and republicans who made that ad, they want it to be some of both. so, constituents in colorado, arizona, maine. i would also say utah where mitt romney white vote the right way, tennessee, lamar alexander is from there. they need to let their senators know that they don't want there to be a fake trial. they want a real trial. they're not asking them to vote to convict. that's likely not going to happen. >> right. >> but they do want some basic resemblance to an actual trial. and it's not that hard of a sell. remember, all of these republican remembers, or at least mcsally, gardner, and collins, are vulnerable in a g

it was no accident that t john bolton blasted the president in north korea. this is a simmer in crisis which the administration have not had a response. he's hoping it will be a beautiful letter and not an actual missile test that he has to try to explain away or buy time for. >> ryan, and finally, the fact that john bolton spoke out about north korea really underscores the absurdity of him not speaking out about what he knows about ukraine. they were talking about something momentous. we had his own aid testifying, he called the maneuvers underway to pressure ukraine a drug deal. he instructed his closest advisors. he had information that's relevant to the senate consideration of this and yet while he feels comfortable talking about north korea, you know he has not come forward on this. there is many career diplomats, despite the white house desires. how can he testify it? >> john bolton would be among the top of the list that democrats would like to hear from. this is what lindsey graham tweeted yesterday. he says this case should mirror the process used an

mick mulvaney and john bolton. as democrats are making that point, they're giving republicans a bit of leverage in not sending over the articles. this gives the gop, the president, the sort of talking point about process, and what are the democrats doing? are they playing with politics? are they trying to keep trump from being acquitted in the senate? we'll have to see which talking point breaks through with the public more and who leaks first, because both sides have arguments they're trying to make, and democrats trying to make this a real trial with real witnesses that they think are important, they're also potentially undercutting themselves. >> the question of leverage is an interesting one because mcconnell says he's in no rush, he would rather not have the trial at all, he wants to move on to other issues. the president last week tweeted he wanted an immediate trial. he said, so after democrats gave me no due process in the house, no wntitnesses, no lawyers, no nothing, they want to tell the senate how to ru

i mean, the guy that i would like to see is john bolton. i don't know how hunter biden fits into any of this. this has nothing to do with what the charges are against the president. do i think we're going to see bolton? i don't think so. i don't think he's coming. he would be the one that i would be the most interested in hearing, and frankly, i wish the democrats had pursued this in the courts but they say they don't have the time and all that. i happen to believe the more information, the more witnesses, the more testimony, the more facts, the better off you do when it comes time to make a decision. they didn't get there on that and as to whether the senate is going to do it, i think not. i think the senate wants to have something done quickly and move on. i think both parties are going to be there too. >> one person who says they want something done quickly and move on is senator lindsey graham. he said exactly that this weekend and even before this trial begins we know that some when it comes to republicans, some republicans have made u

sure and i would say that if you had direct testimony from a john bolton. or mike pump a 0 clue about what trumps president trumps intent was in withholding the military aid that could severely undermine the president's defense that there was not a linkage between his request to. ski for the investigations and the withholding of the aid i think if a john bolton were to come forward and say yes i talked to the president there he made it clear there was a linkage he made it clear why he was doing this withholding the military aid that would be the kind of thing that would cut with a number of republican senators but i gotta say this idea of voting in secret is a nonstarter from the get go this is the united states senate these are these are senators they're politicians the idea that they could cast a vote on as momentous an issue as removing a elected president from office and not stand up and say how they voted and is is just something that would never fly politically so i think that's completely off the table michel i want to ask you a follow up on what cly

>> well, john bolton was in the middle of this security policy. so he speaks from firsthand information. i would add that he's one of the people we should hear from in the impeachment trial because he also is firsthand information about the security matters there. but with regard to north korea, i think the problem here is the president doesn't seem to have a strategy. a strategy that's calculated to lead to ultimately denuclearization of the entire korean peninsula. that is a big goal. to get to that goal you have to outline a strategy for your administration and for the american people, and empower diplomats to do the hard work of negotiation, but we've got to make sure that there is a strategy and the president should make that clear to the president -- make that clear to the people of the united states as well as the world. >> well john bolton does not think the president is meaning what he says when it comes to north korea policy now. senator, thank you for coming in. >> thank you. >>> up front next, tough choice, are democratic voters torn n

but the best part is all these are awful guys bolton's an unrepentant warmonger. trump, of course, is trump so it's fun to watch them turn on each other and try to take each other down. i don't like watching nature shows where a lion kills a baby antelope. but when they show a spider and scorpion going at it, i am in. [ laughter ] so the actual facts of what happened are indefensible. there's nothing republicans can say to defend what trump did that's why they're focused instead on the process they've been whining for weeks about how democrats have been conducting the initial depositions behind closed doors. even though a lot of them are allowed in those hearings. in fact, this week, cnn asked republican congressman ted yoho if he had attended any of the impeachment hearings there was even a deposition going on while he was on tv and the anchor asked him why he wasn't there >> you could attend all of these depositions. have you attended a single one >> no, i haven't gone to those >> but why are you not there >> because i have other responsibilities in the house. >

the thing at obama under bolton are all. about what you think about them are you free speech or more mean you were concealing his identity because he's not authorized to speak he told us that operations like the one we went on have become increasingly rare under golson r.-o. or because she was reported in school i mean. the most i see those are easily your position oh so much you mean you so does hope also. was a poor woman to me in the film with me and what. is absolutely you would you want i mean this in your ph lives garcia. he also told us that their job has become harder due to restrictions on destroying the equipment used by illegal loggers and miners judge them is all we could probably have been is really the show you are putting up here they are that you got it it was somebody you know. argues bob as i can assure the only people who produce so i'll be able to take your ball or russian intervention or something is work which a lot of it in the yard to me. but you know well of course in this. one effect of the weakenin

john bolton was extremely upset about that and went to the sunday talk shows. i'm not sure that our is going to do -- i imagine economic sections are the first place to go, we have nearly 30,000 troops in south korea but the real concern here is for our allies in the region. prime minister abe in japan has been probably the most effective world leader in cozying up with the president, he was the first to come to trump tower after he was elected. they are in the line of fire, our south korean allies as well. i'm hopeful for sanctions that will be effective but i completely agree. and julie, what you're saying, it's clear that his approach did not work in the fact that we were talking a few years ago about the potential president winning the nobel peace prize because he had a summit with this guy, you cannot treat these people kindly. they are disingenuous to their core and we can't be fooled again and i wish honesty likes john bolton was still in the administration when dealing with a threat like this. >> julie: it is a story that senator marco rubio says will b

fiona hill's reported directly to bolton. we also have sworn testimony that john bolton called it a drug deal. you have to assume as a prosecutor that if any of that was wrong we would have heard from a lawyer from john bolton? >> well, absolutely. but you can be pretty sure the white house would not have been saying we are not turning over documents, we are not turning over witnesses if they thought the documents would be good for them. there is another x factor here which is there is going to be a judge. there is going to be chief justice roberts who is going to preside over this. and it is a very interesting role because it's not like a judge in a normal case. now, the democrats get to make a motion to the judge saying we'd like to call witnesses and we'd like a subpoena. and the rules are under rule 7 of the senate rules, the justice can, that is not required to rule on that. so, justice roberts could decide to go forward. if he does, that can be overruled by a simple majority. >> well, is there any sort of deference to h

so john bolton should be there. the leverage here is really what are some of these moderate republican senators and senators up for re-election, susan collins, corey gored ny gardner really want to go back and say i want something where there's going to be no witnesses. i don't know the answer to that question. >> and i think that's the broader strategy, is that schumer and pelosi are saying, okay, we can set this up as what seems like an unfair trial, we can force votes, they only need a simple majority, 51 votes in order to set the rules for the impeachment trial. so they can actually force a lot of votes on these vulnerable republicans and i think that's actually the real issue and the real reason they're doing this. >> great insight from both of you. thanks for being on. i appreciate it. >>> who is going to blink first m the standoff between senator mcconnell and speaker pelosi? we're asking a key democratic kong live. and everything from the economy to their experience to fancy wine, one of the contenders on st

those cabinet official there is, mark esper, john bolton and the national security advisor as well. in late august, defense secretary mark esper joined secretary of state mike pompeo and john bolton for a previously undisclosed oval office meeting with the president where they tried but failed to convince him that releasing the aid was in the interest of the united states. how the president responded to the entreaties they made during the course of that meeting. ukraine is a corrupt country, the president said, according to the piece. we are pissing away our money. in a few weeks after that john bolton left that position as national security advisor. >> a couple questions that immediately come to mind upon reading that passage, of course, is who is putting all of this about ukraine into the president's ear? all of this narrative about ukraine corruption, this narrative that they tried to dismantle his candidacy in 2016, that has been pushed by two main people, rudy giuliani and vladimir putin. so to the extent that the president has been having these conversations with two people th

and bolton could be an extraordinarily damaging witness. i agree with katie. because think about it, he's the one who saw in real-time what was going on with mulvaney, sondland, and the others. he characterized it as illegal conduct by labelling it a drug deal. you don't call something a drug deal if it's lawful, if it's benign, if it's innocent. so, if they were to put a pompeo on the stand, i think what would be exposed was that mulvaney, sondland, and others were kind of the cooks in this so-called drug deal. they're cooking up the political por powder into political crack, but they're the ones with their feet on the ground dealing with the ingredients of the drug deal. it would be the kingpin that i think everybody's after, the kingpin of this particular drug deal is donald trump. so, if we see 51 senators vote in favor of calling the boltons of the world, boy, i don't know that i agree with scaramucci that trump resigns, but i agree it could be a game-changer with respect to the senate trial. >> there's no doubt that it would be, but glenn, if the democra

and nbc news has learned that senate minority leader chuck schumer has called for john bolton an acting white chieve of staff mick mulvaney as witnesses in the senate impeachment trial. schumer sent a letter to mcconnell yesterday proposing that the senate subpoena with bolton and mulvaney along with two other people close to the president who may know about the delay of military aid to ukraine. in a letter, he writes, senate democrats, believe strongly, and i trust senate republicans agree, that this trial must be one that is fair, that considers all of the relevant facts and that exercises the senate's sole power of impeachment under the constitution with integrity and dig ny. president trump has repeatedly lashed out against impeachment and has told confidantes that even if he is acquitted in the senate as expected it will be a stain on his legacy but the a. p. is noting that he believes impeachment could be a political winner, setting re-election campaign data, that shows his campaign rally attendance and battleground poll numbers have increased since the inquiry began. and senator

gillian: it's fantasy that anything john bolton is going to say will move the needle, we have seen how hard it is to do that unless john bolton has some new scathing piece of evidence that nobody has ever heard of before, unlikely to move the kneeled, however, he remains a crucial witness, i think right now his hands are a little bit tied by this lawsuit that he's in, his lawyer asked the courts to rule on whether or not he needs to testify. i wouldn't expect to hear anything from him with all the suit going through system. howie: i want to get to rudy, i will come back in remaining time, the newspaper report that is rudy giuliani while he's working at president trump's personal lawyer and while working with former top prosecutor in ukraine to find unflattering stuff on biden and the binds -- bidens, does this change the giuliani story in a fundamental way? >> i don't think so, i think there's enormous stench involving all of this stuff and that is been for a long time and details that the stench is strong. >> i think it's directly connected to the white house, the president asked us t

>> michael bolton? >> i think we definitely need michael bolton. >> he could bring his guitar and his piano. >> john bolton. >> oh. >> he's got the haircut. >> boy, that haircut. >> they could come in a company. >> that's '90s about the tbolto >> you know when john bolton says this is a drug deal and immediately tells everybody, go talk to the lawyers now, that is the equivalent of pulling the fire alarm. so we can all pretend that john bolton would -- i mean, democrats, republicans, we know where he stands. >> it's the thing that schmidt said is the most important thing here. nancy pelosi and adam schiff, not necessarily all democrats, but pelosi and schiff who have the whip hand on this have decided that there ask nothing, no piece of evidence that would move republican votes in the senate. donald trump is going to be acquitted in the senate. i think they're probably right. >> did michael bolton play piano? just saying. >> i bet he could play. it's not his featured talent but he -- >> he sings with a

the president has a high degree of respect for ambassador bolton. they didn't always see eye to eye on diplomacy. this is one of those cases where ambassador bolton pointed out there has been no success whether in the clinton administration, bush administration or obama administration. there's been no success. with respect to north korea. the president took a different tact. we've gone through a period of time without a nuclear test. we diffused a high-tension situation. we're going to have to see if the president's approach works. like ambassador bolton, the president has no illusions that this is a very dangerous concerning matter. it was dangerous when he got there. he's tried to de-escalate tensions and get to the point where kim jong-un will live up to his commitments. what the president has promised the north koreans is a couple things. he hasn't insisted on regime change. he's laid out a path where north korea could have a great future. they have hard-working people there. there's a great opportunity for north korea. whether they take that op

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 stand, john avalon, the emails released do offer some new insight into how the aid was withheld and ultimately released. what do they change? >> well it is a question of whether republicans will recognize facts as being something that are important to any decision they make. the news that manu just broke that joni ernst, senator from iowa, doesn't want to hear from witnesses and something the house should have done is stunning considering she has a tough re-election and in what is a swing state and she's saying that she'll be part of the no nothing caucus in the senate. that is stunning and disturbing. but the real question is there any information that could come out that would open or change republicans' minds. that itself in answer seems to be no and that is disturbing just from a reason together on behalf of the republic level. >> and manu r

mick mulvaney, former national security advisor john bolton and two others. the white house is dismissing schumer's request tonight with a familiar attack on democrats on what it calls "the impeachment sham." i will get reaction from chris murphy. analysts are also standing by. first to our senior international correspondent, alex. we're getting a piece of the dynamic moving from the house to the senate. >> what it looks like is still very much in the air when the ball is in mitch mcconnell's court. and chuck schumer is trying to get four senior trump officials on ukraine to testify. >> conducting an impeachment trial in the senate is enormously weighty and solemn responsibility. >> the tables are turning. while republicans for now control the senate trial, democrats today pushing their plan they hope will gain republican support. >> do they want a fair honest trial that examines all the facts or do they want a trial that doesn't let the facts come out. trials have witnesses! >> reporter: in a letter to majority leader mitch mcconnell, schumer called for subp

we don't really know what mulvaney and bolton will say. in fact, i argue that mulvaney, despite his little slip of the truth earlier this year, would be totally on team trump and cover in a way that would be unprovable that he's doing that, and that's good for the president. bolton may have a book to sell, but does he really have an ax to grind. trump gave him a front row seat, a title he can earn off for years, and he may not know anything. second, this is a great chance to give to get. if the white house did decide to want to have witnesses, as ridiculous as that is that they'den in control, we'd know who they want, the whistle-blower, house intel chairman adam schiff. if the -- and was trying to root it out, that's all he wanted to do, look, i argue i don't believe that justifies how this president went about pressuring ukraine. but if his lawyers slice up biden, it would help the politics of acquittal. and finally, the hypocrisy of the current situation is going to be part of the stain of this event on history. mcconnell will be haunte

first of all, is john bolton saying, hey, i'm john bolton, you should pay attention to me, which he's been trying to do ever since he left office as national security adviser. but at the same time, this is also an area where clearly he had a fundamental disagreement with the pris in terms of tesid deal with north korea. he inherited a bad situation, the problem is that he has somehow managed to make it worse, which is impressive when you think about it. despite claiming there had been success with summits and so on and so forth. there's clear evidence that north korea has proceeded with its nuclearization and the development of ballistic missiles, and at the same time the administration has managed to alienate just about every other ally you would need to deal with north korea. is no, i we' so now we're in the situation of where it's the worst of zblorl worlds. >> i can just ask you, daniel, am i overdramatizing the concern over a high-level white house official going on national television and when faced by a conspiracy theory that's being peddled by the russians, that official going

there's bolton, there's mulvaney, there's a bunch of folks that have real important evidence to bring to the table and the american people deserve to know, and before of that even happens, mitch mcconnell is now saying that president is done, that we don't even need to sort of have that discussion. guess what? the constitution says that it is justice roberts that presides over this process and not mitch mcconnell. in many ways, mitch mcconnell and the republican senators would also be on trial in this process. >> let's talk a little bit more about what you were talking about there. we've learned now that 90 minutes after president trump's phone call with president zelensky, a white house official e-mailed the omb and the pentagon and asked for the hold on military aid. i think you've already alluded to this but want to press you on this, do you think this is part of speaker pelosi's strategy here, that the longer they wait, that more incriminating information will come out and that that could play a role in this senate trial? >> i think that the white house sabotaged or attempted to s

john bolton and mick mulvaney could testify and the white house could not block them from doing so. i appreciate your time this morning. thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >>> all right. so reports that world leaders are on edge ahead of the nato summit this week in london. the president is set to leave the white house to head there in just a few minutes. we are on top of that. >>> also, quote, i am done being quiet. words from former fbi lawyer and a frequent target of the president lisa page, breaking her silence two years after her text messages sparked a political firestorm. her stunning interview ahead. >>> and democrats rushing forward without key witness testimony that could be crucial for their impeachment case. is that a wise move? next. hi i'm joan lunden. today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advis

with this certain extent bolton is right has not been successful but i would add yet. and here's why. because a lot of what north korea can do right now, and get away with doing is because it's underwritten i china and by russia between china and russia particular china and they get 75% of their food their transportation fuel and their fuel and energy. without the north korean, without that pipeline if you will being shut down, the china gives them in russia gives them, it's very difficult for our sanctions to have any real effect on north korea. one thing i would say guises i'm never sure what john bolton has in mind when he says the policy towards iran is it working. or the policy towards north korea isn't working. does he really want to get involved in another military confrontation in these parts of the world? i think the great thing that trump is done is he's used economic warfare because our economy is so strong. and he's gone a lot further with his economic pressure and economic warfare than anybody has in the middle east using military action. >> you know kt i

john bolton for one. mark esper and as for mulvaney, and pompeo. he facilitated the president's wishes. quoting now from the times, the aide, robert b. blaire, replied that it would be possible but not pretty. expect congress to become unhinged if the white house tried to countermand spending passed by the house and senate. he wrote in a previously undisclosed email. and he wrote, it might further fuel the narrative that mr. trump was pro russia. according to "the times" those carrying out the president's orders to freeze the aid for the most part did not know about the pressure campaign on ukraine's president. however, his testimony in the house shows mick mulvaney could be the exception which is why senate democrats want to hear from him and three others, all four of whom the president has blocked from testifying. in a moment one of "the times" reporters. first boris sanchez outside of mar-a-lago. we know the president has been working on any kind of strategy for the senate trial since he's been down in mar-a-lago? >> reporter: anderson, it appea

john bolton, mike pompeo and mark esper all tried to convince him to release the aid. >> plus people are speaking out to condemn an attack that left five people wounded at ar rabbis home. >> authorities say worshippers returned fire after the gunman began shooting. good monday morning, everybody. it's december 30th. aman is off this morning. we begin with new information at the heart of the impeachment investigation into president trump. it's part of an extensive piece by the new york times on the nearly $400 million in military aid that was withheld from ukraine. as democrats push for witnesses at the senate trial, the times reports that during an oval office meeting in late august, secretary of state mike pompeo, defense secretary and then national security adviser john bolton tried but failed to convince the president to release this aid. the times cites in part this, interviews with dozens and current and former administration officials, congressional aids and others as well as previously undisclosed e-mails and documents. the report also lays out the battle within the administra

bolton and mr. mulvaney. i think that is essential because they have relevant information about the key circumstances i think a lot of americans want to know more about. one is the national security implications here and obviously the question of aid. but what the reporting today or yesterday i should say in the reporting this week about what transpired there, is indicative of the concern that was raised within the administration long before it got up to the level of pompeo and others and esper by folks who were in the national security apparatus of our government worrying about this way back in july, even before july in some circumstances, and i would urge people to read the house intelligence committee reporting, roughly pages 67 to page 80, which outlines all the concerns they had. >> as you know, that e-mail it looks like mulvaney is talking about a followup on a conversation, where does it stand, these efforts to do this? i wonder, you have announced your support for joe biden in the 2020 election. this

mick mulvaney and john bolton and two other officials who were heavily involved and if he wants due process he wants the right to be heard. donald trump is refusing the right to be heard, and i would ask him and frankly, mitch mcconnell and my republican colleagues what is so horrible about asking people to come testify who have eyewitness accounts of what's happening here? the president is really just covering up. he has no rebuttal. he has had no -- he has issued no exculpatory evidence of the charges against him and we're giving him the opportunity to bring people to the trial. you know, a trial without witnesses is not a trial at all, and so we believe very strongly that the president -- that these witnesses should come, that documents should be forthcoming. that's what the due process cause is all about, right? the right to be heard. the president refuses the right to be heard and it seems quite likely because he knows he's guilty. >> so obviously, as you point out, mulvaney and bolton, i know you've asked for two others and if exonerated they would have the ability to do so. it doesn'